no more stand with Monarchy than it can with Monogamy to be married to two several Wives and though 't is said that this Presbyterian Government meddles only with spiritual things which concern the good of the Soul and so it cannot hurt Regal power yet this is but only said and no more for 't is well known that in ordine ad spiritualia and all things may by an ordinary wit be drawn into this rank as they have been by the Church of Rome this Government intrudes upon what things it pleaseth and where a supremacy is once acknowledged no wise man can think that it will carry it self otherwise so that King James his maxim was undoubtedly most true No Bishop no King For that most prudent Prince did soon discern that if a power were once set up which at least in the legal execution of it did not derive it self from the King there was no doubt to be made that it would ere long destroy the very King himself Or consider the Presbyterian Government in the English sence as it 's now set up by the two Houses at Westminster which is a Government limited by an Appeal to the Parliament for either by Parliament here they mean the two Houses excluding the King and then 't is as plain as before they set up two supremacies his Majesties and their own or else by Parliament they mean the King with both Houses and then 't will follow that either there must be a perpetual Parliament which sure the King nor Kingdom can't have cause to like or else the supremacy will be for the most part in the Presbytery because whenever a Parliament sits not there will be no Judge to appeal to or if it be said the Parliament may leave a standing Committee to receive Appeals in such Ecclesiastical causes then either in this Committee the King hath no Negative and in that case 't is clear that the Ecclesiastical supremacy will be not at all in the King or else the King hath a Negative but yet is joyned with persons whom he himself chuseth not and so most probably will be chek'd and affronted in any sentence he intends to give and this clearly overthrows that which is already declared by Parliament to be a right in the King as inherent in his Crown that Ecclesiastical Appeals may be made to him alone in Chancery for the Statute names no other and that his Majesty alone may appoint what Commissioners he pleases for their final decision I say consider the Presbyterian Government in the English Parliament sence and in the sence of the English Assembly for the Presbyterians there are wholly for the Scottish Form as appears by their quarrels at what the Houses have already done in their Ordinances and 't will appear that their aim is not only to set up a new Government but in plain terms a new Supremacy and hence to say truth he must see very little who discerns not that though the Presbyterian party seems to strike at the Bishops yet their main aim is at the King whose supremacy they endure not as being a flower which they intend for their own Garland and so though they hypocritically cry out that they may abuse the people against the pride of the Lordly Bishops yet in the mean time the wiser sort must needs see that they intend to make themselves no less than indeed Kingly Presbyters Thus he And if this Author thinks this reasoning insufficient to prove Presbytery Antimonarchical let him tell us why In the mean time it follows p. 44. 54. Or would his sort of men Presbyterians have no King to reign over them A. None if he will not comply with their humours Doth a Republick better please them A. Not an Independent or Anabaptistical Republick but time hath been when a Presbyterian Republick some parcels of the two Houses did please them far better than an Episcopal King Did the English or Scottish Presbyters ever go about to dissolve Monarchy and to erect some other kind of Government In no wise quoth he for in the Solemn League and Covenant they bound themselves to endeavour the preservation of the Kings person and Authority and declared they had no intent to diminish his Majesties just power and greatness Of the justness of which power themselves would be judges But did not all Covenanters do so as well as Presbyterians The man sure would make us believe either that our Monarchy was not dissolved and another kind of Government exected or else that 't was done by some that were not Covenanters For why is not this Argument as good Independents Covenanted to preserve the Kings person and Authority Therefore they never went about to dissolve Monarchy This is a much better consequence Neither the English nor Scottish Presbyterians endeavoured to preserve the Kings Authority just power and greatness the Justness whereof must be judged of by Law not by the dictates of insolent minds puft up with prosperity therefore either they never bound themselves and intended to preserve it or else they practised contrary to those obligations and intentions If he has the confidence to deny the Antecedent I may chance to evince it to him before we part Indeed his next words suggest a very considerable proof of it After the violent change of Government they the Presbyterians came slowest and entred latest into those new Engagements imposed by the Vsurpt powers Which is an implicit confession 1. That those Engagements were inconsistent with fidelity to Monarchical Goyernment and the Kings Authority 2. That yet at last the Presbyterians did enter into them whence I gather 1. That whereas the third Article of the Covenant obliged them to endeavour not only sincerely but also constantly with their Estates and Lives to preserve and defend the Kings Majesties Authority just power and greatness they ceased to do so at last when they entred upon those new Engagements and consequently did then break their Covenant And 2. That the Presbyterians are not such fixt and unalterable Creatures as he would needs have perswaded us p. 29. 39. they are since they did upon changes in Government vary by degrees from themselves and either deserted those principles which kept them from engaging with the foremost or else contradicted them by engaging at last though slowly And truly that they did so is tacitly acknowledged by this Author p. 45. 55. where he tells us that the generality of conscientious Presbyterians never ran with the current of those times which sadly implies either that the generality of Presbyterians were not conscientious since they generally ran with the current at last or that some conscientious Presbyterians did notwithstanding the dictates of their conscience run with the current For either he must mean that the generality of Presbyterians otherwise conscientious did in that particular by an error of Conscience run with the current but this seems not to have been this Authors meaning for then it follows by his own confession that the
of Canonists Civilians Schoolmen nor is it to my knowledge contradicted by any that the Legislative power is delegable that such a concurrence is no Argument of supremacy or of such a mixture as some would infer out of it Some call it therefore apparens mixtura because it seems to destroy a simple Form of Government and to make a mixture in the power it self but doth not though otherwise they acknowledge it to be such a mixture as doth remit the simplicity thereof Grotius affirms to this purpose de Imperio summ potest circa sacra c. 8. N. 11. Illam legislationem quae alii quà m summae potestati competit nihil imminuere de jure summae porestatis He speaks this of Laws made by general Conventions whose concurrence he saith doth not in the least manner diminish the Rights of Majesty Such a mixture of the three Estates hath been in other Monarchies which all men acknowledge to have been absolute in respect of power as in the Persian which appears from Dan. 6 7 8 9. and the Roman Empire And not only whole representative Bodies but divers particular free Cities have the same priviledge yet have not supreme Authority As for the enacting Authority attributed in latter times to the Lords and Commons in the beginning of some Acts he affirms p. 101. That 't is only a power of assenting for it hath been resolved by the Judges that this clause Be it enacted by the Kings most excellent Majesty and the Authority of the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament is no more in substance and effect than that which was used anciently The King with the assent of the Lords and Commons establisheth the words assenteth and enacteth being equivalent in this case and p. 45. he tells us that though the two Houses have Authority granted them by the King to assent or dissent yet the Legislative power belongs to the King alone by the Common Law the Authority that animates a Bill agreed upon by the two Houses and makes it differ from a dead letter being in the King who is the life and soul of the Law which was resolved also by divers Earls and Barons and by all the Justices in the time of Edw. 3. For one Hardlow and his Wife having a controversie with the King and desiring to have it decided in Parliament a reference being made to divers Earls and Barons and to all the Justices to consider of the business it was resolved that the two Houses were not coordinate with the King in the legislative power but that the King alone made Laws by the assent of the two Houses that he had none equal or coordinate with him in his Realm and that he could not be judged by the Lords and Commons From all which it appears 1. That that part which the two Houses have by Law in the Legislative power is not a sufficient medium to perswade us that they have a part in the supremacy and 2. That they have no share at all in any power which may properly be called Legislative I mean in that sence in which the words Legislative power are now adays commonly taken viz. for a power of making Laws For among the Romans Legem ferre was no more than Legem ad populum in concionem quasi in medium afferre proponere and Legislation was no more than Legis Rogatio à populo the proposing the matter of a Law to the Roman Citizens and asking their assent in order to its establishment I conclude therefore that the supremacy is wholly in the King notwithstanding this insinuation to the contrary For the proof whereof if this Author stand in need of more Arguments I refer him to the Rebels Plea examined p. 11 12. to Dr. Pierce's Impartial Enquiry into the Nature of sin Appendix p. 210 211 c. To Mr. Sheringham's Remonstrance of the King 's Right or the King's supremacy asserted To Judge Jenkins his Lex Terrae p. 7 8 9. Indeed this consideration alone is sufficient to evince it that by the Oath administred to all that sit in the lower House the King is acknowledged the only Supreme Governor in all Causes then in Parliament-Causes says J. Jenkins Lex Terrae p. 127. over all Persons then over the two Houses ibid. which Oath every Member of the House of Commons is enjoyned by Law to take or else he hath no Voice in that House 5 Eliz. c. 1. Lex Terrae p. 67. Therefore the King is by Law the only supreme Governor and consequently it may not be thought that a part of the Supreme Power doth reside in the two Houses Our Author goes on And this part of the Supreme Power is capable indeed of doing wrong but how it might be capable of Rebellion is more difficult to conceive 1. Here he confidently takes it for granted that the two Houses are part of the Supreme Power whereas in the precedent words he spake more modestly and told us only it might be thought that a part of the Supreme Power did reside in them not peremptorily inferring that it doth reside in them And indeed he could not rationally have so concluded unless he had produced more cogent Arguments to make good that conclusion 2. Whereas he acknowledges the two Houses capable of doing wrong and tells us only that 't is difficult to conceive how they may be guilty of Rebellion 1. Notwithstanding this Apology the Presbyterians that acted in and by Authority derived from the two Houses may have been guilty of Rebellion since the difficulty of conceiving how they might be thus guilty will not evince their innocence 2. I demand of him whether 1. they are capable of doing such wrong to the King as the Law makes Treason and Rebellion whether 2. if they do such wrong it be not easie to conceive that they are guilty of Rebellion and Treason The Law of the Land 25 Edw. 3. ch 2. makes it treason to levy war against our Lord the King in his Realm or to be adherent to the Kings enemies in his Realm giving to them aid or comfort in the Realm or elsewhere and also to counterfeit the Kings Great or Privy Seal or Money The resolutions of all the Judges of England upon the said Statute have been that to seize upon the Kings Ports Forts Magazines for War is high Treason Lex Terrae p. 77. as likewise to levy War either to alter the Religion or any Law establisht p. 22. 40. or to remove the Kings Counsellors p. 22. Yea these things were acknowledged to be Treason not only by Sir Edw. Cooke in his Institutes printed by an Order of both Houses dated May 12. 1641. but also by Mr. Solicitor S. John and Mr. Pym in their speeches touching the Earl of Strafford Where as J. Jenkins quotes them Lex Terrae p. 187 188. they likewise affirm it Treason to usurp the Royal power to raise rumors and give out words to alienate the peoples affections from the King to subvert the
Princes the French Calvinistical Church hath made in their Confession of Faith speaking of obedience due to the Supreme Magistrate appears at least every Sunday in all their hands in Print where they acknowledge such Obedience due to them except the Law of God and Religion be interessed on condition that Gods Soveraignty remain undiminish'd which clause says he what it means their so many and so long continued Rebellions do expound What turbulent things Scotch and English presbyterians have been those very practises of theirs which these sheets have mentioned to which many more might be added are a competent Testimony But this Quaere shall not scape so let 's view it again If Presbytery and Rebellion be connatural how comes it to pass that those States or Kingdoms where it hath been establisht or tolerated have for any time been free from broils and commotions A. 1. It may be 't was because though their minds were always enclined by their principles to rebellion yet they had not power and opportunity to act suitably to those inclinations with hopes of success 'T were a sad thing indeed if Rebels should be able at all times to put their traiterous Designs in execution 2. It suffices in reference to the grand Question now disputed if Presbyterian spirits are prone to Rebellion in case their way of Worship be not either est ablisht or tolerated For they deserve not to be so much as tolerated in any Kingdom that will when they have power rebel against Kings if they be not tolerated 3. If this Quaere implies any good proof that Presbytery and Rebellion is not connatural by which he means I suppose not usually conjoyn'd it does as strongly imply that Jesuitism and Rebellion are not connatural since those States and Kingdoms where Jesuits have been tolerated have for some time been free from broils and commotions It follows Or how comes it to pass that Presbyterians have never disclaimed or abandoned their lawful Prince As if to let pass other Instances English Presbyterians did not disclaim and abandon the late King when they denied him to be in a condition to Govern H. of Comm. Decl. 28. Nov. 1646. when they denied him the exercise of that power in the Militia which themselves acknowledged did belong unto him Veritas inconcussa p. 147. 168. When they affirmed that the Soveraign power resided in both Houses of Parliament that the King had no Negative voice that whatsoever the two Houses should Vote was not by Law to be questioned either by the King or Subjects that it belonged to them only to judge of the Law Declar. of May 26. 1642. as if likewise they did not make others to disclaim and abandon him by making them swear that they would neither directly nor indirectly adhere unto or willingly assist the King in his War and Cause But he proceeds How comes it to pass that they have never ceased to solicit and supplicate his regards and favour even when their power hath been at the highest and his sunk lowest Whereas I read in Philips his Veritas inconcussa his Book that proves K. Charles 1. no man of bloud these words p. 124. Indstead of offering any thing which was like to bring peace they the Presbyterian Lords and Commons caused men and women in the first year of their war to be killed because they did but petition them to accept of a peace And in the third and fourth year of their war plundered and robbed them that petitioned them but to hearken to it And put out of Office and made all as Delinquents in the seventh year of their war that did but petition them for a Treaty with the King and refused all the Kings many very many messages for peace not only when he was at the highest of his success in the war but when he was at the lowest and a prisoner to them and conjured them as they would answer it at the dreadful day of judgment to pity the bleeding condition of his Kingdomes and People and send propositions of peace unto him and years and half-years and more than a whole year together after the battel at Naseby insomuch as their fellow-Rebels the Scotch Commissioners did heavily complain of it were at several times trifled away and spent before any propositions could be made ready Was this perpetually to supplicate their lawful Princes regards and favour And p. 126. We are told they were so unwilling to have any peace at all as that 6 or 7 Messengers or Trumpeters could come from the King before they could be at leisure or so mannerly as to answer one of them but this or that message from the King was received and read and laid by till a week or when they would after And p. 128 129. When they did treat they desired the granting of such propositions as were purposely contrived and stood upon to hinder a peace and were not to be asked or granted by any that could but entitle themselves to the least part of reason or humanity c. And p. 68. The King complains that although he had used all ways and means to prevent the distractions and dangers of the Kingdom all his labours had been fruitless that not so much as a Treaty earnestly desired by him could be obtained though he disclaimed all his Proclamations and Declarations and the Erecting of his Standard as against his Parliament unless he should denude himself of all force to defend him from a visible strength marching against him And when the business of the Treaty 1647 as I suppose came into discourse the Assembly of Divines quickly resolved all of them but four to be against it See considerations touching the present Factions in the King's Dominions p. 6. And yet this Brazen-face would perswade us that Presbyterians never ceased to solicit and supplicate the Kings regards and favour It seems their voting 1647 that they would receive no more messages from the King and that no man should presume to bring any from him and that they would make no farther applications and addresses to him was so far from being a disclaiming and abandoning him that 't was not so much as a ceasing to supplicate his regards and favour statuimus i. e. abrogamus what shall be done unto thee O thou false Tongue and ridiculous Flatterer The other part of his Quaere is How comes it to pass that the Presbyterians suffered themselves rather to be trodden under foot than to comply with men of violence in changing the Government A. 1. 'T was because they were unable to make their parts good against those men of violence here intended Independents had cheated them out of that power which before they had 2. Themselves were the men of violence that did first of all really change the Government by acting without and fighting against the Kings Person and Authority Independents took away the name King but Presbyterians had long before destroyed the thing 3. 'T were no great wonder if Presbyterians suffered
1. Their suppressing Lectures and Afternoon Sermons which is nothing to the purpose unless he had proved also that these are of Divine Institution or are necessary means of unfeigned Faith and holy Life 2. A book for sports and pastimes on Sundays enjoyn'd to be read by Ministers in their Parish Churches under penalty of deprivation What so as to exclude either Common-Prayer and preaching in the Morning or Divine Service and Catechizing in the Afternoon or so as to licence the absence of any Parishioner from that service either part of the day 3. Superstitious Innovations introduc'd Si accusâsse suffecerit quis erit innocens 4. A new Book of Canons composed and a new Oath for upholding the Hierarchy inforc'd By whom were not this Oath and those Canons composed in Convocation by our Church-Governours were they not confirmed and imposed by the Royal Assent And why I pray was the new Oath for upholding the Hierarchy establish'd by Law more superstitious than the newer Oath for destroying that Hierarchy so established Far be it from me says he p. 32. 42. to impute these things to all that were in judgment Episcopal for I am perswaded a great if not the greater part of them disallowed these Innovations These Innovations what Innovations The word must in reason refer to the particulars just now enumerated viz. The new Book of Canons the new Oath the Book for sports and pastimes on Sundays But are these men in justice and Reason of State to be protected and encouraged who dare to call new Laws either of State or Church or both occasioned by new emergencies Innovations or new practices superstitious meerly because not commanded in Gods word Now these things are so far from being a proof of the inconsistency of Prelacy with the lively opening of the pure Doctrine of the Gospel with the upholding of all Divine Institutions a laborious and efficacious Ministry c. that the contrary is evident from the instance of the Right Reverend Bishop Morton whom this very Author I believe hath scarce confidence enough to accuse as a Delinquent in those particulars since p. 67. 77. he reckons Bishop Morton in the number of those Episcopal Divines whose Doctrine is entirely embrac'd by the Presbyterians Who yet did not only approve of but had the chief hand in contriving and publishing that Declaration which allowed some Sports and Pastimes as that which was then the most probable course to stop the current of Popery and profaneness as appears from the story of that Bishop's life publish'd by Dr. Barwick p. 80 81. So 't is evident also from the Augustan Confession c. 7. De Potest Ecclesiasticâ and Mr. Calvin's Institutions that both he and the Lutheran Reformers were far enough from thinking the Lords day of Divine Institution who yet were for a lively opening of the pure Doctrine of the Gospel and a laborious efficacious ministry In some following Pages the Author pretends to manifest that the Presbyterian Interest will never be extinguished while the State of England continues Protestant For says he p. 34. 44. let but the Protestant Doctrine as 't is by Law establisht in the Church of England be upheld and preach'd and 't will raise up a genuine off-spring of this people whose way is no other than the life and power of that Doctrine But I as confidently affirm on the other side that if the Protestant Doctrine by Law establisht in the Church of England be upheld and preach'd 't will raise up such a genuine off-spring of true English Protestants as shall own Prelacy and the Churches Authority in appointing Ceremonies both which are establisht by that Doctrine but rejected by Presbyterians If their way be no other than the life and power of that Doctrine they act suitably to these Principles viz. That the Church hath power to decree Rites or Ceremonies and authority in Controversies of Faith Artic. 20. That whosoever through his private Judgment willingly and purposely doth openly break the Traditions and Ceremonies of the Church which be not repugnant to the Word of God and be ordained and approved by common Authority ought to be rebuked openly that others may fear to do the like as he that offends against the Common Order of the Church and hurteth the Authority of the Magistrate and woundeth the consciences of the weak brethren Every particular or National Church hath authority to ordain change and abolish Ceremonies or Rites of the Church ordained only by mans authority so that all things be done to edifying Artic. 34. They practically own the Kings power within his Realms of England Scotland and Ireland and all other his Dominions and Countries as the highest power under God to whom all men as well inhabitants as born within the same do by Gods Laws owe most loyalty and obedience afore and above all other Potentates in Earth They act as if they believed his Majesty to have the same Authority in causes Ecclesiastical that the godly Kings had among the Jews and Christian Emperors in the Primitive Church They use the Form of Gods worship in the Church of England establisht by Law and contained in the Book of Common Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments without surmising it to be either corrupt superstitious or unlawful or to contain any thing in it that is repugnant to the Scriptures They are obedient to the Government of the Church of England by Archbishops Bishops Deans Archdeacons and the rest that bear office in the same not fancying it to be either Antichristian or repugnant to the word of God They do not combine themselves together in a new brotherhood accounting the Christians who are conformable to the Doctrine Government Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England to be profane and unmeet for them to joyn with in Christian Profession They imagine not 1. that any of the 39. Articles are in any part superstitious or erroneous or 2. that the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England by Law establisht are wicked Antichristian or superstitious or such as being commanded by lawful Authority men who are zealously and godly affected may not with any good conscience approve them use them or as occasion requires subscribe to them or 3. that the sign of the Cross used in Baptism is any part of the substance of that Sacrament They hold that things of themselves indifferent do in some sort alter their natures when they are either commanded or forbidden by a lawful Magistrate and may not be omitted at every mans pleasure contrary to the Law when they be commanded nor used when they are prohibited These are parts of the Doctrine establisht by Law in the Church of England as is evident from the 1 2 4 7 9 5 6 30. Canons legally framed and ratified But where are those English Presbyterians to be found whose way hath been no other than the life and power of this Doctrine Have not their practises too loudly proclaimed to the world that they have
Book is scarce exceeded by Knot 's Volume against Chillingworth In it several hypothetical majors are to be met with but the minors are either not mentioned or else presumed to be true without any attempt made to prove them so Now Zachary Crofton tells us in his Berith Anti-Baal p. 62. that Ifs are no proofs or demonstrations What good duty justice morality or religion may not be ruined if a mans fancied If be reason enough against it This way of disputing as apparently Jesuitical irrational Machiavellian barbarous The Rector of Bramshot thus proceeds with reverence to soveraign Majesty I crave leave to speak this word of truth and soberness Parturiunt Montes one would think some very sage and important Oracle should forthwith drop from the Pen of this Reverend Dictator In a knowing age quoth he flattery doth not really exalt or secure the Royal Prerogative Quid nascitur Such a Triobolary Truth as I believe there 's scarce any Presbyterian so simple as to be ignorant of it But there 's something suggested in it that I am afraid will one day be found a notorious and fatal falshood viz. that this hath been a knowing Age as to those parties who have opposed and sought against the Royal interest whereas I doubt 't is far easier to prove that in that respect it hath been either the most ignorant I mean of most grand concerning Truths or the most maliciously wicked profligated and debauched Age that ever Protestant England knew The Authority of Parliaments being depressed and undervalued is the more searched into and urged By Parliaments here 't is evident enough he means the two Houses in contradistinction yea opposition to the King But says Lex Terrae p. 80. The Lords and Commons make no more a Parliament by the Law of the Land than a Body without a Head makes a man for a Parliament is a body composed of a King their head Lords and Commons the members all three together make one body and that is the Parliament and none other The two Houses are not the Parliament but only parts thereof and by the abuse and misunderstanding of this word Parliament they have miserably deceived the people And his late Majesty in answer to their Declaration of May 19. 1642. and to that part of it wherein they complain that the Heads of the Malignant party have with much Art and Industry advised him to suffer divers unjust scandals and imputations upon the Parliament to be published in his Name has these words If we were guilty of that aspersion we must not only be active in raising the scandal but passive in the mischief begotten by that scandal We being an essential part of the Parliament And we hope the just defence of our self and our Authority and the necessary Vindication of our innocence and justice from the imputation laid on us by a major part then present of either or both Houses shall no more be called a scandal upon the Parliament than the opinion of such a part be reputed an Act of Parliament And we hope our good Subjects will not be long misled by that common expression in all the Declarations wherein they usurp the word Parliament and apply it to countenance any resolution or Vote some few have a mind to make by calling it the resolution of Parliament which can never be without our consent p. 5. Neither can the vote of either or both Houses make a greater alteration in the Laws of this Kingdom either by commanding or inhibiting any thing besides the known Rule of the Law than our single direction or mandate can do to which we do not ascribe the Authority And now let this Author search his Law-Books with the exactest diligence and skill he can and then let him tell us by what Law the two Houses abstracted from the King have any Parliamentary Authority Indeed his own following words do clearly enough imply that they have no such Authority For p. 51. 61. he is so inconsiderately bold as to assert that Concerning the utmost bounds and limits of Royal Prerogative and Parliamentary power the Law in deep wisdom chooses to keep silence for it always supposes union not division between King and Parliament Whence all that I shall conclude is that the power of a Parliament truly so called viz. King Lords Spiritual Temporal and Commons is not limited by Law and thence I gather either that some Acts of Parliament are no Laws or that that part of some Acts wherein 't is declared that any following statutes contrariant to such and such preceding statutes shall be utterly void is vain and ridiculous But 2. That the two Houses when they usurped the power of a Parliament as well as the name and acted in opposition to the King had no Law on their side to justifie their actings For if the Law always supposes union between King and Parliament it speaks nothing of the Rights and Priviledges of the two Houses in case of their division from and opposition to the King And 3. That the Kings power and prerogative is absolute and notwithstanding all Law of this Nation infinite for if the Law be silent and that in deep wisdom too as to the utmost bounds of the Royal Prerogative it hath very wisely lest it unbounded which latter conclusions and the first also are so prejudicial to the Presbyterian Interest and Party that I doubt they will conclude him either the veryest Fool if indeed he knew not that the Kings Prerogative was bounded by Law or the most Malignant Flatterer that this knowing Age hath brought forth His next Argument to evince Presbyterian Loyalty is that The subversion of the Fundamental Government of this Kingdom could never be effected till those Members of Parliament that were Presbyterian were many of them imprisoned others forcibly secluded by the violence of the Army and the rest thereupon withdrew from the House of Commons An assertion so notoriously false that it puts me in mind of the proverb in the late War that some men would not swear but they would lye basely The truth is the subversion of the Fundamental Government of this Kingdom both in Church and State was the great work of the Long-Parliament which they effected in the Church by overthrowing the Hierarchy and that Prelacy in which the Holy Church of England was founded Stat. of Carlisle 25 Edw. 1. recited 25 Edw. 3. in the State by passing and pressing upon the King that Bill against the Bishops sitting and voting in Parliament who were in all Parliaments either personally or by Proxy since we had any who were once of the States of Parliament and in the Act of Parliament 8 Eliz. c. 1. acknowledged one of the greatest States of this Realm all whose Liberties and Priviledges and consequently that of sitting in Parliament to which they ought to be summoned ex debito Justitiae Cookes Institut 4. c. 9. are confirmed to them by Magna Charta which was it self ratified by 32 Acts
of Parliament and that inviolably by the 42 of Edw. 3. enacting that if any statute be made to the contrary it shall be holden for none and consequently the Act of Parliament so called against that Priviledge of the Bishops was ipso facto null and void by robbing the King of his Negative voice of his power in the Militia by making Ordinances without him yea against him and so practically denying what they verbally swore that he was the only supreme Governour in all Causes and over all Persons By their electing new members warranted only by a counterfeit Seal By their taking upon them to create new Judges Justices and other Officers without the Kings consent For Laws and Liberties says J. Jenkins p. 146. have not the prevailing party in the two Houses destroyed above an hundred Acts of Parliament and in effect Magna Charta and Charta de Forestâ which are the Common Laws of the Land And p. 135. The Writ of Summons to this Parliament is the Basis and Foundation of the Parliament if the Foundation be destroyed the Parliament falls The Assembly of Parliament is for three purposes Rex est habiturus colloquium tractatum cum Praelatis Magnatibus Proceribus super arduis negotiis concernentibus 1. Nos 2. Defensionem Regni nostri 3. Defensionem Ecclesiae Anglicanae The King says the Writ intends to confer and treat with the Prelates Earls Barons about the arduous affairs relating to 1. our Royal self 2. the defence of our Realm 3. the defence of the Church of England This Parliament says the Judge hath overthrown this Foundation in all three parts 1. Nos Our Royal self the King they have chased away and imprisoned at Holmbey they have voted no Prelates and that a number of other Lords about forty in the City must not come to the House and about forty more are out of Town the conference and treaty is made void thereby for the King cannot consult and treat there with men removed from thence 2. The defence of our Realm that is gone they have made it their Kingdom not his for they have usurp'd all his Soveraignty 3. The defence of the Church of England that is gone By the Church of England must be understood necessarily that Church that at the Teste of the Writ was Ecclesia Anglicana they have destroyed that too So now these men would be called a Parliament having quashed and made nothing of the Writ whereby they were summoned and assembled If the Writ be made void the Process must be void also The House must needs fall where the Foundation is overthrown thus he And all this was done before those Members of Parliament that were Presbyterian were many of them imprisoned and others forcibly secluded by the violence of the Army So that 't is very wonderful how this Rector of Bramshot could be either so ignorant or so impudent as to utter such an assertion especially since in his own following words which it seems he fancied to be a proof of its Truth a very considerable Argument is suggested to evince it an egregious Falshood For quoth he They had voted the Kings Concessions a ground sufficient for the Houses to proceed on to settle the Nation and were willing to cast whatsoever they contended for upon a legal security Now in that very Treaty at the Isle of Wight the Presbyterian party wrested such Concessions from the King as did in their own nature subvert the Fundamental Government of this Kingdom as is evident from the speech of Mr. Pryn himself concerning those Concessions 3. Edit p. 38. wherein he confesses that the Kings of England have always held two swords in their hands the sword of Mars in time of War the sword of Justice in time of Peace And p. 37. he tells us that in those Concessions the King had wholly stript himself his Heirs and Successors for ever of all that power and interest which his Predecessors always enjoyed in the Militia Forces Forts Navy Magazines p. 36. not only of England but Ireland Wales Jersey Guernsey and Barwick too so as he and they can neither raise nor arm one man nor introduce any foreign Forces into any of them by vertue of any Commission Deputation or Authority without consent of both Houses of Parliament and that he had vested the sole power and disposition of the Militia Forts and Navy of all these in both Houses in such ample manner that they should never part with it to any King of England unless they pleased themselves A security says Mr. Pryn so grand and firm that none of our Ancestors ever demanded or enjoyed the like nor any other Kingdom whatsoever since the Creation for ought that I can find and such a self-denying condescension in the King to his people in this particular as no Age can Precedent Thus the sword of Mars which themselves confess the former Kings of England always held was insolently wrested out of the late Kings hands and consequently the Fundamental Government of the Nation subverted in this particular Besides some Parliaments says he p. 40. in former times have had the nomination of the Lord Chancellor some of the Lord Treasurer some of the great Justiciary or some few Judges of England only but never any Parliament of England claim'd or enjoy'd the nomination and appointment of any the great Officers Barons Judges or Treasurers places in Ireland nor yet of the Lord Warden of the Cinque-Ports Chancellors of the Exchequer and Dutchy Secretaries of State Master of the Rolls or Barons of the Exchequer of England yet all these the King for peace-sake hath parted with to us And p. 41. we have the disposal he might have added Horresco referens of all these Officers in England and Ireland both Military and Civil of his sword of War and Peace his Justice his Conscience his Purse his Treasury his Papers his publick Records his Cabinet his Great Seal more than ever we at first expected or desired Thus horridly was the sword of Justice also wrested out of his Majesties hands and consequently the Fundamental Government of the Nation subverted in that particular likewise Another Concession was that no Peer who should be after that Treaty made by the King his Heirs and Successors should sit or vote in the Parliament of England without consent of both Houses of Parliament which says Mr. Pryn p. 43. gives such an extraordinary new power to the House of Commons as they never formerly enjoyed nor pretended to By which provision p. 44. the Commons are made not only in some sence the Judges of Peers themselves which they could not try or judge before by the express letter of Magna Charta cap. 29. and the Common Law but even their very Creators too And if the House of Commons might justly be term'd any part of the Fundamental constitution of our Nation what was this but to subvert the Fundamental Government By other Concessions the Houses were enabled p. 45.
gifts communicated which with some other considerations have wonderfully enlarged the bounds of Professors and Profession Hence there is a noise of Religion and Religious duties in every Corner preaching in abundance and that not in an empty light trivial and vain manner as formerly but to a good proportion of a spiritual Gift so that if you will measure the number of Believers by light gifts and profession the Church may have cause to say who hath born me all these But now if you will take the measure of them by this great discriminating Grace of Christians perhaps you will find their number not so multiplyed Where almost is that Professor who ows his conversion to these days of Light and so talks and professes at such a rate of spirituality as few in former days were in any measure acquainted with that doth not give evidence of a miserably unmortified heart If vain spending of time talents unprofitableness in mens places envy strife variance emulations wrath pride worldliness selfishness be badges of Christians we have them on us and among us in abundance The same Dr. in his Book of Temptations p. 64. asks this Question would any one have thought it possible that such and such professors in our days should have fallen into ways of self of flesh of the World to play at cards Dice revel dance to neglect family closet duties to be proud haughty ambitious worldly covetous oppressive or that they should be turned away after foolish vain ridiculous opinions deserting the Gospel of Christ in which two lies the great temptation that is come on us the inhabitants of this world to try us But doth not every man see that this is come to pass and may we not see how it is come to pass Some loose empty Professors that had never more than a Form of Godliness when they had served their turn of that began the way to them then others began a little to comply and to please the flesh in so doing this by little and little hath reached even the Top-boughs and branches of our profession until almost all flesh hath corrupted its ways and he that departs from these iniquities makes his name a prey if not his person And p. 55 56. How full is the world of specious pretences and pleadings as the liberty and freedom of Christians delivered from a bondage-frame This is a door that in my own observation I have seen sundry go out at into sensuality and Apostasie beginning at a light conversation proceeding to a neglect of the Sabbath publick and private duties ending in dissoluteness and profaneness and then there is leaving off publick things to providence These and the like considerations joyned with the ease and plenty the greatness and promotion of professors have so brought things about that whereas we have by providence shifted places with the men of the world we have by sin shifted spirits with them also we are like a plantation of men carried into a forreign Countrey in a short space they degenerate from the manners of the people from whence they came and fall into those of the countrey whereinto they are brought as if there were something in the Soil and the Air that transformed them Give me leave a little to follow my similitude He that should see the prevailing Party of these Nations many of those in rule power favour with all their adherents and remember that they were a Colony of Puritans whose habitation was in a low place as the Prophet speaks of the City of God translated by an high hand to the mountains they now possess cannot but wonder how soon they have forgot the customes manners ways of their own old people and are cast into the mould of them that went before them in the places whereunto they are translated I speak of us all especially of us who are among the lowest of the people where perhaps this iniquity doth most abound what were those before us that we are not what did they which we do not Prosperity hath slain the foolish and wounded the wise Thus the then Dean of Christ-Church Let 's now return to the Rector of Bramshot Their principles says he p. 54. 64. whose cause is now pleaded if faithfully received and kept will make good men and good Christians and therefore cannot but make good Subjects when men have learnt to fear God they will honour the King indeed and none are more observant of Righteous Laws than they that are most a Law to themselves yea their pattern and practice will be a Law to many others and consequently a main help to Civil Government in a Christian Nation If all this be true then English Presbyterians have not faithfully received and kept Presbyterian Principles for I am sure they have not been good Subjects because Traytors and Rebels against their Soveraign Lord and therefore I shall make bold to conclude from this Author's premisses that they have been neither good Christians nor good men I am sure they dishonoured the King for as his Majesty complained in his Declaration concerning Levyes his Authority was despised by them and as much as in them lay taken from him and reviled in Pulpits and Presses by Persons immediately under their protection and of their recommendation And the London-Pulpitmen if John Price speak truth in his Clerico-Classicum p. 53. told the people that the King was a man of bloud and took hold of all whispering hearsays and probabilities of his wickedness to make him odious to the people And therefore by this John Corbet's good leave I shall conclude that they had not then learn'd to fear God That they were a Law to themselves I easily grant but 't was just as Traytors and other Malefactors use to be who trample under foot the righteous Laws of a Nation because inconsistent with their rebellious ambitious and ungodly designs and are resolved to follow the Law of their own wills and in this Presbyterians were patterns to many others and consequently a main help to the Independents in their destroying those remnants of the Civil Government of this Nation which themselves had for want of time to finish their mischievous enterprizes left undemolished But this Egregious Parasite has not done yet for he would fain delude his Reader with another Apologetick in behalf of his Party Whosoever they be that teach blind obedience Presbyterians teach Faith and Holiness as also Obedience active in all lawful things and passive in things unlawful enjoyned by the higher Power A. I do not understand or believe that there is any such diametral opposition between blind obedience on one hand and faith and holiness on the other but that the same Persons Presbyterians as well as Jesuits may teach both I rather believe that blind obedience in matters prescribed by and agreeable to the word of God will sooner bring a man to heaven than all that Faith and Holiness which too many Modern presbyterian Boutefeaus have taught either by their Doctrine or
purposing to bring the King to Trial when p. 55. nothing serves but the Army prevails the King is brought to Prelatical Presbytery shall not be suffered what pathetick cries and moans sighs and groans are heard in your Pulpits wringing your hands in bitter complaints that the Land is stained with the bloud of our Prince c. when alas the Royal party and many judicious men with them cannot believe but that the root of all this bitterness is that your Crown of Classical Jurisdiction is fallen to the ground And p. 17 18. where as you speak so much of resisting Authority and fill the ears of your Auditors from day to day with rebellizing the Army for their late proceedings against the Members mustering up the same Scriptures teaching and pressing duty to Authority which the Prelatical party did formerly urge against you as that of Solomon Fear thou the Lord and the King put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers Let every Soul be subject to the Higher powers c. Yet we heard not of these things from you when the mutinous Apprentices and others offered violence upon the Houses 1647. No noise then of such Scriptures no putting men in mind to be subject to principalities and powers as if those Scriptures were added since that time Can you presume that men are so blind dull and sottish as not to observe such partial and crafty handling of the Scriptures Word and will of God Do not these practices of yours settle and establish Atheism irreligion and profaneness among men making them to look upon Religion the Gospel the Word of God as upon a mere piece of jugling cheating and deceiving the World and should we take your counsel which you give us from the words of Solomon Meddle not with them that are given to change we should all turn Separatists from you and your ways who have been as full of changes as the Vanes of your Steeples one while stirring up the people against the King and for the Parliament writing Books answering objections and using all manner of endeavours that way that so the Bishops may be dethroned and you advanced witness many of your Sermons preach'd before the Houses and elsewhere another while stirring up the people against the Parliament and for the King lest the Independents should hinder your advance as you did of late in your prayers and preaching expressing greater malignity against the Parliament and their party and greater zeal for the King and his Interest than those very Ministers whose places you possess they being sequestred and cast out for the Tenths of that Anti-Parliamentary malignancy which you have vented Have you not been for Bishops and against Bishops for Common Prayer for Ceremonies and against them Have you not sworn and subscribed and subscribed and sworn over and over again and again conformity and subjection hereunto and yet cast away all and entred into Vows and Covenants against all p. 24. Making your vicissitudes and turnings up and down the subject matter of scorn and contempt and derision both of your persons and function and yet these are the men that a Prince or State may know where to find In the Pulpit Incendiary p. 7. I meet with this story touching one Mr. Edmond Calamy of Aldermanbury London That in the times when the Bishops did bear rule he obeyed their Laws Canons Injunctions Orders and Ceremonies we say not wearing the Surplice reading the Service-Book and Crossing in Baptism c. which many honest and Godly Ministers in those dark days did likewise perform but reading the second Service at the High Altar preaching in a Surplice and Tippet bowing at the Name of Jesus and so zealous an observer of times and seasons that being sick and weak upon Christmass Day yet with much difficulty he got into the Pulpit declaring himself there to this purpose that he thought himself bound in conscience to strive to preach on that day lest the stones in the street should rise up against him And yet upon the wonderful turn of the times Ejection of Episcopacy and advance of Presbytery did presently and without delay not only assert the same but instructed the people in Presbyterian Principles after such a rate of confidence and skill as if his Education had been some Superintendent among the Presbyterian Provinces of the Reformed Churches beyond Sea and not such a notorious conformitant unto and notable stickler for the Prelates Fooleries as the Author of that Pamphlet is pleased to speak in the County of Suffolk in the Kingdome of England The same man gives us this observation p. 7. That as the Constitution of publick Affairs varies among us so the constitutions of these mens Sermons do alter and change one while we find them all for moderation and Christian accommodation and forbearance one of another another while all for Reformation again that is Presbytery in the rigid sence thereof that is that all power may be in the Ministers hands and the Magistrates engaged to put their Orders and Edicts wills and pleasures into execution one while pleading for and pressing the setting up the Government of Christ in the hearts of men minding them to be zealous for the great things of the Gospel Faith Repentance and love among Brethren and not to contend so strenuously for the Mint and Cummin Discipline and Government c. Anotherwhile calling with might and main for Reformation Reformation putting the Crown upon the Head of Christ and the Scepter into his hand pleading for the Government of Jesus Christ that is the exalting themselves above their Brethren and yet these are the men so fixt and constant as none more The truth is these and other Testimonies which might be produced do abundantly evince that Presbyterian Principles alter according to the variation of the Presbyterian Interest And that the same Principles which men of that temper exclaim against and condemn when made use of to the prejudice of their Party or in defence of Prelatical Government have notwithstanding been approved of and reduced into practice by them when the doing so tended to the promotion and advancement of their Interest Bishop Bancroft hath long since manifested to the world by the several instances produced in his Survey of the pretended Holy Discipline c. 26. There is nothing says he more usually objected against the present State Superiority and Authority of Bishops than that of S. Peter 1. Pet. 5. Not as though you were Lords over the Clergy And Luk. 22. 26. But you shall not be so And 't will not be admitted in any wise that we should expound those places of ambitious affectation of Tyrannous practice or of the abuse of such superiority or Jurisdiction But if you will speak of the Right Authority and Jurisdiction of their Elderships the case is altered There are some as it seemeth beyond the Seas who seeing the Pride of the Consistorian Government do affirm that the Power of the Church is only Spiritual and
not any External Exercise Practice and right of any Authority Power and Government With this opposition so much derogating from the dignity of their Elderships Danaeus is moved and answering that conceit saith that although the power of the Church ad animarum salutem sit comparata be instituted for the health of Souls yet notwithstanding it hath necessarily annext unto it an indissoluble band an external exercise practice and use Juris Gubernationis of Law and Government De Potest Eccles c. 3. Against this answer reply as it seemeth is made with the same places mentioned that are urged against our Bishops whereupon Danaeus to make all things clear adds these words to his former Answer and publishes the same from Geneva whereas it may be objected out of Peter Not bearing Rule c. 'T is easily answered Damnatur enim partim abusus non usus illius potestatis partim illius cum civili confusio for partly the abuse is condemned not the use of that power and partly the confounding of it with the civil power Which is the very answer that we make and approve being extorted from them by Gods good providence for the stopping of our mens mouths who upon pretence of those places have opened them so wide against the lawful authority of our Bishops Another example of the like nature we have in the same Chapter It is a thing too manifest saith he with what libelling and railing the Form of our Service of our Ceremonies of our Ornaments of our Apparel c. hath been depraved and shamefully slandered as that our Communion Book was culied out of the Popes Portuise this was abused in Popery that is papistical Whatsoever cometh from the Pope comes first from the Devil If of the Eggs of a Cockatrice can be made wholsome meat to feed with then may also the things that come from the Pope and the Devil be good profitable and necessary to the Church Against these speeches answer hath been made that 't is lawful to try all things and to hold fast that which is good that we must distinguish between the abuse of a thing and its lawful use that as good men sometimes devise that which is Evil so Evil men may sometimes devise that which is profitable But all these answers are misliked denied and condemned by these our Factioners Howbeit upon occasion the stream is turned and they themselves are driven to make the very same Answers for the justifying of their own proceedings and for the maintenance of certain particular matters which they do urge and allow of It hath been laid to their charge that for all their goodly pretences of Reformation yet indeed the course they held did smell most rankly of Anabaptism Donatism and of a new kind of Papism as where they disquiet the peace of the Churches already reformed rail upon our Ministers and their Calling affirm that our Sacraments are not sincerely ministred that there is no Church as it should be but those that they like of that our Ceremonies and Orders are all unlawful that we have no lawful Ministers or Bishops that Princes may not deal in causes Ecclesiastical c. These and many such like points being laid to their charge Cartwright as though he had never dream'd of any thing to the contrary frames this general answer in the name of all his fraternity T. C. B. 2. Ep. If among the filth of their Heresies viz. of Papists Anabaptists and Donatists there may be found any good thing as it were a grain of good Corn in a great deal of darnel that we willingly receive not as theirs but as the Jews did the holy Ark from the Philistines whereof they were unjust owners For herein 't is true that is said the Sheep must not lay down her fell because she sees the Wolf sometimes clothed with it yea it may come to pass that the Synagogue of Satan may have some one thing at some time with more convenience than the true and Catholick Church of Christ Such was the Ceremony of pouring Water once only upon the Child in Baptism used with us and in the most reformed Churches which in some Ages was used by those of the Eunomian Heresy Much more of the same strain is legible in that chapter touching the mutability of the ancient Presbyterians when the changing of their Opinions would render their Interest more considerable And is there no example think you to be met with of the like mutability in our Modern Presbyterians Judge by what follows whether they have not contradicted their own Principles yea and those of their Presbyterian Ancestors For the proof of the latter I refer the Reader to a little Book called Beams of former Light written by Mr. Nye as 't is reported on occasion of that Ordinance made by the Secluded Members at their Re-admission into the House of Commons 1660. imposing on all Ministers the Assemblie's lesser Catechism under the penalty of their being ejected as scandalous p. 101. if they neglected to use it though but 10 Sundays in a year unless on a cause approved of by two Justices against which impositions those Beams of Light discovering how evil 't is to impose doubtful and disputable Forms on Ministers under penalty of Ejection were darted In which Book the Author heaps up the Arguments of the old Presbyterian Nonconformists against the new ones and that injunction of theirs and endeavours to manifest it more harsh and severe than the former Episcopal Impositions p. 104 105. 77. and yet that there was more reason and necessity for those than this p. 107. he throngs together the same Scripture-proofs against this that were formerly urged against those and speaks as superstitiously against a Catechism-Book p. 37 38. as the men of the Presbyterian strain were wont to speak against a Prayer-Book and an Homily-Book From which discourse it appears that those men did for the advancement of their Interest contradict the Principles of their Nonconforming predecessors And that they have upon the same score contradicted their own Principles I shall evidence partly from this John Corbet's affirmations concerning them partly from their late Book called The Covenanters Plea against Absolvers In which last piece I observe that though they did not well understand p. 6. what good thing can be assigned which falls under no divine Precept and consequently they did not understand how any good thing can be indifferent and uncommanded yet p. 10. they grant that the matter of a Promise Vow Oath or Covenant may be something not necessary or previously required of us by some divine Law but free and indifferent not determined by the divine Law And that rational and religious Acts for such they affirm Oaths Vows and Covenants to be Ch. 2. Sect. 3. Ch. 3. p. 11. yea sacred Invocations of the name of God preces of divine Worship Ch. 2. Sect. 3. p. 5. and p. 6. S. 3. may be exercised about matters left indifferent not enjoyned by the
Discipline and Government is founded and exercised 2. Whether those English Presbyterians who have covenanted to endeavour the reformation of Religion in the Kingdom of England in Discipline and Government according to the example of the best reformed Churches in the number of which Churches they may well be supposed to reckon the Kirk of Scotland ought not to be look'd upon as persons engaging themselves to imitate that Kirk by endeavouring the Introduction of the like practices here in England grounded on the like principles 3. Whether therefore such an approbation of those Principles and Practices ought not in justice to have been mentioned as part of their Character and 4. Whether persons that may justly have such a character affixt upon them ought in justice or reason of State to be protected and encouraged or rejected and depressed Whereas this Author tells us p. 24. 34. that the men of the Presbyterian perswasion are not lukewarm but true zelots I answer They are so much the more dangerous and more likely to be Instruments of mischief unless their zeal be ballasted with knowledge and discretion and exerted in lawful ways Indeed if they are like the Scotch Disciplinarian zelots before mentioned they are so far from being lukewarm that they are rather Seditious Incendiaries and prone to nothing more than the kindling of devouring Fires in that Nation where they are encourag'd Nevertheless says he they have no fellowship with the spirit of Enthusiastical and Anabaptistical fancy and frenzy What! not in their main and rooted Principles By which he characterizes them p. 20 21. 30 31. which I intimate chiefly as another Argument of the lameness and imperfection of that character We have reason to believe that our modern Presbyterians are somewhat better than their Forefathers if they do not agree with them and the Anabaptists 1. In disturbing the Church under pretence of reforming it 2. In labouring both by conferences in private and by Sermons in publick to draw the common people from their liking the present State 3. In publishing factious Books to the view of the world 4. In disdaining and reproaching Magistrates for endeavouring to bring them to conformity by compulsion 5. In slandering and reviling those Ministers that withstand their factious proceedings attributing much good to themselves and pouring contempt and discredit upon their opposites 6. In impugning the prescript Form of Prayer 7. In holding that the word of God must of necessity be preach'd before the Administration of the Sacraments 8. In protesting that they go not about to take any authority from Magistrates even while they seek to overthrow the Government of the State That the Anabaptists in Germany were thus guilty and the Presbyterians in England in Q. Elizabeth's days I refer the Reader for proof to Oliver Ormerod's picture of a Puritan written about those times and reprinted 1605. wherein he endeavours to prove that the Puritans then resembled the Anabaptists in above fourscore Points See also Archbishop Whitgift's defence of his Answer to the Admonition p. 33 34. in Fol. And I wish it were not easie to manifest that our late Covenanting Presbyterians have had too much fellowship with the spirit of these Anabaptistical Frenzies now mention'd who says this Author are no Fanaticks although they begin to be by some abus'd under that name But he might have known that turbulent Presbyterians have been so call'd long since by one that had skill enough to give persons such names as were suitable to their Natures even King James himself in his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 B. 2. where speaking of some Scotch Puritans such fiery-spirited-Presbyterians as endeavoured to introduce a parity in the Church you shall never find says he with any High-land or Border Thieves more lies and vile perjuries than with those Fanatick Spirits c. But says this Author they are persons of known learning prudence piety and gravity in great numbers Here it may be question'd 1. How he can prove this Encomium of them to be true 2. Whether the Quakers do not excel them in gravity the Anabaptists in piety the Independents in prudence the Prelatists in learning and some Jesuits in all four and yet this Author seems willing enough to have all these parties rejected and depressed Besides of inferior rank a vast multitude of knowing serious honest people 1. This also wants proof 2. The more learning prudence piety and gravity those of the superior rank have the more peaceably and quietly they will live under lawful Governours and the more obediently they will submit to their Laws which therefore if either they or those of inferior rank refuse to do they are either less knowing or less serious and honest than in conscience it concerns those to be who expect to be protected and encouraged by Governors None of all which are led blindfold by Tradition or implicit Faith This man sure is a very knowing person himself if he be so well acquainted with all the Presbyterians as to be able to aver this of them all or of a vast multitude of them upon good grounds But is he indeed certain that none of them are so lazy ignorant and sottish as to be led blindâ—old by the Tradition and dictates of their Presbyterian Parsons Did none of them by an implicit Faith believe it lawful to take the Covenant Do none of them by an implicit Faith believe the Rites and Forms by Law and Canons establisht among us unlawful p. 29. 39. Was it not an implicit Faith in the seditious Doctrines of the Society of Jesus whereby they believed it lawful to take up Arms against their lawful Soveraign Or do run headlong into Fanatick delusions Are any turn'd Fanaticks at last but those that were first such Presbyterians as himself describes p. 21 22 But they give up themselves to the sole direction and authority of the holy Scriptures He hath told us before that they deny not due respect and reverence to venerable Antiquity p. 20. 30. Let him shew if he can how they respect and reverence venerable Antiquity if they afford it not some directive Authority 2. Why may not Independents and Anabaptists as well be said to give up themselves to the sole direction and Authority of the holy Scriptures as Presbyterians Wherefore impartial Reason will conclude that they chose this way as with sincerity of affection so with gravity of judgment and that the things themselves even the more disputable part of them as that against the Hierarchy and Ceremonies are such as may frequently prevail with good and wise men Which inference signifies nothing till the truth of the premises be clear'd except the Authors confidence that the Prelatists have reason to believe whatsoever he says in the praise of Presbyterians merely because he is bold enough to say it Inasmuch as they appear to those that have embrac'd them to have the Impress of Divine Authority and the Character of Evangelical Purity Dares this Author deny that the Principles of
other Sectaries appear to those that have embrac'd them to have the Impress of Divine Authority and the Character of Evangelical Purity If not does it follow that those men also chose their way with sincerity of affection and gravity of judgment or that their opinions may frequently prevail with good and wise men if it does not follow why does he argue so weakly and injudiciously For the reasons aforegoing the infringment of due liberty in these matters would perpetuate most unhappy controversies in the Church from age to age It seems the man is of opinion that all parties ought to be tolerated yea encouraged who chuse their way with sincerity of affection and gravity of judgment and upon such grounds as may frequently prevail with good and wise men inasmuch as they appear to them to have the Impress of Divine Authority and the Character of Evangelical Purity If he be not of this opinion let him shew why Presbyterians ought to be encouraged and not others that have the same qualifications If he be let him produce convincing Arguments that other Sects have not all these qualifications that is that the Independents Anabaptists and Quakers were for the generality either Fools or Knaves when they chose those ways Besides does he imagine that the Independents Anabaptists and Quakers are not as desirous of due liberty in their way as the Presbyterians are in theirs or that the men of those perswasions are so lukewarm in their affections or so inconsiderable for their number as that the infringment of their liberty will not perpetuate most unhappy Controversies in this Church Ergò by this Authors Presbyterian Logick they ought in reason of State to be protected and encouraged as well as Presbyterians If the three next Pages prove any thing they evince that the Presbyterian Leaven will from time to time sowre the lump of this Church and State if such literally-Polemical and unchristianly-practical Teachers as too many of them are be protected and encouraged 'T is no wonder that Tares should grow where they are suffered to be sown and that they should spoil the Wheat where they are nourished I find it observed by a late writer See the Apologie for Bishops sitting and voting in Parliament P. 73. out of Bishop Bancroft that he long since plainly foretold that the Puritans would never give over their clamour for Reformation till they had utterly ruined the whole Kingdom and Church and yet said he there are divers meaning men in great places that would gladly have these things smothered up being willing to think that the Puritans were no such dangerous men as he and others did take them to be only scrupulous and peevish perhaps about Ceremonies and therefore were willing to forbear them and not to censure them sharply But that Prelate did wisely tell them That if any such mischiefs which God forbid shall happen hereafter they were sufficiently warned that both should and might in good time have prevented them and withall it would then be found true which Livy says Urgentibus Rempublicam fatis Dei hominum salutares admonitiones spernuntur When the Lord for the sins of a people is purposed to punish any Country he blindeth the eye of the wise so as they shall either neglect or not perceive the ordinary means for the safety thereof c. This Author would perswade us p. 29. 39. that the numerous Presbyterian party will not vary from it self or vanish upon changes in Government or new Accidents for it rests not upon any private temporary variable occasion but upon a cause perpetual and everlasting Those forementioned principles of science and practice which give it its proper being are of that firm and fixt nature that new contingencies will not alâ—er them nor length of time wear them out To which I answer 1. If this Party is so invariable how comes it to pass that those Rites and Ceremonies which himself tells us p. 28. 38. were heretofore by the greatest part of the Ministers nam'd Puritans look'd upon and yielded to as things in their own nature Indifferent are now accounted p. 29. 39 by most of this way Unlawful Does not this argue a variation in this Party from it self Hath not length of time worn out those their former Principles of science and practice Dr. John Burges in his Preface to his answer in Vindication of Bishop Morton touching Ceremonies tells us p. 11. that the State in K. James his Reign would never suffer these Ceremonies to be questioned of unlawfulness which Dr. Reynolds Dr. Chaderton Dr. Spark and the rest of the most eminent men of this Nation who seem'd to favour that Party would neither affirm to be unlawful nor be known that any of that side were so weak as to think so But now it seems the men fam'd so much by this Author for their Learning and Orthodoxy their excelling in Polemical and Practical Divinity p. 23. 33. these Judicious and Prudent men that have no Fellowship with Anabaptistical Fancy and Frenzy p. 24. 34. these knowing and wise men p. 24 25. these fixt and unalterable men p. 29. 39. are grown so weak and feeble in their Intellectuals so Feminine in their resolves as to deem them unlawful Again if they are such an invariable Party in their Principles of science and practice what 's the reason that in these days they have Covenanted to endeavour the extirpation of that English Hierarchy which in the days of yore their Presbyterian Ancestors were far from condemning as wicked and intolerable Witness this passage which Crakanthorp in his Desens Eccles Anglicanae contra Archiepisc Spalat p. 243. quotes out of Henry Jacob one of that Party who is his Tract de Veritate Vocat Minister p. 88. against Johnson the Brownist speaks thus Quisquis quicquam de Ecclesiae Anglicanae Statu intelligit non potest non videre multos eosque doctos in Ecclesiâ Anglicanâ sentire docere Hierarchicum quod nunc est in eâ Regimen unicum esse verum ac legitimum Regiminis genus ferè omnes etiam Puritanos idem ut indifferens legitimum agnoscere perpaucos verò vix usquam quenquam invenies qui ut malum impium aut non ferendum judicant He that understands any thing of the State of the English Church cannot but see that many learned men in the Church of England believe and teach that the Hierarchical Government by which 't is ruled is the only true and legitimate Form of Government and that almost all men acknowledge it indifferent and lawful and that there are very few scarce any men any where to be found who judge it evil wicked or intolerable Thus he who in the same P. is quoted by that Doctor as expressing himself to this purpose in behalf of the English Church-Government and Discipline Haec verò Christi esse dicuntur licet non à Christo sed ab Ecclesiâ mandata praescripta sint cùm Ecclesiae Authoritatem Christus
Nobility Gentry and Commonalty and when they had got the power in their hands O what grateful and ingenuous returns they made them for that benignity and favour They ruin'd the Bishops not sparing even those most heartily Protestant Bishops who had been so benign and favourable to them they raised a War against the King plundered sequestred murthered those that adhered to him and by degrees extorted from himself such grand diminutions of his Royal Prerogative as that they left him little more than the Title of a King And are such men as these such true English Protestants so good Christians as that they ought in justice and reason of State to be still treated benignly and favourably Nay rather should not King Nobles and Commons p. 40. 50. remember their darling Protestantism I mean that good English Protestantism contained in the 39. Articles by Law establisht in the Church of England that true mean between Fanatick and Jesuitical Protestantism Should not I say King Nobles and Commons remember this their darling and in reason of State abandon that sort of persons who have contributed so much to the destruction of it Let them not sleep securely while the seeds-men of the envious one sow the Tares of Division in our Field not only to weaken and hinder but to choak and eat out our English Protestant Faith Order and Government And let our gracious Soveraign still shew himself gracious where his undeserved clemency is like to produce happy permanent effects but on the other side let the mischiefs that befel his Royal Father through the stubborn Insolency of ingrateful and disloyal Presbyterians make him wary in time and circumspectly provident for his own and the Kingdoms safety lest himself also know and feel by sad experience what it is to protect and encourage presbyterians P. 41. 51. The Author takes upon him to vindicate Presbyterians from the many Calumnies with which he tells us they are loaded The first that he mentions is their plucking from the Civil Magistrate his power in Causes Ecclesiastical and erecting Imperium in Imperio Which says he is a groundless and gross mistake and to prove it so he urges the declared judgment of the Highest of that way according to their own words which are these To the Political Magistrate is allowed a Diatactick ordering regulating power about Ecclesiastical affairs in a Political way so that he reforms the Church when corrupted in Divine Worship Discipline or Government But notwithstanding this there may be Imperium in Imperio For the Kirk may assume to themselves the power of judging whether there are such corruptions or no and whether the Civil Magistrate reforms those corruptions in a warrantable manner or no and consequently of checking him in both respects if he chance to judge otherwise than they do witness the next He convenes and convocates Synods and Councils made up of Ecclesiastical Persons to advise and conclude determinatively according to the word of God how the Church is to be reformed and refined from corruption how to be guided and governed when reformed But notwithstanding this there may be Imperium in Imperio For the Kirk may challenge to themselves a power of convening without yea against the Civil Magistrate's command and here they actually challenge the power of conclusively determining how the Church is to be reformed and governed He ratifies and establishes within his Dominions the just and necessary Decrees of the Church in Synods and Councils by his Civil Sanction But notwithstanding this there may be Imperium in Imperio For the Kirk may claim the power of determining whether its own Decrees be just and necessary or no and of puting them in execution though the Civil Magistrate deny to ratify them by his Civil Sanction He judges and determines definitively with ae consequent and political judgment or judgment of Discretion concerning things judged and determined antecedently by the Church in reference to his own Act. But notwithstanding this there may be Imperium in Imperio For the Kirk may take upon them to controul the King as well as private persons if his difinitive Judgment of discretion which they allow to every private person p. 20. 30. in reference to his own act should chance to contradict their antecedent determinations He takes care politically that even matters and Ordinances merely and formally Ecclesiastical be duly managed by Ecclesiastical Persons orderly called thereunto But notwithstanding this there may be Imperium in Imperio For the Kirk may imagine that in case the King refuse to take this Political care themselves may appoint Ecclesiastical Persons to manage them and that their so doing is an orderly call to those Persons to act accordingly He hath a compulsive punitive or corrective power formally Political in matters of Religion in reference to all sorts of Persons and things under his Jurisdiction But notwithstanding this there may be Imperium in Imperio For holy Kirk may deny her self to be in matters of Religion under his Jurisdiction He may Politically compel the outward man of all Persons Church-Officers or others under his Dominion unto External performance of their respective duties and offices in matters of Religion punishing them if either they neglect to do their duty at all or do it corruptly But notwithstanding this also there may be Imperium in Imperio For the Kirk may fancy themselves the only or chief Judges of what are the duties and offices belonging to such and such Persons and whether they neglect or corruptly perform them So that if Presbyterians grant no more power to belong to the King of England in Ecclesiastical matters they deny his Supremacy and consequently erect Imperium in Imperio How they who give up themselves to the sole direction and Authority of the holy Scriptures p. 24. 34. can in reason acknowledge a spiritual power over the Conscience as intrinsecally belonging to the Church I leave him to inform us who would have us believe p. 43. 53 that Presbyterians do not claim for the Convocation or any other Ecclesiastical Convention an Independency on Parliaments That they do not claim it for a Convocation of Bishops and Episcopal men I am apt enough to believe But I cannot entertain any reasonable hope that they who have Covenanted so deeply in the behalf of the Scotch Discipline and Form of Government as to swear an endeavour of reforming things in England according to the example of the Kirk of Scotland as one of the best reformed Churches will acknowledge the ratification of the decrees of all Ecclesiastical conventions to depend on Parliaments For if Bishop Bramhall deceive us not Fair Warning p. 9. 'T is a Scotch maxime that Parliamentary ratifications can no way alter Church-Canons concerning the worship of God for Ecclesiastical Discipline ought to be exercised whether it be ratified by the Civil Magistrate or not The want of a Civil Sanction to the Church is but like lucrum cessans not damnum emergens as it adds nothing
of the Scotch Discipline and Government which so manifestly erects Imperium in Imperio may not justly be looked upon as men that would enervate Monarchy and render it too impotent in Scotland 2. Why they who swear to endeavour to bring the Churches of God in England Scotland and Ireland to Uniformity in Discipline and Church-Government and consequently to endeavour the Introduction of that Scotch Form of Church-Government into England may not justly be looked upon as men that would enervate Monarchy in England also and render it too impotent by setting up there also Imperium in Imperio 3. Why they who swear the extirpation of Prelacy that is Church-Government by Archbishops Bishops c. may not justly be look'd upon as men that would enervate the power of that Monarchy which esteems that Form of Church-Government as a very considerable support and strengthening to it Witness the Aphorism of that wise Monarch King James No Bishop no King the truth whereof King Charles found by sad experience * Dum Episcoporum Jurisdictionem invadunt Anarchae caveant Principes Scitè admodum monet Poeta Tunc tua res agitur paries cum proximus ardet ubi enim Episcoporum ditio expugnanda obsidetur ibidem proximè imo potissimè in Regum Principatus irruptio tentabitur S. Clara Apolog. Episc p. 20. 4. Why they who when they had power in their hands constrained our former Soveraign to grant such Propositions as left him only a titular Kingship may not justly be look'd upon as persons that would whensoever 't is in their power again enervate Monarchy and render it too impotent When he hath given a satisfactory answer to these Queries I may possibly trouble him with some more of the like import for I believe there are so many grounds of making this objection that in probability the only reason why this Author could find no other rise of it than what he mentions was because he would not seek it That which he is pleased to mention as the rise is That the Presbyterians were not willing 1. To come under any Yoke but that of the Laws of the Realm Or 2. To pay arbitrary Taxes levied without consent of Parliament To the 1. hoping that whatsoever this Authors words imply to the contrary they were willing to come under the Yoke of the Laws of God also at least such of them as they thought would not lie too heavy upon their Necks I answer 1. If they had been willing to come under the Yoke of the Laws of the Realm they would long ago have ceased to be Presbyterians that is shakers off of the yoke of Prelacy and Ceremonies establisht by those Laws 2. If they had been unwilling to come under any other yoke they would not have come under the yoke of the Covenant since it was not injoyned by any Law of the Realm 3. They have not shewed themselves willing to come under the yoke of the Oath of Supremacy imposed by Law since they have been far from a practical acknowledgment that the King of England is the only Supreme Governour of this Realm and all other his Dominions and Countries in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or Causes and that the reforming ordering corrrecting of them is by a Statute 1. Eliz. for ever united and annexed to the Imperial Crown of this Realm but on the contrary themselves usurpt the power of reforming ordering correcting them without yea against his consent and in so doing they enervated our Monarchy and rendred it too impotent in a chief part of its Prerogative nay too many of them are so far from acknowledging the Kings Supremacy in their actions that they refrain even from a verbal acknowledgment of it in their prayers for when they pray for the King they make a halt at the end of those words Defender of the Faith as if the confessing him Supreme Head in all Ecclesiastical causes and over all Ecclesiastical persons were either Error Heresie or a piece of Treason To the 2. I answer by demanding 1. Whether there be not as much if not more Law for the Kings imposing Taxes in some cases without the consent of Lords Temporal and Commons than there is for their imposing them without the Kings consent 2. Whether the King and his Privy Council are not more competent Judges of the exigency of times and cases in reference to such impositions than Presbyterian subjects 3. Whether any Law of the Land forbids the payment of Taxes imposed by the King without consent of the three Estates viz. Lords Spiritual Temporal and Commons 4. Whether it does not equally forbid the payment of Taxes imposed by the three Estates and much more by two only without the King 5. Whether Presbyterians were not willing enough to pay arbitrary Taxes to the Presbyterian Lords Temporal and Commons though levied without the Kings consent and therefore without consent of Parliament and consequently whether that be not false which this Author tells us that they were not willing to pay Taxes levied without consent of Parliament 6. Whether in so doing they did not abundantly manifest that 't was not the arbitrariness of the Taxes but either their being imposed by the King or else their being imposed to such ends as did not serve the Presbyterian Interest that was the main reason of their quarrelling with and contending against those Imposition 'T is therefore too evident that the Presbyterians had a design to enervate our English Monarchy since though they refused not to pay arbitrary Taxes to some Lords Temporal and Commons levied without the Kings consent and on purpose to carry on a War against him yet they were unwilling to pay arbitrary Taxes to the King though levied for the defence of his person and Authority because levied without consent of Parliament Upon which pretence also their great Advocate Mr. Prynne would fain have perswaded them to deny the payment of the Assessments imposed by those powers that routed the Presbyterian Lords and Commons That Author in his Reasons why he would not pay Taxes viz. to the Independent Lords and Commons tells us p. 1. That by the Fundamental Laws and known Statutes of this Realm no Tax Tallage Aid Imposition Contribution Loan or Assessment whatsoever may or ought to be imposed or levied on the Free-men and people of this Realm of England but by the will and common assent of the Earls Barons Knights Burgesses Commons and whole Realm in a free and full Parliament by Act of Parliament all Taxes not so imposed and levied though for the common defence and profit of the Realm being unjust oppressive c. This is sound Doctrine it seems when Independents domineer but in the time of the Presbyterian Tyranny Taxes might be imposed and levied by some Lords Temporal and Commons only without Act of Parliament and yet not be accounted either unjust or oppressive or inconsistent with the Liberty of the Subject The reason was because Presbyterian ambition was cherish'd and
danger rashly and unnecessarily at first nor afterwards by unlawful means preserved themselves from a legal Trial and the stroke of Justice for those misdemeanors But when resisting evil and those that offer it can be reconciled with not resisting it or them and with the suffering of real and much more pretended injuries When raising War against our Royal Soveraign and continuing it for several years can justly be interpreted making peace When the applying Curse ye Meroz yea curse ye bitterly the Inhabitants thereof Judg. 5. 23. to those that came not forth to fight against the King and his loyal subjects can consist with blessing and praying for those that are supposed despitefully to use and persecute us when Dove-like harmlesness and Wolfish cruelty cease to be contradictories when to wrest the power of the Militia out of the Kings hands and to deny him his Negative voice is to render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's when Covenanting against Prelacy and our Church-Discipline and Orders is all one with the observing and doing what our lawful Governours require when putting up our swords into their sheaths and loving doing good to and forgiving our enemies is compatible with reproaching their persons with ruining themselves and their Families with turning them out of their legal possessions with plundering their Goods sheathing swords into their bowels and spilling their innocent and loyal bloud then and not till then will Presbyterian practises be reconcileable with Christ's precepts and agreeable to that Religion which he taught the world and which as this Author well observes is not variable according to the will of man but indispensably binds every Soul and is grounded upon an unchangeable eternal Truth which if the English Independent J. Goodwin or Bucanan the Scotch Presbyterian had believed heretofore they had not made such an ugly Fanatick Apology as they did for subjects taking up Arms against and murdering their Soveraign De jure Regni P. 50 55. and if the Presbyterian professors of this Religion and of their own true knowledge and sense of the Nature of it had acted suitably to such a profession they had never thought it expedient to reduce his late Majesty to such dismal straits at the Isle of Wight where they constrained him to grant them so much liberty as miserably enfeebled the Monarchical and Legal power of the Kings of England whereby whatsoever he cants in the following lines of a King 's ruling over a free people Presbyterians have sufficiently taught us that they take more delight in making good Kings their slaves than in manifesting themselves to be good subjects To be a powerful Monarch says he p. 48. ever a free people is the freedom and glory of our Soveraign Lord above all the Potentates of the Earth The more disloyal creatures were those presbyterians who in that fatal Isle treated with such a Soveraign Lord and once powerful Monarch to such bad purposes as to despoil him of his Royal Freedom and Glory and by their imperious demands to dwindle this potent and glorious Monarchy into a slavish ignoble titular Kingship whence we may conjecture what a licentious treasonable liberty it is that such Free-born subjects breath after and how insolently they 'l again exercise it over our Soveraign Lord the King if by his Majesties connivence and indulgence they meet with the like opportune advantages of winding themselves by degrees into the like power From which premises I conclude that notwithstanding any thing produced here by this Author to the contrary this second Charge against the Presbyterians that they are Anti-Monarchical is a true accusation not a calumny The third Calumny as he calls it with which Presbyterians are loaded is the charge of Disobedience and Rebellion and this says our Author were a crying sin indeed But yet he thinks it necessary to speak something Apologetical at least to mitigate the business and remove prejudice and therefore p. 49. he tells us The Presbyterian party in England never engaged under a less Authority than that of both Houses of Parliament A. The word engaged is of dubious signification 1. Did they never engage that is subscribe the Engagement to be faithful to the Commonwealth as establisht without King or House of Lords under a less Authority than that of both Houses of Parliament 2. Did they never engage that is raise and foment jealousies against the King reproaches against the Bishops or preach Division Sedition and Schism instead of Union Loyalty and Obedience under a less Authority than that of both Houses of Parliament Nay 3. Did they never engage in fighting against the King under a less Authority than that of both Houses of Parliament Is he ignorant that two thirds and more of the Lords deserted that house because of those frequent Tumults which drave the King from London and that the major part of the House of Commons left that House also for the same reasons and that new men See Judge Jenkins his Lex Terrae p. 35. were chosen in their places against Law by the pretended warrant of a counterfeit Seal Is he Ignorant that his late Majesty in a Declaration 1642. occasioned by the Ordinance of the Lords and Commons for the assessing men a 20th part of their Estates hath these words Our good Subjects will no longer look upon these and the like results as upon the Counsels and Conclusions of both our houses of Parliament though all the world knows even that authority can never justify things unwarrantable by Law They well know how few of the persons trusted by them are present at their Consulations of above 500 not 80 and of the House of Peers not a fifth part that they who are present enjoy not the Priviledge and Freedome of Parliament but are besieged by an Army and awed by the same Tumults which drave us and their Fellow-members from thence to consent to what some few seditious schismatical persons among them do propose Is to fight under the banner of such a minor part of both Houses or of the superinduced major part illegally chosen to engage under no less Authority than that of both Houses of Parliament nay not only illegally but treasonably chosen for to counterfeit the great Seal and by such a Seal they were chosen is Treason by the 25 of Edw. 3. 4. Suppose they had engaged that is fought against the King under the Authority of both Houses legally called sitting in their full number and remaining free yet even then they had fought against their Soveraign upon no higher Authority than Subjects could give them which was none at all to that end for the two Houses though consisting of all three Estates Lords Spiritual Temporal and Commons are no more than Subjects whatsoever this Author insinuates to the contrary in the following Lines I have read says he that the Parliament of England hath several capacities and among the rest these two 1. That it represents the people as subjects and so it
and Idolatry And in the New Testament that covetous Persons revilers extortioners are in the number of those unrighteous men that shall not inherit the kingdom of God that they also who are guilty of idolatry witchcraft hatred variance emulation wrath strife fedition murder shall be excluded the kingdom of Heaven as well as adulterers fornicators drunkards and when 't is evident to us from your practises that you presbyterian Ministers have for many years been in a Scripture account Wizards and Idolaters because you have behaved your selves stubbornly and rebelliously against the command and Authority of God and the King contentiously wrathfully and seditiously against the inferiour Governours sent by him as the supreme that you have born false witness against those that were loyal and obedient Subjects as Traytors Incendiaries c. And then have manifested your selves so insatiably covetous of their goods and legal possessions that some of your party have enjoyed plundered goods and sequestred livings legally belonging to honest Royalists and besides all this you have prayed for the prosperity of Presbyterian Armies and encouraged them to fight against the King and cursed those that did not and the more of the Kings Friends your forces killed the more heartily you gave thanks to God and by such approving compliances are guilty of the bloud of thousands of the Kings Loyal Subjects and consequently of so many murders To kill any man in war without Authority derived from him or them that have legal power to make war being murder and that your Presbyterian Lords and Commons had no such power as to that war which they made and you abetted is evident enough from this that a Law of the Land 25 Edw. 3. c. 2. makes it Treason to levy war against the King in his Realm or to be adherent to the Kings enemies in his Realm giving them aid or comfort in the Realm or elsewhere Since also 't is no better than murder to kill or put those men to death whose lives as well as goods lands c. the Law hath taken special care to preserve you are by your approbation partakers of their sin who murdered such men That you approved the taking away their lives who adhered to the King in the late wars we presume you will not deny yea you covenanted to do them mischief under the Notion of Malignants Incendiaries and Evil Instruments That the Law of the Land saves them harmless is evident from 11 Henry 7. c. 1. Wherein 't is declared to be against all Laws Reason and good conscience that Subjects going with their Soveraign Lord in Wars attending upon him in his person or being in other places by his commandment within this land or without should lose or forfeit any thing for doing their duty or Service of Allegiance Wherein likewise 't was enacted that no manner of person or persons whatsoever that attend upon the King and Soveraign Lord of this Land for the time being in his person and do him true and faithful service of Allegiance in the same or be in other places by his commandment in his wars within this land or without that for the said deed and true duty of Allegiance he or or they be in no wise convict or attaint of high Treason nor of other offences for that cause by Act of Parliament or otherwise by any Process of Law whereby he or any of them shall lose or forfeit life lands tenements rents possessions hereditaments goods chattels or any other things but to be for that deed and service utterly discharged of any vexation trouble or loss And if any Act or Acts or other Process of the Law hereafter thereupon for the same happen to be made contrary to this Ordinance that then that Act or Acts or other Process of Law whatsoever they shall be stand and be utterly void Now you Presbyterian Preachers being thus guilty with what face can you reprove our prophaneness or judge us to Hell for those vices which are but motes in comparison of those beams which an ordinary sight may discern in your own eyes and tell us if you can why these practices of yours do not give us just cause to suspect that either you are very scandalously ignorant of the most material and concerning portions of holy Scripture or that you do not give any credit to them and then why do you seek to affright us from our intemperateness and lewdness with such mormo's as your selves are too sturdy to be scar'd with or else that you have some Salvoes and comfortable reserves which might keep us from despair and make us presume upon Heaven as well as your selves if you would please to acquaint us with them And therefore till your selves are more reformed and civilized and walk more orderly towards God and the King towards the Laws of Nature and Scripture and this Nation you cannot in modesty expect that your Sermons should prevail upon us to restrain our debauchery or convert us from dissoluteness and disorder And now let this Author prove if he can as strongly as he boldly affirms that the men whom he pleads for who are such bad Christians must needs be good Subjects But p. 56. The man goes on to prevaricate and abuse his Readers into a good opinion of Presbyterians Neither are they wandring starrs a people given to Change fit to overturn and pull down but not to build up they do not hang in the air but build upon a firm ground they have settled principles consistent with the Rules of Stable Policy Contrariwise Fanaticks truly and not abusively so called do build Castles in the Air and are fit Instruments to disturb and destroy and root out but never to compose and plant and settle for which cause their Kingdom could never hold long in any time or place of the World Vpon this ground Presbytery not Sectarian Anarchy hath been assaulted with greatest violence by the more observing Prelatists against this they have raised their main batteries This appeared formidable for 't is stable and uniform and like to hold if once settled in good earnest From which heap of words I gather 1. That the Presbyterian Lords and Commons were Fanaticks truly so called since they manifested themselves for several years together fit instruments to disturb and destroy and root out the Order Governours and Government establisht by Law but when they had so far disturbed things as to destroy by Force and Arms that Form of Policy in Church and State when they had done fighting against the King and had gotten him into their clutches instead of shewing their skill in composing planting and setling they employed their time in building Castles in the Air till the Independent Fanaticks out-witted them and cunningly jugled that power out of their hands which they had by force and violence wrested from the hands of his Majesty and the Laws 2. I gather that the principles of the Anarchical sectarians are more consistent with the Rules of Stable-policy than