thought necessary long within the Apostles times even as early as it was said by some I am of Paul I am of Apollo c. and therefore saith in his Dialogue Adversus Luciferian Ecclesiae salus in summi Sacerdotis dignitate pendet cui si non exors quaedam ab omnibus eminens detur potestas tot in Ecclesiis efficientur schismata quot Sacerdotes S. Cyprian also Epist. 55. Non aliunde haereses obortae sunt aut nata sunt schismata quam c. and so also lib. 4. epist. 9. Unde enim Schismata Haereses obortae sunt oriuntur nisi dum Episcopus qui unus est praesumptione contemnitur c. Master Calvin also himself upon Philipp 1. 1. Fateor quidem ut sunt hominum ingenia mores non posse ordinem stare inter verbi Ministros quin reliquis praesit unus So that we cannot apprehend the abjuration of Episcopacy to be a meane to that unity in this Article mentioned That the Lord may be one and his Name one amongst us but rather the continuation thereof according to the counsell of the holy Martyr S. Cyprian Unus Deus unus Dominus unus Episcopus and that of Ignatius ad magnes b Subjecti estote Episcope vobis mutuè ut Christus Patri ut inter vos divina quaedam sit unio Next Prophanenesse is here also to be cast out with Episcopacy yet who may not fear Gods Judgements if he deny the detestable growth of prophanenesse since the contempt of that Apostolicall institution of Episcopacy So that this Article as to Bishops extirpation we must refuse upon that close upon which others take it lest as it is said we should partake in others sin and consequently in their plagues Thirdly because neither can we swear to endeavour the extirpation of that part of this Church-government by Archbishops an Ecclesiasticall constitution so confessedly ancient nor that part of this Church-government by Deanes and Chapters that is a society of grave Divines of Presbyters joyned to the Bishop in his see of residence as assistants in Councell and Government as James Bishop of Ierusalem had his resident Presbyters Acts 21. 18. and consulted with them vers. 20. According also to the ancient generall and continued custom of the Church of God ever since the first Christian Emperours time and moreover endowed with means given to them by the last Wils and Testaments of many which it is not lawfull for us to endeavour to annull Hebr. 9. 17. and by the gifts of many other Donors who had true propriety in their goods and might and did transfer the undoubted property to those to be enjoyed by the right and liberty of the Subject especially such endowments having been consecrated and devoted unto God for pious uses and which may not therefore by us as we conceive be endeavoured to be alienated Prov. 20. 25. Numb. 16. 38. And as to the exercises of piety so also to the encouragement of the most excellent part of learning the study of divinity and of holy Scripture We shall with the same sincerity reality and constancy in our severall Vocations endeavour with our estates and lives mutually to preserve the Rights and Priviledges of the Parliaments and the Liberties of the Kingdoms and to preserve and defend the Kings Majesties Person and Authority in the preservation and defence of the true Religion and Liberties of the Kingdoms that the world may beare witnesse with our Consciences of our loyalty and that we have no thoughts or intentions to diminish His Majesties just power and greatnesse Because in the third Article whereas we are required and that in the first place to binde our selves absolutely without limitation expressed To preserve the Rights and Priviledges of Parliaments and the Liberties of the Kingdoms and were likewise tied simply and indefinitely to defend the Kings Person State and Honour by the Oath of Allegiance and the late Protestation here when we are bidden to swear to defend his Majesties Person and Authority it is added In the preservation and defence of the true Religion and Liberties of the Kingdoms therefore this manner of swearing we dare not admit till it be publikely declared by the Imposers that the meaning of those words is not as to some it may sound that I binde my selfe to preserve and defend his Majesties Person and Authority so farre forth as he shall preserve and defend true Religion and the Liberties of the Kingdoms Since by the holy Scriptures of the old and new Testament by the Law of Nature and Nations by the Oath of God and by true Religion we are bound to endeavour the preservation and defence of his Person and Authority though he were a persecutor of the true Religion and an abridger of our Liberties such as were Saul and Nero in their times And surely a larger Declaration of our endeavours simply to defend his Person is at this time necessary when through the divisions of the Kingdom his sacred Majestie is so endangered and that his Majesty hath often complained of affronts offered to his person and hath complained also that some have endeavoured to kill his Person in two set battails and that there is nothing more frequent in the minds and mouths of some Shimei's then that the King is popishly affected A Papist in his heart and therefore some furious Zelot may not onely upon these surmises conclude himselfe exempted in case from the duty of preservation and defence of his Royall Person but also mistake it as a debt to this Covenant even to offer violence to his sacred Majestie May not therefore some such fuller Declaration and explication of our duty when we will by Oath professe it seem necessary to the end here proposed That the world may bear witnesse with our Consciences of our loyalty We shall also with all faithfulnesse endeavour the discovery of all such as have been or shall be Incendiaries Malignants or evill Instruments by hindring the reformation of Religion dividing the King from his people or one of the Kingdoms from another or making any Faction or parties amongst the people contrary to this League and Covenant that they may be brought to publike triall and receive condign punishment as the degree of their offences shall require or deserve or the supream Indicatories of both Kingdoms respectively or others having power from them for that effect shall judge convenient Whether are not all those to be accounted to us as Malignants c. by hindring reformation of Religion and consequently to be discovered that they may receive condign punishment whom we know to endeavour in their places and callings the continuation of Church-government by Bishops and the preservation of the whole frame of government as it now stands by the known Laws of this Kingdom established administred according to the right intent of those Laws against all alteration till it be by act of Parliament enacted by his Majesties
Covenant bound to offer violence to their persons we pray may be observed by those who have taken this Covenant or shall hereafter enter into it for us who are so perswaded as we have expressed it would have been a greater satisfaction if we should have been to swear to bring the persons of any who have offended to a just and legal triall so that their Office might have been continued then to extirpate the Office with an intimation only that we are not necessitated to offer violence to their persons That which follows is to take off the onely scruple which they would suppose to remain the oath of Canonicall obedience wherein Clergy-men have sworn to obey the Bishops in licitis honestis we will propound their Arguments 1. They which have sworn obedience to the Laws of the Land may yet endeavour their abolition in a lawfull way Therefore they which have sworn to obey the Bishops may endeavour the abolition of Bishops We do not see this consequence from the Law to the Law-giver or the Authority it self from whence the Law is derived It follows upon this Hypothesis that they who have sworn to obey the injunctions of Bishops may endeavour in a lawfull way the alteration or abolition of those injunctions but to infer their conclusion the Hypothosis must have been that notwithstanding our Oath made to obey the Laws made by the King and the two Houses of Parliament we may endeavour to abolish the King and both Houses of Parliament Their second Argument is this 2. If Ministers or others have entred into any Oath not warranted by Gods Word and the Laws of the Land such Oaths call for repentance not pertinacy in them Ergo notwithstanding the Oath of Canoxicall obedience Ministers may endeavour the extirpation of Bishops We believe that to have cleared this consequence they ought to have proved that the Oath of Canonicall obedience is not warranted by the Word of God or the Laws of the Land which seeing they have not done the scruple notwithstanding this Argument will still remain Having thus done with Episcopacy they proceed to such scruples of conscience as they suppose may arise from that which concerns His Majesty And there the design is to prove that this Covenant may be taken notwithstanding the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance already taken and notwithstanding the want of His Majesties consent 1. This Oath binds all and more strongly engageth them to preserve and defend the Kings Majesties Person and Authority in the preservation and defence of the true Religion and liberties of the Kingdoms therefore It doth not crosse the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance We answer 1. The Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance were ordained against those who would not have denied to swear in these very words To preserve and defend His Majesties Person and Authority in the preservation and defence of the true Religion and liberties of the Kingdoms Therefore notwithstanding this Argument this Covenant may crosse the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance 2. That this Oath may be taken without His Majesties consent they would prove by examples either Modern or out of Scripture as 1. The Protestation May 5. was taken without His Majesties consent We did not think we took it without his Majesties consent and one reason we will expresse in their words of the same Paragraph Because His Majesty did not except against it or give any stop to the taking of it albeit he was then resident in person at Whitehall 2. Ezra and Nehemiah Ezra 10. Nehem. 9. Neh. 1. being vassals and one of them meniall servant to Artaxerxes drew all the people into a Covenant without the speciall Commission of the Persian Monarchs The Covenant into which Ezra drew the people is expressed Ezra 10. 3. to have been to put away all the strange wives and such as were born of them according to the counsell of the Lord and of those that tremble at the Commandement of God and that according to the Law And that of Nehemiah Nehem. 9. 10. 29. is expressed to have been a Curse and an Oath to walk in Gods Law which was given by Moses the servant of God and to observe and do all the Commandements of the Lord and his Iudgements and his Statutes The Commission of Nehemiah besides what is mentioned Nehemiah 2. cannot be denied to be the same which Ezra had obtained which is expressed Ezra the 7. In the 7 of Ezra v. 26. we find this as a part of his Commission Whosoever will not do the Law of thy God and the Law of the King let judgement be executed speedily upon him whether it be unto death or banishment or to confiscation of goods or to imprisonment Wherefore we cannot but extreamly wonder that these Covenants here mentioned should be said to have been entered into without the consent of the Persian Monarchs an Assertion to us so exceedingly inconsiderate that our apprehension of the failings in it cannot in a few words be expressed As for that of Hezekiah which follows at some distance we might answer that it is not nor can it be proved out of the Scripture that the keeping of the Passover was not consented to by Hoshea King of Irael However if the revolt of the ten Tribes were indeed a rebellion as it is believed by many of the most famous Divines a then why might not Hezekiah justly send Proclamations to them to joyn with him in a Covenant although the King of Israel should positively have dissented But not to insist upon negative Answers or any thing which may be controverted we answer 1. That act of Hezekiah was a bare invitation 2. That to which he invited them was not a League or Covenant but that which the Law of God enjoyned the observation of the Passover which was some yeeres after the Covenant mentioned 2 Chro. 29. 3 That it was at that time when Israel had not the face of a Kingdom their King being in captivity under the King of Assyria Which two latter answers are joyntly proved by this following Discourse The Covenant was made in 1mo Hezekiae 2 Chron. 29. the Passover was not celebrated till after the captivity 2 Chron. 30. 6. There was no captivity mentioned till after this first yeer of Hezekiah Therefore the Covenant and Passover were not kept in the same yeer and therefore also Hoshea was in captivity before this invitation of Hezekiah The last of the premisses which onely can be doubted is thus proved because the first time expressed which we read in Scripture of Salmanasers comming up against Israel is the fourth yeer of King Hezekiah 2 King 18. 9. It no wise followeth therefore from this act of Hezekiah and the men of Israel that it is lawfull to impose or enter a Covenant without the consent of the King Now after these instances of Scripture they betake themselves to modern examples from whence they would infer more then a bare lawfulnes to enter a Covenant
us contrary to our consciences so informed which is impossible What if as now the King so future Parliaments disallow this Covenant and oppose it shall we then be obliged to continue therein and to assist and defend all those that so continue against all opposition though it shall be contradicted by the same Authority by which it is now imposed upon us Thirdly Where we are required to bind our selves never to make defection to the contrary part whether by the contrary part is not to be understood all that are against this Covenant If so will not these words following Against all opposition against all lets and impediments whatsoever include His Majesties opposition And then as we have said we are in the close impliedly supposed That we will endeavour to do what we are able to suppresse and overcome any part whatsoever of the contrary part opposing it self which since it seems not to except His Sacred Majesty how will this be consistent with the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy and the Laws of the Land 5 H. 4. 25 Edw. 3 Secondly how with the Word of God when we are taught by St. Paul Rom. 13. That whosoever shall resist the higher Powers shall receive to himself Damnation and in case of contrary conflicts of these higher Powers among themselves from the reason included in the object the damnation will be without repentance to those that resist the Highest and among the higher powers if St. Peter may interpret St. Paul the King is Supream and all other Governours are sent by Him 1 Pet. 2. 14. a For our selves therefore if His Majesty should use the Sword committed to him unjustly we must take up St. Ambrose's words conc. 1. contra Auxentium Dolere potero flere potero potero gemere adversus arma milites Gothos quoque Lachrymae miae Arma sunt talia sunt munimenta Sacerdotis aliter nec debâ—o nec possumresistere Fourthly were there nothing in the Law of God or of this Land forbidding us of the Kingdom of England to enter a Covenant of mutuall assistance and defence without and against the allowance of the King yet it would be unlawfull for us to joyn in this Covenant since we are required here not onely to joyn with one another but with the Scots also in a Covenant of mutuall assistance and defence to whom if by a law of their Land all such Covenants and Leagues be forbidden as seditious we if we knowingly covenant to assist and defend them in such a League contract to our selves the guilt of sedition Now to the Scots in the second part of that Act of Parliament holden at Linlithgow anno 1585. are forbidden all leagues or bonds of mutuall defence which are made without the privity and consent of the King under the pain to be holden and execute as movers of sedition and unquietnesse This we read objected by the Divines of Aberdeen but could never yet see any satisfying answer made thereunto Fiftly Whether will not men think themselves bound by this part of the Covenant all the daies of their lives to continue so farre zealously united against the contrary part as to reject all overtures of Accomodation and reconciliation till they be suppressed or overcome and so our wounds become incurcable Sixtly This Covenant as we conceive under correction cannot be wisely taken by any man affected to this cause for should they not here swear never to yeeld themselves though debelled and unable to withstand the common Enemy viz. the Forces raised by the King nor ever to lay down Arms or cease active resistance But if it should please God to give the foresaid contrary part power of conquest and consequently Ius victorie should they not bind themselves by this Covenant never to submit themselves to Gods Will and Judgement against them and so exclude all Christian patience and suffering in afflictions and tie themselves though unable actively to resist plot disturb and overthrow all such who shall so have power over them hereafter all such Governours and governments which it may please God as they must confesse for a punishment of their sins at least to place over them which thing we conceive to be against the Law of God reason and Nations And because these Kingdoms are guilty of many sins c. What the Conclusion suggests we have also considered and professe our selves ready to joyn with our brethren in the necessary humbling of our selves under the mighty hand of God and in the confession of our sins though in a publique set form prescribed such as we conceive this former part of the Conclusion to be our purpose also desire endeavour through the grace of God to amend our lives and touching those words here mentioned In all duties we owe to God and man we professe and declare that did we believe in our consciences the above-written Articles of the Covenant not to be repugnant to our duties which we owe to God and man in the particulars specified relating to His Majesty and to the Bishops of our Churches by God set over us and otherwise we should gladly have gone along with our brethren therein Secondly since this Oath expresly professeth what also all lawfull promisory oaths must include that it is to be made in the presence of Almighty God the searcher of all hearts with a true intention to perform the same as we shall answer at the great day we trust our just refusall will or ought to be better interpreted even by the Imposers themselves then those mens detestable hypocrisie who enter this League and make this Oath with mentall reservation others as far as lawfully they may and saving all former Oaths yet others as far as it is agreeable to Gods Word or in their own sense or according to the sense of the Preacher scandalizing thus our Christian and reformed Religion with Jesuiticall mentall reservations reserving in their minds a sense contrary to their words which are instituted to signifie our minds and contrary to the mind of the Imposers even in the judgement of their own minds sufficiently signified in the words of the Covenant and indeed mentem injuratam gerunt reserving this Popery in thus swearing while they swear to extirpate Popery We professe to know no other legitimate sensing of our Oaths but mens deferentis a and that declared before the taking of the Oath not in a post-Declaration and the Grammaticall common sense of the words without limitation other then what is expressed according to the rule of St. Augustin Juramentum debet esse pressum expressum By thy words thou shalt be justified and by thy words thou shalt be condemned How also can any lawfully take an Oath the matter whereof he judgeth to be unlawfull so far as lawfally he may Be we not deceived God is not mocked May we swear to lie steal or commit adultery so far as lawfully we may Is it more sinfull to go about to do it