CERTAIN DISQUISITIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS Representing to the Conscience the unlawfulnesse of the Oath entituled A solemn League and Covenant for Reformation c. As also the insufficiency of the Arguments used in the Exhortation for taking the said Covenant Published by command OXFORD Printed by LEONARD LICHFIELD Printer to the University 1644. CERTAIN DISQUISITIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS Representing to the Conscience the unlawfulnesse of the Oath entituled A solemn League and Covenant for Reformation c. We Noblemen Barons Knights Gentlemen Citizens Burgesses Ministers of the Gospell and Commons of all sorts in the Kingdoms of England Scotland and Ireland by the providence of God living under one King and being of one reformed Religion having before our eyes the glory of God and the advancement of the Kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Iesus Christ the honour and happinesse of the Kings Majesty and His Posterity and the true publique Liberty Safety and Peace of the Kingdoms wherein every ones private condition is included and calling to mind the treacherous and bloody plots conspiracies attempts and practices of the enemies of God against the true Religion and professours thereof in all places especially in these three Kingdomes ever since the reformation of Religion and how much their rage power and presumption are of late and at this time increased and exercised whereof the deplorable estate of the Church and Kingdome of Ireland the distressed estate of the Church and Kingdome of England and the dangerous estate of the Church and Kingdome of Scotland are present and publique testimonies We have now at last after other meanes of Supplication Remonstrance Protestations and Sufferings for the preservation of our selves and our Religion from utter ruine and destruction according to the commendable practice of these Kingdomes in former times and the example of Gods people in other Nations after mature deliberation resolved and determined to enter into a mutuall and solemn League and covenant wherein we all subscribe and each one of us for himself with our hands lifted up to the most high God doe swear SEeing it hath pleased the composers of this Covenant to set it forth with an Introduction which containes that which it seems prevailed with them and they expect should work upon the three Kingdomes to take the following Covenant it will be behoofefull in the first place to reduce the conscience to a cleare and strict examination upon the contents of this Introduction and then if it shall find that all things therein be true and withall sufficient to that end for which they were premised viz. to inferre a necessity of swearing to all things contained in the following Articles the conscience will be directed to follow that dictate But if it fail in either of those we must betake our selves to other considerations to be guided by We will therefore sincerely propound the contents of the Preface as neer as may be according to its method joyning together matters of the same kind And then we shall find the discourse of the Preface to be resolved into these principles 1. The glory of God the advancement of the Kingdome of Iesus Christ the honour and happinesse of the King c. are to be aimed at and endeavoured 2. Especially when they are endangered 3. The meanes therefore necessary towards those ends are to be used which are either Supplication Remonstrance c. or making warre 4. The former are first to be used but if they faile then the latter These are the universall Maximes whereon by application to the present condition the taking of the Covenant is enforced The three first then being granted they subsume that having used the former and failing of successe we are all necessitated to use the latter viz. To swear to joyn with the Scots in Armes which is the generall and to those particulars after mentioned in the Articles That such joyning in armes is the generall end of the Covenant will appeare by comparing the sixt Article of the Covenant for mutuall assistance and defence of one another with the 14 Article of the Instructions wherein the imposers of this Oath appoint to be read publiquely at the time when the Covenant is read the Declaration of the Kingdomes of England and Scotland joyned in Armes for the vindication c. In which Declaration the taking this Covenant is made one of the grounds both of their confidence as they say that this warre wherein they are so deeply engaged is of God and of their resolution which they professe with courage and constancy unto the end to doe their part Whosoever therefore is not perswaded in his conscience either that all these meanes mentioned and all other such like have been used and have been rejected or upon supposition that they had yet doubts of the consequence viz. that such an Army may be leavied and such a warre managed cannot without deadly sinne though disengaged from oaths for any of the following particulars upon the former principles take this Covenant But not to insist hereon we will briefly run over the severall places of the Preface and consider the naturall intimations from them onely supposing for example the end of this Covenant to be the assistance or at least consent in this present joyning in armes applying it to men of the Church of England I A. B. living under the King This cannot reasonably be a motive to warre but obedience to him nor a motive to enter into a publique League Oath and Covenant not prescribed by Law without him much lesse against his expresse Proclamation forasmuch as an Oath for confirmation either assertory or promissory is to men for an end of all strife And a publique Oath propounded to a Nation or Nations is for the ending of publique strife and divisions and of any publique strife of a Nation or Nations under one King properly so called the King is the supreame Iudge in all causes as well Ecclesiasticall as civill as is evident by the Law of God 1 Pet. 2. And to us moreover by the Law of the Land 24 H. 8. c. 12. by the doctrine of the Church of England Art 37. the book of Homilies and establishâ—d Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy And therefore such an Oath and Covenant may not be entered into without and against the allowance of the King who is the supream Judge even in the supream Judicatory it selfe Being of the Reformed Religion established in the Church of England the very marke and Character of which as differenced from Popery and other Sects hath been chiefly that it hath alwaies maintained That it is not lawfull in any case not in the danger of their Religion for subjects to take up Armes against their lawfull Soveraign Having before my eyes the glory of God and the advancement of the kingdome of Iesus Christ Here the consideration of the mind requisite towards the judgement of conscience will be this whether by this warre considered with its circumstances the glory of God c. is more
apt to be advanced then by peace wherein although reason might easily conclude yet it will be much more certainly guided if we shal examine those precepts which Christ and his Apostles have laid down towards the accomplishment of those ends here proposed and try whether they doe suggest or intimate any thing towards such a warre If they doe not or if the contrary the conscience having before its eyes the glory of God c. will not be induced to take this course for the advancement of it For the rectification of conscience in this case it will be requisite to consider this warre to which we are enjoyned to contribute by whom and against whom it is undertaken Where if the conscience finde it to be unlawfull in the undertaking it cannot lawfully consent or assist viz. If it be no waies lawfull for such as we are moved to joyne with to take up Armes against such as we should be sworne to oppose If it might possibly be lawfull in the first undertaking it could no otherwise be but as it should be a necessary meanes to procure a just peace and the determination of conscience in this case will depend upon the consideration of the conjunctures of things at the undertaking and all the time of the continuance of this warre and if peace with truth might have been or may be established without it much more if this means shall be found opposite the conscience cannot without sin assent to this warre Here the mind is to examine the severall propositions motions overtures c. which have been and are made by both parties and according to them to judge The happinesse and honour of the King and his Posterity Here we are to consider whether or what this action of ours will contribute towards the honour and happinesse of the King and his posterity And because it is not easie to discover any foundation of such honour and happinesse c. besides that the managers of this party with whom they would have us to joyne have never particularly declared the way how these ends shall be or are advanced by their warre although it is one of their most common expressions the safest way at least the most naturall for the conscience is to raise a judgement of what is likely to ensue upon what hath preceded since these undertakings upon the same Principles where it is to consider whether his Honour or Contumely have beene increased by and since these warres And so for the happinesse of Himselfe and his Posterity consider whether if these men be upon the same designe with those who gave him battell at Edge-Hill Newbery c. what those designes made towards the happinesse of him and his Posterity The true publike Liberty Safety and Peace of the Kingdome If the Scots to whose assistance especially we are to be sworn should not hereby be able to conquer and prevail what will our taking of the Covenant advance the publike Liberty and Peace of the Kingdom according to the conceit of the enjoyners of the Covenant If they should consider how that can conduce to our Liberty unlesse thereby be meant freedom from our ancient Laws and from the setled happy government of Church and State whilst we may fear to be put under uncertain new ones Secondly Safety whether the danger of ruine doe not outweigh or equalize the hopes of safety Thirdly Peace whether this be the onely the likeliest or indeed any probable meanes of procuring Peace Seeing there are but two wayes obvious by which this course should procure it viz. Victory or reducing the King to yeeld to their desires Here the judgement of conscience will be grounded upon this Whether the King be no way but by force inclinable to a just Peace Wherein every ones private c. This is subordinate to the former immediately preceding Calling to minde the practices of the enemies of God against the true Religion c. Here we are to consider and reckon up who and of what sorts are the enemies of the Church of England of which we are and which is established by Law to which we have subscribed and what party in this quarrell is openly professed for it hath equally declared against all sorts of its enemies and which is not and accordingly c. Whereof the deploreable estate of Ireland c. Consider whether the true cause of this is to be referred both in the rise and progresse of it to the King or the malice of the Papists stirred up by those who they say had declared an intention of their utter extirpation and secondly where afterward the impediment of succour to those of our Religion lay The distressed estate of England whether that profession which is established by Law be distressed by the King or by Sectaries The dangerous estate of Scotland Wherein was their danger after all things were setled with them and who brought them into that danger that party which we should swear against or themselves After other meanes of Supplication Remonstrance Protestation and Suffering This which is here diâ—joyned from the rest of the motives and cast into a Parenthesis is indeed made the onely foundation of this way of proceeding and puts the onely case wherein such a way of covenanting c. can be imagined to be lawfull So that if these meanes have not beene both before and ever since the undertaking of this designe sincerely and effectually endeavoured by the intimation of this introduction it selfe this course is not warrantable and there are other principles of Scripture and our Religion which are to be examined if they have beene used such as inferre That it is not lawfull in any case whatsoever to resist with Arms the lawfull power by God set over us Now whether these means have been and are to used it will best appear by considering who hath sent the Messages for Treaty towards Peace what hath been declared by both parties of certainty and particularly touching Religion Law and Proviso's for tender Consciences and comparing together the severall Remonstrances Protestations and Sufferings Though all hitherto had beene used and rejected consider if the overture now lately made by the Kings party might not by the mercy of God be a meanes to produce Peace c. if the businesse be managed as it ought And according to the results of these the conscience must conclude For the preservation of our selves and our Religion The Religion wherein we are grounded and to which the Clergy hath subscribed in the Religion of the Church of England comprised in the Liturgy Articles Book of Ordination and Homilies of our Church confirmed by our 35. Article consider whether the Covenant be a meanes ordered in reason to preserve these from ruine According to the commondable practice c. If this Kingdome have done so that cannot resolve the conscience But consider whether ever in the like case the like warre was commenced if any one had been propounded the conscience would the more easily
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
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
our Church-government as it now stands in aggregate whether might this Oath be taken had they also been included Lastly is not their practise for whose satisfaction this Covenant should be taken a added to the common sense of mankind in the like manner of speaking or understanding such speeches evidence enough to us that we cannot take this Oath and Covenant unlesse we will swear to endeavour the extirpation of Church-government by Bishops If this be so we desire to know first whether it be lawfull for subjects to swear such a Covenant as directly contradicts the oath of their Soveraigne at his Coronation as this second branch of the Covenant doth binding us to endeavour the extirpation of the government of our Church by Bishops For that our Soveraign hath taken as contradictory Oath is evidently manifest by the last clause of the oath which the Kings of England take at their Coronation when after many other gracious promises wch the King makes to his people one of the Bishops reading to the King before the people concerning the Canonicall priviledges of the Church and beseeching him that he would be the Protectour and Defender of the Bishops the Churches under their government the King answereth in these words With a willing and devout heart I promise and grant my pardon and that I will preserve and maintain to you and the Churches committed to your charge all canonicall priviledges and due Law and Iustice and that I will be your Pretectour and Defender to my power by the assistance of God as every good King in his Kingdom in right ought to protect and defend the Bishops and Churches under their government Then the King ariseth and at the Communion Table makes a solemn Oath in the presence of the people to observe the premisses and laying his hand upon the book saith The things which I have before promised I shall perform and keep so help me God and the contents of this Book How can this Oath then for the extirpation of Church-government by Bishops be consistent with the Oath or Honour of our Soveraign which we have so solemnly protested to defend in the late Protestation How can we with a solemn Oath enter into such a Covenant to which we may neither swear without our Soveraigns consent nor yet can lawfully desire nor have his consent How sad were our condition were the King willing of himselfe to violate this Oath But what should we have to answer should we by taking such a Covenant this way necessitate so far as in us lies His sacred Majesty to violate his Oath so solemnly sworn at his Inauguration Secondly that to endeavour the extirpation of Church-government by Bishops is a sin against Divine Law all those Arguments and Authorities convince which prove that Bishops are of Apostolicall institution and unalterable and consequently Divine which we shall unfold in these Propositions First that their institution stands grounded upon our Saviours own Action and Institution of the Apostles Secondly that Christ and his holy Spirit by his Apostles appointed Bishops Thirdly that Christ the Sonne of God and the Holy Ghost afterward confirmed and approved Bishops and their Commission and power which the Apostles had appointed For the first we say their institution is grounded upon our Lords own instituting and ordaining twelve Apostles above seventy Disciples who saith to these his Apostles As my Father hath sent me even so send I you a St. Joh. 20. 21. As in other ends of his mission so how not in this which we know they did according to his pattern As he was sent by his Father therefore to ordain one order of Teachers of the Gospell superiour to another which we know because he did so ordain So also sent he his Apostles to ordain which accordingly they did and whatsoever they did by Christs example therein they did by his Commission here given in an imparity Bishops succeeding the Apostles above Presbyters subordinate as the seventy a That Bishops succeeded the Apostles in the ordinary part of their function as it is the judgement of the most ancient godly Fathers b that Bishops we say as contradistinct to Presbyters were the successours of the Apostles so is it manifest from Scripture since power Episcopall as it is now taken in this dispute which we shall prove to have been given by the Apostles to Bishops and to them onely after the Apostles was undeniably in the Apostles and for a while held in their own hands without communicating it to others That the Bishops were afterwards instituted by the Apostles themselves which so many ancient Authous have averred c And namely by the Apostolicall Authority of St. Paul and their institution part of holy Scripture is made good in that the power and Office of a Bishop as the word is now taken in the Ecclesiasticall notion is prescribed in the three Epistles of St. Paul to those two famous Church-governours Timothy and Titus particularly the Office and power of a Bishop as it is now taken contradistinctly to the Office of a Presbyter in these Texts 1 Tim. 1. 3. 1 Tim. 5. 19 20 21 22. 2. Tim. 1. 6. Tit. 1. 5 11. Tit. 3. 9. 10 and some others and these Texts thus interpreted by Antiquity d And as the office prescribed there is Episcopall so these two appointed to this prescribed office of a Bishop by St. Paul himselfe 1 Tim. 1. 3. 2 Tim. 1. 6. Tit. 1. 5. Yea by the holy Ghost say Chrysost. Theophyl Oecumenius by divine Revelation saith Theodoret of Timothy And that these two were Bishops according to the Ecclesiasticall notion of the word now used ancient Fathers plentifully witnesse b Moreover this superiority to office Episcopall to have been fixed and continued to the day of death is evident as from Church-history so also from 1 Tim. 6. 14. where {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} is the same with {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} in the beginning of the Epistle 1 Tim. 1. 18. and includes in it the whole charge given by St. Paul to Timothy in this Epistle c From which Text also it is manifested that his Office prescribed was not personall onely but to descend by succession unto the comming of Christ d Thirdly this Office and power Episcopall that it was afterward approved and confirmed by the Sonne of God himselfe immediately and by the holy Ghost will be proved from Revel. c. 1. 2. 3. Where by the seven Stars the Angels of the seven Churches according to all reason from the Text it selfe and by the testimony of Antiquity e are seven Bishops of those seven Churches understood which Ecclesiasticall story mentions to have been in the Church long before this time as so many Angels and Apostles f of the Churches such as was Polycarp the Angell the Bishop of the Church of Smyrna made Bishop of that place by the Apostles themselves thirteen
Nazianzen in Apologet in 1 Pet. 5. vide Hegesippum apud Euseb. lib. 4. cap. 22. and Chrysostom in Tit. 1. Hom. 2. Saint Ambrose de dignitate Sacerdot c. 2. 6. Isidor Pelusiot lib. 2. ep. 125. Further out of the holy Scripture we might alledge according to Saint Hieroms interpretation that this distinction between the Bishops and his Presbyters was signified in Moses and the 70. So Hierom in Tit. 1. the distinction of Presbyters and Deacons to be that which was under the Law of the high Priest Priests and Levites So S. Hieron. Ep. 2. ad Nepotianum Ep. ad Evagrium and before him Ignat. ad Philadelph Clement ep. ad Corinth Chrysost. Hom. 20. ad pop. Antioch and after Leo ep. 66 Isidor Hisp. de officiis Eccles. l. 2. c. 5. 7. That the eminent dignity and office of Bishops was prophecied of Psal. 45. 16. where Bishops are meant say S. August in loc. Comment. called S. Hieroms in locum S. Cyril of Alex. in loc. Theodoret in locum Ruffinus in locum as the other of Presbyters and Deacons were prophecied of Isaiah 66. 21. And further for imparity of Teachers in the new Testament that answerably to Prophets in the old and sons of the Prophets among some that served in the Gospell some were as Fathers others serving with them as sont So also that we read of Builders and Master-builders in Gods building 1 Cor. 3. and we read also among those builders of {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} c. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} c. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} c. 1 Cor. 12. 28. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Hebr. 13. 17. and under them {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Luc. 22. 27. But for the confirmation by Scripture of the office of a Bishop we adhere especially to the Epistles to Timothy and Titus and those seven Epistles Apoc. 1 2 and 3. And if it be acknowledged of institution Apostolicall and approved by God but temporary onely the contrary will be made manifest as from the proper light of the Texts alledged and from the forecited Text 1 Tim. 6. 14. So also from this Proposition which we avow No Constitution Apostolicall received by the universall Church perpetually in all ages unto this age of this controversie can without scandall and dangerous consequence be called Temporary the universall practice of the Church practising continually and perpetually an Apostolicall Institution being a most sure Commentary that it was no temporary institution Forasmuch as we are taught by the holy Ghost in divine Scripture that contention in what the Law of God is pretended not to be expresse may be warrantably taken off by the custome of the Churches of God 1 Cor. 11. 16. See Theophylact. in locum Custom I doe not say any but of the Churches of God i.e. Primitive also Universall Perpetuall interpreting the controverted Law of God whether Naturall as vers. 14. or Positive by no lesse reason Whereunto agreeth well the rule of S. Augustine contra Crescon. lib. 1. c. 32. contra Donat. l. 4. c. 24. Quod universa tenet Ecclesia c. ep 86. ad Casul epist. ad Januarium 118. si quidtota hodie c. Vincent Lyrin adversus haereses c. 2. c. 3. Quod ubique quod semper quod ab omnibus c. And if not by such traditive interpretation from the custom of the Churches of God according to the Apostles rule how shall we convince contentious gainsayers that the sense of those Texts Goe and teach all Nations baptizing them c. Matth. 28. and those other of baptizing the houshold of Stephanus and of the keeper of the prison 1 Cor. 1. Acts 16. or any other Scriptures to be a divine warrant as they are for Baptisme of Infants Or the sense of hoc facite c. Luk. 22. to imply a divine right of Presbyters onely to consecrate the Elements of the blessed Sacrament or the sense of those Texts Iohn 20. 1 19 26. Acts 20. 7. 1. Cor. 16. 2. Revel. 1. 10. or Psalm 118. 24. or of any other Scriptures to be a divine warrant for the translation of our one day in seven from the seventh day of the week to the first Or on the other side how shall we convince those of the Church of Rome that that Apostolicall divine Precept Iames 5.14 as to the anointing the sick with oil was a temporary Precept onely but negatively from the interpretation of the custom of the Churches of God Since miraculous gifts were also conferred by the laying on of hands which yet was not temporary Heb. 6 2. Now that this Apostolicall institution hath been universally practised and perpetually in the custom of the Churches of God of all times and places excepting onely some narrow place and time of this age of this controversie and that in Churches founded by different planters by all the severall Apostles and others sent by them as well those Churches which have in severall ages rejected the Antichristian Monarchy of the Bishop of Rome over all the Church as others and that order preserved by God from extirpation thorow all the ten persecutions and descending in each Church or City by particular continued succession as for example 27 Bishops from S. Timothy to the time of the Chalcedon Councell as was declared there act 11. that in all times primitive and following Bishops have been chief in Ecclesiasticall government in Councels in Martyrdom in Piety in Learning in the conversion of Nations in the mighty confounding of Heresies and Heretiques we beleeve we are able if any deny to make good And first here for the Primitive Churches we alledge all the forecited Testmonies of Antiquity proving Bishop to have been instituted by the Apostles themselves vide supra Yea and early within the Apostles times there having been not onely three Bishops of Rome successively Linus Cletus and Clemens and within Saint Johns time of life four Bishops of Alexandria successively Saint Mark Anianus Abilius and Cerdo three Bishops of Antioch Saint Peter Evodius and Ignatius two of Jerusalem Saint Iames and Simeon all while Saint John the Apostle yet lived Euseb hist eccles. lib. 3. cap. 12. But also Saint Iames made Bishop of Ierusalem soon after the passion of our Lord saith Saint Hierom. de Script Eccles. After the Ascension of our Saviour saith Euseb. lib. 2. cap. 1. before Saint Stevens Martyrdom for Saint Steven was Deacon to Iames Bishop of Ierusalem saith Ignatius epist. ad Trall and the ancient Author of the Epist. ad Heronem under his name and that James himself was martyred after he had governed the Church of Ierusalem 30. yeers saith Saint Hierom. de Script Eccles. And as Saint Hierom affirmeth Iames the Apostle to have been the first Bishop of Ierusalem in Gal. 1. So also Peter to have been the first Bishop of Antioch in Gal. 2. And
Mark the first Bishop of Alexandria in Prooem. in Matth. who died six yeers before Saint Peter or S. Paul saith Saint Hierom. though therein he dissent from Irenaeus lib. 3. 35. yeeres before Saint Iames the Apostle besides therefore nine recorded as Bishops in holy Scripture Timothy and Titus Bishops of Ephesus and Crete and the seven of the seven Churches in Asia besides two Apostles Bishops viz. Iames of Ierusalem and a Peter of Antioch b and one Evangelist Mark of Alexandria c there are also nine other in all 21. recorded in holy Scripture all which except two of the seven Angels are there registred for Saints who if we will beleeve as credible records of Christians as any other humane Records whatsoever were Bishops before they died viz. Clemens d and e Linus made Bishops of Rome successively by Peter and Paul Evodius f Bishop of Antioch by Peter and Paul Dionysius the Areopagite Bishop of Athens g Archippus h Bishop of the Colossians Epaphroditus i Bishop of the Philippians Epaphras k Bishop of the Colossians Gaius l also Bishop of the Thessalonians Trophimus m Bishop of Arles To which you may adde the two and twentieth Antipas Bishop of Pergamus if we will beleeve Paraeus in Apoc. 2. proving it out of Arethas Caesariensis in Apoc. 1. and Onesimus Bishop of Ephesus n if he were not the forementioned Angel of the Church of Ephesus when Saint Iohn wrote his Revelation To omit to speak here of other Bishops who were Schollars and Auditors of the Apostles Ignatius of Saint Iohn o made Bishop of Antioch by Saint Peter Papias p Saint Iohns Schollar Bishop of Hierapolis Publius and Qâ—adratus q Bishops of Athens Disciples of the Apostles Simeon the son of Cleophâ—â— r Bishop of Ierusalem after Iames and the Kinsman of our Lord This order of Bishops which began though the first we read of in Scripture be Timothy and Titus in Saint Iames of Ierusalem or Saint Mark of Alexandria continued thorowout all the following ages of the Churches of God in which Bishops have been the most reverend Martyrs such as Ignatius Polycarp Irenaeus Bishop of Lions Cyprian of Carthage and more then 30. of the first Bishops of Rome successively both in Episcopacy and Martyrdom Of Bishops also especially did consist the first four generall Councels received by all the reformed Churches the confounders of the maine heresies touching the second and third persons in the blessed Trinity and by an Act of Parliament 1. Eliz. cap. 10. next to the canonicall Scriptures made the rule of judging Heresies who also in Councell gave judgement for the inviolable practice of the Church in this order the generall Councell of Nice providing Ne in unâ civitate duo sint Episcopi Cant. 8. The generall Councell of Constantinople adjudging to Bishops the power of Ordination Can. 2. and Can. 4. in the case of Maximus The generall Councell of Ephesus distinguishing betwixt the Bishop and the rest of the Clergy Can. 7. and confirming the Bishops jurisdiction Can. 5. The generall Councell of Chalcedon determining Can. 29. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} For as much then as in the first Article we are required to swear to endeavour the reformation of Religion according to the Word of God and the examples of the best reformed Churches surely we may not in the second Article swear to endeavour the extirpation of Church-government by Bishops and so to forsake the government grounded on the Word of God and to forsake the example of all the ages of the Primitive Churches then which we conceive no late reformed Church will pretend to be more pure and to whose examples they do or ought to endeavour to reform themselves But after all this it will be said that this government by Bishops is ejured onely as it interprets Prelacy which word if it have been translated Regimen Tyranicum the Translation as farre exceeds the truth of Grammar as the Prelates are accused to have exceeded their lawfull power forasmuch as Prelacy in its originall and acception of ancient Authors Praelati we say not elati imports but lawfull preeminence and power So is Timothy called by Gregory de Cura pastor p. 2. c. 11. Praelatus Gregi and the word Prelate is often honourably mentioned in our Lawes 9 Ed. 2. 24 Hen. 8. and is no more then the Title Praepositi mentioned also with honour by St. Cyprian Epist. 10. 55. 65. Augustin de civitate Dei l. 20. c. 9. or Antistites S. Cypr. ep. 69. Sancti Antistites S. August ep. 162. and divers words in Scripture used signifying equivalently such preeminence but let it not be told indeed in other Churches that any other is here abjured then Regimen Tyrannicum But are we warranted by the following stile of Hierarchy Doth that word import originally and anciently any other then a sacred government was it not accepted and approved in it selfe by Mr. Calvin lib. de necessitate Eccl. reformandae Talem si nobis Hierarchiam exhibeant in quâ sic emineant Episcopi ut Christo subesse non recusent c. ut ab illo tanquam uno Capite pendeant ad ipsum referantur c. tum verò nullo non anathemate dignos fateor qui non eam reverentèr summâque obedientiâ observent Moreover how can we in the same Article abjure Church-government by Bishops with Heresie Schisme and Prophanenesse as there it follows yea Prelacy even before Schisme and Heresie c. when as Bishops have been in all ages the chief confounders of heresie and heretickes such was Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria of the heresie of Arrius Cyril of Alexandria of the Nestorian heresie Caelestine Bishop of Rome Augustine Bishop of Hippo Prosper Bishop of Rhegium Fulgentius Bishop of Ruspi of the Palagian heresie and many more in all ages of the Church before and since Nor was there found any one Christian thorowout all the Primitive and purest times of the Church for above five hundred yeers after Christ who thought it fit to abolish Church government by Bishops much lesse to ejâ—re it save onely one heretick Aerius so censured by Epiphanius Haeres 75. and by Saint Augustine Haeres 53. whose speech savoured of madnesse saith Epiphanius for he had said What is a Bishop differing from a Presbyter a and the occasion of it Saint Augustine lets us know lib. de Haeres c. in Aerium Aerius being a Presbyter is said to have been vexed because he could not get to be ordained a Bishop and thence arose his envy Epiphanius witnesseth as much Haeres 75. Secondly as to Schism Saint Hierom the one and onely Father alledged as denying the divine Institution of Bishops yet held them necessary to represse Schism and then surely most necessary when Schism doth as in these our dayes most abound For avoiding of Schism Saint Hierom witnesseth Episcopacy was
up of truths confessed and undeniable 1. Scots and English are Subjects to the King 2. Of the same Protestant Religion the professors whereof do not differ in fundamentals 3. Their joyning in Arms as is alledged is for the vindication and defence of their Religiâ—n Liberties and Laws 4. Against the Popish Prelaticall and Malignant party 5. By these are meant the Souldiers raised by the King On the other side 1. The King is our lawfull Soveraign 2. Of the same Protestant Religion 3. He hath protested and engaged himself with all solemnity as at the receiving of the holy Eucharist c. to preserve and maintain the Protestant Religion the Laws and Liberties of the Kingdoms and Parliaments 4. That he hath sent many Messages for Treaties toward Peace both before and during the time of these wars and expressed a desire of making the people witnesses of the equity of his proceedings 5. He hath declared his will against both the Scots and English who take up Arms in this Cause Out of these principles whereas many more might be added in behalf of His Majestie let the question be Whether it may be lawfull and necessary for subjects to covenant together without and against the expresse will of their lawfull Soveraign to joyn in Arms against the Forces raised by his command and that for the vindication and defence of that which he hath by all possible obligations engaged himself to maintain and defend and for security of his people hath desired that differences might be composed by Treaty and that the world might judge of his proceedings in it If this be a true state of the question at least so far as is here expressed the next labour for our Consciences will be to examine whether any argument in this exhortation upon supposition that they all were truths in themselves doe infer a lawfulnesse and necessity to covenant in our case all things considered and if it be evident that they are not sufficient it may be a motive to abate the confidence of the composers of it whosoever they were in particular and to procure an examination of their own principles and actions wherein they may possibly see that they have not either in their own actions or in their judgement of others proceeded so exactly according to the Law of conscience and the word of God Now although we are confident that there is not in this exhortation any one argument which the Assembly it self will undertake so to contrive as that it shall conclude for a necessity or a lawfulnesse of taking such a Covenant in such a case all things considered and consequently the whole businesse which was of necessity for vindication of our selves from sottishnesse c. is already done Yet that it may without any danger of prejudice or errour appear that we are not guilty of such a presumption as we have excepted against in them we will as briefly as may be examine their whole discourse and evidently unlesse indeed we be bewitched to think so discover what is untrue or uncertain if any thing of those kinds shall occur and what is insufficient in their Exhortation after we have by way of Apology premised that we will not all answer them in the manner of the delivery of the reasons We have as we hope prevailed against those affections which might have arisen upon those expressions which concern our selves and though with far greater difficulty against that indignation which followed upon the apprehension of those not so very reverent expressions and reflections upon his sacred Majestie so far as not to suffer our judgements or consciences to be withdrawn from a just and meer examination of the truth having seen in them that zeal and confidence however they are excellent affections in those who are sufficiently grounded in an unfallible truth yet they do in no measure help toward a discovery of truth or a removall of scruples in a case of conscience The whole discourse was intended by the Authors of it to consist of perswasions and resolutions of scruples and is immediately resolved into an introduction and the body of the discourse As for the Introduction it contains a collection of many places from whence the composers thereof presume that the necessity of taking this League might be enforced But seeing it carries not clearly in it self any discovery of the consequences it could not in reason be premised to any other discourse then such as in the processe should clear that which was there presumed and seeing the following discourse is no way ordered to a clearing of those inferences so that the design of him who made the introduction is no further prosecuted we may here indeed observe an instance of the variance which is said to be in the Assembly but are no wayes helped in that which was the fundamentall intention of the whole the resolution of our scruples which by the serious consideration of those things here reckoned up we professe to have been exceedingly strengthened upon us and that by such inference as may be gathered if not cleerly seen by this ensuing parallel If the power of Religion described and practised by our Saviour Christ and his Apostles and expressed in the most heroicall actions of the primitive Christians or if solid reason informed by the Doctrine of the Church of England and assisted by the light of the examples of holy Saints and Martyrs and by a perfect information of the beginnings and proceedings of our present miseries and of the standing known Laws of the Land If loyalty to the King and piety to their native Couatry or love to themselves and naturall affection to their posterity if the example of men touched with a deep sense of all these such as have been the most eminent among the Clergy for piety and learning the Instruments as it is confessed used by Almighty God for the preservation of our Religion against all its enemies who with many others the most worthy of the Laity have cheerfully and constantly been spoiled of their goods and suffered a long and tedious imprisonment and are and have been ready to suffer death it selfe in the present cause of his Sacred Majestie or if extraordinary successe from God thereupon such as was necessary to raise his Majesty from a state of despised weaknesse to a power able to resist and probably able to debell all the Forces which his enemies of three Kingdoms can procure If any or all of these can awaken a Nation hitherto stupified and blinded and thereupon imbroiled in the miseries which have attended upon this war to see and imbrace the soveraign and onely means of their recovery there can be no doubt or fear that they will enter into a League with those who have lifted up under what pretence soever their hands against his Sacred Majestie but they will rather repent them of their former disobedience endeavouring to reduce their brethren to a labour for reconciliation and pardon from his Majestie at least to