of Covenanting The particle Such seems to carry it to the quality of the Covenant in respect of the matter covenanted which afterward is particularly and in its proper place excepted against But the words of the Covenant suggested by this exception to be false do relate unto the act of covenanting as we have now at last for the preservation of our Religion determined to enter into a not such a mutual and Solemn League and Covenant And the place of this exception is in the beginning of their exceptions unto the Preface which may be said to be no part of the Covenant and therefore admits not an exception to the quality of such a Covenant Moreover the next exception puts it out of doubt that these words relate to the act of Covenanting in which they profess they finde not in our Histories any footsteps of a sworn Covenant on any occasion whatsoever So that it seems to be the Act of covenanting by Oath which they cannot conceive to be a lawful proper and probable means to preserve Religion from ruine Surely then Sir the weather was very misty about Oxford and made their minds very muddy that they could not conceive entring into Covenants and Solemn Leagues dictated by the light of nature and directed by the Law of God pursued and practised by all Nations and by Israel in the cases of their Religion as the utmost of humane policy and highest of security to their priviledges endangered as a method detecting concealed enmity debarring fraud expressing affection engaging conscience and animating resolution to be a lawful proper and probable meanes of security If it be good and safe as to our Civil I hope it is no less probable in our Religious concernments If Sir I had been to deale with one single student I must have told him That he started this exception more like a Sophistical Disputant than a conscientious Dubitant Fourthly They could not believe the entring into this Covenant to be according to the commendable practice of these Kingdoms 4th Exception in the Oxford Reasons or the example of Gods people in other Nations for that they found not the least footstep in our Histories of a sworne Covenant ever entred into by the people of this Kingdom upon any occasion whatsoever nor could they readily remember any commendable example of the like done in any other Nation but are rather told by the Defenders of the Covenant that the world never saw the like before Whither Sir Answer will not prejudice carry men I cannot but wonder to finde the Masters Students c. of Oxford so much unacquainted with Histories as neither to finde in our own or other Histories a commendable example of Entring into Covenant I may not mind them of the Covenant made by the Nobles and people of Scotland among themselves and with Queen Elizabeth of England under and against the Papal might executed by the then Queen Regent nor of the Netherlands confederacy and Covenant These will not seem commendable in their sight now though so judged when England became their protection and encouraged nay defended them in them Let me therefore enquire whether they knew Israel to have been Gods people of another Nation and that they entered into Covenant in the time of the Judges in the dayes of Joash Josiah Hezekiak and Nehemiah in times of danger and defection in their Civil and Religious concernments And was their practice commendable 2. Did our Gentlemen of Oxford never finde any footsteps in our Histories concerning the Barons of Stamford Anno 1225. assembled not only without but against the Kings consent and covenanted each with other to demand the restitution of their Liberties whereupon a Parliament was holden at Northampton to give them satisfaction And again did they never finde in our Histories how in Anno 1258. they Assembled at Oxford agreed on Articles viz. The confirmation of the Charter de Foresta 2. The establishing of a Lord Chief Justice who might judge them by Law 3. The driving Aliens and Strangers out of England and the like and that they confederated by Oath and gave their hands and mutual faith one to the other Matth. Paris Hist Aug. p. 940 941 952 653. that they would not desist to prosecute their purpose for loss of money or Lands nor love nor hate no nor yet for life of them or theirs till they had cleared England of Strangers and procured laudable Laws And under this Covenant they brought the Kings Brother Richard King of Romans and Earle of Cornwall and caused him to sweare upon the Holy Gospels this formal Covenant Hear all men that I Richard Earle of Cornwal swear upon the Holy Gosples to be faithful and forward with you to Reforme the Kingdom of England hitherto by the counsel of wicked men so much deformed and I will be an effectual coadjutor to expell the Rebels and troublers out of the same Both these our Histories say were in the time and without the consent of King Henry the 3d. Not to trouble our Reader with the like in the time of King John King Richard the 2d and other Princes I must desire the Gentlemen of Oxford to tell us whether these were not people of England and these be not visible foot-marks of some Covenant of the people of England on some occasion And if they shall question whether they be commendable examples let them please to observe the commendable Epethite our Historian gives upon the last of these Covenanters calling them Angliae Republicae Zelatores But the defenders of the Covenant told them that the world never saw the like before I but they did not tell them that there are no footsteps of any Covenant made on any occasion whatsoever And if they had were the Masters and Students in Oxford resolved into such an implicite Faith as to believe an Enemy But I wonder these Masters of Reason had so little Reason as to conclude a general from the concession of a special Their Margent explaineth the concession of the defenders of the Covenant in these termes Such an Oath for matter persons and other circumstances the like hath not been in any Age or Oath we reade of in Sacred or humane Stories Know they not that there is a vast difference between the general form of an Oath or Covenant and those special Qualifications which may circumstance it and that a dissimilitude in the last will not conclude that there never was a Sworn Covenant on any occasion but sit verbum sat sapienti Thus Sir notwithstanding these learned Suggestions of the falsehood of the Preface and in it of the assertory part of the Covenant it yet continueth lawful because true and is our encouragement and assurance that the promissory part will be answerable For as in rational conclusions so I hope in Religious resolutions we shall find à veris vera sequuntur Subsectio Tertia The promissory part of the Covenant is in these six Articles I. THat we shall sincerely
Remonstrance they had declared to be so oppressive and dangerous if they will evade the influence compass and danger of the fourth Article of this Covenant in the first case I dare secure them from it in reference to the second 5. But the main thing which concerneth the Church of England is her foundation which if it be removed what shall the Righteous do And these serious Casuists do tell us That the holy Church of England was founded in the state of Prelacy within the Realm of England and they proved it by the Law for Gospel without doubt they had none to prove it that laying the Prophets and Apostles for the foundation and Christ an enemy to Prelacy the corner stone and in their Margin they cite the Statute of Carlile 25. Ed. 1. Recited 25. Ed 3. on which they profess They dare not by extirpation of Prelacy strike at the foundation of the Church which they are bound to uphold Truly Sir their care of the Church and its foundation is commendable but how comes it to pass that this Form of Government must be made the foundation of the Church without any danger of Schism by them to whom Scotlands making their Discipline and Government the mark of a true Church did seem so much tending to Schism Must the Government of England be a fundamental point of Religion the very esse of the Church and may not Scotland make her Government a note of distinction Turpe est doctori c. Sir we cannot deny the proofs cited and declaring the holy Church of England to be founded in the estate of Prelacy but I cannot but stand amazed to find men making Apologies propounding doubts professing a serious desire to have conscience satisfied so much to content themselves and cozen their Readers with plain fallacies such Sophisme as better beseems the Logick than Divinity Schools and common Halls than the Regent house Two things are to be explained What they mean by holy Church and what foundation this is to which the Statutes relate These learned men wel know that by holy Church in the acceptation of that Age and of those very Acts the Statute of Edward the first at Carlile and the Statute of Edward the third was meant the Pompous Popish Ecclesiastical State whereof Abbies and Priories were no small Members as in Magna Charta and other Grants of Kings which had then such influence on the Civil State as that no Act of Parliament could bind or be deemed valid without the ratifying censure of holy Church whose manner was by her authority to curse all that should not keep such Lawes as were agreed I wish the Masters and Scholars would speak out and tell us whether they think they are bound to uphold this holy Church or that the Church of Christ may not yea do not subsist in England now holy Church is driven out the Church simply Christian is very different from the pompous popish holy Church Again Sir the foundation mentioned in these Statutes is sutable to the Fabrick Foxe his Acts and Monuments p. 22. holy Churches viz. the temporal endowments whereby she was made so pompous the Lands Mannors and large Revenues given by the King or Nobles of the Land as the question occasioning the same doth plainly evidence which was Whether the exactions of the first fruits of Churches and Abbies and all Benefices in England and the profit of vacancies by Pope Clement were just and as the very words and scope of the Statute of 25. Edward 3d. doth plainly declare providing for the advousance and disposal of all Benefices and the profits thereof in manner as the founders that is first donors had established and so the Prelacy in which it was founded is an Independency as to Rome and a sole Power and Prerogative which England had free and within her self in respect of which in the very words of the Statutes themselves it is said The Bishop of Rome usurping the Seigniores of such Possessions and Benefices doth give and grant the same to Aliens which did not and Cardinals which might not dwel in England as if he had been Patron or Advowe of the said Benefices as he was not of right after the Law of England so that this Prelacy is purely Political and the foundation more profitable than pious could these learned men be so absurd as to make the very being of the Church to stand on such a foundation were there not Churches of Christ before Patrons Possessons and Presentations and may they not be when these large endowments are taken away from the places to which they are affixed This Prelacy will determine the Church of England by the fall of Monasteries to have been shaken in the foundation and by vertue of this Political Prelacy the Kings of England have given the possessions of Bishopricks to their Chancellours Treasurers Secretaries Kinsmen meer Lay-persons for increase of their means Pryns Catalogue of Testimonies for the parity of Presbyters and Bishops p. 16 17 18. and have kept the Episcopal and Archiepiscopal Seas void for 2 3 4 5 6 7 10 15 20. and sometimes 30. years together by what loadstone do these learned men think the holy Church did subsist when her Prelates her foundation in their sense was wanting or can they make us believe Denmark or Scotland have lost or the Reformed Churches never had the being of a Church of Christ because they never had or have expelled their Episcopal Prelacy Ecclesiastical Prelacy like the Petrae and Rupes as in the time of King Henery the third have ever been such swelling foundations to the Church and in the State that they have constrained the Kings and Parliament of England as of all other Nations in all Ages to exercise an high Prelacy over them by strict Laws and severe exactions to keep them within their bounds and at last to Covenant the extirpation thereof wherein the Oxford Reasons would make us believe we not only pull an old house about our ears but destroy the very Church if we have not wit enough to see how they would cosen us by the Law of man instead of the Law of God and a false gloss on fair words Having found so little weight in what is urged from the Government by Episcopacy of the estate of the Church of England we shall not expect much in what is incumbent upon themselves against their Covenanting to endeavour to extirpate this kind of Government yet that little we shall consider and it relates unto their personal capacities in their third exception or more publick Obigations in their fifth exception In reference to their personal capacities they say They are not satisfied how it can stand with justice ingenuity or humanity to require the extirpation of this Government Oxford Reasons third exception against extirpation of Prelacy unless it had been proved unlawful what Sir if it had been proved inexpedient it would have been consistent with Saint Pauls Justice Humanity and
expression of their affection only wishing it may have its dependance on right Reason yet confess petitioning is every mans liberty And for the fourth and fifth That they held their livelyhoods by such titles and were sworn to preserve the immunities liberties and profits of the same I only say they held them at the pleasure of the Parliament whose power is over the enjoyments of all persons and publick much more particular societies against whose Laws no Domestick Laws or Oaths could bind and so their plea in this amounts to no more than what might be said for the Monasteries and Abbies which I presume they will not say were wickedly demolished unless they prove Arch-bishops Bishops Deans Deans and Chapters to be built on a better foundation which I would not advise them to seek in the Statute of Carlile repeated in the 25. Edw. 3 d. in which they are conjoyned Their fifth exception is In respect of their Obligation by Oath and Duty to the King Oxford Reasons fifth Exception to the 2d Article of the Covenant and therein their dissatisfaction doth arise from the Oath of Supremacy Coronation Oath The benefit this Government brings unto the Kings Honour and Estate The â—greeableness of this Government to the Civil Constitution of the Kingdom Unto which I answer briefly That the Oath of Supremacy doth acknowledge the King to be the only Supreme Governour in all Ecclesiastical Causes and over all Ecclesiastical persons and that by the Oath of Supremacy and the protestation of the fifth of May they and we were bound to maintain the Kings Honour and Estate and Jurisdiction we freely grant but in swearing to endeavour the extirpation of this Government by Arch-bishops Bishops c. I see not the danger of disloyalty or injury to the King or double perjury to our selves or contradiction to the Parliaments declared and professed knowledge that the King is entrusted with the Ecclesiastical Laws as well as Temporal and therefore wish the nature of the Kings Supremacy may be well considered That the King is Supreme Head and Governour of the Subjects distributively or particularly considered no sober man will deny or that he is the Supream and Topmost Branch and Apex of all that Honour Power and Authority with which the Collective Body of the Nation the three Estates in Parliament Assembled in respect of which the Lords and Commons Methodiet Majestatis causa apply themselves unto Him under the Title of Our Soveraign Lord no Regular man will deny and that he is Supreme in all Exhibition and administration of Justice so that the Judges are by and from Him and in His Name and Authority and so all Submission Honour and Acquiescency in Judicial Proceedings is to Him no good Statist or Civilian will deny and that He is Supream Head and Governour in things Spiritual and Ecclesiastical Ratione objecti or circa Ecclesiam the Executive Administration about not in the Church within His Dominions in opposition to all Papal and Forraign Power no Free-born Subject Good Christian or Protestant will deny but that He is so Supream as to have in Himself sole Legislation to the Church in things Political but belonging to the Church such as is the publick National profession of Christian Faith in such a Form and Method of Articles such a National uniform and publick method and order of worship and such a National Discipline and Government of all the Churches within His Realm so as that the People in Parliament Assembled may not debate consult conclude concerning them and sedente Parliamâ—â—to put in execution by present supersedeas of former Acts and by present Votes and Orders of Restriction and Regulation as in other Affairs of the Nation I think no Loyal Subject Wise Politician Good Statesman or True-born English-man will affirm for that the Supremacy of the King is affixed by the power of Parliament and in all Writs of Summons they are called to consult the ardent Affairs of the Church no less than of the Civil State and the thirty nine Articles Form of Common Prayer and the Government of the Church lay claim to Acts of Parliament for their Civil Sanction and the Parliament in the Remonstrance of December 1641. owned and cited by these learned men do declare the King entrusted with the Ecclesiastical Law to regulate all the Members of the Church of England by such Rules of Order and Discipline as are established by Parliament and the very Statute enjoyning the Oath of Supremacy and the Admonition of Queen Elizabeth in Her Injunctions appointed by Statute to be the Exposition thereof doth oppose the King to the Pope and * That is to say under God to have the Sove aignty and Rule over all manner of persons born within her Majesties Dominions or Countries of what Estate soever Ecclesiastical or Temporal as no Forraign power shall or ought to have any superiority over them Admon Enacted to expound the Oath of Supremacy quinto Elizab. primo Forraign power not to the Parliament and makes Him the executor of all Jurisdiction Superiority and Preheminences by any Ecclesiastical power or authority which heretofore hath been and may be lawfully exercised which was always directed by power of the Parliament of England And I remember the Lord Chief Baron Bridgeman in his late learned Speech concerning the Kings Supremacy unto the late condemned Traytors at the Old Baily did declare the King to be Supream that is beyond the Coercive power of His people but not to have the Legislative power in His own Breast so as to Rule at His own Will and the known Estate of England is to be Ruled and the Coronation Oath binds the King accordingly in all Ecclesiastical and Civil Affairs by such Lawes quas populus elegerit as the people shall choose so that His Majesties Supremacy is not denied when His Prerogative amplified by the Statute of 1 Elizabethae Ca. 1. is contracted and abridged by the Statute of Caroli 17. Or when the Parliament do see good by their Votes Resolves Orders or imposed Oaths to alter or extirpate the Government which the King was empowred to execute and administer His Supremacy being purely executive and that subject to the Legislation of Parliament upon which account the Peoples Oath of maintaining the Honour Estate and Jurisdiction of the King may be voided as to this and that particular mode and thing and yet the Parliament not take upon them to absolve the People from that obedience they owe under God unto the King nor is the limitation of the exercise of Supremacy as to this or that particular and in this or that species inconsistent with or destructive to the Kings Supremacy rightly understood And on these Considerations let it be observed that the Kings Coronation Oath to grant keep and confirm the Laws Customes and Franchises granted to the Clergy by the glorious King Saint Edward and preserve to the Bishops their Churches all Canonical priviledges c. which
of Parliaments judiciously defended in our very case by that profound Lawyer Mr. William Prynne approved no less Loyal to and Zealous for the Kings Prerogative than Loving to the Peoples Liberties I see not how we can avoid this Conclusion That the Votes Orders and Ordinances of the Lords and Commons in Parliament even without or against the Kings personal command is to be obeyed and observed Lastly When I observe the Transactions of Parliament in the times of Vortiger Sigebert Ofred Beornerde Edwin and Edgar and other Saxon Kings Deo dictante annuente populo the power of Parliaments in the times of King John King Henry the third Richard the second and other Kings of England refusing to assemble at the Kings Call assembling without the Kings Writ establishing Laws correcting Vice and Misdemeanour executing Justice and entring into Oaths and Covenants without and against the Kings consent and when I observe in all Parliaments a power of regulating the Kings Court and Council of restraining limiting and enlarging the Kings power of Jurisdiction and Prerogative nay of making void or valid a Title unto the Succession to the Crown as in the times of Henry the eighth in case of his many marriages and that during the Session of Parliament all Laws are under covert at their feet to be by them established or destroyed and are by any Vote or Order superseded before a formal Repeal and that in all Ages and on all sides it is confessed and cannot be denied that the authority of Parliament is exercis'd in al Votes Orders and Ordinances of the two Houses unto the decision of present controversies upon Appeal from other Courts of Judicatory wherein they can and may authorize Examinations on Oath and make a final judgement unto the ease and relief of the Subject not otherwhere relievable unto the enforcement of any Act to be at present done and executed for the good of the Kingdom or any particular persons or society thereof without so much as desiring the Kings consent and concurrence and if this power should be denied what could the freuqency of Parliaments provided for by the old Law of King Alfred and after by the Statutes of 4. Ed. 3.4.36 Edw. 140. twice or at least once every year on this very ground that the people might receive right by holy judgment such was the judgment of Parliament deemed and that the mischiefs and grievances which daily happen might be redressed if need be on which account Proclamation was wont to be made in the open Palace before the breaking up of Parliament Whether there be any that have delivered a Petition to the Parliament and not received answer thereunto And this power removed what will avail the Triennial Parliaments conceded by His late Majesty or of what benefit was the continuation of this late long Parliament against all Casualties whatsoever that might fall out to dissolve them Can it be rationally imagined that their being should be continued and secured to sit within those Walls in Council and Debate without any power to order or execute the Emergent Affairs of the Nation These things well considered I s y I see not how the imposing an Oath can be an assuming or the people swearing an acknowledging of a greater power than hath in former times been challenged If these Gentlemen will consult our own Histories in the cases before touched they will find a power much greater not only challenged but assumed and exercised the which the season and present state of Affair do forbid me to recite in hopes that there will be no need to rip up our wounds newly healed and these generals may I hope sufficiently justifie the sufficiency of that authority which brought us into Covenant But these learned men suggest an inconsistency of this power with their former Protestation in sundry material Branches Methinks Sir they should have specified those Branches and the rather because material and many The Protestation contains not many Branches and those few seem to be fully conform to this Covenant in all the particulars and wherein they have supposed a contrariety we have before evidenced only a dissonancy at the most and that Ratione not Re in the manner of expression not the thing sworn they then protested to preserve the power and priviledges of Parliament and should not covenant any more nay scarce so much in this Oath for they herein promise to preserve the Rights and Priviledges which is something softer than power and I wonder they that then saw a power to be preserved could not now see a right I will only enquire whether they thought the Parliament had a power to impose that Oath and not a right to impose this There was no Act of Parliament nor Assent of the King to that I observe the King in His Messages to the Houses doth note it to be their own Protestation as if He had no hand in it nor consent unto it and if by power they should mean natural strength not political authority it hath been urged by many as their grievance and by these Gentlemen themselves in the foregoing Exceptions that they had too much of that It is the unhappiness of a scrupulous conscience to run it self on contradiction in actions as well as assertions to swear as lawfully called at one time but not to dare to swear an Oath containing the same matter though called by the same authority another time But that which was the greatest doubt with these learned men was Pag. ibid. 4. the King by His Proclamation Octob. 9.19 Carol. had expressely forbidden the entring into this Covenant it being in His power to make void the same That such an Interdict had been published by His late Majesty we cannot deny League Illegal p. 16. but not as Dr. Featly his ghost supposeth on pain of Treason for no Proclamation of the Kings of England did claim the formality of a Law so far as to fasten Treason on the non-observance of what is thereby enjoyned 2. I am not satisfied how regularly His Majesty did issue forth the said Proclamation which is not usually done but by the advice of His Council who are vailed by the Session of Parliament and all Proclamations then usually run by the Advice of the Lords and Commons in Parliament assembled and if at any time the Lords and Commons or either of them during their Sessions give out Orders not only relating to the Estate they represent but to any others the Subjects of this Realm it hath not been usual for the King by the Authority of His Proclamation to thwart oppose and void them and in a case of this nature a good observer may find the Parliament have judged the Kings opposing or taking notice of any thing by them debated or ordered before it is regularly propounded to Him by themselves to have been a breach of priviledge and so to have been acknowledged and as such retracted by His late Majesty the little pleasure I have
the Preachers defended even in the University from censure for them nay these were Printed in several Books of the same Authors licensed and allowed by the Archbishop and his Chaplains and many of them asserted in the visitation Articles of some Bishops and yet were not established in the Church of England As in Doctrine so in worship many corruptions were innovated and exercised As Bowing at the Name of Jesus The turning Communion-Tables into Altars or Altarwise and Railing them in furnishing them with Candlesticks and Tapers Tying the Gospel the blessing and other parts of the publick service to that place enclosed and bowing to these Altars The making Crucifixes and Canopies pictures of God Christ the Holy Ghost Virgin Mary and other Saints in our Church-windows Consecration of Churches Fonts Bells and the like All which and many such were first innovated to the Chappel at Lambeth and ferried over to White-hall and so transmitted to all Cathedral and almost all Parish Churches and yet were not established by Law though enforced by the corruption of Discipline in the Visitation Articles of Bishop Wren Bishop Mountague Bishop Peircy Bishop Lindsey and Bishop Skinner and others in their several Diocesses and by the silencing suspension excommunication and imprisonment and High Commission vexation of Mr. Chauncey Vicar and Mr. Parker an Inhabitant of Ware Mr. Burros of Colchester and many others Nor was Government any more pure if we consider how it was exercised in the High Commission and Star-Chamber with all rigor cruelty and injustice and in Visitations Citations Probate of VVills Letters of Administration and Excommunication in the name and under the Seal of the Bishops themselves never authorized thereunto All which were evidently needful to be reformed as having been so publickly exercised and potently defended and might well enforce a covenanted endeavor to reform Religion in the Kingdom of England I well know Sir that the change of Religion makes a great sound in the world especially if established I cannot be insensible of the noise made by it against our first Reformation and must expect the Eccho to follow all after acts and degrees thereof for all changes are scandalous and many very dangerous If therefore these Masters and Scholars of Oxford could rationally conceive the Covenant to bind them to endeavor a change of Religion in the substance matter and essential parts and form thereof then I must confess their exception is very important for we cannot deny that our Bishops Martyrs and Learned Divines have by Suffering and Writing testified it to have been agreeable to the Word of God And that to resolve that into the power and pleasure of a Parliament who may direct and authorize the profession but not prescribe the matter or form were to make it a Parliamentary Religion and the change thereof must needs condemn our Laws and the punishment of Papists not joyning with us as unjust and so justifie Papist and Separatist the one in his recusancy and the other in his separation But Sir when I consider the Religion of Scotland to be preserved as the concomitant and provocation the VVord of God to be the Rule and the best reformed Churches professing the same substantial Religion though differing in administration and order propounded as the pattern I see not how right reason can render any such sence of it and the rather for that Reformation not alteration of Religion is the formal act which presupposeth the continuation of the subject about which it is conversant But Sir if they as they needs must by Religion understand the order and annexed Ceremonies appendant to Religion whether established as was the Cross in Baptism holinesse of dayes and order of the Liturgy and the like or only exercised and enforced by Prelates power and countenance as the corruptions before mentioned then we must say their exception is of no weight not the reason any thing worth for this change can be no such scandal as is conceived for we deny them to have been testified by our Bishops Martyrs and learned men by any Sufferings or Writings untill of late by the persons and such like before mentioned as agreeable to the Word of God and must put them to the proof of it we think we are able to produce Tindal Latimer Hooper Ridley Farrar and many other Martyrs by laying down their Bishopricks and other contests and sufferings to have testified against them and Mr. Cartwright Baines and many Devonshire Cornwal and Lincolnshire Ministers and others ever since the Reformation by Writing Petition Remonstrance Apology and Sufferings to have testified against not only the corruptions exercised against which our Jewel Fulk Whitaker Archbishop Parker Dr. Ward Dr. Brownrigge Dr. Bancroft and all sound and learned Divines not devoted to return to Rome have written but even the very Order and Ceremonies established as being not agreeable to the Word of God And if these learned Gentlemen had pleased to observe the Visitation and high Commission proceedings they might have found Prynn Burton Bastwick Layton Workman Langley Hind Nichols Ball and many others known learned men who were silenced suspended imprisoned stigmatized and in much Sufferings testified these appendants to our Religion whether established or exercised to be no way agreeable to the Word of God and I know not whom they can ment on as a Martyr for them unless it be Lawde the late Archbishop the grand Innovator of our Church 2. If therefore our Religion be by Papists or Prelates reproached as a Parliamentary Religion we will rejoyce in our reproach and bless God we had a Parliament that had zeal to improve their power about those things that were properly subject thereunto 3. Nor can this Reformation justifie the recusancy of the Papists because these things never became a Reason for their recusancy further than they occasioned their obduracy by assuring their hopes of Englands return to them Nor the Separation of the Separatists for that the corruptions established were never made such essential parts of worship as to make a sufficient ground for separation Witness Cartwrights defence of the Church service The Masters and Scholars of Oxford cannot have been so little observant as not to know that the sober zealous Non-conformists who groaned under the burden of these corruptions and for this Reformation were grieved by and greatly contended against the * Mr. Geree his Vindiciae ecclesiae Anglicanae shewing necessity of reformation not Separation And Mr. Balls two Books against Mr. Cann Separation as that which was without sufficient ground yet like Jesus Christ their Master kept Communion with a Church whose Doctrine and Worship was very much in need of Reformation and taught men so to do granting There was something in the Doctrine and Worship of the Church of England not agreeable to the Word of God and yet not enough to lay a ground for separation 4. Much less doth this endeavor judge the Law against and punishment of Papists as unjust which
never had these pieces of Religion for their ground or reason You see Sir that the first ground of these learned mens dissatisfaction as to the covenanted endeavor of Reformation of Religion in England in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government is clearly groundless supposing a change and suggesting a scandal not to be rupposed Let us try the strength of their second reason for this exception And that is They could not covenant this Reformation without wrong to themselves 2 Reason for this exception their consciences reputation and estates in bearing false witness against themselves and sundry other wayes swearing to endeavor to reform that as corrupt and vitious which they had by their personal subscription approved as agreeable to the Word of God and for which they had not been condemned of their own hearts nor convinced by their brethren that therein they did amiss 2. Which they are in conscience perswaded were not against the Word of God as they stand established by law 3. Which they believe to be in sundry respects much better more agreeable to the Word of God and pactice of the Catholick Church than that to be preserved in Scotland 4. To which all Clerks admitted to any Benefice are required to assent To these reasons Sir I should have answered 1. Credit is indeed a matter of concerment and Reputation is to be regarded and our Estate by all just prudent meanes duely preserved but they are not equivalent to the purity of Gospel administrations nor must be admitted barres to duy or stays from the endeavour of a necessary Reformation when called for 2. We are at a loss to understand their terms the establishment by Law is not expressed in the Covenant and many corruptions we have noted were exercised not established The endeavour of a Reformation of them though not them only was and is required and it is very doubtful how or where to find and prove an establishment by law to which they so much cleave yet I hope the defect in proof thereof will be no just demurre to the endeavour of a Reformation of what is really vitious and corrupt whether established or only exercised We must also entreat a comment on these words the practice of the Catholick Church It is well known that Rome doth engross and monopolize this Epithite nor can the Worship Doctrine and Discipline of the Church of England admit it to be predicated of any so well as that for all reformed Churches do in their practice differ and I presume it will be hard to prove the agreement of the Primitive Churches in these particulars which were first derived from Apostate Rome and have ever since continued as the dregs of their Catholick practices not more to the grief of the Reformed Churches abroad and Non-conformists at home then joy and exultation of the Children of that Church as a plain evidence of their continued possession and encouragement to expect and endeavor a full recovery of England into her bosom But as to their Argument 3 The Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government might be vitious and corrupt notwithstanding their apprehension and assent to the contrary or the subscription of others required by the Law We well know that the Reformation of the Church in England was begun on more * Henry the 8th his discontent at the Pope Political than pious principles which did easily consent to a retaining of what was justly discharged in other Rerormed Churches embracing the administration of the Gospel in its simplicity for the sake of its naked self might consist with those Publick ends which did provoke it and Policy being the principle predominant in the first hath strugled against piety unto this last act and is not yet mastered and I presume the Scholars and Masters of Oxford will not plead an immunity from policy passion and prejudice when they are to pass judgment against their credits reputation and estates as in the case of this Covenant they apprehend they were to do and that these prirciples will provoke us to yield our own and exact from others an assent to things as agreeable to the Word of God which in themselves are vitious and corrupt no serious man or Christian can or will deny It is wel if we find this Reason stated under a more cautious vigilant and pious frame of spirit 4. But I must confess I wonder not so much to hear these Gentlemen to profess They had by their personal subscription approved the Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government of the Church of England as agreeable to the Word of God which might be an act of rashness an effect of ignorance an event of some distressed condition or distemper of mind fear of losing or hope of gaining preferment as to hear them say That this was enjoyned by law to them and all that were admitted to benefices That the Doctrine of the Church was to be assented unto I grant is by Law established but the assent to Worship Discipline and Government I observe not to be enjoyned by any full and formal Law I find indeed something relating to Discipline in the ordering of Deacons and Priests Bishops and Archbishops and the Churches power about traditions and Rites or Ceremonies inserted into the 39. Articles but how or by what Law they are established 13. Eliz 12. I know not The Statute requiring Ministers assent doth not specifie the Articles particulary and the general Note whereby to know them laid down in the Statute is this Articles of Religion which ONLY concern the Confession of the true Christian Faith and Doctrine of the Sacraments This particle ONLY is in my judgment exclusive to Discipline and Government and how these came into the Articles I know not only I find the Epistle to His late Majesty before the * A Book supposed to have be on written by Mr. William Frynn Quench-Coal to charge corruption and forgery to have been acted about these Articles and earnestly implores justice against the Forgers and Obtruders thereof and untill the Legality of the Canons of 1603. and sence thereof be clearly asserted and fully vindicated from the * Necessity for Reformation p. 56 57 58 59. exceptions which are urged against them we must be at a loss for their establishment for if the King had not authority by vertue of the Statute pretended or the matter of them be repugnant to standing Statutes as is suggested the establishment of Worship Discipline and Government by law must abide very doubtful but the University of Oxford might make a Law unto themselves to which these Gentlemen might refer But 5. Whether established or exercised I think it very strange to see these learned men on serious thoughts to profess their own hearts did not condemn them nor had their brethren convinced their judgements they had done amiss by their personal subscription to approve the Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government of the Church of England to be agreeable to the Word of GOD but
conclusion so weighty is a very considerable opposition directly repugnant to their confidence of an universal uninterrupted exercise of this Form of Government for now had Epiphanius more warrantably and on better grounds called this an Heresie I should not much regard it nor will their assurance of this Argument avail to establish this kind of Prelacy or to anticipate the promise on Oath of a due endeavour to extirpate it We see Sir there is nothing of weight in the Government either on the supposed Apostolical Institution or ancient universal uninterrupted practice that could bar from taking much lesse bind unto the breaking of this second Article of the Solemn League and Covenant let us consider what is in the state of the Church of England Oxford fourth exception to the second Article of the Covenant which may bind the perpetuation of this Government or be of force to bar the extirpation thereof and that in their fourth exception to this Article wherein they tell us In respect of the Church of England they cannot swear to extirpate this Government for three Reasons 1. The Inconveniences which attend all change in Government and in this is like to be great it being deeply rooted in the Laws and of strong influence on the Civil State 2. Repugnant to the Declaration of the Commons-in Parliament 3. And a striking at the foundation of this Famous Church of England Unto all which I cannot but briefly say That the two first seem in my thoughts very little to respect the Church for the alteration which might ensue in the Civil State might consist with and conduce unto the being and well-being of the Church and the declared purposes of the House of Commons might be contradicted without any great reflection on the Church 2. Jealousies of inconvenient effects must not intercept a duty These effects may be accidental the duty positive and it is the prudence of Legislators to fore-see and prepare against such incoveniences as may happen on the alteration of Lawes and Forms of Government I question how far the care thereof lieth on private persons or societies And if these jealousies were of weight for continuation of Episcopacy now why not at the destruction of Monasteries and Abbies and exclusion of the Popes Supremacy which was the root to which Prelacy is but a Branch since continued in conjunction with and influence on the Civil State by Magna Charta the grant of the glorious King Saint Edward and most of the ancient Lawes from which this Government doth at this day draw its sap and strength 3. The Delaration of Parliament pleaded as a Bar to this extirpation doth offer Reasons for its alterations which I think are of weight viz. its strenuous study and endeavour to effect a conjunction between Papists and Protestants in Doctrine Discipline and Worship being before agreed in judgement its Tyrannical imposing a Liturgy in Scotland and enforcing it after an happy pacification by his late Serene Majesty with the Bellum Episcopale its violence and cruelty to Religion and Religious men in the Star Chamber and High Commission Courts and what themselves observe its influence on the Civil State which made this Prelacy odious in all Ages and was a very likely provocation to its extirpation in England as in Denmark and if they will but please to consider that sinful superiority over the Ministers of the Gospel which is the anima animans very form of it and cannot be capable of any remedy but by its ruine all which having been published in print by many Petitions to Speeches in and Declarations from the Parliament might have offered Reasons for the extirpation to counterpoise nay weigh down all feared inconveniences which might arise had these learned men pleased to have observed them so that if the House of Commons did any way declare the continuance of it it was from their indulgence and willingness by all fair means if possible to regulate it rather than any merit of the Government it self 4. But the supposed repugnancy of this branch of the Covenant unto the Declaration of the House of Commons is not to me so visible these Gentlemen refer us unto the Remonstrance of December the fifth 1641. and tell us That the House of Commons Remonstrated that it was far from their purpose or desire to abolish the Church-government but rather that all the Members of the Church of England should be regulated by such Rules of Order and Discipline as are established by Parliament Which words by the variation of the character I imagined to be the words of the Remonstrance but on search and second reading of the Remonstrance I find no such sentence in the same some parts of the sentence in the Remonstrance themselves have transcribed in the Margin and it is this They infuse into the people that we mean to abolish all Church-government which Text will not justifie or allow their inference for it proclaims not the Parliaments purpose but Malignants policy not that it was far from their purpose or desire to extirpate this kind of Government but that the malice of their enemies did infuse they would abolish all Government Surely Sir prejudice was very prevalent in these learned men of Oxford which made them read instead of a complaint of grievance a Declaration of purpose and from the complaints of a general charge to intend to abolish all Government to infer a purpose of preservation of this specifical Government as if all Government were included in it had they pleased to have read the whole sentence they would have seen that the words were much more general abolish all Government and leave every man to his own fancy for the service and worship of God which they might not do and yet extirpate the Prelacy and late Episcopal Government of England no marvel that this mistake makes them imagine and insert into the Reason a rather that all the Members should be regulated c. which desire is not therein expressed but only a profession of their knowledge That His Majesty was under God entrusted with the Ecclesiastical Law to regulate all the Members of the Church of England by such Rules of Order and Discipline as are established by Parliament I think Sir a profession of his Majesties Prerogative is vastly different from a Parliamentary proportioning of the Prelates preheminence and the Kings Supremacy may be acknowledged when the Bishops are degraded and set among their proper Peers And now Sir this repugnancy between the Covenanted extirpation and Parliaments purpose of perpetuation appeareth a think so of like nature with the Apostolical Institution of this Episcopacy and it would be enquired whether it be more malignity to suggest to the people a purpose in the Parliament by them never declared and so make them obnoxious to the charge of self-contradiction or infuse into the people the verity and plainness of their meaning not to abolish all Government but to extirpate this kind which through the whole
these learned men do cite is limited unto the Laws of the Land which the People in Parliament assembled shall choose according to which the King is bound to Rule for otherwise this Coronation Oath will not only bind the perpetuation of this Government by Prelacy but also to the Restitution of the Abbies and Monasteries demolished and the Popes Supremacy expelled all which were granted to the Clergy by the glorious King St. Edward 2. But admit we these learned men the sense they seem to put upon the Kings Supremacy methinks the modest expressions of the Covenant might have anticipated this exception it only binding us within our places and callings which might be by humble advice and supplication to the King by vertue of His Supream Authority to effect it to endeavour the extirpation of this Prelacy that is the Government by Arch-bishops Bishops Deans Deans and Chapters and the like but such was their affection to it that they could not desire nay they could not but beg of God that he would not suffer the King to assent thereunto which affection we must not think to abate untill their judgements be better inform'd 3. As to the benefit which did redound to the Crown by the Collation of Bishopricks and Deanaries by their first fruits and yearly tenths and profits in vacancies though some question the Kings propriety not in respect of the Law of the Land but of the Law of God I shall not insist on that only say That the constant enjoyment of the full possessions of them will make a much greater revenue and maintain to the King a greater Honour and Estate than the first fruits tenths and profits of vacancies although such vacancies as the Kings of England have by vertue of this Argument continued for the space of 5 10 15 20. or sometimes thirty years together taking the profits to themselves or bestowing them on their attendants and undoubtedly there is the same capacity to extirpate the whole Government as some Episcopal Seas and to enlarge the Revenues of the Crown by the Reversion of all the profits of the Government and the abolishment thereof as to continue so long vacancies moreover I would desire to know what is in this Argument more prevalent for Arch-bishops Bishops and their Cathedral Churches than for Abbots and Priors their Monasteries and houses 4. As to the agreeableness of this Government in the Church to the Civil constitution of the Kingdom I only say that I question whether the Lord Christ who declared his Kingdom not to be of this World will allow or do appoint the Governments of the World to be the square of Government in his Church and I confess I can hardly reconcile it to his Regal Power and Faithful Administration in his House and I must have a better Comment on the Text than I have yet met withall if it be not prohibited in these terms The Princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them and they are great and exercise authority upon them but it shall not be so among you but whosoever will be great among you let him be your M nister and whosoever will be Chief among you let him be your servant Matth. 20.25.29 27. Mark 10.42 43 44. Luke 22.23 24. The sense whereof made Pope Gregory write himself Servus Servorum Dei Whitehead and others refuse Coverdalle and many others decline their Bishopricks as having in them aliquid commune eum Antichristo I think the Clown his question to the Bishop of Cullen were worth considering What will become of the Bishops when the Dukes be damned Yet the agreeableness of Prelacy with Englands ill Government hath not been so obvious to others as these Gentlemen suppose the vigilant eye and strong hand wherewith in all Ages it hath been restrained these Petrae and Rupes Winchester and Rivallo in the time of King Henry the 3d. were judged very dangerous when they constrained a Covenant without and against the Kings consent to remove them as evil Counsellours Matthew Paris our old Historian notes Bishops to have ever been the Make-bates between the King and People screwing up the Kings Prerogative beyond thee onstitutions of the Kingdom and liberties yea safety of the Subjects and chargeth all the Wars Broiles Mischiefs and Evils of the Barons Wars to have sprung from and been acted by the Bishops And when ngKi Philip lay on his death-bed He charged His son If He would Rule by his Nobles He must keep his Bishops low The premuniries by which they have ever been awed and their late High Commission authorizing them to act any appellation provocation priviledge exemption proclamation law statute whatsoever notwithstanding and their bold Usurpation in their own name and authorities and under their own seals to issue forth Process Excommunications Censures and other Judgements and their Imperial Canons in 1640. do bespeak them prejudicial to the Civil Government and Constitution of the Kingdom and I think a private society should with very much of modesty affirm the agreeableness of this Government after the Parliament on mature deliberation and debate as most proper Judges Vote of the 10th of June had voted this Government to have been found by long experience very prejudicial to the Civil State of these Kingdoms Now Sir as to the so often Canted Aphorisme of King James No Bishop No King with which the Prelates and their Priests do too much strive to rivet their Government unto the Crown I must be free to say that it is more politick than pious and of no more warrant or authority than the Spaniards one universal Emperour and one Pope or universal Bishop and when the Scots loyal adherence to and advancement of His most Sacred Majesty unto the Ruine of their Kingdom Loss of their lives and Estates Exile and Imprisonment of their Nobles and Conquest of their Land together with the uncessant struglings of the Covenant Interest under Sequestration Imprisonments Banishments and death of many not ceasing till they had by Gods blessing effected the Happy and Honourable Restitution of King and Kingdom be well considered I hope these learned Masters and Scholars of Oxford will see some proceedings that may at least weaken their belief in this political Maxime We have seen Sir the strength of these learned exceptions unto the second Article of the Covenant the great eye-sore of our Age and find little or nothing therein to charge the matter thereof with falshood or injustice but that notwithstanding the grudging of proud and profane men it stands in this respect established they have herein been long and constrained me to stay too long in consideration of what they urge but as they so I shall be more brief and contracted in their following exceptions wherein they suggest many to be great ones but profess to take up with few which we must needs imagine not to be of the least weight Unto the third Article they except nothing as to the matter of the promise Subjectio quinta
in the story forbids instances hoping general hints may answer the learned and sober 3. Nor am I convinced that it was in His power by the equity of the Law Numb 32. they mean 30.2 to annull and make void the Covenant for admitting the equity of that Law by Analogy to reach us I hope no adult child shall on observation of irregularities in the Government of a Family be barred from vowing in his place and calling to his power and capacity sincerely really and constantly to endeavor the Reformation thereof viz. Quenquam qui gaudet usu rationis ita plene sub alterius potestate esse quin ut sit quantum ad aliqua saltem sui juris is Dr. Sanderson's Rule though the effect may yet the lawful endeavour cannot be out of the childs reach De Turam if the child or wife swear nothing but positive duty or what is within their power and so limit their vow I hope the Superiours interdiction will favour more of passionate mistake than strength to avoid the vow Yet I must confess I am not clear that the equity of that Law will reach our case I was ever willing to yield His Majesty the Reverence due to a Political Parent but in this case of conscience wherein He is abstracted from and opposed unto the Parliament I find a defect which makes me fear the simile will not square and though I can own Him as a Parent to be by Him corrected and disposed yet methinks the Parental power is placed in others at least conjunct with Him viz. the Parliament I am sure Legislation is Paternal power and Execution more proper to the other Parent and that the Lords and Commons have a share if not the greatest share in Legislation no true Englishman nay no ordinary Polititian can or will deny when I observe the King sworn to Rule according to the Laws quas populas clegerit which the people shall choose and the Writ for their Election to require that they be furnished and have plenam sufficientem potestatem pro se communitate c. ad faciendum consentiendum his quae tunc ibidem de communi in consilidicti Regni nostri contigerint ordinari ita quod pro defectu potestatis hujusmodi c. dicta negotia infecta non remaneant Paternal Authority power to consent and make Laws in the great Affairs of the Kingdom as the Family and when I observe Polititians and Lawyers even English-men generally to conclude the forma informans form animating the Law to be the consent or choice of the people whence Marius Salamonius that great Lawyer defining the Law saith it is Expressa Civium Conventio and makes this the Reason of their obligation Ligatur populus legibus suis De principatu lib. 1. p. 35 36. Instin Cod. 1. Tit. 17. Lex 8. quasi pactis conventis quae verae sunt leges whence Theodosius the Emperour writing to the Senate of Rome doth declare consensus universorum to be the formality of those Laws that he would establish to which our Hollingshead and Sir Thomas Smith before mentioned doth fully assent and concur as likewise Fortescue who makes the King to be as the Minister in Marriage who may establish and declare it but the consent of parties gives it being and the common Dialect of our own Statutes being the Assent of the Lords and Commons and Authority of Parliament wich no less frequency than the Assent of the King and that the contriving debating fully forming by frequent reading serious consideration and full disputes is the peculiar work of the two Houses whilst a Ministerial Declaration though in a Dialect and form of Majesty is the proper and only work of a King though I deny not a Parental power and Prerogative to the King I cannot but judge it more than probable that the proper Paternal power is in the Parliament or at the least in the three Estates and then Sir we are under this unhappy question Whether to obey father or mother when they falling out command different nay contrary things this I confess is not more the distraction than the confusion of the Family yet certainly in such an unhappy chance prudent and rational children must and will cleave to the principal legislative party who hath a confessed authority and power to extend or restrain augment or diminish the Prerogative and Ministerial power of the other bound to act according to their appointments Sir Dr. Gaudens Appeal to the Oxford Reasons hath led me to this Discourse and unwilling distinction but my prayer is and hence-forward shall be that England may honour father and mother and know no difference for the Case is now altered and this Argument is of no force as I thought I had sufficiently hinted in my last for His late Majesty forbade the Act but never assumed an Authority to void the Obligation and His most Sacred Majesty by His own subjection to it Declaration for it and Oath to endeavour the Establishment thereof hath as is before noted made it valid and I hope such as call Him Father will weigh the equity of this Law Numb 30.2 and not only acknowledge their brethren bound by it but themselves become subject to the same bond which had before a lawful and sufficient but now hath a compleat and perfect Auhority 4. 4. The gesture in making the Covenant vindicated The fourth and last particular in the manner of making the Solemn League and Covenant is The action or gesture of the body used in the swearing thereof to declare the assent of the minde by which prophane spirits do endeavour to reproach it for that it was not sworn after the ordinary manner used among us by laying the hand on the Bible but by lifting up the hand towards heaven Amongst those who have of late appeared against the Covenant I find none speaking against this gesture League Illegal p. 21. save only Dr. Featlies ghost who like it self more scurrilously than seriously pretends to Answer one Text of Scripture which he supposeth to be the only one for defence of this gesture Rev. 10.15 The Angel lifted up his hand and sware c. Unto which he saith That might be a fit gesture for an Angel menacing a fatal doom to the world which yet may not be thought so fit a gesture for men entring into an holy League for the preservation of two Kingdoms If they can as the Angel stand upon the earth and the sea at the same time let them imitate the Angels in lifting up their hands when they make their Covenant Howsoever I think it a fitter gesture in taking this Oath than after the usual manner to lay the hand on the Bible for this Oath and Covenant hath no ground or foundation at all in that Book and the lifting up of the hand very well expresseth the purport of the Covenant which is a lifting up their hands against the Lords Anointed and his
Sir this conceit never sprung from the Book of Sports or Bishop Pierce his Somersetshire Septuagint on Revels and Church-Ales which are more clearly contradictory than the Covenant The last is of the same nature and a supposition in their own breast 5. Contradiction charged on the Covenant to preserve the Liberties of the People and yet submit to the imposition of this Covenant not established by Law yet imposed by just and sufficient Authority but in what words of the Covenant lieth this contradiction I hope it is no loss of the Libertie of the Kingdom to swear that we will preserve the Liberties thereof Who ever requires us so to do for the swearing of an absolute duty is but a poor acknowledgment of Authority We must Sir see more dark and doubtful expressions and plain and clear contradictory terms in the Solemn League and Covenant before we can judge it really ambiguous or contradictory or conceive mens clamours to spring from any thing more than their own passionate fancies and prejudicate opinions whose lusts lead them to wish it were such as they cannot charge it to be Sectio sexta Proposition 6. The Solemn League and Covenant for its qualitie and in Respect of its obligation is Publique and Nationall as well as Private and Personall SIR Dr. Gauden in his attempt to loosen St. Peters bonds as he judgeth the Covenant to be was willing to render the Covenant to be in reference to the matter thereof a Religious Bond declaring a sence of dutie to God the King the Church their Country and the Reformed Religion Page 14. to make men more strictly sensible of the sacred and civil obligations respectively due unto them that so they might be more ready to discharge them in their places and callings and hereby he doth establish the obligation thereof which he not finding any way to avoid doth endevour to limit and contract into a narrow Room and Compasse supposing the subjects thereof to be few very few and those private men in their private capacitie and so denominates it a Religious Bond which private men and some party only of the Nations spontaneously took upon themselves in sence whereof he accommodates his solution of the Covenant unto private capacities endeavouring to absolve them by a power which he saith is in themselves or to quiet them with a suggestion of impossibility to accomplish their particular promises against the purpose and current of the Nation how judiciously he hath managed the same I have already shewed in my St. Peters bonds Abide wherein I did among other things suggest my apprehension of the Covenant Page 21. in respect of the extent of its obligation to be Publique and Nationall I expected something to have been said by the Dr. against that suggestion and the grounds from which it did arise but find none only in the Doubts and Scruples handed into the world by his Epistle and offered to your and my consideration he doth adhere to his own notion of the nature and private personall obligation of the Covenant not urging one Reason for it or answering any thing urged against it how ingenuously this is done by a Casuist that presumed to release from the obligation of sacred bonds let the world judge I am therefore constrained to speak out and more plainly to assert what I was desirous only to hint and generally suggest hoping thereby to have produced some serious discourse which might have acquitted our Nation or have affected them with the Oath of God which abides upon them When Sir I say the Solemn League and Covenant is Publick and National I intend by it that which Civilians and Casuists do ordinarily call Real and as they oppose it unto private or personal because it resteth not in any individual persons or particular private number thereof who may soon perish and so the obligation passe away with them or be over-powred and so put into an impossbility of doing what they had sworn as was Saul in the case of Jonathans Rescue and the men that confederated against Paul the breach whereof subjects onely those individual persons unto the guilt or punishment of perjury in non-effecting or endeavouring the thing covenanted but abideth fixed in things and capacities which continue and abide under all mutation of persons and so passe upon all persons whatsoever in al after ages ad infinitum if the Covenant be not limited who shall succeed into those things places or capacities and so binde all persons therein concerned whether invested or represented by and so involved in the same unto the sincere faithful diligent and constant performnance and pursuit of what is therein promis d and in denial or defect thereof subjects them unto the guilt and punishment of perjury so that the generations who never personally sware the Covenant succeeding into the capacities of their Progenitors are bound unto the performance of the Oath and shall be punished many hundreds of years after it was made and it may be some years after it was violated in case of the breach of it for so long as the publick capacity continueth the persons which succeed into it succeed also into the obligation which lieth upon it and the variation of persons voideth not the Oath such is the Oath of any body of people whether a City or Nation wherein the publick faith of that body Politick is engaged and must be maintained First Whether it be done by the universality of the people themselves * Ubi semel decretum erit omnibus id etiam quibus ante displicuerit pro bono atque utili foedere defendendam Liv. lib. 32. in which all singulars are supposed to confederate though some few may not complie yet those few are included in and bound by the universalitie according to that Rule Vbi universi ibi singuli nam singuli congregati vel in summa reputati facitunt universes The universality is made up of the singular persons so in a Corporation or County the Vniversality chuse Members of Parliament or Magistrates confederate â—acta Civium publicis consiliis habita eos obligabunt qui aliter senserunt Grot. bel pa. p. 516. though some singular persons be not present nor vote in the Negative and so personally consent yet a repolitically obliged 2. Or whether it be done by the collective body of the People who represent them in their names and at their appointment not transacting all affairs as did the Senate of Rome in reference to which Salust noteth Senatus uti poterat decrevit suo atque populi injusso nullum potuisse foedus fieri the Senate decreed for if they or the people had gain-said it there could be no Covenant and in this Collective body though there may be many dissenters yet by the Oath and Act of the majority themselves and they whom in that capacity they represent are bound according to that rule Coetus quilibet non minus quam persona singularis jus habet
Gloucester 57 in the County of Salop and 73 in the County of Devon who give their testimony and call it the Solemn League and Covenant of the three Kingdoms and in the sense of the National Obligation they give this testimony and thus plead We find the Covenant is antiquated and banished as intended to be of force during the time of our intestine Warres we confess we are amazed at this quirk we pray the Wars may cease for ever which yet there is fear may too soon be recalled by God Pag. 27. for this treacherous dealing in his Covenant but we believe no honest understanding heart can be perswaded the Covenant was intended as a Truce made with God for three or four years but we shall labour to stop this Gap with some few strong stakes cut out of the Covenant and so passing through the several Articles of the Covenant they advise those terms may be viewed constantly Pag. 28 29. all the dayes of our life our posterity the Lord may dwell in the midst of us and good of the Kingdoms whereupon they conclude these are not for a few years but for ever and affectionately cry out to the Nation Oh England turn not Harlot break not Covenant with thy God and the Lord keep England from this Covenant-breaking and his vengeance from his people Unto this give me leave to add this passage out of the Testimony of the York-shire Ministers It cannot be unknown to the Churches abroad Pag. 8. that all the three Kingdoms stand engaged by vertue of a Solemn League and Covenant sworn with hands lifted up to the most High God sincerely really and constantly by the grace of God to endeavour in our several places the Reformation of Religion in the Kingdoms of England and Ireland in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government according to the Word of God and example of the best Reformed Churches I shall Sir add but one more and it is that in which we have all the rest their 's being little else but a concurrence with this and that is the Testimony of the Ministers of our own City of London and they profess thus Pag. 26. In order to the Reformation and Defence of Religion within these three Kingdoms we shall never forget how solemnly and chearfully the Sacred League and Covenant was sworn with hands lifted up to the most High God wherein the three Kingdoms stand engaged joyntly and severally c. Yet we cannot but observe to the great grief of our heart that this Solemn Covenant of God hath been and is daily neglected slighted vilified reproached and opposed even by too many who have entred into it and endeavours have been used wholly to evade it and render it useless and that it hath been manifestly violated to the dishonour of God to the prejudice of a real Reformation the sadning of the hearts of Gods people and pulling down his dreadful judgments upon us and upon the whole Kingdom Sir I will say no more Pag. 28. but I pray God London Ministers may retain or recover their first love and Englands Watchmen may remember the loud Alarums they have sometimes sounded and the grounds thereof Sectio semptima Prop. 7. The Obligation of the Solemn League and Covenant is permanent and abiding never by any humane act or power to be absolved or discharged SIR By the permanency of the Obligation of the Covenant we mean the continuance of its Bond on the mind and consciences of men so that the Subjects thereof are and for ever will be bound to pursue and perform the things and matters therein promised nor is it in the power of any man or humane authority to release acquit or discharge them from the same but that when and howsoever the Solemn League and Covenant is slighted laid aside or violated by any the Subjects thereof they shall be liable unto the guilt and punishment of perjury in the breach thereof This permanency of obligation and impossibility of discharge doth spring from a double cause 1. The nature of an Oath which is a solemn and serious Appeal to and invocation of God as Witness and Avenger of the thing sworn and sincerity of the Subject swearing so as in case of dissimulation falshood or non-performance of the thing covenanted we shall be liable unto the guilt and punishment of perjury to be inflicted by the God who judgeth righteously And 2ly From the Manner and Form of the Covenant which is absolute and without a condition which might at any time fail and so cause a Cessation of the Bond of the Covenant thereupon dependent and is expressely exclusive to all manner of discharge or release by any humane Act or Power whatsoever by an express protest That this Covenant we make in the presence of Almighty God the Searcher of all hearts with a true intention to perform the same as we shall answer at that great day when the secrets of all hearts shall be disclosed and by a peculiar provision That we shall never suffer our selves directly or indirectly by whatsoever combination perswasion or terrour to be divided or withdrawn from this blessed union and conjunction whether to make defection to the contrary part or to give up our selves to a detestable neutrality in this cause which so much concerneth the Glory of God Good of the Kingdoms and Honour of the King but shall all the days of our lives zealously and constantly continue therein So that the matter of this Covenant being as I have before asserted good and lawful because just and possible if there were in the World any power or persons entrusted with that divine Prerogative to discharge the Obligation of an Oath we could not receive it because it is actually and expresly disclaimed We Sir live amongst Protestants who by their very profession do protest against all Papal Dispensations and Jesuitical Commutation thereupon dependent and therefore I need not stand to make any defence in this cause against the same which would be to suggest some Protestant Divines to be so Popishly affected as to have recourse to Rome for relief against St. Peters Restraint I presume Sir Englands Bishops would not be reputed Popish and other ways to discharge the Obligation of the Covenant we have none save the release of Superiors which alwayes must be in such cases and manner as are peculiar unto them and proper to their cognizance I am not insensible that some suppose to themselves and suggest to others a nullity or non-obliging force of the Covenant by reason that His late Majesty of glorious Memory did interdict the Act concerning which it is necessary to be enquired Whether by the Light of Nature Law of Nations or Rule of Scripture the Prince the Political Parent have such full compleat Parental Authority over His Kingdom collectively or distributively considered as by His interdict to make void the Oath they put upon themselves 2. Whether the Parliaments of England both or either House