was petended the true cause was that which made him so famous even his zeal activity for the work of God in his generation for what ever else they had to lay to his charge if he had either opposed the work of God or done as litle for it as many other of the Nobles his life would not have been taken now more then the life of others it is true other things were sought to colour this bussinesse and failing one another failing that a third but in end ther is a comprehensive generall set downe as the ground of the sentence to this purpose That he had been an enemy to the king his interest these 23 yeers or more by past which in effect is as much as to say he had been an active friend for the interest of Christ. But because generalls cannot well be proved they condescended on severall particular actings of his in carrying on in his place station the work of reformation when all these failed they fix upon his complyance with the Englishes after they had subdued the land in battell and forced the king out of his dominions had garrisoned the whole land used it almost as a conquest by sitting in their parliament when chosen by some shire and when the rest of the shires of the land had sent their commissioners thither This his complyance with them at that time by sitting in their judicatories and there concurring with his advice counsel for the good of the land that was now under their feet is the only particular ground upon which his sentence is founded and the particular speciall cause pretended for which he was condemned to lose his head as a traitour to have his head put up on tâ—…e top of the tolbooth as an eminent traitour A sentence which question lesse at first veiu may make all men of understanding astonished to wonder how ever it could have entered into the minde of the parliament of Scotland to sentence unto death such a peer of the land such an usefull member of the Kingdome an ornament upon such a ground and for such a cause But if these foure particulars be considered the matter will yet appear more wonderfull 1. The matter of complyance with the Englishes at that time was so farr from being accounted treasonable that severall of the lawyers among whom was one Sr Iohn Fletcher who was now advanced to be his Maj. advocat did accuse this worthy Nobleman of treason did swear subscribe an oath to be faithfull unto the governement as it was then established without King house of Lords Now if there had been treason really in this deed either by the civill law or by the municipall lawes of the land would not the lawyers have perceived it whose dayly work study the lawes are 2. If this had been the deed of this nobleman alone the mater had been lesse to have been wondered at but it being such a deed whereof few of the nobles of Scotland were altogether free yea whereof many of the members of Parliament his judges were guilty the matter is beyond a parallel It is hard to make secios criminis sit as judges condemne the accused reason would require that the table should be purged Is it not strange for a Parliament to condemne one for such a fault for which many of their own members might with as much justice equity be condemned and is it not strange how they being by their own confession traitours in the heighest degree could fitt judge others It is true it will be replyed That his Maj. might pardon whom he pleased But then it will aboundantly appear that not this But something else was the cause of this worthy nobleman's death Whatever may be said in poynt of law yet it will be a disput in poynt of conscience If kings may pardon such crimes as do deserve death by the law of God or if such crimes which kings may pardon of their own accord according to their own good pleasure do before the Lord deserve death 3. If the Parliament had thought this particular worthy to bear so much stresse why would they have spent so much of their time in searching for other grounds to goe upon 〈◊〉 why did they not make use of this at the first but it is like this had never once been mentioned if they had been able to fasten treason upon any other of his actions this makes it so much the more to be wondered at that they would condemne such a noble man for such a particular which they would never once havâ—… named if they could have done their intended work otherwayes 4. Is it not strange that of all the complyers of Scotland there was not one except this nobleman impannelled upon this account let be put to death yea is it not strange that those noble Men were never once questioned who being desired by Generall Monck when he was entering England with his army to rancounter Lambert did abjure king Charles his interest this Nobleman must die Yea is it not yet more strange that one William Purves who by complying had occasioned almost ruine to many noblemen brughs and gentlemâ—…n should have been absolved by act of Parliament as might be cleared if there were a table of the unprinted acts set down after their acts as is done alwayes in other Parliaments and yet this nobleman must be sentenced to death for complying for the good of the countrey But to speak unto the bussinesse in poynr of law let these foure or five Particular quaere's be considered and then any shall be able to perceive the iniquity of this sentence 1. By what act of Parliament is such a deed as this condemned as treasonable By what municipall law can any member of the Kingdome be challenged upon the account of treason for treating with a conquerour for life liberty for sitting in his councells for the good of the countrey after that he with the rest of the body of the land had foughten in the defence of King countrey till no more could be done after the whole land had been overcome at severall battels and wholly overrun had acted nothing for the advantage of the enemy disadvantage of the king countrey before the victory obtained but in all poynts had carryed as became a loyall subject contributing all the help by armes counsell which was required what act of parliament declareth such a deed as this treasonable such a subject to deserve death as a traitour 2. Was there ever such a Practique in Scotland since ever there was a king in it Severall times was the kingdome of Scotland overrun by the kingdome of England particularly in the dayes of Baliol at that time King Edward caused the Nobles of Scotland swear all aidgeance unto him But when Bruce came to be King was there any of the Nobles questioned for treason upon that account
approved there the same may be with publick humiliation all Religious answerable solemnity sworne subscribed by all true professors of the Reformed Religion all his Maj. good subjects in both Kingdoms Thereafter on the same day it was approvedby the Convention of estates then sent unto the kingdome of England where after mature deliberation it was approved by the learned assembly of Divines by Both Howses of Parliament by them in their solemne assemblies after sermon solemnely sworne subscribed by Ordinance of Parliament sworne suhscribed in all the parishes of the Kingdome a copy thereof appointed to be affixed in every parish Church also a faire Copy thereof with all the names of the members of Parliament who subscribed the same is ordained to be affixed at the end of the great Hall of Westminster When thus it was sworne subscribed in England The Commissioners of the Gen. Assembly Octob. 11. 1643. ordained the same to be with publick Humiliation all Religious solemnities received sworne subscribed by all ministers professours within the Kirk for this effect it is ordained That the League Covenant be forthwith printed that the printed copies bound with some clean sheets of paper be sent unto the ministry that every minister upon the first Lords day after the same shall come to his hands read explaine it by Exhortation prepare the people to the swearing subscribing thereof solemnely the Lords day next immediately following ordaine that presbiteries proceed with the censures of the church against all such as shall refuse or shift to swear subscribe the same And the Commissioners thinke it very convenient for good example the better encouragement of others that it be solemnely sworne subscribed by themselves now present before the Congregation in the East kirk upon friday next the 13 of this instant after sermon exhortation to be made by Mr Robert Douglas Moderator that the Commissioners of the Convention of estates now in towne the Commissioners from the Parliament of England Divines of that kingdome here present be earnestly desired to joyne with them in this solemne Religion action Upon the 12 of Octob. the Commissioners of the convention of Estates did also ordaine the same to be sworne subscribed under the paine of being punished as enemies to Religion his Maj. honour peace of the kingdoms to have their goods â—…ents confiscate c. also ordaine all Sheriffs Stuarts others his Maj. magistrates in Brugh land Committies in the severall shires to be assisting to ministers and presbiteries in procuriing reall obedience hereunto Which deed of the Commission of the Church was ratified approved by the Gen. assembly Jun. 28. 1645. So is the deed of the convention of estates their commissioners approved ratified by act of Parl. July 15. 1644. where the League Covenant is insert in the Registers Thus the kingdoms of Scotland England after other meanes of Supplication remonstrance Protestation and sufferings to the end they might preserve themselves and their Religion from utter ruine and destruction according to the commendable practises 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 solemne League and Covenant wherein all did subscribe and with hands lifted up to the most High God did swear as they should answer at that great day to God the searcher of all hearts That sincerly really and constantly they should endevour in their severall places and callings 1. To preserve the Reformed Religion in the Church of Scotland in Doctrine worship Discipline and Governement and to Reforme England and Ireland according to the word of God and the example of the best Reformed Churches and to bring the three kingdoms to the nearest conjunction and uniformity in Religion Confession of Faith forme of Church governement Directory for worship and Catechising 2. To endevour the extirpation of popery Prelacy Superstition Heresy Schisme Prophaness and whatsoever shall be found contrary to sound doctrine and the power of godliness 3. To preserve the Rights and privileges of the Parliaments liberties of the Kingdomes and the Kings Maj. person and authority in the preservation and defence of the true Religion and liberties of the Kingdomes 4. To discover all such as have been or shall be incendiaries Malignants or evill Instruments hindering the Resermation of Religion dividing the king from his people and the kingdomes one from another or making any fâ—…on or parties among the people contrary to this League and Covenant that they may be brought to triall and condigne punishment 5. To endevour that these kingdomes may remaine conjoyned in a firme place union to all posterity 6. To assist such as enter into this Covenant and not to suffer themselves any maner of way to be divided or to make defection or to give themselves to a detestable indifferency and neutrality in this cause but shall continue â—…in against all opposition and promote the same according to their power against all sets and impedimentes whatsoever When these hands did thus enter in Covenant with the great God of heaven earth many of soul was converted which was as the finite of this noble Marriage when they saw the wonderfull works of the Lords right hand whereby he openly â—…nyably owned that Covenant such as entred into 〈◊〉 Then did these Churches flourish begin to have a beautifull countenance to be admired abroad by strangers who stood astonished at the report of what they did hear dayly of the Lords owneing fighting for that Covenant seconding the Covenanters in carrying on the Ends of the same But at length after the Lord had by many signes wonders testified his displeasure against broken the whole strength force of the Popish Prelaticall Malignant faction wrought deliverances in all the three kingdoms for the people that engadged in Covenant with him It seemed good in his eyes who doth all things according to the counsell of his own will to suffer another enemy to arise to trouble his Church to try his people viz. the Sectarian party who grew to such an hieght in the English Army that they over-ruled the Parliament of England putting away the House of Peers they modelled the House of Commons as they thought good erected a New Court which they called an High Court of Iustice before which they did Impannel the King at length did violently take away his life Januar. 30. 1649. against which deed the Commissioners both from the Church State of Scotland did protest were therefore hardly used at London When the report of this cometh to the eares of the Parliament of Scotland which was then sitting They upon the 5. of Febr. 1649. considering that for as much as the kings Maj. who lately reigned
it may not be a supersede as to an Act a ground of exemption to the subject from the rigour thereof till the law be revived by a posteriour act which was never yet done lawyers may judge But which is more there is an Act of Parl. Anno 1592. declareing that that former Act shall no wayes be prejudiciall nor derogat any thing to the privilege that God hath given to the spirituall office bearers of the church concerning heads of religion matters of heresy excommunication collation or deprivation of ministers or any such like essentiall censures specially grounded have and warrand of the word of God And which is more considerable The parliament 1648. did disclaime any such power of judging in church matters took it for an unjust challenge charge to say that they took an antecedent judgment in maters of religion for in their letter to the presbyteries of Scotland being their Act 16. May 11. 1648. they have these words Neither can it be with any truth or justice in any sort alleidged that we have in the least measure wronged or violated the true privileges or liberties of the church or any way taken upon us the determination or decision of any matters of faith or church discipline though we be unjustly charged with taking an antecedent judgment in matters of religion By which every one may see that the parliament did looke upon themselves as an incompetent judge in matters of faith or religion Primo instanti or antecedently unto the decision determination of the church And now let lawyers judge whether when the parliament the supreme judicature of that land doth declare themselves incompetent judges in matters of religion The Privy Councell which is a judicature inferiour to the parliament by the fundamentall lawes of that land having its originall power antiquity from the Kings Maj. the estates of parliament so is subordinat there to ought to be countable to censureable by them according to the 12 Act of Parl. 2. King Iames 4. See for this Act 27. Parl 2. of King Charl I. 1640. may become judges thereof whether seing by confession of Parliament they can be no lesse incompetent judges then the parliament it self it can be truely treasonable to decline them Though it were granted that that Act of Parliament 1584. were no way weakened by the other Act 1592. which yet is expressely explicatory thereof yet it could no wayes be treasonable in him to decline the councell as an incompetent judge to him in that case because the Act 1584. is to be understod in such cases only in which they are propper judges But it will be replyed that the Act maketh them judges competent to all persones spirituall or tempâ—…rall in all matters wherin they or any of them shall be apprehended summoned or charged Answ. True the act speaks so in the generall yet it is well known that notwithstanding thereof any of his majesties subjects might decline them when cited for causes the cognition whereof did popperly belong to another distinct judicature such as the court of exchequer or the Lords of the Session so that this all is to be restricted to such causes as do belong to them And under it causes purely ecclesiastike cannot be understood because of that which the Parliament Anno 1648. said Parliaments know best what causes belong to their cognition what doth not belong to a Parliament will never belong to the Privy Councell If it be replyed againe that the meaning of the Parliament 1584. was to give the councell power in church matters because this act was devised of purpose to hinder ministers to protest against the King his counsell as they had done before Ans. that is true But that will say nothing now when the Parliament 1648. hath declined to be judges in such matters and Parliaments can best expound their own lawes and acts can best explaine the extent of their own power and consequently can best declare what causes these are of which the Privie Councell is competent judge what not when they declare that themselves are not competent judges in matters of doctrine religion they do more then sufficiently declare that the Privie Councell is not a competent judge in those matters But for all this this worthy man must die he dieth a martyr for the truth against the Erastian abomination SECTION VI. The sufferings of some other Ministers related AMong other acts of the Committy of Estates there was a proclamation which they caused be read at all the church doores of the Kingdome upon the Lord's day in which they discharged ministers to speak or preach any thing against them or their proceedings this was to command them to handle the word of the Lord deceitfully to become false prophets to preach smooth things and to prophecy deceits wherby the malicious ill affected people who did not love their ministers were encouraged to give in delations of such such things as they thought good to allaidge against them as uttered in their sermones bring in any prophane persones they pleased for witnesses By which meanes some though many were in no hazard thinking it commendable prudence to be silent at such a time were brought to trouble both by the Committe of Estates by the Parliament being imprisoned or confined and other wayes hardly used though litle of what was allaidged could be proved against them More over ther was one minister who after the Parliament had annulled the covenant passed many other acts against the work of reformation thought himself bound in conscience to give faithfull free warning to shew the greatnesse of the sin of backslideing defection from the cause and truth of God to protest publikely in a Ministeriall way for his own exoneration after the example of Samuel at the comandement of God against the course of defection carryed on all acts made in prejudice of the covenanted worke of reformation for which cause he was summoned before the Parliament and at length condemned of treason sedition onely upon that acount therafter was banished out of all his Maj. dominions And if any say that ministers should have been silent not meddled with state affairs let the answers which famous doct Voet giveth in his Politia Eccles. pag. 982. 983. c. be considered which are these 1. It is the duty of Ministers to give faithfull warning unto people Ezek. 3 17 22. 2. This was not to meddle with the politie but with the abuse of it by men in power 3. Rulers no lesse then others must be touched when they provoke God to wrath by their carriage 1 Thes. 5 11. Iam. 5 20. 1 Sam. 15 14. Isa. 58. 1. 4. Then they should never speake to a hundered places of scripture which do speake so directly against Magistrats abuseing their power See what he sayeth furder to this purpose there in answering therest of the
this Kingdome to have the sole choice appoyntment of the officers of state privy councellours the Lords of the Session That the power of calling holding and dissolving of Parliaments all conventions meetings of the estates doth solely reside in the Kings Maj. his haires successours that as no Parliament can be lawfully keeped without speciall warrand presence of the Kings Maj. or his commissioner so no Acts nor statutes to be past in any Parliament can be binding on the people or have the authority force of lawes without the speciall approbation of his Maj or his commissioner interponed thereto at the making thereof that the power of armes making of peace warre making of treatjes leagues with forraigne princes or states or at home by the subjects among themselves doth propperly reside in the Kings Maj. his heirs successours is their undowbted right theirs alone that it is higâ—… treason in the subjects of this Kingdome or any number of them upon what soever ground to rise or continue in armes to maintaine any forts garisons or strengths to make peace or warre or to make any treaties or leagues with forraigners or among themselves without his Maj. authority first interponed thereto That it is unlawfull to the subjects of whatsoever quality or function to convocat convcen or assemble themselves for holding of Councells conventions assemblies to treat consult determine in any matters of state civill or ecclesiasticke except in the ordinary judgments or to make leagues or bonds upon whatsoever colour or pretence without his Maj. speciall consent approbation had thereunto That the league covenant and all treaties following there upon Acts or deeds that do or may relate thereunto are not obligatory that none of his Maj. subjects should presume upon any pretext of any authority whatsoever to require the renewing or swearing of the said league Covenant or of any other Covenants or publick oaths concerning the government of the Church Kingdome and that none offer to renew or swear the same without his Maj. speciall warrand and approbation This acknowledgment doth sufficiently clear what that supremacy in civil matters is which they grant unto the King as his due which by this oath they would have all to acknowledge also So that there is no great difficulty to clear the grounds ofscrupleing at this oath even upon this account to shew that such as have refuised the same cannot be accounted disloyall for all indifferent persones will see that there both was and is good ground to scruple at this oath thuâ—… sensed by this act if they shall consider these ten Particulars following 1. The Parliaments of Scotland from the beginning have been partakers fellowshareis of supremacy with the King the Kings of Scotland never were the sole subjects thereof as appeareth by their appending of their own seal with distinct from the King 's great seal in treaties with forraigne princes in some important acts sentences at home of which there is one instance yet on recoâ—…d in the acts of Parliament viz act 112. Parl. 14. King â—…am 3. 2. The Parliaments of Scotland have had the power of setling the governement for they did willingly sweaâ—… to Fergus and his posterity and when he died left two young sones â—…erlegus Mainus both unfit for governement they resolved upon a new course That neither a childe should governe nor yet their oath which they made to Fergus be brocken which was this That when the Kings children were young at their fathers decease some other of the posterity of â—…ergus fit for governing should be chosen who should rule the Kingdom all his dayes which law continued 1025. years untill the reigne of Kenneth the 3. and accordingly when Fergusius died they choosed Ferâ—…haris when â—…erlegus came to age he desired to be put in possession of the Kingdome but it was refuâ—…sed so long as Feritharis lived And when Cotbâ—…edus died they passed by his sone Câ—…tbred made choice of Dardaâ—…us the grand childe of Metellan thus did they alwayes unto the dayes of Kenneth the 3. Epropinquis sayeth Buchanan in vita 〈◊〉 Regum defunctorum non proximos sed maxime idoneos modo a Fergusio primo Scotorumrege essent oriundi eligere consueverant And who but they did condescend to that law at length that the Kings eldest son should be called prince should succeed if the son died before the father then the grand childe should succeed unto the grand father that if the King died leaving a young childe to be heire of the crowne a regent should be chose to mannage the affairs of the Kingdome dureing his minority till he were 14. years of age at which time he might choise his curatours was there ever any such thing concluded without the Parliaments consent 3. The Parliaments of Scotland have had a great share of the legislative power Therefore the lawes are stiled the acts of Parliament not the acts of the King they are said to be enacted by the Estates of Parliament So do the many explicatory acts witnesse that they share in the supreme power of interpreting the lawes of the land which demonstrateth their legislative power and both these are no small part of supremacy 4. In the time of Finnanus the 10 King there was a law made Ne quidreges quod majoris esset momenti nisi de publici coucilij authoritate juberent that Kings should command nothing in matters of any moment but according to the authority and command of Parliament And so when Milcolumbus the 92. King was giving away for peace with England Northum Berland the Estates were against it denying jus esse regi quicquam de sinibus regni detrahere nisi omnibus ordinibus consentientibus That the King had any power to give away any part of his dominions without the consent of all the Estates of Parliament 5. The Parliaments of Scotland have regulated the actions of princes have censured punished them for enormities let the lives of Thereus Durstus Ethus Luctatus Mogaldus Conarus Constantin Ferchardus 1. Ferchardus 2. Eugenius Donaldus 8. Culenus others recorded by Buchanan in his chronicles be seen considered the power of the Parliaments of Scotland over their princes will casily appear So at that Parliament in which King Iames the 6. was created King the Earle of Murray setled in the regency it was debated what course should be taken with the Queen concerning whose accesse unto her husbands death there were such shreud toakens And some voted that justice should be executed upon her and others that she should only be keeped in prisone see Buchan lib. 19. 6. The Parliaments of Scotland have had expresse power in some cases to withstand resist even by armes the King if he should break treaties of peace made concluded by him them with forraigne princes
displeasure of many at court when Ministers were freely rebuking sin in about the court they were accounted railers traitours And being accused of treason before the King his Councill They declined them as incompetent Judges Upon this account in this houre of darknesse by the meanes of the Earle of Arran This Parliament is suddenly called wherby there were two Parliaments in one year 1584. the one meeting May 22. the other which is called the ninth Parliament as the former was called the eight Agust 22. which granteth this supremacy to the King over persones ecclesiastick for formalities sake civil therefore in the end of that act it is declared to be treason to decline his Maj. or his Council in any case So then the question was not betwixt the King the Parliament But betwixt the King or his Councel the Church in spirituall matters It is true also that in the 1. Act of Parliament 18. Anno 1606. His Maj. soveraigne authority Princely power Royall prerogative and privilege of his Crowne over all Estates persones and causes whatsoever is acknowledged But this act is of the same nature with the former no prerogative over above the Estates of Parliament is acknowledged here to belong properly to the Crown And moreover these words are but faire flourishes parliamentary complements Finally the prerogative here spoken of is founded upon personal qualifications where with they say he was endued far beyond his predecessours such as extraordinary graces most rare and excellent vertues singular judgment for sight Princely wisdome the like these may be wanting in one possessing the crowne therefore it could not be the minde of the Parliament to give a supremacy founded upon such qualifications to these who had not those qualifications so they could not annex it unto the Crowne 9. Together with these particulars let this be considered That in 3 Article of the league Covenant they did all swear Sincerly really and constantly in their severall vocations to endeavour the preservation of the rights and privileges of the Parliaments And then it shall appear that there was good ground of scrupleing at that oath which as explained by their acts tendeth to the overturning of those rights privileges For none who desired to make conscience of the oath of the Covenant might swear an oath so apparently opposite thereunto It is true those questions concerning the power of Princes Parliaments are dark ticklish Ministers not being lawyers by profession can not be supposed to be well acquanted with the lawes constitutions of the realme or with the nature extent of the same in all points Yet it concerneth them to see to this that they run not themselves upon the rocks of contradictory oaths And having sworne to endeavour in their places callings the preservation of the rights privileges of Parl. it concerneth them all not alitle to search so far into the rights privileges of Parl. as that they may know when an oath is tendered unto them which crosseth the same being once engadged in an oath in a matter not sinfull not to change or to swear that which destroyeth contradicteth the former oath But leaving those things not laying more weight on them then they will bear other particulars more weighty pressing must be spoken to therefore let it be considered 10. What dreadfull consequences will follow upon the taking of this oath thus explained as to its civil part by the forementioned act concerning the prerogative other acts now to be mentioned as 1. A condemning of the convention of Estates Anno 1643. conform to the Act 6. of this Parliament 2. A condemning of the Parliaments Anno 1640 1641 1644 1645 1646 1647 1648. conforme to their Act 15. as also the committees Parliaments thereafter Anno 1649 1650 1651. conforme to their Act 9. 3. A condemning of all the Acts made by these Parliaments conforme to their Act 3. 4. A condemning of all the meetings Councells Conventions of the subjects at the beginning of the late work of Reformation conforme to their 4 Act. 5. A condemning of the League Covenant conforme to their Act 7. 6. A condemning of Scotlands joyning with helping of England in the day of their straite conforme to their Act 7. 7. A condemning of the renueing of the Nationall Covenant Anno 1638 1639. conforme to the last words of the 11 Act. 8. A condemning of the Generall Assembly 1638 severall others thereafter conforme to their 4 Act. 9. A condemning of Scotlands riseing in armes in their own defence against the Popish Prelaticall malignant Party conforme to their 5 Act. 10. A condemning of their seizing upon forts castles in their own defence conforme to the said 5 Act. Was there not then cause to scruple at the taking of this oath which would have imported a condemning of all those things sure there was as shall be showne in speaking to each of the particulars mentioned Now it is clear that the taking of this oath would have imported a condemning of all these particulars from this That the Parliament doth condemne all these mentioned particulars as the acts specified do clear because done without his Maj consent which ought say they to have been had by vertue of his prerogative royall and supremacy the perogative doth explaine his supremacy in things civill as shall be showne more fully hereafter But to come to the particulars first There was no ground for condemning that convention of Estates 1643. notwithstanding that the Kings consent was not had therto 1. Because in poynt of conscience the Estates of the land being essentially judges are bound when the publict affaires of the Kingdom do require to conveen consult thereanent when Religion lawes liberties are in hazard when the necessitie is such as will admit of no delay pure legall formalities of state must be dispensed with when they cannot be gotten followed as in this case it was clear The true protestant religion his Maj. honour the peace of the Kingdomes were in hazard by papists their adherents in armes in England Irland The King refuised to call a Parliament at that time though he was oftin requeested there unto In this case what could the states of the Land do who were bound by the lawes of God of nature of nations to see to the preservation of the Kingdom to their own interests to religion that should be dearâ—… to them then any thingâ—… else were bound by the law of God to judge governe the land but obey God disâ—…ense with state formalities according to the many examples of the Estates of Scotland before who did conveen in Parliament whether the King would or not as that Parliament which did imprison donald the 70. King the Parliament at Scone which summoned King Culenus before them that Parliament which
deprived the Queen mother of her regency But to avoid tediousnesse let Buchanans Chronicle be perused many such like Parliaments shall be seen 2. Who was it who summoned all those Parliaments which conveened for the election of new Kings of viceroyes as that which did choose Notatus the brother not Ruther the son of Dornadilla the 4. King that which did choise Even brother to Durstus not Durstus his sonne that which made Dardan King not Corbred's son being under age that which make Teâ—…rasell brother to Conarus King and not Eâ—…hodius son to Canorus and many moeâ—… Yea Buchanan no stanger to the constitution of the scottish Kingdome sheweth in his book de jure regni apud Scotos that the Parliaments of Scotland were summoned not only without the consent of their Kings but against the same What ground was there then for condemning of this convention at this nick of time when matters were in such hazard Especially 4. Seing the very next Parliament which conveened Anno 1644. by vertue of the last act of the Parliament Anno 1641. at which the King himself was present did ratisie approve that convention upon these grounds as their 5. act beareth Considering that the Lords of his Maj. privy councell and Commissioners for conserving the articles of the treaty having according to their interests and trusts committed to them by his Maj. and Estates of Parliament used all meanes by supplications remonstrances and sending of commissioners for secureing the peace of this Kingdome and removing the unhappy diseractions betwixt his Maj. and his subjects in England in such away as might serve most for his Maj. honour and good of both kingdomes and their humble and dutifull endeavours for so good ends having proven so ineffectuall their offer of mediation and intercession being refuised by his Maj. And thereby finding the weight and difficulty of affaires and the charge lying on them to be greater then they could bear did therefore in the Moneth of May 1643. meet to gether with the commissioners for common burdens that by ioynt advice Some resolution might be taken there in and in respecâ—… of the danger imminent to the true protestant religion his Maj honour and peace of these kingdomes by the multitude of Papists and their adherents in armes in England and Irland and of many other important and publike affaires which could not admit delay and did require the advice of the representative body of the kingdome appoynted and indicted a meeting his Maj. having formerly refuised their humble desires for a Parliament Secondly there was no ground for anâ—…ulling those Parliaments mentioned in the act rescissory and act 9. 1. Because in both those acts there is no mention made of any informality which might justly either in law or conscience render these Parliaments null Only there is mention made of their acts deeds but these cannot in any manner of way annull their constitution for a Parliament may be a Parliament legally conveened though it should astablish iniquitie by a law if the ground which they have laid down in these two acts 15 9. forannulling of these Parliaments hold good indifferent men will soon see that they have anulled their own constitution declared themselves no Parliament for if their acts were compared with the acts of these Parliaments which they have annulled examined either by the rule of God's word which all Christian commonwealths Parliaments should stir their course by or by the fundamental lawes of the land they would be found more worthy to be condemned Sure succeeding ages need take no more but the ground which themselves have laid downe here whereupon to declare this Parliament null But 2. These Parliaments were all legally conveened called for the King called the Parliament 1639 sent the Earle of Traquare as his commissioner thither which was adjourned to Anno 1640. then after some time it was adjourned to Anno 1641. at this Session of Parliament the King himself was present so owned them as a lawfull Parliament being called by his command continued hither till ratifyed all their Acts among which this was one viz Act. 17. Anno 1640. That every third year once at least there should be a full free Parliament that the time place should be appoynted by his Maj. or his commissioner for the time the Estates of Parliament before the end and elâ—…sing of every Parliament According to which Act King Parliament did appoint the next Parliament to meet Iun 1644. this Parliament is continued till Ian. 1645. thence till March thence till Iuly 1645. from thence it is adjourned to November 1646. then till March 1647. at the close of this last Session of Parliament conforme to the forsaid Act 1640. They appoynted the next meeting of Parliament to be Anno 1648. This Parliament adjourned to March 1650. but with all they give power to their committy or the quorum thereof to call the Parl. sooner if they saw necessity accordingly it is convocated An. 1649. at the time appointed it meeteth An 1650. so adjourned to times convenient So that there is no informality here at all discernable If it be said that neither the King nor his commissioner was present at those Parl. so this informality annulled all Ans. 1. The want of this formality cannot be the cause of annulling these Parl. or Sessions of Parl. because they annull the very Session of Parliament 164â—… at which King Charles himself was present 2. There is no law making the presence of the King or his Commissioner essential to every Parliament far lesse to every Session of a Parliament 3. There have been many Parliaments holden in Scotland without either king or Commissioner as in the dayes of King Iames 2. Anno 1437 1438 1440. where there is no mention made of the King in the Acts as there is at the next Parliament 1443. but only of the three Estates of Parliament concluding and ordaining So Anno 1560. there is a Parliament holden at Edenburgh by the three Estates without either King or Queen an Act thereof ratified first Parliament King Iames 6. Act 2. So Anno 1567. the Parliament is keeped by the Regent the three Estates without the Queen who then did Reigne as the Acts of Parliament 1581. King Iames 6. shew for there these words are to be found in the first Act thereof And especially the Act made in the Reigne of the Queen his dearest mother in the Parliament holden at Edinburgh the 19 of April Anno 1567. 〈◊〉 Wherby it is aboundantly clear that she was then governing when this Parl. did sit yet the Parliament was keeped without her as the Acts shew So in the dayes of Queen Mary the Acts of Parl. run in the name of the Lord Governour three Estates of Parl. this Governour was not representing the Queen as her Commissioner
because when she was present as Act 1. Parl. 2. of Queen Mary both she the Governour are mentioned thus The which day the Queen's grace with advice of the Lord Governour three Estates of Par. moreover it is not usuall to have any Acts running in the name of a Commissioner For where a Commissioner is present the King is supposed to be present therefore to this day all the Acts of Parl. made were a commissioner is present except such as are wholly concerning the King himself Run in the name of our soveraigne Lord with advice consent of his Estates of Parl. but where neither King nor Commissioner is present then the Acts run thus The Estates of Parl. enact c. So that this Stilus curiae being punctually observed to this day consirmeth the observation concerning the fore mentioned parl viz. That they were holden without King or Queen when neither King nor Queen is mentioned in the Acts. 3. Is it not strange how they could annull the parl 1648. among the rest seing the Acts of that parl were more homogenious with their own Acts then the Acts of the rest For the Acts of designe carryed on by that parl were no such injurious violation of his Maj. power authority nor were they Acts of rebellion as they suppose the Acts of the other parl to have been So that the ground upon which they rescinde the rest of these Parl. will not warrand them to rescinde this so it is not upon the ground of their Acts that they rescinde these parl Because then they would not have rescinded this parl 1648. What grounds then they will seek out next who can tell For all the grounds which they have hitherto to given whether from their Acts deeds oâ—… from informalities through the want of the presence of the King or his Commissioner are declared null of no effect by themselves 4. It is yet more strange how they could annul the Parl. 16â—…8 When all the members of that parl some of whom no doubt were members of this did Iun. 10. declare and testify their resolution and obligation to acknowledge that Parliamentre have been a free and lawfull Parliament likeas they did oblige themselves upon their honours and credit and as they desired to be to be holden true lovers of their countrey and of the religion lawes libertâ—…es thereof efauldly faithfully to the uttermost of their power to joyn and concurre with their persones and estates every one according to their severall stations and callings in the maintenance of the freedome and lawfulnesse of that Parliament and they ordained that that Act should be subscribed by all the members of Parliament present and absent and by all noblemen Barons and all other subjects inhabitants of the Kingdome in their thires and brughs 5. It is yet more strange that this Parliament had so far forgot it self as to reckon up the Parliament 1648. among the rest in the Act rescissory when in their 9. Act they had acknowledged it to have been a Parliament for there when they are approveing the Engadgment the all onely bussinesse which that Parliament 1648. was carrying on they stile them the estates of Parliament of this kingdome which is a title agrying to none but to lawfull Parliaments Thus it is clear that there is no ground warranding a consent unto these Acts rescissory but good ground to scruple at that oath the taking whereof would have imported a consenting unto the annuling of these Parliaments considering 6. How King Charles the first in the large treaty in his answer to the first demand sayeth that at the humble desire of his subjects he did call conveen a Parliament to beholden at Edinburgh Iun. 2. 1640. so that this Parliament was lawfully convocated acknowledged to have been so by King Charles the first himself Thirdly nor is there ground for assenting consenting unto the anulling of those Acts done and concluded in these Parliaments for 1. They are Acts made by Parliaments lawfully conveened 2. They are Acts not repugnant to the word of God but Acts made for the carrying on advanceing of the work of reformation except those made by the Parliament 1648 which every one according to his place power is sworne to maintaine promove this the very vieuing of them will evince how ever that whole work be now branded as rebellion sedition So that none could swear that oath as now tendered by Acts explained but withall he must condemne the whole work of reformation all Acts made for establishing of the same in doctrine worshipe discipline governement 3. did not King Charles 1 in the large treaty give this answere unto the first demand That for as much as the King's Maj. at the humble desire of his subjects did call and conveen a Parliament to be holden at Edenbrugh Iun. 2. 1640. wherein certaine Acts were made which Acts his Maj. for the peace and good of this kingdome is pleased to publish in his own name with consent of the Estates and therefore commands that the said Acts bearing date â—…un 27. 1640. be published with the Acts to be made in the next session of the same Parliament and that all the saids Acts as well of the precedent as of the next Session to be holden have in all time coming the strength of lawes and to be universally received and obeyed by all the subjects of the kingdome of Scotland His Maj. doth in the word of a king promise the publishing of the saids acts in such sort as is above specified And more over at that next Session of Parliament Anno 1641. when himself was present all those Acts were approved ratifyed fully did not King Charles 2 before at his coronation ratify approve the Covenant all Acts made in order to the carrying on of the ends of the Covenant So that now they are full compleat lawes wanting nothing even of formality which can be desired seing he hath ratified approved them all 5. Are there not many of these Acts made by those Parliaments very much for the glory of God the good of the countrey did not themselves see this when for shames cause they were forced to make some Acts of the same nature for curbing of vice since they would not be said to renew them so that it were hard to put Christians to condemne those Acts laudable lawes 6. Is it not strange how they could condemne make null void all the Acts done by the committees Parliaments after 1648. seing by this meanes they shall condemne all the applications which were made unto his Maj. while he was in Holland also they shall condemne the Kingdomes receiving of him yea their crowning of him both as null as done by a Non-Parliament And thus they will have the King no crowned King of Scotland how deep this may draw let lawyers judge It was
Governours under the King as well as the King himselfe He speaketh of such as are God's Ministers which is a generall word comprehending all civill Governours He speaketh of all such to whom tribute custome honour or fear is due so he must take in all Magistrats otherwise this text should not concerne commonwealths which are ruled without a King He speaketh of such as are revengers by office to execute wrath on them that do evill thus are a terrour to evill doers and a praise to such as do well And this agreth to all Magistrats therefore this place cannot be understood as speaking of any single person or of Nero concerning whom it is a great question among lawyers if at this time he had the heighest soveraigne power in the Roman State as learned Prin sheweth in his soveraigne power of Parliaments c. part 3. pag 109 110 111 112. 2. Inferiour judges do judge for the Lord are deputed of him therefore they are endued with power from him for that effect 2 Chron. 19 v. 6 7. Deut. 1 17. 3. Inferiour judges are commanded to rule well they are threatened rebuked for mal-administration See Ier. 5 v. 1. Isa. 1 17 21 5 7. 10 2 59 v. 14. Ier. 22 3. Ezek 18 8. Amos 5 7. Micah 3 9. Levit. 19 v. 15. Deut. 17 11. Exod. 32 2. Now would God command those inferiour Magistrats to relieve the oppressed to judge the fatherlesse to plead for the widow if they had not the power of the sword for this effect or would he challenge them for neglecting this duty if they had not been impowered by him for that effect doubtlesse not So then if inferiour Magistrats be endued with power of the sword they ought to defend the fatherlesse the widow the oppressed subjects by the help of the sword they ought to rescue them from the hands of their oppressours And therefore when Popish malignant enemies rise up in armes seek to destroy the Land Man Wife Childe the inferiour Magistrats much more the Parliament may lawfully draw the sword which God had given them for the relief of the innocent defence of the countrey of their lives lands goods Religion all that is dear to them against malicious open enemies 2. Buchanan a man well acquainted with the lawes constitutions of Scotland in his Book De Iure Regni apud Scotos sayeth that the Kings of Scotland had no power of peace or warre without the Parliaments consent So that a warre raised by the Parliament against the common enemy in defence of the Kings honour the saifty of the people the purity of Religion cannot be condemned as unjust illegall 3. The renowned Historian Buchanan sheweth also that the Kings of Scotland have been oftintimes resisted by armes which a few instances will evidence when Durstus the 11. King banished all his Fathers Friends became loose dissolute he was pursued by the Nobles till he was forced to professe his repentance promise amendement afterward when he had cut off many of his Nobles by treachery the rest did rise up in arme against him kill him in battel So they rose in armes against Gillo for his wickednesse against Even 3. who was a most viâ—… wicked man So with one consent they arose against Darâ—…an slew his wicked servants who had been instruments of much evill They routed his forces tooke himself prisoner When Mogaldus grew odious by reason of his vices they rose up in armes against him So did they levy forces against Athirco when Romach had become cruell and had put many to death they rose in armes against him when Ferquard 1. turned tyrant he was summoned before a Parliament when he refuised to come they levied forces against him pursued him they stormed his castle in which he thought to shelter himself at length he was taken prisoner So did they purpose to rise in armes against Ferquhard 2. If they had not been diverted Likewise when King Iames the 3. had been seduced by his evill courteours had plotted the murther of the nobles they raised an army against him at length killed him So did the nobles take up armes against Bothwell the Queen pursued her untill she rendered herself prisoner The nobles wrote unto the queen regent Anno 1560. for removing of the french forces did adde as Buchan sayeth Lib. 17 Which tearmes if they be rejected we take God men to witnesse that we take armes from no innate malice or hatred but sore against our wills are forced to assay the last remedy least we should expose our selves our fortunes and our posterity to the worste of colamities Hence it is clear that it was the common practice of the Parliaments of Scotland and lex currit cum praxi to rise in armes against their Kings when they turned tyrants And therefore the Parliament their late taking up of armes in their own sinlesse self defence can no wayes be condemned let court sycophants speak what they please to make that bussinesse odious they both bewray their malice ignorance of the fundamental constitution of that kingdome 4. Though for all that is said the Parliaments interest in warre should be questioned yet their late defensive warre may be justified upon clear undenyable grounds for there is no such connexion betwixt these two but they are rather two distinct questions naturall sinlesse self defence may belong to such as have not propperly in stricke law the power of warre 5. The practice of other protestant princes Magistrats sheweth that their practice was not so odde nor odious as men who have taught their tongues to speak lies would make the world beleeve it was for Sleidan lib. 8. 21. 22. Bilson out of him in his difference c. part 3. pag. 274. sayeth that the German princes levied warre against the Emperour viz. the Duke of Saxon the Landgrave of Hesse the Magistrats of Magdeburgh together with other Princes cities joyning in the warre who having had the advice resolution of lawyers after mature deliberation did conclude That the lawes of the empire permitted resistence of the Emperour in some cases That the times were then so dangerous that the very force of conscience necessity did lead them to armes to make a league to defend themselves though Caesar or any in his name would make warr against them and That if the Emporour had keeped his bonds covenants they would have done their dutyes but because he made the first breach the fault was his For since he attempteth to root out religion subvert our liberties he giveth us cause enough to resist him with a good conscience The matter standing as it doth we may say they resist as may be shewed both by sacred prophane histories Vnjust violence is not Gods ordinance Nether are we bound to him by any
calling for God giveth no command to do evill nor to tyrannize He is not God's vicegerent when he playeth the tyrant therefore he may be resisted opposed without any violence done to the office or ordinance of God As the King's messinger may be resisted withstood when he crosseth his commission warrand without any wrong done to the office or to the King Every disobedience in things sinfull is not a resisting of the ordinance of God The office may be owned the person in the office honoured esteemed as he ought when yet his unjust violence may be resisted his sinfull commands disobeyed for it is onely powers that are ordained of God that must not be resisted tyrants or Magistrats turning tyrants and exerceing tyranny cannot be called the ordinance of God though the office abstracted from the tyranny be the ordinance of God And there is no hazard of damnation for refuseing to obey unjust lawes but rather hazard of damnation in willingly following after the command And so there is no danger in resisting such Acts of tyranny for tyrants exerceing tyranny are no terrour to evil doers But on the contrary they are a terrour to good works therefore that place Rom. 13. cannot be understood of tyrants It is a true a worthy saying of famous Mr Knox in his history of Soâ—…land Lib. 2. pag. 141. There is a great difference betwixt the authority which is Gods ordinance the persons of those who are placed in authority The authority God's ordinance can never do wrong but the corrupt person placed in authority may offend So that the King as king is one thing the king Acting tyranny is another thing They plead not for rebelling against the office or resisting that which is God's ordinance They did never intend to destroy Magistracy or to lessen the Kings Maj. just power lawfull authority or to wrong the office in the least And therefore all the arguments of their adversaries taken from Rom 13. or the like places which speak against withstanding opposeing of the office divine appoyntment of God are of no force against them their cause Tyranny is one thing the office of the King is another thing And what arguments speak well against resisting the office or the person duely legally dischargeing the duties belonging to that office will not conclude against resisting of tyranny So that all the arguments taken from Numb 16. Exod. 22 28. Eccles. 10 20. 8 2 3 4 Prov. 17 26. And the like places do not speak home to their case 2. There is also a great difference betwixt riseing up in armes without any just lawfull ground or for trissles or matters of small moment as for the exacting of some more tribute then is due by the law or the like riseing up in armes in extreme necessity when religion lawes lives liberties all that was dear to them as men as christians were in hazard and this was their case for the king came with an army upon them blocked them up both by sea land thus with forraigners was seeking to subdue them so to overturne religion lawes liberties all was not this extream necessity What more imminent danger could be expected then an army of bloody papists bent to prosecute their bloody designes coming with fire sword encouraged by a commission from the king so approaching their very borders Was there not then a necessity an extreme inevitable necessity to rise up in armes for the saiftie of religion lawes lives liberties when all was thus in most imminent danger Should the Parliament the whole body of the land give up unto the lust of these bloody irish popish prelaticall malignant enemies their own lives the lives of their wives children their liberties as men as christians Should they sell religion the land their soulls their consciences unto those men because for sooth they had a commission from the King there is no reason in the world for this Therefore seing there is nothing more dear to people then their religion their lives their liberties a warre raised in the defence of these cannot be accounted a warre raised upon trissles or sedition faction or mutiny but a necessary defensive warre not raised upon privat injuries discontents But upon matters of the greatest importance necessity viz to prevent the extirpation of religion the subversion of lawes liberties the destruction of lives all Cicero de officis lib. 2. can tell us that omnium societatum nulla est gratior mella carior quam ea quae cum republica est nui cuique nosirum cari sunt parentes cariliberi propiâ—…qui familiares sed omnes omnium caritates patria una complex a est pro qua quis bonus dubitat mortem oppetere si ei sit profuturus 3. There is also a difference betuixt a war raised of purpose to force the supreme Magistrat to be of the same religion with the subject or else to dethrone him and a war raised to defend that religion which both Magistrat subject owneth Betuixt a war raised in defence of that religion which hath never been established by the lawes of the land and a war raised in defence of that religion which is publickly owned by the lawes of the land which King subject both are sworne to maintaine which by the lawes becometh a civill right a part of the civill liberty of the subject Whatever may by said against a war raised in the former case yet in this last case a war defensive is most warrantable and this was the very case of Scotland for they were seeking to defend the religion which was established by the lawes of the land which popish prelaticall malignants were seeking to overturn So that any argument which adversaries can bring from the practice of the primitive christians will conclude nothing against them because the true religion was not then established by law the emperours had never consented therunto but it was otherwise in Scotland as hath been abundantly shown Sect. 1. 2. 4. There is also a difference betuixt a violent laying of hands upon the person of the King of purpose to destroy cut him off or to denude him of his just power privilege that in cold blood too by privat persons for some personall injuries This they abhore ever have abhored and betuixt a sinlesse self defence when unjustly assaulted by armies sent by the King to destroy cut them off In pleading for a sinlesse self defence they do not plead for an illegall taking away of the life of a King Their raising of forces in their own sinlesse self defence cannot be condemned there being an actuall invasion made upon their lives liberties which made their war to be tutela vitae proxima the last refuge for the life the only remedie
that was left for the saifty of religion of all that was dear unto them So then their case not being a prosecution of adesigne of some privat persons upon some privat injuries received to destroy ' cut off the King or to denude him of his just power privilege but a nationall defence of religion lives liberties against the Kings armies unjustly seeking to destroy violently to overturne all None of the arguments of adversaries taken from 1. Sam. 24 6 10. 26 9 11 23. 2. Sam. 1 12 16. do conclude against them or speake to their case 5. There is also a great difference betwixt a warre contrived carryed on by privat persons when grievously oppressed And a warre carryed on by the body of a land in their representatives in Parliament against a king Suppose the first could not well be defended which yet is not absolutely denyed yet this last is clear for a Parliament hath more power over a king then any privat person or subject how great so ever hath judicious Calvin is clear for this in his institutions lib. 4. cap. 20 n 39. saying if there be inferiour Magistrats such as the Ephori among the Lacedaemonians Tribuns among the Romans The demarchi among the Athenians and as the Estates of Parliament in kingdomes now if these connive at the king's oppressing of the people they become persidious because they betray the peoples liberty which by God's appoyntment they are to protect Thus Scotland is cleared for their warre was carryed on by the body of the land in their representatives by their Parliament acting in its publick parliamentary capacity and so the arguments drawn by adversaries from the practice of the primitive Christians speak nothing against the Parliament of Scotland Their levying warre against the king in their own defence in the defence of the liberties lawes of the land 6. There is a difference betwixt a warre raised by a Parliament of purpose to cut off the king to depose him from his throne governement which hath been severall times practised by the Parliaments of Scotland when their kings turned tyrants vitious in their lives as was showne above their case which was a case of pure defence there being no intention to offer the least violence to his Maj. person crowne or dignity but only to defend religion the kingdome against the popish malignant invading plundering forces which were sent forth to destroy all for their armies advanced with petitions seeking redresses of wrongs with all humility shewing their willingnesse readinesse to lay down armes so soon as they were secured in the peaceable enjoyment of the religion sworne to freed from the just fears of these bloody invading forces who were seeking the destruction of their lives liberties So then when their adversaries reason against riseing in armes against the King they speak not to the poynt none of these arguments come near to their case which was a case of naturall sinlesse self defence 7. It would be considered that the warre did not begin upon the Parliaments side but they were forced constrained to it The King commanded all the English Nobility with all their power forces to meet him at York April 1639. that they might advance with him towards Scotland The Scottish Noble Men who were at court were also sent down towards Scotland to raise their friends having some expert forraigne Officers with them There were three thousand Men sent down with the navy six hundered Horsemen were sent down to the Borderes to make incursions all which preparations of warre did clearly speak out his Maj. intention did necessitate them to bestir themselves in their own defence against those invaders to keep their own rights unviolated And yet with all they had their supplications ready to presente after the granting of which viz. a quyet peacable enjoyment of their Religion Lives Lawes Liberties they resolved to lay down armes accordingly did so for after the pacification Iun. 18. 1639. their army was disbanded Againe when the Parliament which was convocated by his Maj. command conforme to the pacification was contrary to the articles contrary to the liberties of the land privileges of the Parliament prorogued the Castles of Edinburgh Dumbritton were fortified with men ammunition Theis friends travelling to England Irland were constrained to swear unlawfull oaths or to góe to prisons The sea was stopped no liberty was granted to trassique so the land was blocked up The articles of pacification were broken Berwick and Carlile were fortified The Commissioners who were sent from the Parliament to the King were imprisoned contrary to the law of Nations The Castle of Edinburgh was killing many threatening to destroy the whole city with their cannon their ships were intecepted by sea their merchands spoiled of their goods sea men were taken prisoners miserably handled When matters went thus were they not constrained to take up armes againe to advance towards England that they might seek peace from his Maj. not being able to maintaine an army on the borders after they had been so impoverished through the long want of fine tradeing and not to lay downe armes untill their necessary and just desires were granted Now let any judge whether they can be justly blamed for standing to their defence being thus necessitated as they would not betray the Land their Lawes their Liberties their Religion so sell their soul consciences all into the hands of their malitious enemies So then when this shall be made the state of the question whether or not the Parliament body of the Kingdome of Scotland may not lawfully take up armes having no purpose to wronge his Maj. person or to spoile him of his just rights privileges to defend themselves Lands Liberties no lesse then their Religion after it had been setled by law When the King in stead of granting their just necessary desires viz. security that they should be ruled by lawfull generall Assemblies other inferiour Church judicatories in Church matters according to the ancient discipline of the Church And by a free Parliament in civill matters according to the foundamentall lawes of the Land And that they might be free from illegall courts alteration in their Religion that the articles of agreement should be keeped that granted which was promised under hand seal is raising a strong army of forraigners Irish Popish prelaticall malignant enemies to the Church kingdome of Scotland intending to destroy their Land Liyes liberties to overturn their Religion Privileges for this end blocketh them up by sea Land fortifyeth Castles in their bosome giving them commission to destroy all they could denunceth them all rebells treatours Sure it may be supposed that seing this is the true state of the question it shall easily be granted that this
the work of first preaching propagating the Gospell could be done by none after them when they had done it themselves but that was not their ordinary office if Mr Stillingfleet speak truth here If this office did cease by God's warrand then how can any raise it up againe without his expresse warrand for either it was the Lord's will when he caused it to cease that it should cease till he was pleased to make use of it againe or till men pleased to raise it up at their owne pleasure This last cannot be proved therefore seing God thought fit to lay is aside gave no signification of his minde when the Churâ—… should be at liberty to make use of it againe It must now be aâ—… new office unwarranted of God so unlawfull 4. That rule thâ—… to make a thing unlawfull which was before lawfull there must be some expresse prohibition for bidding any furder use of such power will not alwayes hold in this case because some othâ—… thing may be equivalent unto an exprese prohibition 〈◊〉 when God removeth the speciall propper work of such an office the speciall proper qualifications with which such officers were endued when those cease the office ceaseth God thereby declareth that the office work was extraordinary therefore should not continue As for Example in the primitive Church there were some Prophets these were distinct from Apostles Evangelists Pastors c. so were there workers of Miracles such as had the the gift of healing of speaking with tongues And when God withdrew those gifts fiting those offâ—…cers for the work unto which they were then called did he not therby declare that it was his will that that office should cease was there a necessity for any other expresse probition And because of the want of this expresse prohibition will it be lawfull now for any to set up such officers offices in the house of God when God giveth not the qualifications so giveth not the call thereunto So is it in this case of the Apostles when their qualifications their speciall work ceased their office ceased there will be no call for such officers till there be fit work God give fit qualifications without a call warrand it must be unlawfull to set up such an office againe This will be clearer if it be considered what was the speciall work of an Apostle It was this A planting of Churches setling of the Gospell government in them by insâ—…nteing the standing officers thereof that by an eminent power immediatly granted by Christ to them solely This was their speciall work this ceased with them so did their office with it As also the qualifications And therefore it would be unlawfull now for a Church at here own hand to set up such an officer againe though there be no expresse probition By this it is clear 5. That the power office of Apostles laid no foundation for prelaticall power the work belonging to them as such being altogether extraordinare It is true their power did extend over many Churches pastours but yet 1. They were not fixed to such such particular dioecies as propper to themselves but sometimes moe of them were to gether in one place following their work Nor. 2. Did they account themselves the sole pastors of such or such a Church after other ministers had been ordained there 3. â—…or did they ordaine alone in Churches constituted nor 4 Did they exerce jurisdiction alone but alwayes they joyned others with them in Churches setled 5. They assumed to themselves no negative voice either in ordination or jurisdiction so in them there could be no foundation for prelacy laid even as to their common work or work of a lasting nature which did not properly peculiarly appertaine to them as Apostles 6. Neither finally were they consecrated ordained after the manner that prelats are now consecrated being first made Deacons next Presbyters then Bishops so that there is a vaste disparity But distrusting this answer he giveth a second § 12. to this purpose The extending of any Ministeriall power is not the appoynting of a new office because every Minister hath a relation Actu primo to the whole Church of God the resiraint enlargment of which power is subject to positive determinations of prudence conveniency in Actu secundo The exercise and execution of the power of order belongeth to every one in his personall capacity but as to the power of jurisdiction though it belong habitually and Actu primo to each presbyter yet being about matters of publicke and common concernment the limit ation and exercise of it belongeth to the Church in common such is the power of visiting Churches of ordination and censures and when this is devolved to some particular persons by the rest of the pastors or by the Magisrat quoad executionem it belongeth to them Ans. 1. This contradicteth the former answer for the former answer did suppone that these were distinct officers from presbyters because their office was such as the ordinary office of the Apostles and the Apostles were distinct from other Church officers even by their office not in respect only of their extraordinare mission or power of working miracles But this answer affirmeth them to be one the same with presbyters But. 2. By this answer he might plead for the Pope for every Minister in actis primo hath a relation to the whole Church so might be a Pope if the supreme Magistrat or the rest of the Ministers would devolve upon him the execution of the power of jurisdiction so the Pope is no new officer but a mere presbyter only his power of jurisdiction is enlairged So may he plead for Cardmals Patriarchs Primats Archbishops as well as for Bishops But it will be objected that the Pope pretendeth to some other thing as the warrand of his power even to a jus divinum Ans. so do prelats but with Mr Stillingfleet all is one whether that be pretended unto or not for it is no matter what they say of themselves but what any may feigne of them to the end they may both deceive others be deceived themselves This is as if one would defend a man who had taken upon himself to be a King of such or such a common wealth contrare to the fundamentall lawes of the land and would alledge that he were no distinct officer from any other member of Parliam because for sooth the power of Government as to its execution is subject to positive determinations Parliaments may do commissionat some of their number to some eminent piece of work as to be a Generall or the like he who calleth himself King is nothing else notwithstanding that he rule the commonw with as absolute power unlimited as ever King did Sure any man of understanding would smile at such a defence and just
integrity of the parliament is restored particularly act 40. the King doth faithfully promise to do or command nothing which may directly or indirectly prejudge the liberty of free voteing of the Estates of Parliament But 2. It will be objected That all this supremacy was acknowledged by the Parliament 21. Anno 1612. when the Acts of the Assembly at Glasgow Anno 1610. were ratified among which this was one that Ministers should swear the same oath which was tendered by this Parliament which is there set down Ans. It is true it was appoynted by that pretended Assembly that Ministers at their entry or admission to the Kirk should Testify declare that the King was the only supreme Governour of the realme as well in matters Spirituall Ecclesiasticall as in things temporall c. And it is true this Parliament did ratify approve this deed so that it had the force of a law But 1. There is a great difference betwixt such a civill sanction as this is an other Act of Parliament other Acts stand in force untill they be repealed but when the Church constitution which is the ground Basis of the civill sanction ceaseth the sanction ceaseth the Act perishâ—… without any formall repeall The Act ratifying approveing the deed of a Church judicature standeth in force no longer then the deed of the Church judicature standeth in force the deed of a Church judicature may be altered without any respect had unto the civill sanction or notwithstanding that the civill sanction is not formally removed because the civill sanction did follow depend upon the Church Act the Church Act doth not depend upon the civill sanction 2. It is not incumbent unto a Church judicature to determine the limites of the King 's civill supremacy far lesse to determine the same in the first place this pretended Assembly was more anxious about the King 's Ecclesiastick supremacy then the civill it was his supremacy in Church matters which was here intended by them approved by the Parliament And therefore it is added And that no forraigne Prince State nor Potentat hath or ought to have any jurisdiction power superiority preheminence or authority Ecclesiasticall or Spirituall 3. What ever civill supremacy may be supposed to be here included there is no supremacy over Parliaments acknowledged But any civill power that is here recognosced as his due is in opposition to forraigne Princes States or Potentats not to Parliaments within the Kingdom If it be said that the oath tendered by this Parliament Anno 1661. being every way correspondent unto that oath which is recorded Parliament 21. Anno 1612. can import a recognosceing of no more civill power then that Anno 1612. therefore might lawfully have been sworne It is replyed That the oath Anno 1661. is more expresse for civill power supremacy then that An. 1612. But if there had been no more then the words of the oath Anno 1661. there had not been very great ground of scrupleing at the taking thereof upon the account of the civil part for it is not the words of the oath that ground that scruple upon that account so much as the glosse put upon the words by their other acts particularly by the act for acknowledging his Maj. prerogatives which as a commentary explaineth what they meane by his being supreme governour over states civil in all causes civil Now the like of this was not done by the parliament Anno 1612. Or any other before or since that time till this parliament Anno 1661. which hereby hath put another glosse upon the civil part of the oath then ever was done before But. 3. It will be objected May not Parliaments give more civil power unto the King then he had before so enlarge even intensivè the privileges prerogatives of the crown so denude themselves of that in whole or in part which did formerly appertaine unto them And when the Parliament hath done this annexed such such power unto the crowne can it be unlawfull for privat subjects to acknowledge that the King hath indeed so much power Ans. in poynt of law it will be a very great question whether Parliaments who are but trustees intrusted by the people whose commissioners they are virtually if not expresly bound to maintaine their rights privileges may betray their trust give away the iust ancient privileges of Parliament there with the just ancient liberties of the people It will be agreat question if they at their own hand may alter the foundamentall lawes of the land without the consent of these whose commissioners they are And it will be a greater question in law if this Parliament might have sold or given away the privileges of Parliament liberties of the people seing so much in poynt of law may be objected against its being a free Parliament if the want of freedome of election in shires brughs if prelimitation if the election of such as were not capable by the foundamentall constitution of Parliaments practice of the Kingdome other informalities of that kinde may have any place or weight in the anulling of Parliaments But. 2. In poynt of conscience it is clear that Parliaments may not now give away according to their pleasure dispone of the rights privileges of Parliament for in the third article of the league covenant all the people of the land Parliaments among the rest are sworne to maintaine in their severall places capacities so Parliaments in their Parliamentary capacitie the rights privileges of Parliament 3. Though the Parliament not with standing of the bonde of the covenant should denude themselves of their privileges yet now seing every particular member of the Kingdome is sworne according to his place station to maintaine the rights privileges of Parliament they may not assent unto such a deed of the Parliament by their oath subscription approve of such a wrong for that is the least that private persons who desire to minde make conscience of the oath of God can do at such a time viz. to refuse to give an expresse clear positive assent unto such a wrong done to the rights privileges of Parliament contrary to the covenant But 4. All this is to little or no purpose for there is not the least syllabe in all the Acts of this Parliament which doth import any new deed of gift but all alongs they speak of these prerogatives as formerly inherent in the crown yea as essentiall to it hence it is that they condemne the actings of the Parliaments Kingdome of Scotland these many years by gone because done in such away as was an actuall insolent as they say incroachment invasion upon the privileges prerogatives of the crowne Obj. 4. The acknowledging of the prerogative is distinct from the oath of allegiance therefore seing they were
because of the palpable breach of a Covenant Or such a peace as is very consistent with the curse vengeance of God pursueing the quarrell of a broken Covenent But whoever he be he tryeth his skill strength in pulling down both the solemne league Covenant with which he both beginneth endeth the nationall Covenant which he fighteth against on the bye his strength in this matter must be tryed In dealing with the Solemue league covenant he layeth downe three maine grounds The first is this pag. 22. That an oath howsoever in it self lawfull yet the case may be such that by something following after it may cease to binde yea the case may be such that it can not lawfully be keeped It will not be necessary to examine this at any length as it is here set down but it will be sufficient to examine it in so far as it maketh for the purpose in hand that will be by examineing Whether the cases wherein he alledgeth this holdeth good will suite the Covenant now under consideration He mentioneth three cases The first is this When the matter of an oath is such as doth belong unto a superiour to determine in then the oath of the inferiour ceaseth to â—…blige when the superiour consenteth not to what is sworne This is both agreeable to reason because no deed of the inferiour can prejudge the right of the superiour also sound divines do acknowledge this upon the common equitie of that law Numb 30 4. Unto which these things may be replyed 1. Whether the relation betwixt subjects Magistrats be so strait as is the relation betwixt parents Children betwixt huâ—…band wife may be some what questioned as to the matter in hand the one being naturall the other but politicall the one such as cannot be changed at will the other such as may A man may Choose to live under what Magistrat he will but a woman cannot cast off her parents her husband when she will take others therefore there may be a greater latitude allowed in the one case then in the other whether Magistrats subjects come within the compasse of that text Numb 30 May be questioned also seing there is nothing in the text hinting at this Yea though Moses be speaking to the heads of the tribes concerning the Children of Israel yet he maketh no mention of this case nor of any other except of two viz. a woman under a husband a woman not sorisfamiliat though analogies may be allowed in some cases yet there ought to be a clear ground out of the word for such analogies as will founde an argument against the obligeing force of oaths such analogies as will warrand consciences in this case had need to be very clear undoubted 2. Though this analogie were ganted yet this case will speak nothing to the poynt in hand unlesse it were proved that there were no civil Magistrats in Scotland beside the King that all Even the Estates of Parliament convâ—…ened in Parliament were subjects nothing else but subjects so though the Parliament all the land at the command of the Parliament should take an oath it should not binde if the King dissented therefrom But there is enough said above to show that supreme soveragnitie did never so reside in the Kings of Scotland as that Parliaments even in their Parliamentary capacity were no sharers thereof And this one thing is enough to disprove this phancy viz. That the legislative power which is an eminent part of severaignitie did alwayes in paâ—…t at least belong unto the Parliament of Scotland for they statute ordaine together with their soveraigne Lord therefore they are called the Acts of Parliament Yea without a Parliament the King can make no lawes yea nor can he make a law without all the Estates of Parliament But of the power of the Parliaments of Scotland in making lawes yea over the King himself enough hath been said therefore this case doth not concerne the matter in hand 3. Let this be given though it cannot be granted Yet this case will not help his cause because it can hold good in no other things but such in which the inferiour is subordinat to the superiour is by the law of God subject unto him as the doughter in the matter of her marriage or the like is subjected unto her parents the married wife in the disposall of domestick goods affaires is subjected unto her husband but in matters of religion in morall duties no wife is so subjected unto her husband nor doughter unto her parents as that they can loose the obligation of their vowes promises Yea in this case it will be easily ganted that inferiours may vow Covenant not only without but even against the command of superiours for it is alwayes better to obey God then men Now it hath been showne above that these Covenants are about morall duties matters of religion wherein inferiours are not to waite upon their superiours But must advance whether they will or not But to this he replyeth Pag. â—…3 That such as plead the obligation of the Covenant in the matter of Episcopacy must suppone that it is indifferent or not unlawfull for if by God's word 〈◊〉 be found unlawfull then whether there had been a Covenant against it or not it cannot be allowed It is Answered 1. It will not be a fit place here to lanch forth into the disput concerning Episcopacy more is already said against it by many famous worthie divines then is or in haste will be Answered as for what this Author is pleased to say for it against presbyterie else where in his pamphlet it is but that which hath been said said over againe by others before him who knew to put their arguments in a better dresse then he doth is sufficiently answered by others but if he had brought any new arguments forth to the field it had then been fit to have taken some notice of them But 2 whereas he thinketh that such as plead the Covenant obligation must suppon that Episcopacy is a thing indifferent that presbytery is nothing else he runeth alone without the company of any casuist or divine for all do grant that an oath may be de re lâ—…cita possibili concerning a matter lawfull and possible and particularly that it may bâ—… about a matter morally good that in things morally good an oath hath an obligeing force ad quae praestanda sayeth D Sander sâ—…n de jur prâ—…m obl pâ—…ael 3. § 6 vel injurati tenemur jurati multo tenemur magis accedente sciliceâ—… ei quaepraefuit ex praecepto nova obligatione ex jureâ—…urando i e. for the doing of those things which we are bound to do though not under an oath being under an oath we are much more bound for to the former obligation ariseing from the command there
prael 4. § 6. It is required that there be a clear intimation of this dissent for it is not enough for the father to say he is not well pleased with such a vow but he must openly contradict the same in refuseing he must refuse it in taking it away he must quite take it away as if he had said he must constantly in very deed refuse prohibite the same by his full power and authority 2. Doct. Sanders ubi supra prael 4. § 5. sayeth that a tacite consent will suffice that is to say sayeth he When he who sweareth may in probability presume that the superiour would not refuse it his consent were asked Now had not Scotland this tacite consent when some yeers before the King had ratified Acts of Parliament discharging Church governement by prelats yea more they had a formall expresse consent having an Act of Parliament made by King Parliament against the prelats unto the thing which they did then vow promise 3. This dissent must be presently testified in the very day he heareth thereof if one day passe the oath is ratified for sayeth the forcited Doct. Sanders ubi supra he who signifieth his dissent too late may be thought for some space of time to have consented Now this proclamation was not before the 9. of Octob. 4. This dissent must be constant as sayeth the forecited author for if at any time thereafter he yeeld the oath standeth in force for his former dissenting did not make the oath no oath nor loosed its obligation But only hindered the execution so now the impediment being removed the oath should be followed forth what is promised therein should be performed And the Covenanters have this to say That the King gave his after consent unto the oath when he said in his soliloquies That good men should least offend God him in keeping of it But to put this out of all doubt The King who now is as was showne above did solemnely owne this Covenant approve of all that was done in carrying on the ends of it promised that he would look upon the friends of the Covenant as his only friends the enemies thereof as his enemies And now quod semel placuit amplius displicere non debet that which once pleased cannot againe displease him But to this the author replyeth thus It would be considered if it was the Lord's minde in that law That if Children or wiver having vowed should by some meanes drive their parents or husbands out of the house and bargane with them either to ratify their vowes or never to enjoy these comforts that then the consent so obtained should be irrevocable Ans. 1. He can be in no worse case as to this matter of giving hiâ—… consent then he would be as to his swearing of an oath Now it is granted by Casuists that an oath unto which a man is forced doth binde if the matter be lawfull otherwise all oaths might be evited by alledging that force constâ—…ined to it Even the oath of alleagiance might be questionâ—… upon this account For it hath a penalty annexed to it so the swearers thereof may pretend that they were forced thereunto by the penalty Was noâ—… Zedekiâ—…h's oath to Nebuchadnezzer forced Doct. Saâ—…d his determination in this may satisfie He â—…bi supra Prâ—…l 4 § 5. sayeth 2. If the matter required by force or sad fear be not unlawfull nor injurious to any but only some what disadvantagious to the sâ—…er as if one travailing should fall among robers that with drawne swords would threâ—…ten his life unlesseâ—…e would promise them such a summe of money with an oath In this case it is lawfull both to promise the money to confirme the promise with an oath 3. I say such an oath doth oblige And he giveth these reasons why the oath obligeth 1. Because â—…e sweareth a thing lawfull possible 2. He did choose that which seemed best for that instant 3. What is promised for a certane end should be performed when the end is attained Yea which is more an oath into which one is cheated in which there is lesse reall will then in an extorted oath obligeth as that to the â—…ibeonites So then if an oath into which one is forced doth oblige much more will a consent to an oath stand though extoâ—…ted by fear especially seing the text maketh no such exception But 2. how can he say that such as were for the Covenant did deprive the King of all his worldly comforts seing it was conscience to that Covenant that moved Scotland to call home the King after that the Covenant breakers had taken away his fathers life had banished himself And how can this shamelesse man say as he doth pag. 24. That the Covenant was contrived carryed on as if the designe had been laid to extirpat episcopacy whether the King would consent 〈◊〉 not or whatever course should be taken to force his consent vi armis When he cannot but know that before ever there was a word of this league Covenant of which he is now speak ing prelacy was rooted out of Scotland But he will reply That Scotia d did suspend this King from the exercise of his royall power until he consented which was an unparallel'd way of usage from subjects to their soveraigne Ans. This Gentleman would speak sparingly lest he run himself into a premunire for the Estates of Scotland did nothing but what the lawes of the land allowed them to do There was an act of Parl. Parl. 1. Act. 8. K. Iam 6. enjoyning the King at his coronation to sweare to maintaine the true religion of Christ Iesus to rule the people according to thâ—… loveable lawes coâ—…stitutions received in this reaâ—…me to procure to the uttermost of his power to the Kâ—…K Christian people true perfect peace And this oath King Charles the first did swear what wrong did the Estates of Scotl. when they caused King Charles the II. sweare the same It is true that both the nationall solemne league Covenant were tendered to him also But what was there in either of those different from this oath all the question is about Episcopacy was not Episcopacy abolished fully by act of Parliament by an act of Parliament ratified opproved by King Charles the first himself being personally present Anno 1641 so was not this a received an approved law as full formall as ever any law made by any Parliament in Scotland was And what wrong was it then to put this King to sweare to rule them by their owne approved allowed lawes By this it may be seen that Reverend learned Mr Crofton the authors of the Covenanters plea are mistaken through misinformation when indirecly at least they alledge or take it for granted that the Scots dealt uncivilly disloyally with their prince in this businesse the reader must be intreated
AN Apologeticall Relation Of the particular sufferings of the faithfull Mâ—…nisters professours of the Church of Scotland since August 1660. Wherein severall questions usefull for the time are discussed The King 's preroâ—…gative over Parliaments people soberly enquired into The lawfulnes of defensive war cleared The supreme Magistrats power in Church matters examined Mr Stilling fleet 's notion concerning the divine right of formes of Church Government considered The author of thâ—… seasonable case answered other particulars such as the hearing of the Curats appearing before the high commission court c. canvassed Together with the rise reigne ruine of the former 〈◊〉 lats in Scotland Being A brieff account from History of the Government of the Church of Scotland from the beginning of the many troubles which Prelats have created to her first last For satisfaction of strangers incouragement of present 〈◊〉 By a well wisher to the good old cause JER 50 34. Their Redeemer is strong The Lord of hosts is his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall thorówly plead their cause that he may give rest to the land 〈◊〉 quiet the inhabitants of Babylon MIC 7 9 10. I will bear the indignation of the Lord because I have sumed 〈◊〉 him untill he plead my cause execute Iudgement for me â—…e 〈◊〉 bring me fâ—…rth to light I shall behold his righteousnes then sheâ—… that 〈◊〉 mine enemy shall see it shame shall cover her which said unto me 〈◊〉 is the Lord thy God Mine eyes shall behold her now shall she be 〈◊〉 down as the mire of the streets ISA. 51 22 23. Thus saith the Lord thy God that pleadeth the cause of his people Behold I have taken out of thine hand the cup of trembling 〈◊〉 the dregs of the cup of my fury thou shalt no more drink it again But I â—…ll put it into the hand of them who afflict thee which have said to thy soule 〈◊〉 down that we may goe over thou hast laid thy body as the ground 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—…reas to them that went over Printed in the Yeer 1665 The Epistle to the READER Christian Reader This is a time wherein little or nothing is heard from the Churches of Christ all the world over but lamentation woeâ—… partly by reason of grievous afflictions sore persecution which is none of the worst conditions partly by reason of woefull and shamefull defection falling from former zeale integrity occasioned either by the temptations which usually attend sharpe tryalls of affliction whereby the weakness of many perversness of heart in moe is discovered Or without any such force of externall temptation from an inward decay of life love wearying of God his wayes the Worst condition that a Church can be in which is now the Epidemicall plague of this age Hence it is that the Lord seemeth to be angry with all ready to reject some of his Churches which to him are as a generation of his wrath Have not his people set up their abominations in the house which is called by his name to pollute it And may it not be feared that the curse shall devoure the earth they that dwell therein shall be made desolate because they have transgressed the lawes changed the ordinances broken the everlasting Covenant There appeareth now hanging over the head of the poor little flock of Christ a black dreadfull cloud threatning no lesse then utter ruine overthrow or at least speaking a loude alarme for awaking the secure sleâ—…ping Bride It is most sad to behold how little the Churches of Christ in every place are affected with this imminent stroke ready to light on all to see some of them quiet at rest singing a requiem to themselves as if though dispensations from the Lord doe speak the contrary to all who will but open their eyes their mountaine stood so strong as never to be moved This deadness deepe security when all things speak an approaching storme as it doth evidence a great Judgement spirituall plague from God upon the Spirits of people so it dothpresage no less then remediless â—…uine if God in the riches of his mercy prevent it not What a dreadfull night of confusion astonishment must be at hand when there is such blackness without And such deadness prodigious security within Are not the enemies of the Church as Gebal Ammen Amalek The Philistines those of â—…yre Assur the Children of Lot who are early late at their master's work devising plotting the ruine destruction of the interest Kingdome of Christ Are they not all combined together acted with the same Spirit of Antichrist for this very end purpose to helpe forward as with one shoulder to raise up his fallen interest heale his wound And are they not setting themselves to thrust King Iesus from his throne to put the crowne from his head the scepter out of his hand so to prey upon devour his little flock that if it were possible they should be no more a nation nor their name remembered any more And are they not about the swallowing up of the protestant interest as in a moment And what is the Church of Christ doing all this while Doth she stir up her selfe to call upon her head husband or to awake the watch man of Isreal who neither slumbereth nor sleepeth Is she upon her watch-tower looking out guarding against the approaching enemy or observing his motions Ah not so She is fast a sleepe while the enemy is within the walls And which is more sad lamentable with her own hands she hath helped to make the breach in the wall at which the enemy hath entered now hath faire advantage given him to accomplish his bloody designe against the protestant cause interest So little hath she gained by her sinfull compliance with the opinions practises of Antichristian men whether through base feare or carnall prudence even the cutting of it off And the bringing of his people back againe unto Babylon Who knoweth but though the Lord's enemies shall at last be troden under as straw for the dunghill he shall spread forth his hands in the midst of them as he that swimmeth spreadeth forth his hands to swim bring down their pride together with the spoiles of their hands lay low in the dust bring to the ground even the high fortresse of their wall so make all his enemies know that there is a King in Zion who shall must reigne untill all his foes be made his footstoole the onely wise God who knoweth how to turne every thing to the best may suffer the adversaries to prosper in their device designe so give up many of the people called by his name to the sword of the enemy that others may be alarmed awaked from their sleep put to their prayers even to calling upon God with their whole heart
who sometime could not only have beene a member but a president of any judicatory in Europe have spoken for the cause interest of Christ before Kings to the stopping of the mouths of gainsayers He was triumphed over particularly by the Archprelat Sharp who then with the black crue of his false brotherhood did sit in Parliament as constituting the third Estate And was condemned to die in the manner abovementioned So that that Parliament which was consecrated with the blood of two Noble witnesses in the entry was shut up and closed with the blood death of this worthy witnesse But which is to be remembered with admiration behold this half dead man when the day of his death came had a wonderfull reviving was beyond the expectation of all graciously visited mightyly assisted of God hearing the many prayers of his people put up in his behalf So as hee gave a noble testimony to that honourable cause worke In carrying on of which he had been honoured of God to be a worthy instrument from the beginning And Christ triumphed in him over all his enemies that watched for his halting as the reader may see by his speech carriage on the scaffold set down in Print But he may have hereafter more full satisfaction both concerning him the Noble Marquis of Argile famous Mr Guthry when the world shall see their Processes their defences in Print or when these following sheets shall be reprinted if that shall be thought expedient necessary not only for these now mentioned particulars but also for further explaineing confirming vindicating of any or all of the rest of the purposes here spoken to after fuller information had in those particulars Till then let the reader rest satisfied with the hints that are given here in the following sheets of the case carriage of those worthies pardone what is spoken short unsuitable to their worth As to those who have appeared before the High commission court induced thereto by the evil counsell of some others or the not thorow narrow examination of the complex-case as circumstantiated or being otherwayes circumvented And are now suffering upon some other account wherein they found more clearness satisfaction And as to others also who have not fully seen the evill of some things which in the following debate are clearly demonstrated to be sinfull yet as to other particulars are endeavouring to keep their former integrity to guaird against complyance Let none of those think that any thing here is said intentionally to put them to shame or to proclame before the world their weakness defection or to make glad the heart of the wicked for if there had been any other way for vindicating such as doe suffer upon the account of these particulars and for preventing the fall of others into the same snare this way had never been made choise of therefore seeing nothing is said upon any sinfull or sinister designe these brethren Christians will take this smiting as a Kindness these reproofs as an excellent oyle that will not break the head They will not take in evil part the discovery here made They are of another spiâ—…it then to be embittered at such free full â—…iping up of the evils of the course which many in this houâ—…e of darkness do follow Yea it cannot but be hoped certainly expected that such as truely feare the Lord will blesse his name with all their heart for such things made known to them that in time they may repent of the same see cause of wondering at his goodness mercy in not leaving them to themselves in other particulars of tryall notwithstanding of their sailing of duty in that their begun tryall And who knoweth but serious mourning and repenting before the Lord for fainting so far would open a doore for a great in-come of joy and consolation to the sweetning of the bitterness of suffering to the strengthning and bearing up of their soules under their mighty pressures So then the designe both Operantis Operis being good let no tender Christian be displeased with the way of the prosâ—…cution of these particulars or think that there is too much sharpness used that the consequences are drawn too strait For if in the Particulars themselves truth be maintained as may be supposed will be granted the arguments made use of can give no just offence especially such as are drawn from the Covenants which now are trampled upon by this sinfull backslyding Generation upon which many otherwise not ill minded think not much especially now when it is reckoned a crime once to name them as standing in force obligeing the lands And when the Spirit of these who carry on with violence this woefull course of defection are so enraged at the same that they cannot endure to heare a Covenant so much as named though it were even the Covenant of grace This however incredibleiâ—… may seeme to be will hardly be received by a Christian eare is a well known truth Now at such a time to put people in minde of their ingagements unto God to discover how such such practises are contrary to their Covenant obligations vowes cannot justly be condemned but approved of all who desire to stand fast in this houre of temptation It is beyond all question the Particulars here asserted shall meet with much contradiction from men of corrupt mindes whose principles will lead them to oppose what here is spoken in vindication of truth of the honest sufferers of Christ And upon that account it may be expected that the same honour shall be done to this which hath been done to other more worthy pieces viz. that it shall be committed to the fire there to receive a quick dispatch answer which will be so far from lessening the credit of the booke that it will render it much more desireable confirme the weake concerning the truth of the Particulars here spoken to of the unanswerableness of the arguments here made use of so the authors expectations shall be fully answered But if they shall doe it the justice to commit it to examiners one or moâ—… who with sobriety moderation shall publish their exceptions to the contrary shall examine these papers by the word of God right reason the fundamentall municipall lawes of Scotland the particulars here spoken to shall be revindicated The Lord granting life strength liberty from all their exceptions Only let not such as undertake this taske improve the advantage of authority now on their side so far as to doe nothing but raile at randome stuff their reply with unbeseeming to say no worse And Unchristian expressions outcries of treason treason for in that case it will be thought expedient not to answer such in their folly A good cause is a mighty second to a weak man And so being perswaded that the cause is
reason they ought to be if he be King head of his Church He must have no more liberty to exerce his jurisdiction by the Ministery of his inferiour officers within their dominions territories then seemeth good in their eyes The discipline of his house must be exerced only in so far as they think good to permit And thus it is undeny able that they look on Christ as an evil neighbour as no good friend to Caesar They think his Kingdom is of this world therefore it must have no place within any of their Kingdomes territories Thus thou seest that in end the controversy cometh to this Whether Christ or man shall reigne in the Church as head supream Governour thereof And whether the interest of Christ or of man shall be preferred And to preferre the interest of a man unto the interest of Christ hath heretofore been accounted malignancy of the deepest dye But what shall become of this controversie how shall it end Are they or shall they be able to put our Lord from his throne out of his possession No he is set upon the holy hill Zion by a mighty hand his inheritance among the heathen is given to him by a surer deed of gift then that he should be so easily put from it He hath a rod of yron that will dash in pieces as a potters vessel all his enemies be they never so great mighty He is too strong a party for all the potèntats mighty ones of the earth therefore this which is the grand controversy of those times shall must be decided in favours of those who stand upon Christ's side maintaine his right he is a strong captaine will run thorow all the hosts of his adversaries Christ's sufferers then may rejoyce what ever affliction they are or can be put to endure for this cause which is a cause that doth highly concerne Christ the royall prerogatives of his crown Kingdome his glory as he is the only head of â—…his Church seing they may certanely expect the victory â—…re all be done And seing as famous worthy Mr 〈◊〉 in the preface to his Aaronâ—… rode blossoming sheweth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christ is 〈◊〉 King hath a Kingdome 〈◊〉 in his Church distinct frâ—…m the Kingdoms of the world 〈◊〉 civil Governmeâ—… 〈◊〉 this commendation and 〈◊〉 â—…oue all â—…hen 〈◊〉 that Christ himself suffered 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and sealeâ—… it with his blood For it may be 〈◊〉 fâ—…om the 〈◊〉 of his passion that this was the only pâ—…nt of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was 〈◊〉 And avouched by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Joh. 18 33 36 37. and Luk. 23 3. was most aggravated prosecuted and driven home by the jewes Luk. 23 2. Joh. 19 v. 12 15. Was prevalent with Pilat as the cause condemning him to die Joh. 19 12 13. And was mentioned also in the superscription upon his crosse Joh 19 19. And although in reference to God and in respect of satisfaction made to divine justice for our sinnes his death was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a price of redemption yet in reference to men who did persecute accuse and condemne him his death was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a martyr's testimony sealing such a truth Thus he Christ is a good second will not suffer any who contend for his crown throne scepter privileges roy all prerogatives of his Kingdom to be put to the worse If he pleade for any cause we may be sure he will plead for his own Let not then his constant valient sufferers feare for greater is he who is with for them then they who are against them Christ alone is more then match party against all Kings princes potentats Parliaments popes prelats Kingdomes armyes Yea all the Posse of devils men Therefore they may be assured that he his cause shall be victorious For he must reigne untill all his enemies be made his foot stool 5. Thou mayest see That the truth for which thou dost suffer is a truth which is after godlinesse tending to the promoveing of piety of the power of godlinesse Whileas the contrary cause course leadeth to all prophanity debauchery as experience doth this day evidently undenyably prove this is no small ground of comfort for the way which is not of for God cannot stand You may pray against your adversaries as really wicked driveing on a designe of wickednesse which is evidently demonstrated by their acts actings Their enmity against opposition unto godly faithfull Zealous able conscientious Ministers of the Gospell unto Christian meetings exercises As also their pressing of Godly conscientious persons unto perjury blasphemy which is the height of wickednesse do put the matter beyond all doubt And is not this enough to make thy soull loath stand a loos from these wayes And to blesse God for his preserving thy soull from their counsels courses so from partaking of their judgments which doe certainly make haste For God is of purer eyes then to look upon iniquity Therefore he will not alwayes look on these that deal treacherously hold his peace when the wicked devoureth the man that is more righteous then he The Lord hath ordained them for judgment the mighty God hath established them for correction when Agâ—…silaus did hear that Tissaphâ—…rnes a captaine of Persia had broken his Covenant which he had made with him was raiseing an army to come against him he was very glade said se magnam habâ—…re gratiam Tissapherni quod perjurio suo deos homines sibs infensos reddidisset adversae vero parti propitios He thanked him heartily that by his perjury he had made both God man angry at himself favourable to him and his cause may not his people be perswaded that God iâ—… this day displeased with the Covenant breakers who are not satisfied with their own treacherous dealing perfidiousnesse but will have all others intangled in the same guilt 6. Thou mayest see that Action which is now so much branded with the vile contemptible names of treachery rebellion I mean Scotlands defending of it self against its bloody enemies cleared from all these imputations foule calumnies changes of times make many Changes in peoples judgement at this time it may be feared that many have Changed their opinion because they see the watter runing in another channell then it did formerly are now ready to condemne these noble worthies valient champions who jâ—…oparded their lives unto the death in the high places of the field have shed their blood in that cause which is a more grievous guilt then many do now apprehend But here thou seest how little cause there is for condemning that Action Yea what necessity there was laid upon Scoâ—…l to stand to their defence as they would not have betrayed the cause interest of Christ which they
had to write so I know not except he did build upon that which Iohannes Major sayeth But from the instruction of the Scots in the faith to conclude that the Church after it was gathered had no other for me of governement will not stand with reason for be it as they speak that by the travelle of some pions monks the Scots were first converted unto Christ it cannot be said that the Church was ruled by monks seing long after those times it was not permitted to monks to medle with the maters of the Church nor were they reckoned among the Clergy thus he To which it is easily answered 1. That the sole word of a late Historian of an Excommunicated forsworne Prelate speaking in his own cause will have lesse weight with every rationall man then the Testimony of so many famous eminent Historyographers known through the world 2. All the Prelat's logick will not conclude from these words of Boetius that there was Episcopall governement among the Culdees if Boetius himself may be heard whom all are bound to beleeve better then this Prelate who reasoneth according to his skill for he lib. 7. c. 28. sayeth erat Palladius primus omnium c. i. e. Palladius was the first of all who did bear holy Magistracy among the Scots being made Bishop by the great Pope thus he affirmeth clearly that Palladius was the first who had Episcopall Power or exercised a Magistraticall domineering power in Church maters 3. Could Buchanan a man many stages beyond the Arch-prelate know no reason or ground for what he said but what this Archprelat could perceave who had no will to open his Eyes 4. As this Archprelat doeth wrong his own credite as an Historian when without warrant he contradicteth so many famous Historians so doeth he discover much weakness in reasoning for to say that the monks did not governe the Church befor Palladius landed in Scotland because after Palladius came they were putt out of all accompt got not liberty to do so is such a ridiculous consequence as can hardly be paralleled as if one should reason now say the Church of Scotland was not governed by Ministers befor the year 1661. becaus after Bishops got all the power into their hands the Ministers had no power of governement in the Church Much more might be said here against the reasoning of this late Historian were it sitt to insist upon every such frivolous argument of his So then from these forocited Historians from Baronius in his Annal it appeareth that the Church of Scotland was severall hundereths of years without a domineering Prelate after this time that this Palladius came she was still in a decaying condition through the increase of popery which at length did overspread the whole land in which Romish darkness she did ly untill about the year 1494. About which time the Lord began to visite that poor Church with his salvation to cause some light of the Gospel to break up in severall places of the land but no sooner did the light appear but as soon did those Antichristian Prelats vassals of the Pope begin to rage to raise persecution against the young professors of the truth followers of the lamb so with fire faggot they sought to destroy all who prosessed the true Religion untill about the year 1550. when notwithstanding of all this rage cruelty of the Beast his followers the knowledge of the trueth did spread through the land a farther worke of Reformation began to he caryed on by worthies whom the Lord raised up such as famous Mr Knox others who were singularly owned of God in that work Though Mr Spotiswood according to his usuall maner of mistaking the works of God of venting his enmity to piety purity is pleased in the 60. page of his history to say that this Reformation was violent disorderly And albert at that time the Queen was endevouring by all means possible to keep up the Idolatry of Rome to suppresse the Reformed Religion so powerfully did the Lord in his goodness assist these worthves that in the year 1560. there was a large Confession of Faith drawn up at the command of the Parlament which did conveen that year in which Confession all the Popish errours were renounced after it was exhibited to the Parliament there read when it was read the Prelats who were there present had not one word to speak against it which when the Earle of Marshall did perceave he said Seing the Bishops who by their learning can for the zeal they should have to the truth would gain say if they knew any things repugnant say nothing against the said Confession I cannot but thinke that it is the very truth of God Thus this Confession was openly avowed professed by this Parliament as is clear by the act 6. parl 1. King Ja. 6. Au. 1567. act 86. par 6. An. 1579. where these words are found in both acts and decerns declairs that all sundry who either gainesayeth the word of the Evangell receaved approved as the heads of the Confession of faith professed in parliament of befor in the year of God 1560. At this Parliament there are severall acts made against popery as against the Masse against the Popes authority jurisdiction for such as were for the Reformation or the Congregation as they were then called did supplicate that they would condemne the Antichristian doctrine would restore the Discipline of the ancient Church discharge the popes jurisdiction accordingly as was said there is an act made ordaining that the Bishop of Rome called the Pope have no jurisdiction nor authority within the Realme in any time coming and that no Bishop or other prelate of the Realme use any jurisdiction in time coming by the said Bishop of Romes authority under the pain c. which was afterwards ratified by severall acts in the dayes of King James And thus by act of Parliament the Reformed Religion is established the church governement by Prelats is virtually discharged because Prelats then had no power but what they had from Rome when the current is cut off at the head it must needs cease in the streams But this will be the more clear if we consider how the Reformers were dealing for the establishment of Discipline together with the Doctrine knowing that the doctrine would not be long keeped pure if the Popish discipline governement were still retained upon this the great council giveth a charge dated April 29 1560. requiring commanding them in the name of the Eternall God as they would answer in his presence to committ to writing in a book deliver their judgements touching the Reformation of Religion which heretofore in this Realme as in others hath been utterly corrupted According unto which charge the first Booke of Discipline as it was called in which book the governement
what he many other brethren had to object against their office Mr Iames Laâ—…son did seconde this moved the debate touching the lawfulness of the office it self Mr Andro Melvin affirmed that none ought to be officebearers in the Church whose titles were not found in the Book of God and for the title of Bishop albeit the same was found in scripture yet was it not to be taken in the sense that the common sort did conceive there being no superiority allowed by Christ amongst Ministers he being the onely Lord of his Church and all the same servants in the same degree having the like power These beginnings the Lord was pleased so to seconde with his blessing that when it was moved by the Regent whether they would Stand unto the Policie aggreed upon at Leith or setle some other forme of governement It was resolved that a constant forme of Church policy should be sett down for this â—…ffect they nominate twenty of their number to meet at severall times places for the drawing the Modell thereof And accordingly after some pains the second Book of Discipline is finished Anno 1577. at the Generall Assembly Sess. 13. approven in all points except that touching Deacons which was referred to farther debate but Anno 1578. that head with the rest was approven by the unanimous consent of all though Spotiswood will not let the world know so much When this Second Book of discipline is thus appoven by the Nationall Assembly after prayer fasting they appoint some of their number to exhibite it to his Maj. to the end he might add his approbation thereunto Unto whom the King being then about 13. years of age did promise that he would be a proctor unto the Church caused some of his Counsellours conferr with those Ministers upon that business the heads of which conference were once insert in the Registers of the Assembly but Anno 1584. when the Court had power of the Registers those leaves were taken a way seen no more as shall be cleared hereafter and again Anno 1579. the King wrote unto the Nationall Assembly desiring a farther consultation upon the heads on which his Commissioners and their delegats did not accord the last year to the end that when all the particulars are fully aggreed upon they might be approven in the ensueing Parliament in the mean time the Assemblies are going on prohibiting any moe bishops to be chosen ordaining such as were chosen to submit themselves to the determination of the Generall Assembly under the paine of Excommunication accordingly some then all of them afterward did submit So Anno 1580. they ordained that all who were called bishops should dimit simpliciter because that office had no warrand in the word they ordained Provinciall Synods to call before them such bishops as lived in their bounds ordaine them to give obedience to this act His Majesties Commissioners who were present at this Assembly of Dundy did concurr with this Assembly in appointing some of their number to consult about the Modell of the Presbiteries In this same yeer in the moneth of March for as yet the new year did not begin untill the 25. of march is the Nationall Covenant solemnely taken by the King his Councill Court afterwards by the inhabitants of the Kingdome in which covenant prelacy under the name of Romish Hierarchy was abjured as shall be cleared in due time the Doctrine Discipline of the Church was sworne to be defended Anno 1581. in Aprile at Glasgow the Generall Assembly did insert the book of Discipline in their Registers did show how the act touching Bishops made at Dundee Anno 1580. did condemne the estate of Bishops as they were then in Scotland Unto this Assembly his Maj Commissioner William 〈◊〉 of Caprintoun presented the Confession of faith subscribed by the King his houshold as also a plot of the presbiteries to be erected mentioning their meeting places appoynting the severall parishes which should belong to such such presbiteries with a letter to the Noblemen Gentlemen of the countrey for their concurrence for the erection of presbiteries dissolution of Prelacies in his Maj name he promised that his Maj would set forward the policy until it were established by Parliament thus presbyteries began to be erected throughout the Kingdom This was a sweet sun-shine but it was followed with a very sad showre for when Amate Stuart of Aubignee afterward Duke of Lennox obtaineth by the death of the Earle of Mortoun who was executed the banishment of the Earle of Angus the superiority of Glasgow other things to secure the same to him his posterity he aggreeth with Mr. Robert Montgomery Minister at Sterlin to accept of the bishoprick to dispone to him all which belonged to that bishoprick for the yearly payment of one thousand pound Scots some horse-corne poultry which when the Church heareth he is summoned before the Assembly at St. Andrews commanded to leave the bishoprick under the paine of Excommunication the Presbitery of Sterlin is appointed to take notice of his cariage in doctrine discipline for they had found him guilty in 14 or 15 points but he went on notwithstanding the presbitery had suspended him from the exercise of the Ministry he procured an order unto the presbytery of Glasgow to receive him as their Bishop under the paine of banishment with a company of armed souldiers entred the Church pulled Mr. David Weems out of the pulpit being summoned to compear befor the Synod of Lothian the King causeth summond all the Synod to compear before him at Sterlin the 12 of Aprile Mr. Pont some others compeared in name of the rest protested that albeit they had compeared to testify their obedience to his Mat. yet they did not acknowledge him or his council judges in that mater which was an Ecclesiastick cause that nothing done at that time should prejudge the liberties of the Church But the Council rejected the protestation discharged them to proceed any further And shortely thereafter when the Generall Assembly is examining his processe the King sendeth a letter to them discharging them to proceed any further when they went on notwithstanding they are charged by a Messenger of armes to desist under the paine of Rebellion but they thinking it better to obey God then man ordained Mr. Montgomerie to compeer befor them the next day who compeered not onely a Proctor in his name appealed unto the King The Assembly did reject the appellation proceed to examine the libell given in against him finding him guilty of many hainous crimes they ordaine him to be deposed excommunicated but ere the sentence be pronounced they appoint some of their number to aquaint his Maj. with their whole procedure And ere long Mr. Montgomery submitteth passeth from his appellation acknowledgeth his faults
of one though their own father before their tyrannicall Court Now is there a black cloud over the Church for many years piety is dayly decaying formality profanity increasing the godly are mourning lamenting the wicked rejoyceing But the Prelats have not yet ended their purpose For Anno 1633. when King Charles was present at a Parliament there is an Act carried through but not without some opposition made thereunto by some of the Nobles granting power to his Maj. to command what habits he pleaseth for all men in office whether in Church or State that as a priviledge annexed to the Crowne by this means a door was opened to bring in the Surplice the Corner cap other trash These worthies being traduced by the Prelats as contemners of authority sowers of sedition in Church State procure the kings displeasure by their freedome For the king did not onely chide them openly but with his own hand he wrote down their names as disloyall subjects which made these Nobles thinke of drawing up a supplication which being drawn up by William Haig his Maj. solicitour was committed to the trust of the Earle of Rothes Lord Loudoun to present it as they found conveniency but they perceiving that it would not be well accepted resolved to keep it up But at length some way or other a copy thereof cometh to the Bishops hands they deliver it unto the king withall complaine of those Noble-men as standing in the way of his subjects yeelding chearfull obedience And upon their importunat requeests there is a Commission granted to certaine persons as a committee to proceed against the Authors abettors of that supplication as guilty of sedition treason Whereupon William Haig fleeth all his goods are confiscat Some Noblemen are questioned the Lord Balmerino who had the supplication in his custody is imprisoned at length condemned to die but obtaineth pardon Now the prelats do reigne there being none who durst peep or move a wing against them The Achprelate of Saint Andrews was Chancellour other eight of the prelats were in great places being either Lords of the privy Councell or Lords of the Exchequer being thus lifted up in power honour they are puffed up with pride what durst they not attempt now thinke they Therefore they proceed to do more wickedness draw up a book of Canons which was printed approven by the Kings Maj. all were commanded to obey the Bishops in all points By this book that which remained of presbyterian governement is taken away Parochiall Sessions Classicall Presbyteries are accounted Conventicles Ruleing Elders Deacons are cast out of the Church all Ecclesiasticall causes are brought only to the Pelats tribunall So were they about the drawing up of a Liturgy a Book of Ordination against which before ever they were printed or seen all were discharged to speak under the pain of Excommunication And at length the book of Common Prayer is published imposed on the Church by the kings command as the onely forme of publick divine worship Every Parish is commanded to have two at least of these books under the paine of horning being punished as rebells And a strict command cometh forth enjoyning the same to be used from Pasch forward Anno 1637. But some of the Prelats as of Rose Dumblaine did anticipate the day made use of it in their Cathedralls Others of the Prelats propone the matter to their Synods but the Ministers replyed that such a change should not be made without a Nationall Assembly but it was answered that they were the Representatives of the Church However some prelats gave Ministers liberty to advise untill Octob. but through the furious importunity of some a letter is procured from his Maj. commanding the useing of the Liturgy with all expedition in the Churches of Edinburgh The Ministers being called to see what they would do such as refused are presently suspended SECTION II. The way how the Lord brought down these Prelats the History continued IT was sad lamentable to see what a face the Church of Scotland had now No hedge of Discipline to keep the vineyaird from foxes wilde boars all the Discipline which was was tyrannie over consciences over mens persons estates profanitie was not curbed but encouraged Prelats themselves being chief in all those crying abhominations as will be cleared ere long yea that poor Church was now posteing fast to Rome The Prelats their underlings beside the points of Arminianisme which were accounted speciall pieces of their qualification did avow openly severall points of Popery so that it was taught publickly in the chief Citie That the Pope was not Antichrist And thus all things were growing worse the worship corrupted like to be corrupted more the mindes of people were filled with feares that God would depairt leave that Church altogether so thattheir case looked most deplorable desperat like But asoftentimes the Church people of God have found him who was the hope ofIsrael the Saviour thereof in times of trouble a ready help in time of need so did the poor Church of Scotland finde it now by experience that whē the storme was sorest it was neerest an end that this was as the darke houre before the dawning of the day for now the Lord awaketh as one after wine looketh through the cloud with Compassion on a long tossed sorely afflicted Church which had groaned under oppression of cruell task-masters till they could do no more sheweth that his hand was not shortened that it could not save but that he was the hearer of prayer that now his appointed time was come to take vengeance on his adversaries even the vengeance of his Temple And as ordinariely the Lords great works appear to carnall reason to be despicable at the beginning so the Lord began this great change alteration of affaires in that poor Church in a way that seemed not to promise much yet such a way it was as the hand of God was to be seen in it and seen carrying of it on wonderfully as shall appear In obedience to his Maj. last letter which commanded the reading of the liturgie in all haste the Bishop of Edenburgh the first sabbath day thereafter resolved to do it when he beginneth there ariseth a tumult among the people begun by some women which encreased so as that the prelate when he came out of the Church did hardly escape in the rest of the Churches of Edenburgh the reading was stopped Immediatly after dinner the Secret Counsell did meet resolve to search out the authors of this tumult commanded the use of the service book all to speake reverently of the Bishops but notwithstanding of this the people rage more then ever against the Prelats after the afternoons sermon they set upon the Prelate with stones forced him to
the office of Episcopacy pressing the Church with Innovations Particularly Mr Spotiswood for open ordinary prophanation of the sabbath drinking over late in taverns venting atrocious slanders interlining changeing the Acts of the Assembly at Aberdeen facrilege Simonie conniving at Heterodoxies Mr Linsday of Glasgow for oppressing of the Consciences of the Ministers in his Dioecy extorting money from some ministers withholding stipends from others oppressing his Vassals and forceing Probationers to swear some idle vaine oaths which he had invented Mr Lindsay of Edenburgh for admitting none to the ministry but such as would first take upon them the order of Deacons for bowing at the Altar useing the Rotchet other Masse-cloths in time of divine service consecrating Temples useing the Rite of Elevation at the Celebration of the Lords Supper conniving at Heterodoxies maintaining the Ubiquity of Christs body Mr Sideserf of Galloway for open ordinary prophaneing of the Lords day exercing tyranny in his Dioecy conversing with Excommunicated papists defending all the Arminlan many popish opinions Mr Maxwell for kneeling before the Altar wearing popish garments playing at Cards Dice on the Lords day even when the Sacrament had been given oppressing his vassalls keeping friday fasts defending all Arminian many of the most grosse Popish opinions Mr Whitefoord for such flagitious crimes as were notour to all So do they depose Excommunicate Mr Ballantine of Aberdeen VVedderburne of Dumblane for the generall crimes particularly Mr Ballantine for Simony for suspending Ministers because they keeped a fast on the Lords day dedicating a Chappell freeing Papists suspected of Incest from Church censures turning such an Apostate after he had appeared once so zealous for the truth Mr VVedderburne for concurring with Mr Maxwell in drawing up the book of Canons swearing profancing the Lords day commending Arminianisme many points of Popery So do they depose Mr Lindsay of Dunkell Mr Abernethy of Cathnes Mr Guthry of Murray Mr Grahame of Orknay Mr Fairly of Argile Mr Campbell of the Isles as for the generall crimes common to all so in particular Mr Lindsay for Simony Mr Abernethy for Simonie Mr Guthry for being the first who did put on the Surplice in Edenburgh Anno 1633. professing he would be yet more vile to please the King Mr Grahame for profancing the Lords day sacrilege conniving at adultery Mr Fairly for oppressing Intrants with new oaths profancing the Lords day defending the Arminian opinions Thus are those enemies to Church State after they had oppressed tyrannized over that poor Church for a long time wonderfully brought under her feet So let all thine Enemies perish o Lord. And now being filled with rage they all except some few who had acknowledged their wronge run to Court stir up his Maj. to make warr against Scotland accordingly warr is concluded both by Sea Land free tradeing is taken away the Scottish nobility at court are made to abjure the Nationall Covenant the Assembly at Glasgow The English Nobility with all their forces are commanded to meet the king at Yorke April 10. 1639. When the Covenanters see this preparation they emit 〈◊〉 Declaration shewing that Religion was their onely worke Conscience their onely Motive Reformation their Scope that they intended no harme to his Maj. nor did they intend to invade England whatever their malicious enemies did say to the contrary that all this was brought about by the means of some proud perverse Popishly affected Prelats But this Declaration was suppressed in England so that they might not know the true State of affairs and there is a contrary Declaration emitted stileing the Covenanters seditious rebells the like which was read in all the Churches of England Withall the Covenanters learne that the Earle of Huntly is made governour of the north that they are all declared Rebells in England that Berwick Carlile frontier cities were strongly garrisoned that the Earle of Arundale is made Generall that the King was to Rendevouz at York That Huntly had already four or five thousand in armes That Aberdeen was fortifying it self to take in the Kings navy That the Papists in the South were ready to rise with the Marquis of Douglas Lord Harris that the Deputy of Irland intended to Hand some men in the west And therefore after fasting prayer they resolved being in a sort the whole body of the Land the Nobility Gentry Burgesses Commons Magistrats of all sorts in City country to put themselves in a posture of defence to strengthen themselves against Invasion the best way they could to suppresse the enemies within their own bosome Wherein the Lord blessed them so as their enemies both in the North South were compesced with all they did emit a Declaration vindicating themselves their actions from all the aspersions of their enemies answering his Maj. Declaration read in the Churches of England that they might undeceive those of England May 1639. The Kings Navy cometh to Scotland with some thousands of men much provision The Covenanters send a supplication to his Maj. but in vaine for nothing is intended but fire sword The King approacheth their borders with an army the two armies are near to joyne in battell But God was pleased to prevent the shedding of bloud by moving the King to a Pacification wherein the King promiseth declareth that all causes Ecclesiasticall should be determined by Church Assemblies and that there should be a Generall Assembly every year once and that civill matters should be determined by Parliaments That there should be an Assembly held at Edenburgh the 12. of August next and a Parliament thereafter to ratify the Acts of the Assembly Whereupon the Scotish forces are disbanded the Castles are surrendred now the whole land looketh for nothing but peace The Assembly is opened up August 1639. the Earle of Traquair is present as his Maj. Commissioner all these things which were before concluded in the assembly of Glasgow are established his Maj. Commissioner assenting The Covenant was approved in all its heads clauses was subscribed both by Traquair his Maj. Commissioner by the Privy Councell according to a petition of the assembly unto the Secret Councell there is an act of Councell ordaining all in all time comeing to subscribe the Covenant according to the Generall assemblies declaration dated August 30 1639. Now according to the Pacification it was expected that these acts should have had the civill Sanction of the parliament which was to sit down the next day after the assembly was dissolved viz August 31. But before any thing was done by the Parliament to this effect it is commanded to dissolve Decemb. 18. under the paine of treason so the Parliament is prorogued unto the 2 of Jun. 1640. The Parliament for peace resolve to obey but because they had never been adjourned
nor dissolved formerly without their own consent lest this might be a preparative for times to come they resolved to emitt a Declaration for their exoneration caused insert it in the Registers ad futuram rei memoriam And withall they send some of their number unto his Maj. with grievances appoint others to attend his Maj. answer at Edenburgh then they dissolve having first published an Infirmation to the Estates of England concerning the present state of affairs But these Commissioners after they had endevoured to give his Maj. satisfaction in all points according to their Instructions at severall times from the 20 of Febr. unto the 23 of March 1640. were detained afterward the Lord Loudoun is put into the Toure of London other three are put under a restrant contrary to the Law of Nations A new warr is intended The Castle of Edenburgh is fortified with a hundreth strangers moe much Ammunition The Commissioners of the Parliament seeing this hearing of an army leavyed in England under the conduct of the Earle of Northumberland how the Deputy of Irland with the Nobles there in Parliament had offered a great summe of money what stir the prelats of England were making at Court what offers they were making to carry on this new warr which they so far owned as to call it Ballum Episcopale they resolve to put the land into a new posture of defence and emit a Declaration for satisfaction of their friends in England which was so satisfactory as that many of the lower House of Parliament then sitting declared that they saw no cause of a warr against Scotland therefore would grant no subsidy But this parliament is dissolved Scottish ships are intercepted their goods taken away the Seamen imprisoned miserably handled all Sea-ports closed up with Frigots the Kings army advanceth both by sea land the Castle of Edenburgh oppresseth the town killeth many with shote Now at the time appointed Jun. 11. the parliament conveeneth leavieth an army for a new Expedition in defence of the land cleareth the equity of the same in a Declaration shewing 1 how they were necessitated thereunto being not able to live without traffique justice to mantaine an army on the borders 2. That the warr was onely Defensive the King being stirred up by their adversaries to breake the Articles of Pacification to imprison their Commissioners to call Parliaments in England Irland for subsidies for the warr to take their ships imprison their sea-men to give Commission to the Governour of the Castle of Edenburgh to kill all he could when they resolved onely to defend themselves to seek a firme sure peace then to lay down armes after security had for their Religion liberties 3. That they were called by the same divine Providence by which they had been directed hitherto 4. That they looked upon none as their enemies but a Canterburian Faction made up of Atheists Papists Arminians Prelats the seducers of the King 5. That their end was not to wrong his Maj. nor to enrich themselves but Gods glory the firm peace of both nations the true honour of the King that the enemies of both Kingdomes might be punished So do they emit another paper for the satisfaction of the good people of England clearing their true Intentions And so do advance with their Army in to England take New Castle before they would advance toward York where the maine body of the Kings Army did lye they supplicat his maj at length to consider their greevances particularly to ratifie the last Parliament that the Scott in England and Irland might be set at liberty and not forced to take unlawfull oaths that the Incendiaries might be punished according to justice the Scottish ships restored and every thing removed which hindereth free commerce and tradeing between the two Nations Many of the English Nobility the City of London petition for a Parliament they and others advise his Maj. to desist from the warr At length the King is moved to thoughts of peace chooseth eight English Earles eight Lords to meet with such as Scotland should make choise of to conclude all matters of difference This Conference did begin at Rippon was concluded at Westminster the substance of which shall be mentioned presently when it shall be shown how these Acts were all ratified approved by the King himself his Parliament of Scotland Anno 1641. When the Parliament in Jun. Anno 1640 had conveened at the time appointed at the last Session all the Acts of the former Assembly 1639. are ratifyed by their 4. Act. They also ratify the Covenant the Act of Councell beformentioned thereanent do insert the said Covenant with the assemblies explication in their Registers And rescinde all Acts Statutes made in favours of the prelats as Act. 23. Anno 1597. anent their voice in Parliament Act 2. Anno 1606. anent their restitution the act 8. Anno 1607. anent the Chapter of St Andrews act 6. 1609. anent their Commissariates the 1 Act 1612. ratifying the acts of the pretended assembly at Glasgow 1610. the 1. 2. Acts Anno 1617. anent the Election of Bishops restitution of Chapters the 1. act 1621. ratifying the Articles of the pretended assembly at Perth 1618. all others whatsoever made in their favours prejudiciall to the spirituall nature jurisdiction Discipline privileges of the Kirk or of the Generall provinciall presbyteriall assemblies or kirk Sessions after the enacting of many other profitable lawes they adjourne the Parliament unto the 19. of Novemb. next then unto the 14. of January 1641. then unto the 13. of April following then unto the 25. of May then unto the 15. of July at which time the King himself was present And in this Session of Parliament the Articles of the Treaty are ratifyed enacted ordained to have in all time comeing the fullforce strength of a true persect security Act of Parliament the King for himself his successours promised in verbo principis never to come in the contrary of that Statute Sanction or any thing there in contained By this Treaty these Articles were concluded 1. That for as much as the Kings Maj. did call conveen a Parliament to beholden at Edenburgh the 2. of Inn. 1640. wherin certaine acts were made aggreed upon which acts hiâ—… Maj. for the peace good of his kingdome is pleased to publish in his own name with consent of the Estates therefore commands that the said acts bearing date the 11. of Iuny 1640 be published with the acts to be made in the next Session of the same Parliament that all the said acts have in all time coming the strength of lawes 2. That the Castle of Edenburgh other strengths of the kingdome should according to their first foundation with
the advice of the Estates of parliament be furnished used for the kingdome 3. That all Scottish men within England Irland shall be free from censure for subscribing the Covenant shall be no more pressed with oaths subscriptions unwarranted by their lawes contrary to their Nationall oath Covenant approved by his Maj. 4. That all his Maj. Courts of Justice shall be free open to all men parliaments of the respective kingdoms may try and judge Incendiaries and that he will employ none in his service without consent of parliament 5. That their ships and goods and all dammage shall be restored 6. That the summe of three hundreth thousand pound sterline should be given to them for their losses 7. That all Declarations proclamations acts books libells and pamphlets that have been made published against the loyalty dutiefulness of his Maj. subjects of Scotland should be recalled suppressed and forbidden in England and Irland that their loyalty shall be made known in all the parish Churches of his Maj. Dominions 8. That the garrisons of Berwick Carlile be removed As also there is an act of pacification oblivion aggreed upon out of which the Scottish prelats are excepted as also Traquair Sr Robert Spotiswood Sr Iohn Hay Mr Walter Balcanquell who were cited pursued as Incendiaries In which act his Majesty declareth that the ensueing Parliament of Scotland shall have full free power as the nature of a free parliament of that kingdom doth import to ratify confirme the Treaty Thus at length were these officers which Christ had never appointed cast out of Gods house where they had formerly caused so much desolation layd the vineyaird of the Lord waste as a wilderness both by Church State The King all ranks of People consenting thereunto For which God who is wonderfull in Counsell excellent in working ought to be acknowledged for ever exalted Seing he raised up such as were brought low brought down these who had set their nests on high whose wayes had been alwayes grievous who said in their hearts they should never be moved God hath forgotten he hideth his face he will never see it Now God arose lifted up his hand did not forget the humble he did behold mischief spite to require it did breake the arme of the wicked The memory of which should be still fresh with refreshing unto all the people of God ground of hope that he who did then make the names of these Prelats to â—…ot to stinke in the noâ—…rils both of Church State can will againe pursue his controversy against these who now dare be so bold as to attempt what they have attempted after that the Lord hath put such notes of disgrace infamy upon their predecessours While the Parliament of England is sitting there are severall complaints given in against the Earle of Strafford Deputy of Irland the Archbishop of Canterbury both being sound guilty of points of High Treason are condemned to die Severall Courts of Judicatory are abridged in their power the High Commission Court is taken away and the Starchamber Court the coâ—…ive power of Prelats their Courts The Prelats are ejected from the House of Peers Bils are presented to his Maj. for the punishment of the scandalous Clergy for the abolition of Episcopacy the calling of an Assembly At length there is a civill war begun between the King the Parliament occasioned through his Maj. withdrawing from his Houses of Parliament North towards Hull The warr is continued In the mean time the Parliament calleth together an Assembly of Divines to consult about matters of Religion Church-governement so carry on the begun work of Reformation And Anno 1643. They appoint Iohn Earle of Rutland Sir William Armin Baronet Sir Henry Vane Iunior Knights Thomas Hatcher Henry Darley Esquires with Mr Stephen Marshall Mr Philip Nye members of the Assembly of Divines their Commissioners to repear unto the kingdom States of Scotland to the Generall assembly there their Commissioners to propone consult with them in all occasions which may furder the so much desired work of Reformation in ecclesiastical matters a nearer conjunction betwixt both Churches Accordingly these Commissioners came presented their propositions a Declaration of the Lords and Commons in Parliament unto the Generall assembly Aug. 10. 1643. So is there a letter sent from some brethren of the ministry in the Church of England subscribed by very many hands showing how low that poor Church was now brought being ready to be swallowed up by Satan his Instruments that the Protestant Religion was in great hazard desiring very affectionately their aide help August 15. those Commissioners presente some propositions to the Assembly which they had a little before August 12. presented unto the honorable Convention of Estates desiring that because the Popish Prelaticall faction is still pursueing their designe of corrupting altering the Religion through the whole Iland the two Nations might be strictly united for their mutuall defence against the Papists Prelaticall Faction their adherents in both Kingdoms not to lay down armes till those their implacable enemies be disarmed subjected to the authority justice of Parliament in both Kingdoms respectively And that the two Kingdoms might be brought into a near conjunction into one forme of Church governement one Directory for worship one Catechisme c. the foundation laid of the utter extirpation of Popery Prelacy out of both Kingdoms The most effectuall ready means whereunto is now conceived to be That both Nations enter into a strict Union League according to the desire of both Houses of Parliament that for prosecuting the Ends of that Union against the Papists Prelaticall faction Malignants now in armes in the kingdom of England their brethren of Scotland would raise a considerable force of horse foot for their aide assistance For which Ends there are Committees appointed by the convention of Estates the Gen. assembly to meet with the commissioners of the parliament of England by whom the forme of the League Covenant is aggreed unto resolved upon Which draught Aug. 17. 1643. was approven by the Gen. assembly With all their hearts with the beginnings of the feelings of that joy which they did finde in so great measure upon the renovation of the Nationall Covenant of the Kirk kingdom as the most powerfull mean by the blessing of God for setling preserving the true Protestant Religion with perfect peace in his Maj. Dominions and propagating the same to other nations and for establishing his Maj. throne to all ages generations recommended unto the Right Honorable convention of Estates that being examined approved by them it may be sent with all diligence to the Kingdome of England that being received
And seing ther can no instance be produced out of the History of Scotland since ever it was a Kingdome that any subject noble Man or other was accused of high treason for such a cause surely this noble Mans case was unparalleled 3. Is not this strange considering what the principle of Royallists is They say that Conquest giveth a just tittle to a crown So sayeth D. Ferne Aâ—…nisaeus Maxwell in his Sacro Sancta Regum Majestas Cap. 17. And by this principle Cromwell was the lawfull supreme Governour of the Kingdome of Scotland and had just tittle right to the Crowne thereof having now conquered the same if this principle of theirs be true which is much questioned by their opposites no complyance with him could by any law in the World be treason against any Prince whatsomever for obedience unto concurrence with a lawful supreme Magistrat can be treason against no man living How then could this noble Man be challenged upon the account of treason for complyance Let all the Royalists answer this without contradicting themselves if they can 4. Is there any lawyer who can produce such a definition of treason against a Prince or a supreme Magistrat out of the civil law as will condemne the deed of this worthy noble Man make complyance with a conquerour for the good saifty of the countrey after all meanes of defence are broken lost an act of treason And since the civil law can condemne no such deed as treasonable the sentence given out against his noble Man must be without all warrand of law 5. Are there not many countreyes Kingdomes cities that have been overrun by their enemies have had their own lawfull Governours put from them so have been forced to live under the feet of strangers hath it not been usuall for them to comply with such as had the present power in their hand for their own saifty the good of the place And was it ever yet heard that such were accused condemned of â—…reason against their own lawful Governours thrust from them sore against their wills for any such complyance And is it not wonderful that this eminent noble Man should become a preparative unto all the World So then to put a close to this let an appeal be made to all Governours of Commonwealths Statesmen Lawyers Casuists Politicians Canonists Quodlibâ—…tists yea Royalists if they will speak consonantly to their own principles their answer interloquutour be had in point of law unto this question Whether or not when a land is overcome in battel once againe a thrid time a fourth time so aâ—… they are forced to lie under the feet of the conquerour and expect his mercy their own supreme Magistrat is forced to flee away for his life without all hope of returning so they left without all goverment but what they have from the conquerour when it might have been expected that he would have ruled them disposed of them jure conquestus as conquered according to his own pleasure yet he did admit such as they thought sit to choise to sit in his supreme Councel for giving their advice for regulating the affaires of that Kingdom common wealth which is now conquered subdued Can it be treason in any when chosen by the countrey to sit in these Councells advise what they think best for the good of the countrey Or can they or any of them be challenged or accused condemned as guilty of heigh treason when providence bringeth back the prince after ten yeers absence for acting so under the conquerour for the good of the land to prevent its utter ruine destruction And if the answer shall as certainly it will be negative then it is beyond all question that the sentence execution of this worthy noble Man upon this sole account shall be matter of astonishment to all that hear of it know the cause thereof Thus a great prince falleth within five dayes therafter a great prophet falleth as shall be shown in the next section SECTION V. The groundes of the suffering of Mr Iames Guthry Minister at Sterlin who was executed the first Day of Iune 1661. examined AFter the parliament is assembled Mr Iames Guthry minister at Sterlin who was one of those ministers who were incarcerated for the cause above mentioned Sect. 3. who after some weeks imprisonement in the castle of Edenburgh was carryed thence imprisoned in Dundee from thence is sent for by the parliament impannalled before them being accused of high treason He was a man who had been honoured of God to be zealous singularly faithfull in carrying on the work of reformation had carryed himself streightly under all changes revolutions because he had been such an eminent one he must live no longer for he is condemned to die most basely handled as if he had been a notorious thief oâ—… malefactor he is hanged afterward his head is stuck up upon one of the ports of the city of Edinbrugh where it abideth unto this day preaching the shamefull defection of these who dealt thus with him calling to all who goe out in at the gate of the city to remember their covenant with God for which he died a martyr But it is like many will think it behoved to be some great crime for which this eminent servant of the Lord was thus handled but what if it be no such crime yea what if it was a duty for which he was thus put to suffer Reader thou shall hear ir then thou mayest judge Some ten years before he was challenged by the King his councell for a doctrinall thesis which he had maintained spoken to in sermon because he found them incompetent judges in matters purely ecclesiasticall such as is the examination and censureing of doctrinall poynts primo instanti he did decline them upon that account This is his crime for this he is condemned as guilty of high treason this will be the more wonderfull if thou consider how as thou hast heard many worthy precious servants of christ did decline the King his councell in the dayes of King Iames such as Mr Baleanqual Mr Melvin Mr Blake Mr Welch Mr Forbes others as incompetent judges in causes meerly ecclesiasticke and yet ther was never one of them put to death It is true there was an act of Parliament Anno 1584. dischargeing such declinatures under the paine of treason but the very next year Anâ—…o 1585. King Iames himself did emit a declaration shewing that he for his pairt should never that his posterity ought never to cite summond or apprehend any paster for matters of doctrine in religion salvation heresies or true interpretation of scripture but avoucheth it to be a mater meerly ecclesiasticall altogether impertinent to his calling Which though not equivalent to an Act of parliament yet whether
objections how he cleareth it from Act. 7 51. Hos. 2 1. Dan. 3. 6. Act. 4. 5. 6. Hos. 4. 15. Iud. v. 23. About this same time there is another minister banished indictâ causà for while he was going towards Irland upon some particular occasion he was brought back By the command of the committee of Estates committed to prisone untill the meeting of Parliament then receiveth summones of treason to which when he had desired some time to answere he is sent back to prisone when he expecteth to be called upon to give in his defences he was sentenced with banishment out of his Maj. dominions And which is more to be wondered at Neither these two ministers nor any other who were afterward banished as shall be showne could ever to this day get an extract of their sentence which no judicature in the world could ever have refuised in equity justice yea because the power of the Parliament Councell of Scotland could reach no furder then their own bounds so could banish none any further then out of Scotland they devise another way draw up a bonde where in the subscriber bindeth himself under the paine of death to remove out of all his Maj. dominions betwixt such a day not to returne without license under the paine of death this bond they caused the banished ministers subcribe before witnesses which they were all necessitated to do to save themselves from worse Judge reader if this was not both cruell unreasonable SECTION VII Concerning their sufferings who refuised to observe the Anniversary Day AMong other Acts of the first Session of Parliament there is one for a solemne anniversary thankesgiving wherein they statute ordaine That in all time coming the twenty ninth day of May which was the day of â—…his Maj. birth restauration to his government be set a pairt as a holy Day unto the Lord that in all the Churches of the Kingdome it be imployed in publick prayers preaching thankesgiving praises to God for so transcendent mercies that all trade merchandise work handy-labour other ordinary imployments be forborne the remaineing part of the day spent in such lawful divertishments as are suiteable to so solemne an occasion Unto which Act many of the ministry did give obedience out of fear But others could not in conscience yeeld thereunto not only because it is not in the power of any under heaven to appoint anniversary holy Dayes the Creator alone having reserved that power into his own hand to consecrate any portion of time he pleaseth make it holy So as holy duties must attend it as holy duties acts of worship attend the Sabboth-day the only holy Day which is now warranted by the Word of God It is true the Church may when God by his providence is calling to mourning to fasting or to thankesgiving set some time a pairt for these duties of praying or rejoiceing but then the time doth attend the dutyes called for the duties doe not attend the time as they do the Lord's Day But also because of the grounds reasons of the solemnizeing of that Day which are contained in the narrative of the act unto which no man who had not made shipewrak of faith of a good conscience could consent as every one may see who will but ponder the Act a part whereof to give but a taste of the whole followeth The â—…states of Parliament of the Kingdome of Scotland taking to their câ—…sideration the sad condition slaverie bondage this ancient Kingdome hath groaned under durcing these twenty three years troubles in which under the specious pretences of reformation a publick rebellion hath bâ—…en by the treachery of some mispersuasion of others violently carryed on against sacred authority to the ruine destruction so far as was possible of Religion the Kings Maj. his Royal Government the laâ—…es liberties property of the people all the publick private interests of the Kingdome So that Religion it self hath been prostitute for the warrand of all these treasonable invasions made upon the Royall Authority And disloyal limitations put upon the alleagiance of the subjects c. By which what followeth it may be obvious to all who read consider the said Act. That none could so much as preach on that day or give any countenance to such a work unlesse they would condemne all which had been done for twenty three yeers space in carrying on of the work of Reformation as being the height of treachery rebellion designedly purposely carryed on under the specious pretexts of Reformation And what faithfull Minister durst adventure on that to condemne King Parliaments Church State themselves too as treatours rebells unworthy to live any longer Can any expect that Ministers before they be convinced of a fault should be so rash unadvised as to goe to pulpites with ropes about their necks declare before all that they had been so long possibly all their dayes as to some young men living a life of rebellion against the lawfull Magistrat carrying on a course of â—…rebellion to the ruine of Religion King Kingdome And can it be expected in reason that such as refused to countenance that day should be condemned by any who shall but seriously consider what are the consequences of such a complyance Neither let any say that it was out of disrespect to his Maj. that any Minister did refuise to countenance the work of that day For all of them did willingly keep a day of solemne thankesgiving at his coming home And Presbyteries Synods did chearfully appoynt dayes for that effect That which the famous learned Voetius observeth concerning such dayes in his Polit. Pag. ult viz. That it may come to passe that the time when such an anniversary day should be keeped may be a time when God calleth for fasting mourning then such may look for that woe Isa. 22 12 13. As rojoyce when they should mourne is considerable whether it was a fit season then to rejoyce or not let the Reader judge when he considereth that upon the Monday before that anniversary day the famous Marquis of Argile was executed upon the Saterday thereafter Faithfull Mr Guthry was put to death And that also which he sayeth against Ministers keeping a sinfull fast Pag. 993. Holdeth good here for Ministers were clear that this was against the common cause of God And therefore many who could not satisfy themselves with some fine distinctions evasions to reconcile themselves unto the publick lawes resolved with the primitive Christians to hazard their reputation of loyalty as Stillingslcet sheweth in his Origines Sacra Pag. 321. rather then to countenance such impiety SECTION VIII The grounds why Ministers did resuise to goe to the Prelats Courts cleared A Little after his Maj. returne he was pleased to write unto the Presbytery of
now presbyterian government is quite overturned all presbyterian assemblies are discharged under the highest paine after prelats are advanced never till then there cometh forth a new order for new meetings upon new principles meetings otherwise constituted then formerly in a word such meetings as did but serve to approve of confirme prelats in their place power therefore all were commanded by the Estate to concur with the prelats in their meetings under a penalty So that it is but a meer falshood to say that the meetings then now are of the same constitution nothing altered for then they were hedges standing in the prelats way though much weakened by reason of the civill power opposeing but now they are props to support strengthen the hands of the prelats as being wholly ruled guided by them By what is said it is hoped that tender Christians will see that there was no small ground of scrupleing at these meeting that they will be loth rashly to condemne such as feared to transgresse in the least resolved rather to suffer then to sin seing it is now beyond controversie that their concurring in those meetings had been upon the matter a consenting unto an approving of prelaticall government upon which account alone the faithfull servants of Christ did refuise to concurre SECTION IX The reasons why Ministers refuised to seek presentations collations cleared defended THus the Lord was pleased to keep his servants out of this snare which the prelats had caused plet for their consciences but there are others stronger following The Parl. in their second session An. 1662 made an act ordaineing all Ministers who had entered to the cure of any parish within brugh or land in or since the year of God 1649. to have no right unto nor uplist the rents of their respective benefices modified stipends manse or gleib for this instant year 1662. nor for any year following unlesse they should obtaine a presentation from the lawful patroâ—… and have collation from the Bishop of the dioecy where he liveth before the 20 of Sepr next for understanding of this It would be considered That before the year 1649. the Church was groaning under that sore oppression of laick patrons having power to presente Ministers unto benefices and then the Parliament was pleased to discharge all presentations of Kirks patronages whether belonging to the King or to any laick patron upon good weighty grounds as the narrative of their 39 act March 9. 1649. sheweth in these words The Estates of parliament being sensible of the great obligation that lyeth upon them by the nationall Covenant by the solemne league covenant by many deliverances mercies from God by the late solemne engadgment unto ties To preserve the doctrine and maintaine and vindicate the liberties of the Kirk of Scotland and to advance the work of reformation therein to the utmost of their power considering that patronages and presentations of Kirks is an evill and bondage under which the Lords people and Ministers of this land have long groaned and that it hath no warrand in God's word but is founded only on the commonlaw and is a custome popish and brought into the Kirk in time of ignorance and superstition and that the same is contrary to the second book of discipline in which upon solide and good ground it is reckoned among abuses that are desired to be reformed and unto severall acts of the generall assembly and that it is prejudiciall to the liberty of the people and planting of Kirks and unto the free calling and entering of Ministers unto their charge And after this Ministers entered by the call of the people of whom they were to have charge Now this Parliament will have this piece of reformation undone the Church brought back unto her old state of bondage so will have Ministers to seek for these presentations thereafter to go to the Bishop for his license approbation to officiat exerce the Ministeriall function But the faithfull zealous servants of Christ had not freedome nor liberty to do either of these therefore resolved to suffer rather then to sin They had not freedome to go to seek a presentation for these reasons 1. Because they saw no warrand for such a way of entering into the Ministery allowed of Christ or his apostles nor practised many hundereds of years thereafter and therefore toapprove of such a way had been a sin 2. The Church had been long groaning under that oppression bondage was desireous to be rid thereof at the very beginning but could never obtaine it untill An 1649 Now if they had obeyed this act submitted unto this oppression they had consented unto the spoileing of the Church of her privileges and had condemned that worthy renowned Parliament who were graciously moved of God to take off this Yoke off her necke 3. They should in so far have consented unto the defection now carryed on for this was a piece thereof The restoreing of the Church unto her rights privileges was a part of the work of reformation yea no small part thereof when this privilege is taken away the work of reformation is in so far overturned therefore such as would have sought presentations should have made defection themselves have consented unto approved of the Parliament in carrying on the worke of defection in so far 4. By the 36 act of the first Session of this Parliament It is ordained that the person to be presented shall in presence of the patron or his atturney and of the sheriffe of the shire Stewart of the Stewartry or heretable baily or commissar of the bounds of it be in the countrey and of the Magistrats of the brughs within the brugh before the granting and their accepting of the presentation Take and subscribe the oath of alleagiance otherwise his presentation is null and void of it self Now as shall be showne hereafter no man could with a saife conscience take that oath as it was tendred by this Parliament 5. They should have thereby condemned the manner of Elections by the people consequently themselves as being hitherto intruders because entering into the Ministery without a lawfull call viz without the presentation of the patron But it will be objected That all the ministers of Scotland who entered before the year 1649. should by this meanes be condemned as intruders entering without a lawfull call Ans Though patronages cannot but be condemned as sinfull tending to ruine the Church to defraude her of much advantage beside the spoiling robeing her of her privileges liberties which are purchased to her by the blood of Christ because the patron who sometime may be a prophane person a persecuter either hath not understanding to discerne the spirits or will not make choise of the best most able minister Yet such as entered that way before the
year 1662. or in time comeing as having no right thereto and that they do not acknowledge them for their lawfull pastours in repaireing to their sermones under the paine of being punished as frequenters of private conventicles meetings commanding chargeing the saids Ministers to remove themselves their families out of their parishes betuixt the first day of Novemb. thereafter not to reside within the bounds of their respective presbyteries This was very sad threatening no lesse then ruine to Ministers and their poor families to be put from their houses in the middest of winter to seek new places of abode not having the small stipend which was due to them allowed for to transport their families with all or to provide themselves in necessaries But yet they resolved to cast themselves on Gods providence trusting in his word accounting it better to suffer affliction with the people of God to enjoy peace of conscience then to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season and accordingly did remove themselves By which meanes there were some hundereds of parishes left destitute the shepherds were scattered up down the land seeking a sheltering place for themselves It was a sad lamentable sight to see the sad farewell betwixt the loving pastor his beloved floke the teares the cryes and the bitter groanes that were there Now were the breasts pulled from the mouthes of the young infants the table was drawne the people were made to wander up downe the mountaines seeking the word of the Lord could not finde it they had silent Sabbaths empty pulpites some countrey sides were hereby laid utterly desolate And what could these faithfull Ministers do in this case but sigh groan to God seeing they could not in conscience yeeld obedience unto these commands therefore they resolved to be subject for conscience sake and to submit unto the punishment of banishment out of the bounds of the presbytery where they lived which was afterward made more sad for they were commanded to remove Twenty miles from their own parish Church Six miles from a a cathedrall three or foure miles from a brugh Now judge o reader whether this cruelty would not have more beseemed Turks how little cause there was for all this severity rigour to Ministers who had been endeavouring with some measure of faithfulnesse On their part fruitfulnesse through the Lor'ds blessing on their labours to enlarge the Kingdome of Iesus Christ to build up poor souls in their most holy faith because they would not give obedience unto such Acts as were but snares for the conscience to which obedience could not be yeelded without sin SECTION X. The oath of Alleagiance explained as to its civil part some reasons Against the taking thereof even upon that account adduced The act rescissory his Maj. prerogative canvassed AFter that there were some other Ministers whom the forementioned Acts did not reach removed out of some of the chief cities Brevi manu without any processe There are some wayes devised how moe of these might be removed with some colour or pretext therefore some Six or Seven were called before the Parliament at their second session and because they refused to take the oath which was tendered they were sentenced with banishment by act of Parliament ordained to remove off the Kingdome so soon as his Maj. commissioner should signify his minde the reanent But this sentence was not put in execution possibly because they saw an inconsistencie betuixt this deed an Act which they had made the former year in their first session By which all such as refuised to take that oath were to be uncapable of any publicke trust to be looked upon as persones disaffected to his Maj authority government this was all But in Decemb. 1662. The privy councell called some other Ministers before them tendered the oath unto them because of their refuiseing of the same they banished them out of all his Maj. dominions then gave them a bond to subscribe wherein they did binde themselves to remove out of all his Maj. dominions within a moneth not to returne under the paine of death otherwayes they would commit them to close imprisonment there keep them untill they had occasion to send them elswhere Whereupon these Ministers saw a necessity of subscribeing that bond of banishment Though it was very hard to binde themselves to remove within so short a time that in the midst of winter But strange it is that when the King himself by his oath at his coronation is bound to rule the land by the lawes and constitutions received therein This his councell which by the fundamentall lawes of the land as appeareth by the 12 Act of the 2 parliam of King Iames 4. whereby they are first established is to give his highness a true and essauld counsell in all matters concerning his Maj. and his realnie and to be responsall and accusable to the King and his estates of their counsell so is a judicatory subordinat unto the Parliament accountable to censur able by them would banish such as the lawes of the land did not account worthy of banishment whether they would do right if they should punish with death such a fault as by the Established lawes of the land deserved only to be punished by a fine or a summe of money let lawyers judge whether this be not an arbitrary illegall power which they have assumed any that considereth what is said the act 27. of the 2. Parliam of Char. 1. may judge possibly it was for this cause that they resuised to give an extract of their sentence although it was humbly craved But to clear what good grounds there were yet are for refuiseing to take that oath Let first the oath it self be considered compared with the former oath of alleagiance The oath now tendered is thus worded in the acts of this Parliament severall times I for testification of my faithfull obedience to my most gracious redoubted soveraigne Charles King of Great-Britaine france Irland c. affirme testify declare by this my solemne oath That I acknowledge my said soveraigne only supreme governour of this Kingdom over all persones in all causes that no forraigne prince power or state or person civill or â—…elesiasticke hath any jurisdiction power or superiority over the same and therefore do utterly reâ—…nce all forâ—…aigne power jurisdictions authorities shall at my out most power defend assist maintaine his Maj. jurisdiction foâ—…elaid against all deadly shall never decline his Maj. power jurisdiction as I shall answer to God This is the oath which they call the oath of alleagiance but is indeed very far different therefrom as will easily appear to any who will compare the same with that oath of alleagiance which King Iames treateth of in his dialogue
states as is yet to be seen extant in the records of their old treaties of peace with England and France 7. The Estates of Scotland wrote unto the Queen An. 1559. Oct. 23. thus Ex literis tuis ac mandatis c. Buch lib. 16. that is By your letters mandats sent us by a herald we understand how obstinatly you are set against piety towards God and the publick good of our nation the common liberty of all But that we may according to our duty defend all these We in â—…e name of our Kings do suspend prohibite all that publicke admininistration titles and superiorites which you take upon you being certanely persuaded that those things which you â—…ow do are contrary to that constant good will which Kings have carryed towards the welfare of this Kingdome And as you do 〈◊〉 loâ—…k upon us as lawfull subjects of this Kingdome and as a laâ—…full Parliament So nor do we look upon you as regent or as exerâ—…ing any publick Magistracy Especially seing your pâ—…wer if there be any such committed unto you is upon good weigâ—…ty reasons suspended by us in the name of the Kings of this realme So Anno 1567. they put the queen regent mother to King Iames from her regency which deed of theirs is fully vindicated by the earle of Morâ—…on in his discourse to the Queen of England a part whereof out of Buch Lib. 20. because usefull both for clearing of this particular some others before mentioned shall be here transcribed Primum Factum ipsum c. As for the deed it self of punishing Kings or queens The ancient custome of our predecessours will not suffer it to be accounted new for it were not necessary to enumerat how many Kings have been punished by death â—…onds exile by our nobles far lesse were it necessary to confirme this deed of ours by forraigne examples seing there are so many so obvious in ancient histories But now the nation of the Scots have been a free nation from the begining have made Kings to themselves upon these conditions that when necessity required they might dethrone them of which there are many footsteps remaineing fresh unto this day for in the isles about in many places of the continent in which the old language lawes had any abode this custome is followed in the chooseing of their governours to this day And the ceremonies used at the coronation of Kings do clearly demonstrat that the government is nothing else but a mutuall stipulation betuixt King subjects as also the constant tenor of the ancient law by which Kings were inaugurated which remaineth unchanged in the least to this day yea while so many of our Kings have been banished imprisoned or more severely punished there was never one motion made of relaxing the rigour of the law what wonder seing it was not of the nature of those lawes that change with tht time but of those which are fixed in the heart of man by nature consented unto by all nations which being subject to no other lawes do command rule all so that whether we will or not they are before our eyes what ever we be doing stick in our heart This law did our predecessours follow being alwayes armed against violence ready to suppresse tyrants But that I may passe in silence the famous cities of Athens Lacedaemon Rome Venice which keeped this law so long as they keeped their liberty Yea even then when Rome was under tyrants if any good man became emperour he did account it his glory to acknowledg himself inferiour to the people subject to the lawes for when Trajanus gave a sword according to the custome unto the praefectus urbis he said use it for me or against me as I shall deserve and Theodosius a good emperour in these worst times would leave this noble saying among the lawes that he confessed he was under the lawes Neither was this law unknown to barbarous nations as all histories testify But lest I should be thought to gather together examples now out of use I shall onely make mention of two later the one is of Christieris the King of the Dennes who for his intollerable cruelty was put from the Kingdome he all his posterity which is a sadder punishment then ever was inflicted by any of our progenitours what did the mother of Charles the 5 that made her deserve perpetuall imprisonment now what did we but following the examples of so many nations Kingdomes suppresse tyranny which swelled above all law not indeed so severely as our predecessours did in like cases for had we followed their example we had been farr from not onely the fear of danger but also here calumnies Thus he much more is added to this purpose there More over this same Queen regent was told by the Earle of Ruthven that same night that David Rizio was killed as Buch reporteth lib. 17. That the government of the Kings of Scotland was alwayes very lawfull that it was exerted not after the lisst pleasure of any one man but according to the lawes by the consent of the nobles and if any King did otherwayes he suffered accordingly and now Scottish men are not so farr degenerated from the institutions of their predecessours as to suffer the tyranny and slavery of one who is a stranger and whom they look not upon as deserving any honest service 8. Yea in the 8 Parliament of King Iames 6. Act. 2. the honour authority of the Supreme court of Parliament continowed past all memory of men is ratified there it is said That by the court of Parliament under God the Kingdome hath been upholden rebellious and traiterous subjects punished the good and faithfull preserved and maintained and the lawes and acts of Parliament by which all good men are governed are made and established and therefore they statute and ordaine that none take up on hand to impugne the dignity and authority of the estates or to seek or procure the innavation or diminution of their power or authority under the paine of treason It is true that in the preceeding Act they confirme the Kings Royall power and authority over all estates as well spiritual as temporal And therefore their maintaining of the power and privilege of Parliaments is the more remarkable And by the two Acts compared togetheâ—… it is aboundantly clear that the authority mentioned in the first Act of that Parliament which is granted to the king is not over the Estates of Parliament but over private persones whether civill or ecclesiastick And so it is but a granting of him to be singulis major which will easily be granted And this will be more clear if it be considered what occasioned that Act at that time As was shown above in the first Section the Lord was stirring up his servants to act something for the setling of the government of the Church which occasioned the
never yet heard of that a King was crowned in Scotland but by a lawfull Parliament whose deed was valide if this deed of that Parliament was not valid let wise men conjecture what the consequences will be It is true they except in their Act 9. All such Acts as were passed in any meeting of Parliament or committee of Estates authorized by his Maj. presence But his Maj. presence will not make every company of men a Parliament yea his being present with them at any of their Sessions sayeth he owned them as a lawfull Parliament 2. How ever all these Acts which concerne himself seing he was not present at their making are null 3. How cometâ—… it to passe that the Kings presence Anno 1641. did not availe to keep that session of Parliament from a stroke with the rest And furder it appeareth that they annull the Parliament 1650 1651. altogether because if that had been a Parliament it had been the first Parliament of King Charles 2 so the Parliament 1661. had been his second Parliament But the Parliament 1661. is called his first Parliament therefore there was never a lawfull Parliament before in his reigne thus by their principles he hath never been crowned in Scotland as yet What a Premunire they fall into here let lawyers judge Fourthly There was as little reason to condemne these meetings counsels conventions of the subjects at the begining of the late work Because those meetings were necessary for the defence of Religion against the bloody Prelates who were seeking the overthrow destruction of all 2. Nor is there any Act condemning such which can with any colour be allaiged except the Act of that Parliament 1584. wherein things were carryed on by a strong faction in great haste for they had five Sessions in three dayes with great secrecy for the Lords of the articles were sworne to secrecy the dooresâ—… were keeped closse all the time of Parliament See laborious Mr Petree his History pag. 442 and the Act of this Parliament did mainely strick against the assemblies of the Church for that was the thing designed 3. What ever can be made out of this Act against civill meetings it will not stricke against those meetings because the Parliament 1640 in their Act 29. hath showne the true meaning thereof to be otherwise saying It cannot be extended against any councells conventions assemblies committees or meetings made holden keeped by the subjects for mantenance and preservation of the kings Maj. Religion lawes and liberties of the kingdome or for the publick good either of Church or state this Act was approved by the large treaty againe by the next Session of Parl. An. 1641. where the King himself was present 4. The secret councell which then was did approve of these conventions or tables as they were called so did his Maj. commissioner thereafter So then these meetings might be warrantably keeped for God's glory the removeing of the just grievances of the subject being no wayes prohibited by the municipall lawes which onely disallow such conventions as are for disturbance of the peace or usurpation against authority neither of which can be allaiged here for no invasion violence offer of wrong by word or deed to any person no not even to these against whom they had justly complained followed thereupon And those meetings were onely to consult upon the most fit humble way of supplicating his Maj. for the most convenient propositions to be presented to his Maj. to the Parliament to the assembly all which are most compatible with the loyalty duty of good subjects do no wayes encroach upon authority seing they assumed not any judiciall determination in any matter of state civill or ecclesiasticall but by voluntary instructions and opinions every one to another in a common cause of religion did resolve what might be most conduceable to their lawfull and just ends To use the words of the protestation Decemb. 18. 1638. Fiftly Nor is there just warrand ground upon this account to annull the League Covenant Because 1. It was against no municipall law for as to that 12 Act of the Parl. 10 of King Iam. 6. Anno 1585. it is so explained by the 29 Act of Parl. 1640. as that it cannot be extended to any bands leagues made for the preservation of the Kings Maj. Religion lawes liberties of the Kingdome or for the publick good either of Church or state and this may be furder cleared by vieuing the 43 Act of Queen Mary which the forecited Act of King Iames 6. relateth unto ratifieth for that Act is to be understood of particular leagues or bonds of man-rent as they called it or maintenance respectivè that by privat persones in brugh land therefore cannot be understood of leagues or bonds made by the body of the land in their representatives in Parliament which hath so much power in making of leagues that without their consent the King cannot make a league as is clear by a league which King Robert 2. consented unto betwixt Scotland France England which was annulled because it wanted the Parliaments consent for sayeth Buch in the end of his 9 book neque enim ipse pacem vel inductas facere poterat nisi ex sententiâ publici conventus nec firmas polliceâ—… sine publico decreto He could neither make nor promise truce or peace without the Parliaments consent in the Parliament 10. King Iam. 6. Anno 1585. among the unprinted Acts there is one containing the assent of the Parliament for concludeing of a league with the Queen of England 2. The Parliaments of Scotland have made leagues with forraigne Princes without the Kings consent as that Parliament which deposed the Queen Mother from her regency did enter in a league with the Queen of England 3. All leagues bondes made by the Parliament were ratified by this King by his solemne oath both before at his coronation and therefore none in conscience could condemne these bonds or take an oath importing the same What is more allaidged against the league covenant shall be fully examined hereafter Sect. 2â—… Sextly Nor was there just cause upon this account to condemne Scotland for aideing assisting of England in their straite extreame danger Because 1. It is a most ordinary thing for one nation to send help relief unto another thus the french the Englishes helped the Hollanders The king of Britaine offered to helpe the Rotchell the Palatinat 2. It was against a common enemy a popish prelaticall malignant faction seeking the ruine of religion lawes liberties in Scotland as well as in Engl. By the light of nature a common fear uniteth even these who are furthest divided so while Scotland fought for England they fought for themselves their own saiftie what ever law will warrand nations now to joyn together against the Turk will
warrand Scotland their joyning with England against the common enemy Yea nature hath taught heathens to prevent their own ruine destruction by joyneing their forces with other nieghbours against one who designed nothing but the promoteing of his Empire Thus the Romans warred against Philip left Greece being subdued he should make warre against them Thus the Lacedamoniam warred against the Olyâ—…hii diverse other instances might be given 3. Scotland England used to joyne together before to enter in a league with other princes for the defence of the protestant religion as Anno 1586. againe 1587. 1588. they draw up a league among themselves But it will be replyed that this was with the consent of the supreme Magistrat Ans. True but the want of this consent will not make such aideing and supplying unlawfull so long as the law of nature is to the fore obligeing every man to defend his neighbour and are not Scotland England near nieghbours being in one Island under one King Neither did they waite for the consent of Scotlands supreme Magistrat when they helped them first against the French next against a faction of papists within their own bosome and therefore Scotland should not now waite for the consent of England's King when they were to help them against a popish and prelaticall faction Nor needed Scotland waite for the consent of their own supreme Magistrat because as the law of nature doth oblige every one to defend himself by force of armes against an army of bloody enemies though the King should not consent as shall be showne hereafter so the law of nature will warrand any to defend their brother though the King should not consent especially seing therby they are but defending themselves against such an enemy as would next fall on them 4. The law of God will warrand this communion of saints Prov. 24 11 12. the commendable practice of those who helped David 1. Chron 12 18. 1. Sam. 22 2. Seventhly nor was there ground for condemning the lands renewing of the nationall Covenant Anno 1638. 1639. Because 1. There is no absolute necessitie for asking obtaineing the Kings consent to the same as if a Kingdom once sworne obliged in covenant with God might not renew the same obligation as oft as they thought fit There is no such necessity of having his Maj. expresse consent approbation either to the first making or to the renewing of the same with God as shall be more fully showne hereafter There is no law of God for this 2. Nor is there any municipall law inhibiteing the renewing of that covenant Yea that warrand by which all the land took it at the first viz the King 's his councell's command to Ministers to put their parishoners to take it severall acts of Generall Assemblies stand still in force accordingly in each universitie the Covenant was renewed yearly 3. Moreover the Generall Assembly Anno 1639. enjoyned by ecclesiastical authority the subscription of the same the Assembly presented a supplication unto the privie Councell desireing their ordinance for the subscription of the same by all the subjects of the Kingdome this was granted Agust 30. Anno 1640. the parliament by their act 5. did ratifie the act of the Generall Assembly their supplication the act of Councill thereupon which act of Parliament was approved by the King in the large treaty thereafter by his personall presence at the next session of Parliament where all was ratified So that this deed of renewing the Nationall Covenant wanted nothing either in poynt of law or conscience to make it lawfull therefore it had been unlawfull to have taken such an oath as would have imported the condemning of that deed Eightly nor was there ground for condemning the Church Assemblies at which the King's commissioner was not present or which wanted his speciall approbation 1. Because there is no warrand in the word of God clearing this necessity but much to the contrary 2 No munipiall law of the land is against such meetings because the act 1584. Was taken away rescinded anno 1592. since that time there is no lawanulling all Assemblies which want his Maj. approbation consent 3. It was never either the profession or the practice of that Church as is clear by what is said Sect. 1. It will be a fitter place to speak to this when the ecclesiasticke part of the oath is spoken to which shall be done Sect. 12. SECTION XI The former purpose further prosecuted the lawfulness of Scotlands defensive warre demonstrated THere are other two Particulars or rather one for they are much to one purpose which virtually would have been condemned by the taking of this oath thus explained as to its civill part viz Scotland their riseing in armes in their owne defence against the King's armies of papists malignants their seizing on the castles which within their owne bosome were threatening their ruine when garisoned with adversaries These must now be spoken to and so Ninthly There is no ground to condemne that defensive warre Though much hath been said by court parasites others who were ambitious of gaine preferment to exaggerat aggraige that supposed crime thereby to make them their cause odious to all the World yet rationall indifferent persones will after serious pondering of a few particulars forbear to passe any rash sentence Much hath been already said in the defence of that bussinesse by the author of Lex Rex more then ever could or will be answered And therefore that book behoved to be answered by a fiery fagot by Mr Prins soveraigne power of Parliaments c. a book published by authority of Parliament never answered to this day And therefore there will not be a necessity of insisting much on it here only a short hint at some particulars will suffice 1. In point of conscience it will be hard to prove that the power of warre resideth only in the King that he only beareth the sword For 1. Rom. 13. The sword is given to all Magistrats for the Apostle there speaketh of heigher powers indefinitely in the plurall number without specifying any kinde it is certaine Rome had not two or moâ—… Kings at once And if the Apostle had intended only Nero he would have designed him in the singular number He speaketh of powers that are of God are ordained of God this agreeth to Inferiour Magistrats who are God's Deputies judge for him as well as others 2 Chron 19 v. 6 7. Deut. 1 v. 16. Numb 11 16 17. He speaketh of Rulers this name agreeth to inferiour Magistrats as may be seen Exod. 18 v. 21 22 25 26. 16 22. 34 31. 2 King 10 1. 1 Chron. 12 v. 14. 26 32. He speaketh of such as must not be resisted but subjected unto Peter sheweth who these are 1 Peter 2 v. 13 14. even
obtained a great victory that same year they renewed their Covenant at Brunna in which Covenant the other Ten Cantons at severall times thereafter being oppressed by their Nobles did joyne at length by warre brought themselves into that state of liberty in which they are at this day See for all this Simlerus de Repub. Helvet 12. And lastly they have the practice of the Bohemians who in the Dayes of Wenceslaus Sigismond waged great warres under the conduct of valiant Zizca See Fox's acts monuments Vol. 1. And thereafter in the dayes of Ferdinand they resolved to fight couragiously against all their enemies how great so ever they were But in case some should be so bold as to condemne all those Acts as treacherous rebellious let it be considered 6. That some of those same practices are allowed and approved even by the Kings of Britaine for King Iames in his answer to cardinall perron justifyeth the protestants of France their taking up armes in their own defence Memorable is that speach which King Iames had in the Parliament house Anno 1609. a King sayeth he governing in a setled Kingdome â—…easeth to be a King degenerateth into a tyrant so soon as he leaveth to rule by his lawes much more when he begineth to invade his subjects persones rights liberties to set up an arbitrary power impose unlawfull taxes raise forces make warre upon his subjects whom he should protect rule in peace to pillage plunder waste spoile his Kingdom Imprison murder destroy his people in a hostile manner to capâ—…vat them to hâ—…e pleasure This is a sentence well worthy to come out of a Kings mouth to beâ—…ingraven upon the thrones of Kings princes and doth more then abundantly justify Scotland in their late defensive warre Moreover Queen Elizabeth King Iames both by the publick advice consent of their realmes did give publick aid assistance unto the protestants of France against their King to the Netherlands against the king of Spaine and to the protestants in Germany Bohemia against the Emperour entered into solemne leagues covenants with them if they had been traitours rebells that action of defence utterly unlawfull would those princes have joyned with them in this manner who can think this So did King Charles the first openly avow to aide the protestants in France at Ree Rotchell against their King who was come in armes against them the Germane Princes against the Emperour the Netherlands against the King of Spaine And entered into a solemne league with them for that end All which do aboundantly justify the Scottish defensive warres free Scotland from the aspersion of disloyalty rebellion But moreover 7. It is to be considered That King Charles I. himself hath fully freed them of all these aspersions in his publick Acts in his Parliaments declareing The Scots late taking up armes against him his Consellours in defence of their religion lawes privileges to be no treason nor rebellion them to be his true loyall subjects notwithstanding of all aspersions cast upon them by the Prelaticall Popish party because they had no evill nor disloyall intentions at all against his Maj. person crown dignity but only a care of their own preservation the redresse of these enoâ—…mities pressures grievances in Church state which threatened desolation to both See the acts of oblivion pacification Here is enough to stope the mouthes of all Calumniators to vindicate them to cleare the innocency of their cause before all the Woâ—…d And furder King Charles who now is did approve of the same in his declaration at Dumfermlâ—… which is cited Sect 2. 8. Some of their chief antagonists are forced through the clearnesse of truth to assert such things grant such particulars as will by clear undenyable consequence justify their taking up of armes resisting the armies of their King when they came against then to destroy Religion Lives Lawes Liberties Beside that all of them are forced to speak most in consequently unto their own principles by their concessions do overthrow their own grounds arguments as might easily be made to appear if to discourse at length of this subject were designed now As 1. Iohn Barclay Lib. 4. Cap. 16. he sayeth expresly That if a King will alionate and subjecte his Kingdom to another without his subjects their consent or be carryed with a hostile minde to the destruction of all his people his Kingdom is actually lost and the people may not only lawfully resist and disobey but also depose him This is more then the Scots could desire for they plead not for deposeing or dethroning of kings but only for resisting withstanding them when they carry a hostile minde against them whereof a strong army of strangers marching with armes to their borders after they were contrary to all law declared rebels is as evident a demonstration as can be are seeking the ruine destruction of their own subjects They plead only That in that case the people may are bound before God to defend themselves when their religion which ought to be dearer to them then any thing else is sought to be taken away or altered service books or masse books the like tyrannically obtruded upon them So Contra Monarch lib. 3. c. 8. He granteth that the people have right to defend themselves against great cruelty what greater cruelty could be expected by a nation from their King then to be blocked up by sea land threatened with utter ruine extiâ—…pation unlesse they would sell soull conscience all doth not this speak abundantly for the justifying of them 2. D. Fern. Part. 3. s. 5. acknowledgeth that personall defence is lawfull against the suddaine illegall assaules of the Kings messingers or of himself in so far as to ward off his blowes to held his hands and when the assault is inovitable Now if resistence be lawfull against suddaine assaults much more against premediated deliberated advised assaults If resistence of illegall assaults be lawfull then they cannot be condemned because the assaults of the King's forces were against all law reason for there is no law warranding the King or any other having a commission from him to force popery upon them by armes If resistence be lawfull against inevitable assaults then they are justified for how could they resist the assault of so many thousand armed men but with armed men Yea when he alloweth in such a case that hands may be laid upon the prince he more then justifieth them who never did intend harme to his Maj. person honour but wished sought the saifty preservation thereof by all meanes And againe when he would answere the argument taken from Elisha's resisting of the King he granteth that itis lawfull to resist the Kings cutthroats and what did Scotland more then resist his
bloody emissaries Moreover he alloweth to privat persones liberty to deny subsidies and tribute to the prince when he imployeth it to the destruction of the common wealth and is not this a clear resistance a taking of the sword out of his hand But what shall a nation do that cannot get pay holden from a plundering army of enemies so cannot get them disbanded but take up armes force then to it This is but resistence the other is resistence Majus minus non variant speciem yea it is a question if it be lawfull to deny to the King any of his tribute though it be clear enough that it is lawfull for a nation to defend themselves against the King's unjust illegall commissions The same Doct. in conscience satified Sect. 5. confesseth that Salus Populâ—… est supremâ—… Lex and if so some meanes must needs be allowed unto the people to preserve their own saiftie when it is in hazard to recover it when almost lost by the invasion tyranny of governours who instead of levelling all to that end which should be before their eyes are taking courses tending to the destruction of the people To come with an army of armed enemies against a common wealth is no sit mean to preserve that common wealth but to common sense speaketh out an intention to destroy the same therefore Scotland can not be condemned for preserving it self in such a case 3. Iohn Bodin de republ lib. 2. c. 5. granteth That if a King turntyrant he may lawfully at his subjects requâ—…est be invaded resisted condemned or slaine by a forraigne prince proveth it at large from severall exemples And if a forraigne prince may do this why may not the subjects themselves do it if they be able if the subjects may petition for this help why may they not forbear to trouble strangers if they be able to do it themselves a forraigne prince hath no more superiority nor right over their prince for that effect then they havethemselves yea not so much And elsewhere in that book viz lib. 1. c. 10 lib. 5. c. 5. he alloweth subjects to resist to depose Kings in some cases which is more then Scotland doth desire 4. Arnisaeus de author prinp c. 2 n 10. granteth that if the prince proceed extrajudicialiter without order of law by violence every private man hath power to resist much more then may the body representative of a land resist when he cometh against them with fire sword which is the most extrajudiciall acting imaginable So c. 16. n. 4. he granteth that limited princes may be resisted such an one is alwayes was the King of Scotland for they never knew an absolute prince as is clear from what hath been already said 5. So Grotius who de Iure belli paâ—…is lib. 1. c. 4. n. 1 2 3 4 5. denyeth that the warr of subjects against superiours is lawfull would prove it by the law of nature the Mosaicall law the Gospell by the practice of the primitive christians and n. 〈◊〉 denyeth this not only to private subjects but also to inferiour Magistrats all which to examine is not the work presently intended only it is worth the noticeing that even he is forced to grant many things which serve abundantly to justify the practice of Scotland for ibid. n. 7. He granteth the law of not resisting doth not binde when the danger is most weighty certaine doth prove it thus because the lawes of God in some cases admit the exception of extreme necessity as the law of the sabbath further addeth that this law about resistence hath its â—…ise from their will who did first associat themselves in a society created governours over themselves for if they were asked whether they would acknowledg these conditions that they should die rather then resist in any case they would not grant it unlesse in this case when resistence would wrong the common wealth occasion the killing of many innocents He furder proveth it from that passage which was cited out of Barclaius yea he dar not condemne any no not the lesser part of the people who rise in armes in extreme necessity far lesse would he condemne the body of a land useing this last remedie in the extremity of hazard danger furder he proveth this from David who took armed men 1. Sam. 22 2. 23 13. to resist the violence of Saul after he had learned for certanety that he was seeking his life and from the Maccabces whom as he thinketh nothing else can defend but the great imminent danger in which they were And furder n. 8. he granteth that such princes may not only be resisted but also punished by death who are not absolute And it hath been showne that the Kings of Scotland have been obnoxious unto their Parliaments yet they desire not so much as is here granted Moreover n. 10. he assenteth to Barclaius saying as hath been cited that if a King alienate his Kingdome he loseth it but furder he addeth if â—…e prince but attempt to do so and to subject it to another he may be resisted and also n. 11. he assenteth to Barclaius saying as hath been cited that the King doth lose his power when he seeketh the destruction of his subjects And againe he sayeth N. 13. If the king hath one part of the supremacy the senat another then the king may be resisted when he incroacheth upon the senat that notwithstanding that it were granted the King onely had power of war for that is to be understood onely of warre with forraigners Thus he doth abundantly justify the late defensive warre of Scotland against their prince who was incroaching upon the liberties of Parliament people These particulars seriously pondered will do much to cleare their innocency unto the world to vindicat their cause and practice from the many foule calumnies aspersions which the Dâ—…gs of the generation did cast upon them of purpose to foment the discord betwixt the king his faithfull loyall subjects And though by what is said conceded by their adversaries the clearnesse equity of their cause appeareth both in poynt of law conscience yet for furder clearing of the same these few following particulars may have some weight 1. There is great difference to be put betwixt actuall disobeying of rebelling against violently with force of armes resisting the lawfull Magistrat doing his duty commanding just things warranded by the lawes of God the land And disobeying his unjust Acts resisting his violent tyrannicall oppressing plundering spoiling killing armies The former is a resisting of the very ordinance of God forbidden Rom. 13. where the Apostle is speaking of the civill Magistrat doing his duty in his place as God's deputy exerceing the duties of his calling executing his office But in the other case the Magistrat is out of his function
Prins Soveraigne power of Parliaments c. Where the matter is fully cleared both in poynt of law conscience which was published by order of Parliament and a book intituled de jure Magistratus insubditos Trochreg's commentary on the Ephesians where he will finde this question prudently judiciously and satisfactorily handled from pag. 911. to 925. Thus in some measure is this Ninth particular cleared the Iawfulnesse of Scotland's defensive warre clearly showne hereby the unlawfulnesse of swearing any oath which might have imported a condemning of that warre is also demonstrated By what hath been said to this Ninth particular the Tenth last is likewise cleared viz. The lawfulnesse of Scotland their seizing upon the Castles within themselves For if it be lawfull for a land to defend themselves to use resistence by armes in their own necessary defence It is also lawfull for them to seize upon such castles strengths as may prove a fit necessary meane of defence It is lawfull to possesse these keep them out against the enemies of the countrey who if they had them would make use of them for the destruction of the land for the subversion of Religion Lives liberties What ever law will allow of self defence will also allow the use of all fit meanes for that end For the end includeth the meanes leading to the end Moreover these Castles Fortifications were originally appointed for the saifty security of the Kingdome of none else therefore at the learge treaty it is concluded in answer to the second demand That the Castle of Edinburgh and other strengths of the Kingdome should with the advice of the Estates of the Parliament according to their first fundation be fournished and used for defence and security of the Kingdom So that hereby the King approved of all which was done in this businesse before acknowledged that according to their first fundation they were for the Kingdom 's advantage It is true these Castles were annexed to the Crown Parl. 11. Act 41. King Iames 11. but that was done to guaird against the poverty of the real me for all that the King might not give them away in fee or heritage nor in franck tenement without the advice deliverance decreet of the whole Parliament And for great soon reasonable causes of the realme otherwise any alienation or disposition was to be of no avail And it was enacted that the Kings of Scotland should be sworne at their coronation to keep his statute in all points Act 9. Parl. 9. king Iam. 6. sayeth that These Castles are for the welfare of the realme as well as for his Maj. behoofe so Act. 125. Parl. 7. K. Iam. 6. The Castles are called the keyes of the realme So though the King hath the custody command of them yet it is alwayes in order to the right end that is for the saifty good of the countrey if he should make use of them for the ruine destruction of the countrey they should be abused might lawfully be taken out of his hand converted to the right use as when a father turning mad will kill his children with a sword the children may lawfully take the sword from him with which he was bound to defend them against the common enemy make use of it in their own defence Castles fortifications are not the King's patrimony but belong to him as King Governour of the land so that he is to make no use of them but for the countreyes good he cannot dispone sell them as he may do other things that belong to his patrimony Therefore Scotl. cannot be blamed for seizing on these for their own saifty seing this is their native end the only thing they were ordained for Nor can any be blamed for refuseing that oath which would have imported a condemning of this lawfull necessary deed Thus reader thou hast shortly laid before thee a hint of what clear grounds there were of stumbling at the taking of this oath as to the very civil part thereof seing this civil supremacy is must be the same with his perogative his prerogative is such as hath been showne A difference betuixt the supremacy the prerogative is not imaginable unlesse it be this that the supremacy is more comprehensive taketh in all the prerogative something more yea by some posteriour acts they are made of one the same latitude as in the act for the national Synod the setling of the external government of the church is said to belong to his Maj. as an inherent right of the crown how by vertue of his prerogative royall and supreme authority so that his prerogative royall supreme authority are made one if they be one as to ecclesiastical matters much more must they be one the same as to civill matters more clearly in the King's commission for the heigh commission where it is said His Maj. by vertue of his royall prerogative in all causes and over all persons etc so that any may see that his supremacy over all causes is one the same thing with his prerogative Moreover this is certane that who soever do acknowledge recognosce the King 's power supremacy in all causes and over all persons do acknowledge recognosce all that which they say agreeth to him as King and who soever do acknowledge recognosce this do acknowledge recognosce his royall prerogatives for his royall prerogatives are such things as agree to him as King because they are annexed to the crown as they say It is true in their 11 act of parl the acknowledgment of his Maj. prerogative is mentioned beside the oath of alleagiance But that will nor make them to differ so far yea the acknowledgment of his Maj. prerogative is but explicatory of a part of that supremacy mentioned in the oath of alleagiance So that his prerogative over parliaments over their actions over all other subjects is but a part of that supremacy which they say he hath over all persons in all causes So in the oath for asserting his majesties prerogative defensive armes the Kingdomes entering in a league with England all their proceedings in the work of reformation are condemned this cannot be denyed though there be an expresse oath afterward conceived of purpose for that end viz the declaration set forth â—…ept 2. 1662. SECTION XII The meaning of the oath of Alleagiance as to its ecclesiastick part opened some reasons why upon that account it could not be taken THe civil part of this oath of alleagiance being thus spoken to in the next place the ecclesiastick part must be handled when this is but explained reasons without much difficulty will appear why as to that part of it it could not then nor as yet can in conscience be subscribed unto In this part as in the other the sense
which the tenderers thereof do put upon it must be searched sought for out of their acts for though it could have been wished both reason religion would have required it that after the example of Abraham they had made the oath as plaine easie as might be so that the sense meaning of it had been obvious to all or had annexed such a glosse meaneing as the words in ordinary construction would bear tender Christians might saifly assent unto yet there was no such thing done yea not being desired to do it would they do it yea nor would they suffer any to enquire at them in what sense they would have the oath taken yea which is more they made an act dischargeing all to offer any sense of the oath under the paine of treason So that there is no way now left to finde out the meaning of the oath as to this part but by their acts actings which when considered together with some other things usefull in this bussinesse will help to cleare the true sense thereof Three things then must be spoken to 1. The rise progresse of this bussinesse which is imported by this part of the oath viz the Kings supremacy over persons ecclesiastick in ecclesiastick causes in England 2. The rise progresse of it in Scotland 3. Some acts deeds of the King Parliament who now tender it As to the first of these It is notour enough what King Henry the Eight did when upon some privat discontents he shook off the Pop's supremacy Anno 1530. for having caught the Clergy in a Premunire for countenanceing some way or other the Pop's legat he would not be satisfied with their payment of 100000. lib unlesse also they would acknowledge him for the supreme head of the Church on earth which after some debate in their Synod both in the upper lower house of convocation was condescended to in forme as followeth cujus c. of which Church viz the Church of England we recognosce his Maj. to be the singular protectour the only supreme Lord so far as Christ's lawes will permitt the supreme head This was subscribed unto by all put into their publicke acts or instruments presented to the King afterward Parl. 24. c. 12. upon this ground it was statuted ordained that all ecclesiasticall suites controversies should be determined within the Kingdom all appeals to Rome were prohibited and Parl. 25. c. 20. The manner of electing of Archbishops Bishops was altered that power given granted to the King and upon this same foundation Parl. 26. c. 1. it was declared that the King is supreme head of the Church of England that he should have all honours preheminences which were annexed unto that title after this there followed another act c. 3. for Tenths first fruits as appertaineing to that head-shipe supreme authority Hence also Anno 1532. The convocation submitting unto the King's Maj. promiseth in verbo sacerdotis That they would never from thence forth presume to attempt allaidge clame or put in ure enact promulge or execute any new canons constitutions ordinances provinciall or others or by whatsoever name they shall be called in the convocation unlesse the Kings most royall assent may to them be had to make promulge execute the same that his Maj. do give his most royall assent authority in that behalfe Which deed of theirs the Parliament did shortly thereafter ratifie in these termes That none of the said clergy from thence forth should presume to allaidge clame or put in ure any constitutions or ordinances provinciall or synodall or any other canons nor should enact promulge or execute any such canons constitutions or ordinances by whatsoever name or names they may be called in their convocations in time coming which alwayes shall be assembled by the Kings write unlesse the same clergy may have the kings most royall assent license to make promulge execute such canons constitutions ordinances provinicall synodall upon paine of evry one of the said clergy doing the contrary to this act thereof convicted to suffer imprisonment and make fine at the king's will 25. Parl. c. 19. So Parl. 35. c. 1. There was another oath devised ratified which was to be imposed upon the subject for the more clear asserting of the King's supremacy By these Particulars any may see that Peter Martyr had good ground to say as he doth on 1. Sam. 8. That King Henry took all that power to himself which the Pope challenged atque hoâ—… fortasse est quod Rex Angliae voluit se secundum Christum appellari caput ecclesiae putavit enim campâ—…testatem quam sibi Papa usur paverat suamesse in reguo suo ad se pertinere i. e he would there fore be called head of the Church next under Christ because he thought that all that power which the Pope did usurpe did belong to him within his own dominions and he had good ground to say that it was a proud title which gave much offence unto the godly Nor was it without reason that judicious Calvin did inveigh so much against that title in his commentary on Amos 7. saying qui juitio tantopere etc. i e. They who at the first did so much extoll Henry king of England were no doubt inconsider as men they gave unto him the supreme power over all and this did alwayes wound me They were blasphemous when they called him supreme head of the Church under Christ. So that Peter Heylyn must not be beleeved when he telleth the world in his discourse of the reformation of the Church of England pag. 13. That thâ—…se statuts which concerne the kings supremacy are not introductory of any new right that was not in the crown before but only declaratory of an old againe pag. 48. 49. That when the supremacy was recognized by the Clergy in their convocation to king Henry 8. It was only the restoreing of him to his propper and originall power invaded by the popes of these later ages for that title of supreme head not only seemed to have some what in it of an innovation as himself is forced to acknowledge in the following words but really had an innovation in it of no small consequence as shall appeare But this title of supreme head gave offence both at home abroad therefore Queen Elizabeth did change it into this of supreme governour over all persons as well in all causes ecclesiastick as civill in these tearms it was keeped is to this day But all this change did not much help the matter for many were offended even there at and what wonder seing it seemed to attribute to her Maj. no lesse spirituall jurisdiction power then what the former oath did importe Whereupon the Queen in the first year of her reigne after the Parliament had condescended on the forementioned oath published an
admonition in her injunctions of purpose to explaine interpret the sense meaning thereof gave it this sense That nothing was is or shall be meant or intended by the same oath to have any other duty alleagiance or bond required by the same then was acknowledged to be due to the most noble kings of famous memory King Henry 8. her Maj. father King Edward 6. her Maj. brother That her Maj. neither doth nor ever will challenge any other authority then that which was challenged lately used by the saids noble kings which is and was of ancient time due to the imperiall crowne of this realme That is under God to have the soveraignity rule over all manner of persones borne within these realmes dominions countreyes of what estate either ecclesiasticall or temporall soever they be so as no other forraigne power shall or ought to have any superiority over them And this was confirmed by Parliament 5. Eliz. cap. 1. But neither did this remove the offence for still the oath did import more then soveraignity over all persones even over all causes also and it was certaine that King Henry 8. did both challenge use more power then that therefore the convocation of the clergy meeting Anno 1562. took notice of the offence saw a necessity of declareing another sense for the satisfaction of all this they did Artic. 37. declaring signifying That there was no authority in sacred matters contained under that title but that only prerogative which had been given alwayes to all Godly princes in holy scriptures by God himself viz That they should rule all Estates and degrees committed to their charge by God whether they be Ecclesiasticall or temporall and to resâ—…raine with the civil sword the stbbâ—…rn and evildoâ—…rs as also to exclude thereby the Bishop of Rome from having any jurisdiction in the realme of England this Article was assented unto by the Parliament 13. of Eliz. c. 12. is insert in the statute book But under favour any may see that this covering was not sufficient to hide the deformites of that oath as worded for all the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome was hereby excluded now the Bish. of Rome's power was more then civil for it was ecclesiastick also the oath gave unto the Queen that which was taken away from the Pope more over supreme governour in causes ecclesiastick importeth more then this explication doth And therefore it had been much better if no more had been intended then this explication saifly taken doth hold forth to have changed the words of the oath made them more conformable to the glosse for every one who readeth seeth this sense will not be able to discerne an harmony betwixt them the oath as worded holding forth more then the glosse hence it was that for all this glosse the English divines were put to much trouble to defend themselves when sorely pressed with the words of the oath they seemed to be at some losse disadvantage were constrained to run from the words of the oath unto the glosse which is a sufficient proof that if no more be intended by the oath then what is held forth in the glosse giveÌ„ the oath ought to be otherwayes worded hence also it is that all the followers of Erastus to this day do look upon the Church of Engl. as wholly of their judgment this puteth such divines as write against Erastianisme to great paines to search out the meaning of the English divines to answere that objection certanely these divines would have wished that the oath had been otherwise worded So that adversaries might have had lesse ground to boast of the Church of Englands being of their judgment Yea Triglandius in dissâ—…rt de Civil Eccles. pot Waveth the English divines in this poynt fearing possibly that he should not be able to extricate himself out of the thicket of difficulties which he might see before him therefore sayeth Cap. 8. Pag. 154 155. Controversiam Anglorum i. 〈◊〉 We owne not the controversie of the Englishes with Papists upon this subject aâ—… owrs for we are not of the judgment of Papists nor are we necessitated to defend our judgment by the judgment of the English divines And again in his Amapologia Pag. 726. Col. 2. Quamvis non diâ—…eamur c. Though we cannot deny but they i. e. the Englishes in respect of the usurped hierarchie there and the King's power over it have extended the King's supremacy furder then it ought to have been And Apollonius in his Ius Majestatis Part. 1. Pag. 11. telleth us that Some reformed divines in the heat of disput against the Papists out of hatred to the Roman hierarchy did turne a little out of the right way that they spoke according to the lawes of that Kingdome common-wealth in which they lived This especially is to be noted in those divines who wrote of the King's supremacy in the Kingdome of England The learned have seen the writtings of Lancelot Tooker Burchill Thomson and Salcobrig c. And the writtings of their adversaries who debated with them concerning the King's supremacy all who are not slaves in their judgments unto the great ones of the World may see clearly that there are failings on both hands And againe out of Didoclave Pag. 43. he telleth us That albeit they did blote out the metaphoricall title of the head of the Church lest it should give offence put in its place the Supreme Governour Yet the sense was the same for Henry of Salisburry sayeth That the King of England is the primat of the Church of England that he is a mixed person having both Ecclesiastick temporal Jurisdiction that in a supreme way proveth from the statute I. Eliz that the jurisdict Eccl. which was or might have been exercised by any spirituall or Church power for visiting the Ecclesiastick state order for reforming bringing into order punishing Churchmen all sort of errors schismes abuses offences enormities within the Kingdome is for ever annexed unto the Crown So that it is too too apparent that severall of the English divines run a furder length give a larger exposition of the supremacy So dangerous a thing is it to admit of oaths which must have strained glosses commentaries for clearing of them which the words will not in a faire construction bear moreover if any consult the later actings of King Parliament there in England they shall see a far other sense put upon it such as plead for the present change of Church government there walk much upon this supremacy particularly the author of the grand case asketh how any man who hath taken or is willing to take that oath can speak against the King's power of setting up what forme of Church government he pleaseth in the Church which whether it may not make Englishmen of a truely tender conscience
scruple now at the taking of that oath let wise men judge Next as to the rise of this power over the Church the occasion of this oath in Scotland seing it may sufficiently be gathered from the short historical narration of the government of the Church set down Sect. 1. a short recapitulation will be sufficient here In the confession of faith which was ratified approved by the Parliament Anno 1560. againe ratified insert in the records Anno 1567 cap. 25. the power in Church matters which is there given unto the civil Magistrat is in these words That to them chiefly and most principally appertaineth the conservation purgation of religion and they are appoynted for the maintenance of the true religion and for suppressing of idolaâ—…ry and superstition in that same Parl. An. 1567 Act 2. there is an act which was made Anno 1560. ratified ordaineing that the â—…ishop of Rome called the Pope have no jurisdiction or authority within this realme and that none of his Maj. subjects suite or desire title or right of the said Bishop of Rome or his sect to any thing within his realme under the paine of banishment c. and that no Bishop use any jurisdiction in time coming by the said Bishop of Romes authority under the paine forsaid whereby the Popes authority was quite rejected not only in civil matters but in Church matters yet there is no expresse word of the Kings being invested with any such power Anno 1568. There was one Thomas Bassenden Printer in Edinburgh who did printe a book intituled the fall of the Roman Church and in that book the King was called the supreme head of the Church This gave great offence moved the generall assembly to cause call in these books to delete that title of the Kings But all this did not preserve the Church from incroachments for when Montgom pretended Archb. of Glasgow was proceeded against the king summoned the whole synod of Lothian before him afterward when this same Mr Montgomery was summoned before the Nationall Assembly there came a Messinger of armes from his Maj. to discharge the Assembly under the paine of rebellion of puting of them to the horne to proceed any furder whereupon the assembly did complaine of this incroachment April 27 Anno 1580. as such the like whereof had never been made before But this availed not for Mr Balcanquell Mr Dury were summoned before the Councell for some freedome which they had used in preaching Of this the Assembly did complaine againe which occasioned a conference betwixt the King some Ministers the result whereof was That in all time coming the tryal of Ministers doctrine should be referred to Church Iudicatories as the only competent Iudge But this was soon forgotten for Anno 1581. Mr Balcanquell was againe accused the privileges of the Church were incroached upon which did put the Church to supplicat Anno 1582. complaine that His Maj. by advice of some consellours was about to take the spirituall Power authority upon himself propperly belonging unto Christ as the King head of his church of the ministery the execution thereof unto such as bear office in ecclesiasticall government so that in his person some men presse to erect a new Popedome as if his Maj. could not be full King head of the commonwealth unlesse the spirituall as well as the temporall power should be put into his hand unlesse Christ be bereft of his authority the two jurisdictions confounded which God hath divided which tendeth directly to the wrecke of all true relig it their next assembly there was an article drawn up to be presented unto his Maj. to this affect That seing the jurisdiction of the Church was granted by God the Father through our Mediator JESUS CHRIST given to those only who by preaching overseeing bear office within the same to be exercised not by the injunctions of men but by the only rule of God's Word That an Act of Parliament concerning the liberty jurisdiction of the Church be so plainely declared that hereafter none other under whatsoever pretence have any colour to ascribe or take upon them any part thereof in placeing or displaceing of Ministers of God's Word in spirituall livings or offices without the Churches admission or in stopping the mouthes of preachers or taking upon them the judgment or tryall of doctrine or of hindering or disannulling the censures of the Church or exeeming any offendour there from By the endeavours of these faithfull worthies any may see what a Spirit was stirring then when the King would assume to himself spirituall power authority so rob Christ of that which belongeth to him as King head of the Church make himself a Pope the fountaine of all power jurisdiction both civill ecclesiastick challenge power to give commission for deposeing ordaineing of Ministers hinder free preaching to try censure doctrine to anull all Church censures as he pleased This was the Spirit that was then stirring at court this is the supremacy to the life this was it which court parasites said did belong unto the crown let the Church say do to the contrary what she could Hence a little after this Mr Melvin was accused for his sermon after he had declined the King his Councell as incompetent judges in that cause was forced to withdraw to Berwick for fear of his life Anno 1584. The Parliament which was suddainely convocated did put the copestone upon this bussinesse gave the King in forme what he had assumed to himself formerly upon the matter in their very first Act give him Royal power and authority over all Estates as well spiritual as temporal within the realme And Statute and ordaine that he and his heires or successours be themselves and their Councels in all time coming judges competent to all persones of whatsoever Estate degree function 〈◊〉 condition they be of spiritual or temporal in all matters that none decline their judgement in the premisses under the paine of treason From this supremacy flowed the impowering of Bishops with Church jurisdiction as commissioners from the King so that when the King wrote unto a Prelat he stilled him Our beloved Clerck Commissioner in Ecclesiastical causes So that by this supremacy the power of Church jurisdiction was made propper to the King the exercise thereof was committed by him to whom he would After this blast was something blown over Anno 1592. Papists others at court stirr up his Maj. against the government of the Church so that when the commissioners of the Generall Assembly had met had sent some of their number to shew the King what offence was taken at his calling home the Popish Lords he was offended asked how they durst meet without his warrâ—…nd But Mr Andrew Melvin answered That there were two Kings two
Kingdomes in Scotland that Christ was a King the Church his Kingdome that he himself was a subject unto Christ a member of his Church neither head nor King thereof that the spirituall office bearers to whom he had committed the government of his Church had power warrant to conveen But the King went on told the Ministers thereafter That there should be no agreement betwixt him them untill the marches of their jurisdiction were rid that they might not speak in pulpit of the affaires of the Estate or Councell that no Generall Assembly should meet without his special command that Church judicatures should meddle with fornication luch like scandalls but not with causes whereupon his lawes do strick shortly thereafter Mr Blake was summoned did decline his declinature was owned by severall hundereds of Ministers when King Iames saw this he laboured to ensnare the Ministery therefore invented the bond which was mentioned Sect. 1. Pag. 27. whereby any may see what was intended designed But when he is in possession of the crown of England then the poor Church findeth his hand heavier then formerly for Anno 1606. Six Ministers were convicted of treason condemned for declineing the councell as an incompetent judge in matters ecclesiastick all by vertue of the Act of Parl. 1584. And the Parliament which did meet that yeer 1606. to make all sure did acknowledge his Maj. soveraigne authority princely power royall perogative privilege of his crown over all Estates persons and causes whatsoever and ratifieth approveth and perpetually confirmeth the same at absolutely amply and freely in all respects and considerations as ever his 〈◊〉 or any of his royall progenitoure Kings of Scotland in any time by gone possessed used and exercised Thus was the copestone of this supremacy put on againe And at that pretended assembly at Glasgow Aâ—…no 1610. it was acknowledged that The indiction of the Generall Assembly did appertaine unto his Maj. by the prerogative of his royall crown And it was ordained that the oath which is set down before pag. 37. be sworne by all ministers at their ordination the Parliament which conveened Anno 1612. ratified all this And finally Anno 1633. in the 1 Parl. of King Charles Act 3. that Act which was made Anno 1606. was againe ratified this conclusion was drawne from it that he hath power to prescribe what apparell he thinketh fit for Kirk men which was done of purpose for this end that his Maj. might with greater facility get the use of the surplice by Ministers established by law and practised And now by all this any may see what is the nature of that supremacy which the higher powers have been all alongs grasping after which the faithfull servants of Christ have been withstanding according to their power But in the last place the sense meaning of this late Parliament which did tender the oath must be sought out of their acts actings out of some commissions granted by his Maj. thereby it shall be seen what ground there was of scrupling at the oath how the feares of such as did then scruple at the oath were not groundlesse seing the after actings of king Parliaâ—… have abundantly confirmed the apprehentions which such had of their giving to the King of his taking more power in Church matters then themselves would then acknowledge or confesse did belong to him Now for clearing what power was then is now assumed by given to the King in Church matters these particulars may be noticed 1. When these Six or Seven Ministers who were cited before the Parliament had offored a sense in which they would willingly have taken the oath they could not be heard though they granted unto him in their sâ—…nse offered as much power in Church matters as the word of God the confessions of faith both of the Church of Scotland of other reformed Churches did allow for they did grant that his soveraignity did retch ecclesiastik causes objectively though in its own nature it was alwayes civill extrinsick But this did not satisfie therefore it was evident enough that they did intend some other thing by that oath then every one could well see 2. In the 4. Act of their first session it is made a part of the Kings prerogative That none of his heighnesse subjects of whatsoever quality state or function presume to convocat conveen or assemble themselves for holding of councells to treat consult determine in any matter of state civil or ecclesiastick except in ordinary judgments without his Maj. speciall command of expresse license had obtained thereto under the paines c. By which it is apparent that they will have no Church judicatories without his command or license otherwise his prerogative is violated so it is a piece of his perogative supremacy to have all these assemblies depending â—…o upon him as civill meetings do that is that they shall be null without his expresse consent and command for this part of the act is in every word conforme relative to that black act Anno 1584. viz act 3. parl 8. King Iam. 6 by which all Church judicatories which had been set up conforme to the second book of discipline viz sessions presbyteries synods were discharged 3. In the 16 Act of the first session concerning religion and Church government they say That as to the government of the Church his Maj. will make it his care to setle secure the same in such a frame as shall be most agreeable to the word of God most suiteable to monarchicall governement most complying with the publicke peace quyet of the Kingdome in the meane time his Maj. with advice consent foresaid doth allow the present administration by sessions presbyteries Synods So that by this act it is clear that they think that there is no particular forme of Church government sâ—…t down in the word 2. That every nation is left at liberty in this to choose what forme they will as most suitâ—…ing to civil government complying with the people temper 3. That he is judge of what forme of government is most agreeable to the word of God 4. That this governement must be some other government then that which is by Sessions Presbyteries and Synods which is but allowed in the interim 4. There is a commission or act from his Maj. for a Nationall Synod ratified by Parliament in their second Session which is worth the noticeing the Act is thus worded For as much as the ordering disposall of the externall government of the Churh the nomination of the persones by whose advice matters relating to the famine are to be setled doth belong to his Maj. as an inherent right of the Crown by vertue of his prerogative Royall supreme authority in causes Ecclesiastick And in prosecution of this trust his Maj. considering how
zealous Christian of servant of Christ consent unto this dreadfull incrouchment usurpation by subscribeing any oath which might import the same Who can but hear of it his heart not tremble Let all the arguments which the reformed divines make use of against the usurped headshipe of the Pope be considered they will with equall strength militat against this usurpation justifie the refuseing of this oath upon that account yea Arminius himself disp de pontif Rom. Thes 3. sayeth that the Church hath but one head otherwise she should be a monster 2. By this meanes they should upon the matter licke up popery which they have abjured againe againe for none will say that they have abjured such a piece of popery only as it was seated in the head of the man with the treeple crown that sitteth at Rome not simply in it self as a blasphemous tenent No reformed divine writeth against the Popes supremacy headshipe as a power usurped by him to the prejudice of some one prince or other but as a heigh insolent usurpation of that which belongeth unto him who is King of Kings Lord of Lords for this were not to speak against an incroachment made upon the privileges prerogatives of the King of his Church but against some civil wrongs done to a neighbour prince or state indeed the adversaries are not ashamed to say that the Pope in his usurpation of this Church jurisdiction wronged not Christ but more immediatly the King Princes unto whom that power did belong of right before therefore they say that King Henry 8. assumed but his own back againe that he neither took nor did the Parliament give him any new power which did not belong to him before So said Heylyn as was showne But if any should assent unto this they should consent only unto the change of the pope but not unto the change of the Popedome should shake off an ecclesiasticall Pope submit unto a civil Pope For Zepp◅rus speaketh with reason when he sayeth P◅lit Eccles. Lib. 3 c. 13. Quando tota Doctrinae cultus c i. e. When all the matter of Doctrine worship as also of the constitution of the Church is ordered according to the pleasure of the Prince alone the counsell advice of the ministers of the word of their synods being despised when such are declared rebels who will not assent unto all that which these polititians do when the whole Government of the Church is made over to them almost by an apostolick authority who only exerce an externall politicall power on the outward main Then doth themagistrat goe beyond his bounds the Popedomeis not taken away but changed yea made twofold worse yea the Arminians in their apologie do call this the very heart marrow of Popery which being granted all his other usurpations do necessarily follow 3 By this means they should grant that ministers is the very discharge of their ministeriall function are subordin◅ unto the supreme Magistat his power acting under him as his servants commissioners This is clear in the exercise of jurisdiction discipline The prelats are his Maj. Commissioners in matters of discipline they receive their commission from him to depose to silence to excommunicate so also they must Acte as his commissioners in lesser censures as in publick rebuking for sin the like seing both the keyes of doctrine discipline were given at once if the key of jurisdiction or discipline come from Christ mediatly from the King immediatly so must the key of doctrine for the scripture sheweth no distinction none may separat the keyes which Christ hath tyed together thus every minister must come forth preach exhort rebuke censure ex communicate not in the name of Christ immediatly but in the name of the King But to this they could not assent therefore they could not take the oath 4. By this meanes they should grant that the supreme Magistrat himself might immediatly in his own person rebuke publickly the scandalous debarr from the sacraments depose suspend excommunicate for what his commissioners do by vertue of a commission from him that he may do himself immediatly But this could no be yeelded to there being not the least warrand for it imaginable out of the word but much against it therefore none except an Erastian or Arminian will condemne such as refuse an oath which would import this see Voetius de politia ecclesi pag. 146. arg 12. 5. By this meanes they should have upon the matter opened a door unto the King 's bringing into the Church what popish rites externall superstitious ceremonies he pleaseth◅ By the act for the nationall Synod he hath as an inherent in the crown the ordering disposall of the externall government of the Church power to settle all things concerning doctrine worship discipline government by the advice of the nationall Synod which is but as his Councell so that the whole power of ordering setling the matter of the worship is in his own hand it was upon this ground that the former prelats did warrand their use of the ceremonies his supremacy was a basis unto this So said Camero in his prael Tom. 1. pag. 370. 371. Tom. 2. pag. 41. That in all things perteineing to externall order in religion Kings may command what they will pro authoritate And thus they should consent unto opening of a door unto all the trash of Rome the significāt ceremonies that are there for if the King have such power what ceremony may he not bring in who is there to controle him in any thing of that kinde who may ask whether lawfull or unlawfull seing no question he himself will call all that which he doth most lawfull he is not without the compasse of his power or authority or calling when he appoynteth the use of those ceremonies if he be thus rector Ecclesiae Now who can acknowledge that any such power doth belong unto the supreme Magistrat to institute any significant ceremony or part of God's worship this being the very sin of Ier◅oam 1. King 12 28 33. It was his fault to devise of his own heart those ceremonies of sacred signes places or persons times And therefore they could not take such an oath be guilt◅sse 6. By this meanes they should have granted that he had power to change the whole frame of religion so give way unto his bringing in the whole body of popery or what he would for by this oath he should have granted unto him the supreme power in matters concerning doctrine worshipe discipline government It was charged upon the Church of England by some adversaries that the great alteration of their religion that was made from popery to the truth back againe to popery so forth in the dayes of Henry 8. Edward
confusion yeeld that a Church as a Church should be 〈◊〉 commonwealth a commonwâ—… 〈◊〉 ipso that it is a commonw shoud be a Church because a supreme governour in Church matters hath reference unto a Church a supreme governour in civil matters hath reference unto a commonwealth so make the supreme governour of the commonwealth upon that account that he is such a supreme governour the supr gov of the Church then â—…o ipso that he is the supreme governour of the commonwealth he should have reference unto the Church so a Church should be a commonwealth a commonwealth a Church which is most false Moreover this new commission court is another speaking evidence of this mixture flowing from this supremacy for in that court Church officers meddle with civil matters state officers meddle with Church matters both do so as they are such such officers as his Maâ—… commissioners and therefore they could not assent unto this That which Luther sayeth in responso ad Melanth de ceremonijs cited by Voetius ubi supra pag. 174. Is worth the marking Seing it is certane that these administrations are distinct viz. the ecclesiastick and politick which Satan did confound by Popery we must watch and see that they be not againe confounded and if we suffer this we should be guilty of sacrilege and we must rather choise to die then sinso see further what he citeth out of Olevianus pag. 179. and 180. 11. By taking of this oath they should grant that the magistrat as such is a propper competent judge in Church matters a propper competent judge of ministers of their doctrine of other Church matters because it was upon this ground of faithfull ministers their declineing of the King 's his councell their judgement in Church matters that the Parliament 1584. Did grant unto the King this supremacy It was intended for this end that he might have power to call convent judge sentence Ministers for the faithfull discharge of their duty exoneration of their consciences as their lawfull formall competent judge in Church matters though under the notion of treason sedition Moreover he is made propper judge of what is the best forme of Church Government of what is the best constitution of a Church judicature what are the most sit lawfull acts conclusions or canons of Synods he is made propper judge in matters deserving excommunication suspension deposition all these are Church matters Now the falshood of this is so satisfactorily discovered by divines that none can be blamed for refuseing an oath which would import an assenting unto these things as truths Sure every Magistrat is not fit for such matters should no other be a Magistrat but he who is fit for such questions Where is there any precept or precedent for thiâ—… What need is there then for Church Officers for Church matters if the civil Magistrat may do all see learned Voet polit Eccles pag. 146. Arg. 12. yea if they had taken this oath they had condemned their worthy predecessours who took their hazard declined the judgment of the civil Magistrat in Church matters should justifie the severe sentences of imprisonment consinement banishment which passed against them should assent unto the lawfulnesse of all these acts which established iniquitie tyranny by law And how could they have done this with a good conscience 12. By taking of his oath they should grant that Ministers in the discharge of their Ministeriall function were not under Christ immediatly but under the Magistrat for as his commissioners they sit in the high Commission court are accountable to him for their mal administration so are immediatly under him as their immediat superiour Master But this they could not grant Seing 1. As was said these two powers are toto genere distinct so there cannot be a subordination amongst them 2. There is no warrand for Ministers receiving of instructions from the Magistrat 3. Nor for any civil Pope more then for a Church Pope 4. Ministers in scripture are said to have immediat relation unto commission from God not from the Magistrat therefore they are called priests of God 2. Chron. 13 9 12. Men of God 2. Pet. 11 2. Tim. 3 17. And are commissionated from Christ Luk. 10 2. Mat. 20 2. 21 34 25. 22 2 3 10. 24 45. Isa. 6. v. 8 Ioh. 20 21. Gal. 1 1. not from the Magistrat They acte in the name of Christ by power from him 1. Cor. 5. But there is enough spoken to this by judicious Wallaus others writting against Vtenbâ—…gard other Erastians which will abundantly justifie the refuseing of this oath see further learned doct Voetius de polit Eccles. pag. 145. Arg. 10. 13. By the taking of this oath thus tendered they should grant that the supreme Magistrat is exempted from subjection unto the Ministery of the messingers of the Lord for if Ministers in their Ministeriall function acte as commissioners from him as accountable to him then in the same administration they cannot be above him a commissioner in the particular wherein he is a commissioner cannot be over him whose commissioner he is But this they could not grant because there is no warrand for this exemption Kings of old were not exempted from rebukes all are commanded to obey such as are set over them Heb. 13 17. no King is excepted Emperours have submited unto discipline Therefore they could not take this oath 14. By taking of this oath they should yeeld unto many palpable into lerable incroachment made upon the liberties privileges of the Church of Christ Which could not be done without great sin iniquity As 1. That there could be no Church judicatories or assemblies without his warrand or expresse consent for in the act concerning the acknowledging of the royall prerogative among other things annexed to the crown this is one the conveening of his subjects this is explaned Act 4. Where it is ordained that none of his subjects conveen for holding of Assemblies to treat Consult determine in any matter ecclesiasticke And upon this ground doth the act concerning the nationall Synod goe And upon this ground did King Iames take upon him to prorogate assemblies either to definite or indefinite times as he thought good Now no faithfull Minister or Christian could assent to this Because 1. Whatever may be said upon the grounds of prudence at some times yet when the bussinesse is spoken to as a case of conscience according to the rule of the word this is true that though the Church be in the commonwealth yet she is a distinct society from the common-wealth hath power from Christ to hold her own meetings Assemblies for her own government as she did while she was under heathen Emperours in the dayes of the Apostles 2 It hath been showne
appeal unto Caesar was from a civill court from Festus was in a matter of life death from no Church judicatorie See Voetius ubs supra Pag. 197. Quaest. 24. SECTIO XIII The former purpose further prosecuted fleet 's notion examined THere is one reason more pleading against the taking of the oath as it is now glossed it is this 20. By taking of this oath they should assent unto that power which is given unto the King in the 16 Act of Parliament viz. a power to settle secure Church governement in such a frame as shall be most agreable suiteable unto Monarchicall Governement most complying with the publick peace quyet of the Kingdome And so grant 1. That there is not one forme or modell of Church governement set down in the word obliging Churches in all ages to follow the same 2. That the supreme Magistrat alone may appoynt what forme he thinketh good To speak to this head at length would take a long time in regard that one Mr Stilling fleet hath been at the paines to give the World a proof of his learning reading by engaging in this quarrell in pleading against the privilege prerogative of the Crown of Christ whom God hath made King in Zion who will reigne untill all his enemies be made his footstool He would without all doubt have had more peace when stepping into eternity if he had imployed his partes abilities for Christ his interests as King sole King in his Church Kingdom But yet though the nature of this discourse will not admit so long full an examination of the grounds whereupon this learned man walketh Some thing must be said in short so much the rather because through the injury of the times the labours of such as have fully solidly answered him cannot be gotten printed And therefore till providence so order matters as that both those severall other things against prelats may receive a free Imprimatur Take these few observations upon his whole book which he is pleased to call a weapon salve c. so far as concerneth the bussinesse in hand Obs. 1. He granteth pag. 154. That it is necessary there should be a forme of government in the Church by vertue not only of that law of nature which provideth for the preservation of societies but likewise by vertue of that divine law which takes care for the Churches preservation in peace and unity So then if there be such a divine law for a forme of Church Government iâ—… in the primitive times there was a forme of Church Government followed the poynt is gained by Mr Stillingfleet's own concessions for part 1. c. 1 § 3. He sayeth that there is not the same necessitie for a particular clear revelation in the alteration of a law unrepealed in some circumstances of it as there is for the establishing of a new law as to the former a different practice by persons guided by an infallible Spirit is sufficient which is the case as to the observation of the Lord's day under the Gospell for the fourth command standing in force as to the morality of it a different practice by the Apostles may be sufficient for the particular determination of the more rituall occasionall part of it Now there being a standing morall law for a forme of Church governement the practice of the Apostles who were guided by an infallible Spirit is sufficient for an alteration And so as their practice obligeth now to the observation of the first day Sabbath because of the standing force of the morall law for one day of Seven So their practice obligeth now unto that forme of Governement which they used because of the standing force of the law of God for a forme of Church Governement So that we need not enquire after a particular clear revelation in this case where there is but the alteration of a law unrepealed as to some particular circumstances And thus if the morality of the first day Sabbath stand the morality of the governement of the Church which the Apostles did set up will stand also Their practice altering the last day of Seven into the first will no more oblige then their altering of the ancient governement into a new one which was distinct from the former Obs. 2. Part. 2. c. 1. § 4 5 6. When he is about the stateing of the question he will have a nationall Church to be understood as a Church in which a forme of Government should be setled It is true a nationall society incorporated is a Church It is also true that the notion of a Church agreeth to other societies then nationall as himself sayes wherever the notion of a Church particular is to be found there must be a Governement in that Church so every society which may be called a Church should have a Governement in it But now the question is whether every such society as may be called a Church should have its own liberty to set up what forme of Government it thinketh best or only a nationall Church If only a nationall Church have that liberty then that liberty agreeth not to a nationall Church as it is a Church but under some other notion what is this other notion Is it because they are under one civil Governement But many nations may in some respect be under one civil Government in some respect there is hardly any one nation which in all its parts incorporations cities is governed after one the same manner But further what hath the Church to do with the civill lawes or civill way of Governement especially seing himself granteth that the Church is a quite distinct society from the civil state But next if every Church hath this liberty then in one the same nationall Church there may be many severall sorts of Governements this would occasion the greatest confusion in the world looketh no way like the ordinance of God which neither tendeth to union nor edification but to confusion distraction will make every parochial Church he cannot deny a parochiall Church to be a Church to have its own distinct forme of Government thus porachiall Churches should be like the Cantâ—…ns of Helvetia or distinct Kingdomes ruled by their own lawes after their owne manner If it be said that the unity peace of the nationall Church ought much more to be looked after then the peace unity of any one particular congregation Ans. will it thence follow that every particular congregation in a nationall Church should be Governed after one manner then it will follow also that all nationall Churches being members of the Church universall must be Governed after one the same manner for the peace unity of the Church universall is preferable unto the peace unity of a Nat. Church as the peace unity of a Nat. Church is preferable unto the peace unity of Particular
such an one is Mr Stillingfleet's prelats rule domineer with as absolute unlimited power as ever any did when it is alledged that they account themselves distinct officers from superiour to other presbyters that there is no warrand for any such officers Mr Stillingfleet their new advocat cometh in sayeth They are no distinct officers let themselves say what they will you may take them up as no distinct officers so suffer them to domineer still if you look upon them as no distinct officers there is no hazard all is saife be they Pope be they Prelat let them pretend to never so high speciall commissions as speciall distinct officers yet they may be submitted unto obeyed this mentall conception will make all right 3. When any are disputing against an intruder in the house of God whether is it saifest to take him up in his own colours to look upon him as he holdeth forth himself or to paint him as any think best If any disputant would take liberty to paint him as he pleaseth he should not dispute for truth but deal deceitfully Let Mr Stillingfleet answere this question Whether is it possible that a man may give out himself for a new officer or not or whether is there any hazard that such an one may be acknowledged countenanced as an officer as such an officer as he giveth himself forth to be in the house of God or not If Mr Stillingfleet be consonant to his principles he must answere that it is not possible for really there can be no new officers warranded of God every one is at liberty to take them up under a right notion there is an end then let all the popish rable ten times moe come in they may be submitted unto for really there can be no other officers in God's house but pastours deacons with Mr Stillingfleet every one may look on all the rest as having their power either restricted or enlairged according to the determination of prudence 4. It may be asked whether the Apostles were distinct officers from presbyt yea or not If they were distinct what was it which made them distinct It could not be their different way of mission for Matthias had not such a mission as Iames Iohn Peter the rest had yet all of them were Apostles Matthias no lesse then the rest It could not be their extraordinary qualifications for Prophets workers of miracles speakers with tongues had extraordinary qualifications yet they were not the same with Apostles further distinct qualifications make not distinct officers Or was it a larger extended power Then it is certane that prelats upon the same account must be distinct officers from other presbyters for they have a larger extended power then other presbyters have 5. Doth Mr Stillingfl think that there is no difference betuixt a man who acteth as commissionated from a judicature having his power particular commission from them a man who doth all of himself by his own power having a commission from none that there is no difference betuixt one who receiveth commands from others as accountable to them one who taketh upon him to command them as he thinkest best betuixt the generall of an army sent forth by the Estates of a land ruled without a King having power commission from them a King making use of the Estates or of the Parliament of the Kingdome as his counsellours whose advice he will follow or not follow as seemeth him good commanding all of them aâ—… pleaseth him best If he think that there is no difference betuixt these then indeed he cannot be much blamed for thinking that the prelat whom he busketh is one the same with the prelat of whom the controversie is But in sober sadnesse let it be asked of Mr Stillingfleet If he did satisfie himself with this his fiction notion There is no controversy now about what may be or of a man in the moon but of the prelats who are now in being concerning these it would be asked whether he thinketh that they arâ—… chosen by the Church over which they are that they are impowered by that Church or by the officers of that Church for that effect that they are accountable unto them so that their power may be restrained at the Churches pleasure Or not rather that they choose ordaine the presbyters commissionat them calling them to an account punishing as they think sit usurping useing this power as their owne not borrowing it from the presbyters in whole or in part as being themselves solely invested with all Church power from Christ letting out the same to presbyters as they think meet Now it is of these that the controversy is it is such as are understood when it is said that they are new Church officers there is no controversy concerning Mr Stillingfleet's supposed Commissioners for whether such as he speaketh of be new distinct officers or not it is no matter so long as these of whom the disput is are such without all question for any thing which Mr Stillingfleet hath said to the contrary for the persons he speaketh of are not the same with the persons concerning whom the controversy is Commissioners having all their power derived from others are one thing such as have all the power from with in themselves are another thing But. 6. To put the matter more out of doubt let it be considered that a distinct proper work with a distinct ordination for that effect is enough to make a distinct officer What distinguisheth Presbyters Deaâ—…ns Let ruleing elders be laid a side seing Mr Stillingfleet will not owne them as Church officers but their distinct peculiar work ordination so since prelats assume to themselves as their peculiar work the power of jurisdiction ordination to speak nothing of the power of order they do account themselves so must all take them to be distinct officers All the prelats that ever were yet in the world did look upon themselves as distinct from presbyters all who ever wrote of prelats took them up as such whether Iure Divino or Humano all is one as to this bussinesse of their being distinct till Mr Stlling fleet did vent his new notions 7. That a judicature which acteth joyntly in matters of jurisdiction may in some particulars for facilitating their execution impower one or moe of their number for that effect is easily granted but that they may so Impower them as to denude themselves wholly of the power so enlarge the power of others as to null their owne must be otherwayes proved then by Mr Stilling fleet 's bare assertion Christ's commission taketh in both the power of order jurisdiction alloweth his servants no more to denude themselves of the one then of the other They themselves must answere for
own phancies as to be in paine untill he were delivered of this birth not considering the unseasonablenesse thereof at such a time There is a season a time for every purpose under heaven sayeth the wise preacher Eccles. 3 1. a wise mans heart discerneth both time judgment Ecc. 8 5. But it seemeth he hath been so desirous that the world should see this monstruous birth that 〈◊〉 he wanted a time he would take the most unfit season imaginable for it For it is hardly imaginable that he could have chosen a more unfit time for publishing this his notion Because though his notion in thâ—…si were unquestionably true as it is not yet in hypothesi it could not now be yeelded the Kingdomes being tyed to one of these formes by the oath of God the solemne League Covenant so not at liberty to choose what forme they please His principles will not suffer him to say that Presbyterian governement is utterly unlawfull that Episcopall governement is necessary his learning will soon discover a validity in a Covenant about things not sinfull though not absolutely necessary his piety will grant that conscience should be made of such oathes And now when the Kingdomes were under the oath of God to set up a government most agreable to the Word of God And to endeavour the extirpation of Prelacy could there be a more unseasonable time for venting this his notion touching the indifferencie lawfulnesse of either Presbyterian or Prelaticall For suppone his notion were a truth of what use could it be now when the Churches hands were bound up by a solemne vow Covenant from following their liberty Sure his disputing so much for the liberty of the Church in such a case at this time sayeth that in his judgment the oath of God is of no value otherwise at least he would have casten in this clause of exception some where so have stated the question as a case in Utopia if so be it was as a fire within him that could not be keeped in And now indifferent readers may judge whether intentio operit I shall not say operantis was union peace edification To teach people to break Covenant with God to null their oaths vowes is no way to the good edification of the Church Such an union by perjury will be nothing else but a sinfull conspiracy Peace in such away will be but dreadfull security when the judgments of God are at hand And such edification is nothing but destruction But it seemeth his silence in the matter of the Covenant all alongs sayeth that in his judgment the obligation of the Covenant is null so this weapon-salve of his must be strong that will eat thorow the bones of a Covenant but because it is so dangerous destructive unto the substantials vitals of Religion it is the lesse to be valued whatever vertue he allaigeth it hath for cureing wounds in the flesh Did he think that tender Christians would get the Gordian knot of a Covenant oath vow so easily cut as to think themselves at liberty to choose what forme of governement they pleased Or if he did not presuppose this of what use did he think his book would be Though it were to be wished that this learned man had imployed his talent more for him who gave it Yet seing he would not forbear the publishing of his notions conceptions he might have spoken his minde concerning the obligation of the solemne League Covenant For so long as that Covenant standeth in force his notion will evanish as a cloud without raine But we must end this digression in which we have insisted the longer because it is one of the maine grounds upon which the complyers of this age do walke goe on that we may hasten to some other particular SECTION XIIII Such reasons or objections as are allaidged for taking against refuseing of the oath of alleagiance as it is called Answered BEfore any other particular be entered upon or this concerning the oath which is called though falsly the oath of alleagiance passed from there are some few objections which would seem to militate against the refuseing to swear subscribe the oath as it was tendered which must be rolled out of the way And these are either such as concerne the civill part so seem to weaken the grounds of scrupling at the oath upon that account which were laid downe Sect. 10 11 or such as concerne the Ecclesiastick part so seem to weaken the grounds of scrupleing at the taking of the oath upon that account which were mentioned prosecuted Sect. 12 13. First then as to the civill part it will be objected 1. That there was no ground of scrupleing at taking of the oath upon that account Because it was but the acknowledging of that very power which did properly belong to him before which former Parliaments had recognosced as his due viz. the 18. Parliament of King Iames the V I. which did acknowledge his Soveraigne Autherity Princely Power Royall Prerogative Privilege of his Crown over all Estates persons causes whatsomever Ans. This Objection was sufficiently obviated above Pag. 126. where it was showne that these were but Parliamentary flourishes complements grounded upon personall qualifications And indeed the act seemeth to raise this structure upon his Maj. being put in possession as the righteous inheritour of the famous renowned Kingdomes of England France Irland which far surpasse the wealth power force of the dominons of his progenitours Kings of Scotland thereby having a greater increase of care burden with all upon his extraordinary graces most rare excellent vertues where with he was endued for the discharge of that trust Now any man of understanding may see that the increase of his extensive power authority or of personall qualifications is no sufficient ground for the increase of his intensive power or for the enlargeing of the privileges of the crowne Moreover it is said expresly in the act that they ratifie approve perpetually confirme the same as absolutely amply freely in all respects considerations as ever his Maj. or any of his royall progenitours Kings of Scotland in any time by gone possessed used exercised the same Whence it appeareth that they gave no new power only they did recognosce what he his progenitours had before Now as was showne above neither he nor any of his progenitours had such a supremacy over parliaments as is now allaidged to belong unto the crown For as to that first act parl 8. Anno 1584. it was showne above Pag. 125. how notwithstanding of the supremacy there granted unto the King the privileges of Parliament remaine intire as they had been continued past all memory of man without any alteration or diminution whatsomever And after this Anno 1587. in the 11. Parl. act 33. the ancient order dignity
not put to take that acknowledgement they could not refuse the oath upon the account of these consequences contained in the acknowledgement Ans. So is the Declaration dated Sep. 2 1662. Set down as distinct from the Acknowledgement yet who ever sweareth subscribeth the Acknowledgement doth sweare subscribe the Declaration upon the matter so is it here who ever taketh the oath of alleagiance doth upon the matter take the acknowledgem also for it is not possible to see any discrepancy betwixt them save such as is betwixt the text the commentary for the acknowledgm is nothing else upon the matter then an explication or Exegesis of the oath in the acknowledgem the same thing is said assirmed in plaine full clear tearmes which is but in generall affirmed in the oath By their Acts they declare what things they account privileges of the crowne all these they comprehend under his supremacy so in their account his supremacy over all persons the prerogatives royall or privileges of the crowne are all one Therefore they could not acknowledge this supremacy because they could not acknowledge the prerogatives royall See this objection further answered above Pag. 168. In the next place there are objections of another nature which must be answered as 1. Obj. Such as refuse this oath of alleagiance declare that they are not dutyfull loyall subjects which Ministers Christians ought not to do Ans. It hath been showne at the beginning of the tenth Section what difference there is betwixt this oath the oath of alleagaince there is no Minister or Christian who would scruple at the taking of the pure oath of alleagiance Yea they would account themselves obliged to take the same if there were any necessity or just suspition of disloyalty in them which might occasion the same King Iames in his book called God the King sheweth that those treacherous persones who occasioned the frameing of the oath of alleagiance were the Pope's bloody emissaries following the principles of Rome practiseing unparalleled treacherie against King Queen Parliament among whom none will have the fore head to reckon such as did now refuse the oath as it was tendered It is the supremacy in Church state which only was scrupled at the acknowledging of this supremacy is no part of alleagiance for one may acknowledge his father to be his father though he should not say that he hath power as a father over his soul conscience one may acknowledge the King of Britane lawfull King of his dominions though he should not acknowledge him to have as much dominion power over them as the great Turk usurpeth over his dominions And therefore letnone so interpret that passage of the Apology for the ministers of England pag. 2. Where they prove that they cannot be challenged as guilty of Laese Majestie because they acknowledge that the King is defender of the faith in all causes the supreme head Governour over all persons as well ecclesiastik as civil as if they would assert that all in Scotland who do refuse this oath acknowledgement were guilty of Laese Majesty merely upon the account of their refuseing of the oath seing as hath been showne their case the case of Scotland is not every way the same though they give out this as an evidence of their loyalty yet they do not pitch upon it as proprium quarto modo unto a true loyal subject 2. Obj. Will you allow his Maj. no power in Church matters Ans. yes Even all that power which the first confession of the Church of Scotland doth allow viz. tho conservation purgation of religion the maintenance of the true religion the suppressing of idolatry and superstition as also all that which the later confession concluded by the Assembly of divines at Westminster doth allow As also as much as sound reformed divines grant unto him according to the word of God He hath power over the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 things extrinsecall that properly belong unto the outward man are common to the Church with other societies He is Custos utâ—…sque tabulae in a civill manner must have a care of both the tables of the law It were tedious here to set down all the particulars See Gillespy in his Aarons rod blossoming lib. 2. cap. 3. the CXI Propositions which are full enough to this purpose 3. Obj. Why then was this oath refused seing no more was required thereby Ans. More yea much more was required as appeareth by what hath been said cleared from their Acts actings especially from their refuseing of the sense given in by these Ministers who were detained so long prisoners in the Tolbooth thereafter banished which was large enough possibly larger then some of these who gave it afterward upon second thoughts would approve It is beyond questioning that this Parliament giveth unto the King by vertue of this prerogative as annexed to the crown far more then ever the confession of faith of that Chuch or any other protestant reformed Church did give And as they give so he taketh more as might be evidenced by his letter unto the Archbishop of York if it were now at hand 4. Obj. But whatever they assume to themselves it is not much matter Seing none 〈◊〉 put to affirme that so much power doth belong unto him the oath tendered hath not so much in it in terminis Ans. When an oath is contrived in such generall comprehensive termes as may take in much when there is no other way to finde out the iust latitude meaning of it but by their Acts actings who tender it it is of much concernment to know what sense their actions will put upon it for by their actions the true sense must be learned For it is a received known principle that oaths must be taken according to their known sense meaning of the words who tender the same because oaths were first invented for their security therefore whosoever would deal honestly Christianly in taking an oath must take it in the very sense that it is understood in by such as tender it Otherwise the holy name of God shall be taken in vaine the takers of the oath shall deal deceitfully in frustrating the end of the oath the designe of the tenderers thereof To take an oath Quatenus Eatenus in fo far will not satisfie as worthie D. Voetius judgeth de Pol. Eccl. p. 283. 5. Obj. This shienesse were good in case the oath as worded could bear such a sense as is supposed to be meaned by the tenderers But it is not so here Ans. It is certane the oath as to the part controverted is conceived in generall termes It is certane that their sense who tender it is not sound it is certane that there is nothing in the oath contradicting their sense meaning Yea it is certane that the very
the ground of the answere is clear from the very words of the commission which putteth no difference betuixt the way of their appoynting Ministers to be suspended or deposed the way of their appoynting others to be fined confined or incarcerated we must not distinguish where we have no ground And therefore it is said more clearly in the former part of the commission that they have power for the causes specified to suspend deprive excemmunicate these words make the matter as clear as can be 2. This coâ—…t is raised of purpose to put the Acts of Parliament in execution immediatly for so sayeth the commission it self That they are to â—…se their outmost endeavour that the Acts of Parliament and councell â—…or the peace and order of the Church c. 〈◊〉 put in vigour and in impartiall execution Now as for this end they immediatly execute the lawes for fineing confineing c. So have they power also immediatly to execute these lawes that are for suspending deposeing of Ministers 3. The end why this court was erected sheweth further that it is in part a Church judicature For it was erected to keep the peace order of the Church the governement thereof by Archbishops Bishops to punish such as presume to violat contemne disobey the Ecclesiastick authority 4. That which doth put the matter yet more out of doubt is the Basis or ground on which this High commission is reared up viz. his Maj. prerogative royall in all causes and over all persones as well Ecclesiastick as civil Now if they looked upon this court only as a civil court haveing power to meddle only with civil punishments his prerogative royall in causes civil had been a sufficient Basis for this Therefore the expresse mentioning of his prerogative royall in causes Ecclesiastick putteth it beyond all debate that they have proper Church power granted unto them so may immediatly depose suspend c. In the last place Some may object against the arguments brought from the unlawfulnesse of Church men their taking upon them civil places And say That though they will prove it unlawfull now for Ministers to take upon them such places Yet they will not prove it unlawfull for any to compeaâ—… before them when instaled in those places More then it can be unlawfull to come before a judge who possiblie hath come'â—… to the place by unlawfull indirect meanes that is his fault others are not concerned therein so here it is the prelates their fault to take upon them these places private persones are not so much concerned therein Ans. There is a vaste difference betwixt the prelates in this court other judges in other courts though comeing to these places by indirect meanes For. 1. These other courts places of judicature are unquestionably lawfull But the High commission is not a court so unquestionably lawfull 2. Other courts are not affected in the poynt of lawfulnesse or unlawfulnesse by the quality of the persones But it is otherwise here in the High commission the very lawfulnesse of the court is questioned upon the account of the prelats being members thereof sine quibâ—…s non 3. These vices or indirect meanes used by others for attaineing of such or such a place in a judicature are for â—…he most partsecrete not clear undeyable or obvious unto all But that which is objected against the prelats is notour to all who read the gospell where they are expresly discharged by Christ to meddle in such a manner with any civil place or power so 4. That which is objected against the prelates is such a thing as affecteth the very person incapacitateth him for the place but in the other cases instanced these vices affect only the manner of entry but do not incapacitate the person a man may be one fit enough for such or such a place in a judicature as to be a judge or a justice of peace or thelike though he use indirect meanes to come by the place but the prelats as prelats if so be they will be accounted Church officers because they are Church men are uncapable of such a place therefore though it will not be unlawfull to acknowledge a judicature unquestionablie lawfull notwithstanding of some secret corruption in the entry ofhim who is in possession of the place Yet it will be unlawfull to acknowledge a judicature in it selfquestionable at best whether lawfull or not when such persones are made constituent members thereof yea members sine quibus non that by the expresse law of Christ are uncapable ofsuch a place and the acknowledging of this judicature cannot but be an approveing of that corruption Because the very acknowledging of the judicature sayeth that the persons who are constituent members thereof are really legally capable of the place as the compearing before acknowledging of a court made up of mere civil persons having power to try ordaine rebuke depose or excommunicate Ministers should be 〈◊〉 acknowledgeing of civil persons their having Church power contrare to the lawes of the gospell Therefore the arguments brought from the unlawfulnesse of Church men taking upon them civil places are still in force By those particulars It is abundantly clear that that high commission court is a most sinfull court even as to it's constitution how dangerous it is to compear before it upon any account without a declinature how it is saifest to with draw escape the snare that is laid there for catching of unwarry souls ere they be aware See the learned Voetius pol. eccles pag. 214. quaest 2. 216. quast 3 SECTION XX. The dreadfulness of the sin of covenant breaking particularly of abjureing the nationall Covenant the solemne league Covenant manifested MAny sad particulars have been mentioned which may occasion grief sorrow unto all the people of God yet there is one other which putteth on the copestone may deservedly make that land a gazeing-stock a hissing unto all nations round about who may stand astonished wonder what is become of Covenanted Scotland For it was not enough for the Parliament to condemne the Covenants which were solemnely sworne subscribed by Parliament at their command by all ranckes of people in the land by the King himself as was showne in the 2. Section But they formed a declaration Septembr 5. 1662. which they ordained to be subscribed by all officers of state members of Parliament privy councellers Lords of Session Commissioners in the exchequer members of the college of justice Sheriffs Stewards or commissaries their deputies and clerkes Magistrats and councells of Brughs justices of peace and their clerks or any other who have publick charge office and trust within the Kingdom And by the subscribeing of this declaration they promise as followeth I do sincerly affirme and declare that I judge it unlawfull to subjects upon pretence of reformation or any other pretence
5 2. 7 9. Ezek. 16 59. 17 16 17 18. Hos. 10 14. Zech. 5 3 4. 8 17. Mal. 3 5. Many precedents in scripture cleare it to be duty to stand to oaths As these Gen 21 31. 24 9. 25 33. 26 31. 31 53. 47 31. compared with Cap. 50 5. So Gen. 50 25. compared with Exod. 13 19. Iosua 2 12. comp with Cap. 6 22. So Ios. 9 15 20. 1 Sam. 24 21 22. 2 Sam. 19 23. compared with 1 King 2 8. 1 Sam. 20 17. compared with 2 Sam. 21 7. 1 Sam. 30 15. 1 King 1 13 30. Neh. 5 12. Now shall Christians make no more of all these them Sampson did of the new ropes Shall neither law of nature law of nations nor yet the law of God be of any binding force If so they declare themselves not only to be no Christians But to be no men Sure then it must be a hainous iniquity for any who are engaged in this Covenant to cast it behinde their heels contradict what they have there sworne It is a great sin to break a promise but it is a greater sin to break an oath because an oath is a greater ground of security in an oath the dreadfull name of God is invocated to attest the sincerity of the promises purposes of the promisers this maketh the obligation stronger so the breach of this bond must be the sader 3. There is in this a clear breach of a vow for in these covenants there is a promise made unto God that is a vow Now the obligation of a vow is no lesse then the obligation of an oath For in every vow there is an implicit calling of God to witnesse a vow is of the like nature with a promissory oath so should be performed with the like faithfulnesse sayeth the confession of faith at Westminster cap. 22. Sect. 5. That lawfull vowes ought to be observed with all carefulnesse many both precepts precedents in scripture do cleare as Num. 30 v. 2 4 8. 1 Sam. 1 21 Deut. 12 11. 23 21 23. Ps. 76 v. 11. Eccles. 5 4 5. Gen. 28 20. Numb 6 21. 21 2. Iudg. 11 30. compared with Levit. 27 28 29 Ps. 132 2. 22 25. 56 12. 16 5. Prov. 20 25. Isa. 19 11. Iona. 1 16. 2 9. Nah. 1 15. So then the sin of violating these oaths or covenants being likewise the violation of a solemne vow made unto the Lord after which it is not lawfull so much as to make inquirie must be great 4. There is in this a clear breach of a Covenant made with man for in the league and covenant The King the Parl. the people of the three Kingdomes do mutually covenante each with other for the performance of those things which do concerne them in their severall stations either as to the work of reformation or as to the preservation of each others mutuall rights privileges King and Parliament do Covenante to preserve the peoples liberties King and people Covenante to preserve the privileges of Parliament Parliament people Covenante to preserve his Maj. person honour authority And all the people stipulat engadge each to other so that here without all doubt there must be a clear breach of a Covenant and this must be a grievous sin for very heathens looked upon the breach of a Covenant as a hainous uncouth thing did abhominat the same Hence Collicrates did disswade the Achâ—…ant from hearkening to Perseus the King of Macedon who intending warre against the Romans was seeking to make peace with them Because it would be a breach of the Covenant which they had made with the Romans see Liv. lib. 41. To break Covenant is a sin against the law light of nature so condemned amongst very heathens Rom. 1 30. for which the Lord gave them up to a reprobat minde v. 28. The obligation of a Covenant is the highest assurance greatest ground of security that natures light could finde out betwixt nation nation or betwixt man man in matters of greatest concernment And this ground of assurance is generally rested on by all unlesse they have to do with a Hannibal or with the Samnites whom no Covenant could binde Hence is that saying sides supremum rerum humanarum vinculum est faith is the highest assurance in humane matters It is spoken to the dishonour of Philip King of Macedon that none could call him a good King because that usually he despised oaths and broke his promise upon any light occasion so that no mans promise was lesse esteemed of of Hannibal that in warring against Rome he did wadge warre more against his owne faith and promise and rejoyceing in lyes and deceit as so many excellent arts he resolved to leave behinde him a notable memory of himself but so as it should be uncertane whether as of a good man or of an evil man The Trojans accuse themselves of this iniquity apud Homer As rendered by one thus Rumpentes foedera sacra â—…uratamque fidem pugnamus non quibus est fas Who sacred leagues annihilate Their faith though sworne do violate 'Gainst those on whose side stands no right We do may with courage fight Yea it is reported that the Romans would not break Covenant even to such as had broken unto them therefore when Sergius Galba would have cut off 7000 of the Lusitanians who had broken Covenant in a most perfidious way he is accused by Libo a tribun of the people for wounding the honour of the Romans in recompensing perfidiousnesse with perfidiousnesse sayeth Appianus persidia persidiam ultus contra Romanam dignitatem barbaros â—…abatur It was a great evidence of basenesse in the Saxâ—…s when the pickâ—…s refused to make any Covenants with them because that with them Covenants which with others were the surest bond of friendshipe were but snares for the simple So Buchan in viâ—… Gorani So that natures light teacheth the obligation of Covenants to be inviolable And also the light of the scriptutes teacheth the same Ios. 9 19. Neh. 9 38. 2 King 11 17. Ezek. 17. throughout Ier. 34 18. c Gen. 21 27. 1 Sam. 18 3. 20 16. Gen. 31 36. 44 49 50 52. Neh. 5 11 12. 1 King 5 12. 20 34. 5. There is in this a breach of Covenants whose tye obligation is sacred religious of Covenants which God will owne as his he being called to witnesse therein by an oath which was interposed All Covenants confirmed with an oath whatever the things be religious or civill concerning which they are made are owned of God as his hence the Covenant betwixt David Ionathan is called the Covenant of the Lord 1 Sam. 20 8. upon this account the violating of those sworne Covenants must be a hainous great transgression therefore Zedekiahs fault in breaking his Covenant with the King
of Babilon is aggraiged upon this score Ezek. 17 19. soâ—… judgments are threatened therefore Therefore thus sayeth the Lord God as I live surely mine oath that he hath despised and my Covenant that he hath broken even it will I recompense upon his owne head The oath is called God's oath the Covenant God's Covenant which v. 16. is called the King of Babilon his oath his Covenant And upon this account the sin is aggraiged he is the more assured of judgments because of his breach of this Covenant So likewise that Covenant mentioned Ier. 34 8 9 10. wherein thâ—… princes the people did sweare to let their Hebrew servants goe free is called God's Covenant v. 18. upon this account sorer judgments are threatened v. 19 20. And I will give the men that have transgressed my Covenant which have not performed the words of the Covenant which they had made before me into the hand of their enemies So then the breach of this Covenant which was sworn with hands lifted up to the most high God in an eminent way before the Lord must be the breach of a Covenant which God will owne as his Covenant as his oath therefore the greater sin 6. It will be the breach of Covenants made with God for they containea vow a promise confirmed with an oath made for doing of such things as God commandeth in his word therefora greater sin for Covenants made with God should be more bindeing inviolable then Covenants betwixt man man For in Covenants betwixt man man there may be dispensations in remissions of the obligation moreover the ground of those Covenants may faile Now none can either dispense with or grant remissions in the matters of God Moreover Covenants made with God are more absolute lesse clogged with conditions so more obligeing And therefore the sin of breaking such covenants must be the greater all may be sure that God shall avenge the quarrell of these Covenants which are his owne he being in them not only judge witnesse but also altera pars contraâ—…ens the party with whom the Covenant is made Lev. 26 15 16 17 25. 7. It will be the breach of Covenants made with God about morall duties It is a morall duty to abjure all the poynts of popery which was done in the nationall Covenant it is a morall duty to endeavour our own reformation the reformation of the Church which was sworne to in both Covenants It is a morall duty to endeavour the reformation of England Irland in doctrine worshipe discipline and Government which was sworne to in the league Covenant It is a morall duty to purge out all unlawfull officers out of God's house to endeavour the extirpation of heresy schisme whatsoever is contrary to sound doctrine which was sworne to there also It is a morall duty to do what God had commanded towards superiours inferiours equalls which by the league Covenant all were bound unto And therefore the Covevenants are strongly obligeing being more absolute then other cov because they binde vi materiae vi sanctionis both by reason of the matter by reason of the oath so are perpetuall Ier. 50 5. And therefore a breach of these must be a greater fault then the breach of such Covenants as are about things not morally evil which only binde vi sanctionis so it is beyond all doubt that the breach of these Covenants is a most hainous crying sin 8. It will be a breach of such Covenants as are so framed as that they cannot be made void though they should be broken buried forgotten Because they are Covenants about morall indispensable duries such duties upon which dependeth the glory of God the advancement of the Kingdome of our Lord saviour Jesus Christ The honour happinesse of the King's Majesty his posterity the true publick liberty saifty peace of the Kingdomes the good of posterity in all time coming the Lord's being one his name one in all the three Kingdomes And so the transgessing of such Covenants must be a greater fault then the bâ—…each of such which are of that nature as to be made void after some period of time or after a failzy by the one party Therefore seing those Covenants must binde though all had broken them brunt them also so long as â—…fe lasteth It must be a hainous crime to break them 9. It will be a breach of Covenants reall hereditary such as reach not only the persons themselves entering into Covenant but likewise their posterity like that betwixt David Ionathan 2. Sam. 9 7. 21 7. that betwixt Iosua the Gibeonits that mentioned Deut. 29 14 15. For this Covenant is of that nature as shall appear if that which Grotius de jur â—…el pac lib. 2. c. 16. § 16. Sayeth concerning these Covenants be considered where he giveth this as one evidence of such Covenants viz. When the subject is of a permanent nature addeth albeit the state of a commonwealth be changed into a Kingdome the Covenant must binde quia manet idem corpus etsi mutato capite though the head be changed the body of the commonwâ—…alth is the same And againe he sayeth as grving another evidence of such Covenants When there is such a clause in the Covenant as that it should be perpetuall or when it is such as is made for the good of the Kingdome addeth When neither maâ—…er nor expressions can certanely determine then favorabiliora creduntur esse realia the most favourable advantagious are reall Covenants So that by these marks evidences it is clear that these Covenants are reall Covenants obligeing not only them but also their posterity for 1. The subject or the person who did first enter into this Covenant was the body or universality of the people themselves then their Parliaments in their Parliamentary capacity like the oath of Iosua the princes which did binde the people in all time coming notwithstanding of what they might have said for themselves as not owneing the same but murmureing against it Yea the King in his princely capacity sitting on his throne with the crowne on his head in the day of his solemne inauguration this though there were no more will make it a reall Covenant binding the people according to that imperator foedus percussit videtur populus percussisse Romanus As King Zedekiah's oath to the King of Babilon did oblige the people Now then seing where either the body of a land their Parliaments or their prince in their severall capacities do Covenante the Covenant becometh reall perpetually obligeing much more must it be so where all these three are so theseoaths being Regall oaths Parliamentary oaths nationall oaths covenants they must be covenants perpetually obligeing so that as long as Scotland
hath a King or a Parliament Yea though there should be none of those this obligation would stand because mutato capite maneret idem corpus The subject would be permanent therefore the faith of Scotland being Engaged so long as Scotland is Scotland the Engagement standeth will not be dissolved The faith of the Medes being Engaged made it fare the better with their tributary cities even after the Medes did obtaine the Empire had their state changed So the publict faith of Scotland being Engaged by all persons in all capacities as long as there are any scotish men to succeed in those capacities the obligation standeth 2. Consider the very expressions of the covenant the â—…nd thereof it shall appear to be perpetuall reall publick in the preface there are these words having before our eyes the glory of God the advancement of the Kingdom of 〈◊〉 our Lord saviâ—…ur Iesus Christ the honour happinesse of the King's Maj. his posteritie the true publick liberty saiftie peace of the Kingdoms wherein every ones privat condition is included sure all this is a publick good a publick nationall good to be endeavoured by the Kingdom of Scotland in all future generations againe it is added for preservation of our selves our religion from utter ruine destruction So in the first article there are these words That we our posterity after us may as brethren live in faith lâ—…ve the Lord may delight to dwell in the middest of 〈◊〉 And in the second article there are these words That 〈◊〉 Lord may be one his name one in the three Kingdomes in the fift article there are these words we shall each one of us according to our place interest endeavour that these Kingdomes may remaine conjoyned in a firmâ—… peace and union to all posterity So that it is beyond all question that the scope intent of the covenant is publick nationall 〈◊〉 Consider the matter of the covenant this will yet further appear The very matter sheweth this for as was said it is about morall duties so though it were true that juramenti obligatio personam tantum obstringeret Yet ipsa promissâ—… haeredes obligaret for in ipsa promissione satis est efficaciae such a promissorie oath is of â—…orce to binde the posteritie So then this being a publick reall nationall covenant It must be a haiâ—…ous offence to transgresse it such an offence as their posteritie after them were bound to mourn for when they renewed as they were bound in conscience to do the same â—…fter the example of those mentioned Ezra 9 10. Neh. 9 10. 10. It will be the breach of covenants obligeing perpetually by the very persons who did solemnely sweare enter into these covenants This cannot but be a great aggravation of this crime If it would be a sin for their posteritie some 〈◊〉 of yeers after this to transgresse these covenants will it not be a greater sin for them to beak them in their own dayes's How unspeakably hainous must it be that the very persons who lifted up their hands swore as they â—…hould answere to God in the great day do run counter their own oath transgresse that Covenant Was it so great a sin for Saul to break that Covenant made with the Gibeonits as did provoke thâ—… Lord to send Three yeers famine his anger to burne sore against the land till Seven of Saul's posteritie were hanged up before the sun when this was Three hundred yeers or more after the Covenant was made would it not have been a greater sin if in Iosua's dayes he the very princes who made the Covenant had broken it Sure the posteritie after some hundereds of yeers might have said more for themselves have pretended ignorance or forgetsulnesse of the thing or some one thing or other which for shame the self same persons who entered into Covenant could not once mention So then it is beyond all question that this doth aggraige the guilt of this generation that it is the same generation for the most part which did sweare these Covenants that doth now break them seing they cannot yet be ignorant or forgetfull of the many evident demonstrations which God gave of his owneing of these Covenants both at the swearing of them afterward so long as people made any conscience of standing by them 11. It would be the breach of Covenants sworne with the greatest solemnities imaginable whether or not that be true That quanto crescunt c. as the solemnities do grow so groweth the oath Shall not be now debated though it seem a truth that solenne juramentum non magis obligat exse naturâ suâ quà m simplex that an oath accompanied with solemnities hath no stronger obligation of it self and in its own nature then a simple oath wanting such solemnities Yet as Doct. Sanders sayeth de jur Prom. obl Prael 5 § 12. The solemnities of the oath do aggraige the sin of perjurie necessaryly and inseparably for which he giveth two reasons 1. Because of the greater deliberation for these externall rites solcmnities are used of purpose to strike into the minde a greater reverence of the Action and a greater sense of religion that so the man might goe about the Action with greater attention deliberation and every sin caeteris paribus is the greater that it is done against a deliberat Act of the will 2. Because of the greater scandall for the more solemnely any thing 〈◊〉 done it is the more observed bymoe therefore the scandall is the more notorious pernicious Scripture is likewise clear for this as may be seen Ezek. 17. where the perjurie of that King is aggravated from this among other things v. 18. when lâ—… he had given the hand that is when he had solemnely engadged himself by this rite ceremony of giving his hand So 〈◊〉 34 19. when thâ—… sin of the breach of Covenant is spoken of this is mentioned that they passed between the parts of the calfe a rite used in making of solemne Covenants it was to have some beast or other divided in two the Covenanters were to passe thorow betwixt these parts And therefore the breach of those Covenants must be a horrible provocation for in them they gave as it were their hand to God when they lifted it up swore what more solemnity can be used about the making of a Covenant then was used at the making of these was there not here as may appear to any who will but look back to what is said upon this subject in the second Section a swearing unto the Lord with a loud voice with shouting and with trumpets and with cornets as it were as 2. Chron. 15 14. The transgressing of those Covenants must then be a sin unparallelable 12. Adde to these That it would be the breach of such Covenants against which
to any Councell But what followed upon this perfidious dealing When the report of the execution of Iohn Husse Ierome of prague spreadeth thorow Bohemia there ariseth great tumults which draw to a war under the valient renouned Iohannes Zischa which was so bloody cruell that Sigismund was forced to implore help of the Empire Memorable is that passage in the Turk's historie concerning the Covenant betwixt Vladislaus King of Hungary Amurath for Ten yeers peace the consequences of the breach thereof This Vladislaus was moved by great Kings princes as well Mahumetans as Christians also by Iohn Palaeologus of Constantinople by Francis the Cardinall of florence generall of the Christian fleet who shewed him how low Amurath was brought what faire advantages the Christians had Especially by Iulian the Cardinall who had a long speach to this end pressing him to break that Covenant having ended his discourse in name of the Pope he disannulled the league absolved Vladislus all whom it might concerne Whereupon the war was renewed against the Turks when battell was joyned near to Varna the victory began to incline to the Christians so that Amurath was thinking to flee but was stayed by a privat souldier when he saw the great slaughter of his men beholding the picture of a crucifix in the displayed banner of the Christians he plucked the paper out of his bosome which did containe the late league holding it up in his hand with his eyes cast up to heaven said Behold thou crucified Christ this is the league which thy Christians in thy name made with me Which they have without cause violated Now if thou be a God as they say thou art and as we dreame revenge the wrong now done unto thy name and me and shew thy power upon thy perjurious people who in deeds deny thee their God A little thereafter Vladislaus is killed his head is stuck up upon the poynt of a speare his army is broken Iulian the Cardinall is found mortally wounded by the way side in a desert Scarce the third part of the Christian army escapeth And long after this the warre with the Turks had very ill successe It is reported of Rodolphus duke of Suevia that being instigated by the Pope he waged ware against Henry the 4th Emperour of Germany contrary to his oath having a crown senâ—… to him with this Motto Petradedit Petro Petrus diadema Rodolpho The rock gave 't Peter Peter so On Rodolph doth this crowne bestow But in fight Rodolphus lost his right hand falling sick he called for it said â—…ehold this my right haâ—…d which hath suffered a just judgment which through your Importunity contrary to all equity broke that oath which was given to Henry my Lord and master Fuller in his history of the holy war speaking of the causes of the many losses which the Christians had in that undertaking sayeth How could saiftie it self save this people 〈◊〉 blesse this project so blackly blasted with perjurie a sin so repugnant to morall honesty so injurious to the peace quiet of the world so odious in it self so scandalous to all men to break a league when confirmed by oath the strongest bond of conscience the end of particular strife the souldier of publick peace the assurance of amity betwixt diverse nations is a sin so hainous that God cannot but most severely punish it no wonder then that the Christians had no longer abideing in the holy hill of Palestine driveing that trade wherewith none ever yet thrived the breaking of promises wherewith one may for a while fairely spread his traine but will melt his feathers soon after The fabrick must needs come tumbling down whose foundation is laid in perjury In the history of Scotland there are severall memorable passages to this purpose When Durstus the eleventh King was pursued by the Nobles for his wickednesse had promised to amend his manners He did solemnely swear to passe in oblivion all by-gones but thereafter he treacherously killed the nobles at a feast unto which he had invited them But what followed upon this The body of the Land rose up in armes against him he was killed in battell Thus did God pursue him for his perfidy It is recorded by Buchan on the life of Gregorius that the Britans after they had made a peace with the Scots did break their Covenant invaded the Scots But divine vengeance pursued them for this for they were broken defate by Gregory at Lâ—…maban their King Constantin was killed Memorable is that story of Balliol who to get the Kingdom promised swore subjection unto the King of England thereafter having received some â—…ussle at the court of England for being accused by one McDuff he was constrained to stand at the barr there to defend himself he reneweth the old league with France casteth off England contrare to his oath alledging that he was forced to give that oath that albeit he had done it willingly it could not stand because he had not the consent of Parliament without whose consent the King might do nothing in matters belonging to the whole Kingdom But these shifts could not clear him from perjury nor free the land from wrath because of that sin for war was raised at Berwick above 7000 of the Scots were killed even the floure of the nobility of Lothian â—…ife The castles of Dumbar Sterline Edinbrugh were taken Balliol himself was at length apprehended sent prisoner to London all the nobles were called by King Edward to Berâ—…ick there were forced to swear subjection to him And thus was the Kingdom keeped at under a long time by the Englishes save what liberty was obtained by renowned Sr William Wallace but this did not last long for Scotland was againe subdued King Edward called a Parliament at St Andrews where againe all the nobles except Sr William Wallace did swear alleagiance unto him this was the sad fruite of perjury which made the land mourn many a day When Cumin Bruce made a compact together at London for to endeavour the liberating delivering of the Kingdom out of the hands of the Englishes had given an oath of secrecy faithfulnesse to other Cumin perfidiously did reveal the matter unto King Edward but for his treacherie God pursueth him for ere long he is killed by Bruce in the Church of Drumfries About the year 1447. England breaketh their promise of truce unto Scotland useth some incursions to spoile Scotland But being payed home by the Scots it draweth to a warre on the south borders there England is foiled looseth 3000 beside many prisoners the Scots obtaine a great booty for the English did certanely expect the victory therefore came forth more for pompe glory then for fighting About the year 1535 the King of England sent to Scotland to commune with the King about some
quod sicri non debuit factum valet nor knowing well how to guaird against this deceit which he hideth with a multitude of words his challenges must be answered All which he sayeth on this head is some thing to these three particulars 1. The want of authority in the imposeing 2. The generality of the termes in which it is conceived 3. Some incongruitie in the 3d article The summe of what he sayeth unto the first of these is this To carry on a publick oath without the soveraigne power is without any example among jewes or Christians It is a speciall royalty of the King to have power of imposeing an oath on all his subjects especially where the oath hath a direct aime for raiseing armes Such leagues are inhibited by the lawes of the land Ia. 6â—… Parl. 10. Act. 12. Mary Parl. 9. Act. 75. Now this Covenant was carryed on in England by a meeting of Parliament excludeing one of the Estates and in Scotland by a committee of Estates Ans. what if all this be granted Will it therefore follow that the obligation of the Covenant is loosed Nay himself dar not say so for he addeth Now although this could not nullify the obligation of the Covenant were the matter of it undoubtedly lawfull and otherwise still obligeing yet it were well if unlawfulnesse in regaird of this defect were acknowledged So that all which he would have of the Covenanters now for proof of their sincerity is that they would give as publick testimony against the sinfull way of entering into that bonde as against that siâ—… as they suppose of breaking it But what would this advantage his cause And seeing he saw that it would not advantage his cause why did he spend time paines in vaine He is at a weak passe now when he can bring no arguments but such as himself must needs answere discover the weaknesse of But it is like out of a desire to have it going well with the Covenanters he would have them repenting of the misse which was made But by his favour they must first be convinced of the errour ere they can say that they have erred and ere they be convinced of an errour in that Particular they must see more cogent arguments then any which he hath yet brought For as for that committee of Estates which he sayeth did carry on that Covenant in Scotland it had power for that effect from the convention of Estates their deed was approven in all poynts by the next meeting of Parliament Anno 1644. the lawfulnesse of which convention Parliament hath been shown above and as for the Parliament of England Mr Croften Timorcus have sufficiently spoken to that and as for Scotlands entering into a league with England without the King's consent it hath been vindicated before So hath it been showne how the Parliaments of Scotland do partake of the soveraignity with the King and have power of warre so all which he here sayeth is answered already Only because he desireth some examples of the like among Iewes or Christians though there be no great necessity for this businesse yet some few instances shall be brought first among the Iewes there are two eminent examples one in the dayes of Asa King of Iuda 2. Chron. 15. where many strangers of Ephraim manassâ—…h Simeon fell to Asa out of Israel in abundance when they saw that the Lord his God was with him v. 9. And entered into a Covenant to seek the Lord God of their fathers with great solemnity v. 12 14. that without the consent of their own King Another in the dayes of Hezekiah when he came to the throne which was in the third yeer of Hoshea King of Israel 2. King 18 1. In the first year of his reigne 2. Chron. 29. 3. this was six yeers before the Kingdome of Israel was wasted destroyed by Salmanassâ—…r King of Assyria 2. King 17 6. beginneth a work of reformation said it was was in his heart to maâ—…e a Covenant with the Lord God of Israel 2 Chron 29 10. And he sent to Israell writting letters to Ephraim Manasseh desireing them to come up to the house of the Lord accordingly diverse of Asher Manasseh Zebulon 2. Chron. 30 1 11. joyned with him in that Covenanted work of reformation here are some of the subjects of Basha Hoshea without their consent or approbation joyning in a Covenant or bond with another King Kingdom which would seem more treasonable like then for the subjects of one King to joyn together in Covenant for the good of King Kingdome to carry on a work of reformation no doubt this advocat darre not condemne this deed of those subjects of Hoshea or Basha As for such Covenants among Christians instances in abundance may be given some have already been named as that betwixt the first reformers of Scotland the Queen of England these in France Germany the Low countreyes Helvetia piemont c. so a few moe shall suffice If he had read the History of the reformation of the Church of Scotland he had seen there severall examples of Covenants entered into by Christians without the consent of the supreme Magistrat viz. one Anno 1557 subscribed by Argile Glencarne Morton Lorn others Another at Perth Anno 1559. subscribed by Argile Iohn Stuart Glencarn Boid Vchiltree c. A third at Sterlin that same yeer subscribed by many A fourth at Leth Anno 1560. subscribed by all the nobilite barons gentlemen others professing Christ Iesus in Scotland a fift at Aire Anno 1562. subscribed by severall noblemen gentlemen In Sleidan's commentaries Lib 7. Anno 1529. there is a Covenant betwixt the city Strausbrugh which was under the command jurisdiction of the Emperour three of the cities of Helvetia viz. Tigurum Berna Basil about assisting deseâ—…ding one another in the cause of religion this was without the consent approbation of the emperour as appeareth by the letter written to Strausbrugh from the dyet of the Empire againe An. 1530. there was a Covenant betwixt the Laâ—…dgrave of Hesse those three cities Tigur or Zurich Basil Strausburg anent mutuall defencein the cause of religion That same yeer the protestants meet at Smalcald draw up a Covenant for mutuall defence in religion it was subscribed by Albert Gebert of Mansfeldt by the cities of Magdeburgh Breme Sleidan sheweth also lib. 19. That in February 1547. the nobles of Boheme meeting at Prague entered into a Covenant among themselves for the defence of their liberty whether Ferdinand would or not The second particular is about the generality of the termes wherein the Covenant is expressed The summe of what he sayeth here is this The Covenant was purposely framed in generall and homonymous termes that all the sects might lurck under it And so the Sectarian army when they invaded Scotland did pretend the
Covenant And presbyterian Government was no way secured it not being once named but wrapped up in generall under the reformation in doctrine worship discipline Government unto which independents separatists might assent purposeing to preserve the same against the common enemy yea even such as entered into the Covenant could not agree in its sense as may be seen in the Parliament of England's baffling the Scottish Commissioner's declaration Anno 1647. other papers Ans. 1. To say that the Covenant was purposely framed in generall termes that severall parties might be fast united against prelacy is a base slanderous imputation But suteth him well who pleadeth for such a cause If the Covenant for the most part be thus conceived in generall ambiguous termes how cometh it to passe that he produceth not instances thereof no not so much as one Was it not as cleare as the sun shineth at noon day that the reformed government of the Church of Scotland at that time was presbyteriall And did not himself say a little before that at that time there was no such officers in the Church of Scotl. as are mentioned in the second article of the league Covenant And whereas he sayeth that severall sects did lurk under the lap thereof doth â—…he think this a cogent argument to prove it's ambiguity What sect is it which doth not plead scripture Shall scripture therefore be accounted ambiguous 〈◊〉 No not at all Let men of corrupt mindes principles wrest words in the Covenant as they please the Covenant to any who shall reade it is plaine clear enough he who will wink may wander at noon day let men imagine put what glosses they will on scripture It is plaine hath but one sense But what will all this make to the businesse Will the obligation of a Covenant in which some men think there lyeth some ambiguities be loosed upon that account This must be proved ere it be received off his hand as a truth neither he nor any of his party hath hit hertill attempted any such thing Lastly is there any ambiguity in the second article Yet sayeth he were it not better to lay aside when now it is disclamed by Kiâ—…g Parliament all persons of trust in the land a human for me which in respect of the composure of it is apt to be hath been is like to be a seminary of variety of parties worse evills then prelacy is imagined to be When he hath made it to appear that this composure is apt of its own nature to be such a seminary of worse evills then prelacy his advice may be taken to consideration but till then which will be ad Calendas gracas he must excuse the Covenanters for neither King nor Parliament though they had the pope with them can give a dispensation in a matter of an oath And King Parliament with all the persones of trust will have enough to do to hold the broad roll the curse off themselves their houses their posterity to keep themselves out of his hands Who will be a swift witnesse against false swearers though they undertake not to protect others from the wrath vengeance of God The last particular which he exaggerateth is the limited or conditionall preservation of the King's Maj. person authority viz. in the preservation defence of the true religion c. He enquireth whether this was right or not And if difference in religion loose a people from their duty to the King To which a short reply will suffice 1. Though it were granted that there were some thing wrong here this will not ground the non-obligation of the Covenant in other particulars what hath he gained then 2. What ever wrong may be in wording this article thus The blame is not be laid upon the first authors of this league Covenant For in the nationall Covenant which was subscribed at first by King Iames his houshold Anno 1580. And in obedience to an act of Councell together with an Act of the Generall Assembly by persons of all rankes Anno 1581. And againe subscribed by all sorts of persons Anno 1590. 1591. The Covenanters duety towards the King is so qualified in these words We protest promise with our hearts under the same oath hand write paines that we shall defend his person authority with our gear bodyes lives in the defence of Christ's evangell liberties of our contrey ministration of justice punishment of iniquity against all enemies within thâ—… realme or without So that if he annull the leagué Covenant upon this account he must much more annull the nationall Covenant whereof King Iames was the author For in that there is more addâ—…d to the qualification of their duty to the King viz. his minisiration of justice and punishment of juiquity So then this clause in the league being consonant unto that in the nationall Covenant needeth not be so much quarrelled at 3. It is like he is displeased with any such qualification but his reason is not very forceable viz. because it would insinuat that they were no otherwayes bound to defend him for it will only insinuat that the Covenanters are to preferre that which is of greater moment unto that which is of lesser concernment that they are to preferre the end unto the mean leading to the end That is when the King is in direct opposition unto the cause work of God it becometh them to preferre the interest of Christ before man's not to help the mighty against the Lord but the Lord against the mighty And when defending promoveing or any way advanceing the authority of the King shall directly tend to the ruine of the interest of Christ religion no Christian is bound to concurre And this was granted even by the Parliament Anno 1648. So that the question betwixt the Parliament the Church at that time was not whether religion the interests of Christ should be preferred to the interest of the King or not But whether the Engadgement which was then carryed on was not a preferring of Man's interests to Christ's for as to the thesâ—…s or major proposition it was granted by the Parliament viz. That Christ's interest should be sought before man's the King's interests only in a subordination to Christ's Thus they did professe openly their owneing of the Covenant their resolution to prosecute the ends of the covenant to seek to secure establish the King's interests only in subordination to the interests of Christ for in their letter to the presbyteries Printed in their records May. 11. They shew that they were resolved to proceed for the preservation defence of religion before all other worldly interests whatsoever to carry on sincerely really constantly the Covenant all the ends of it And againe in their answer to the supplications from Synods presbyteries Iun. 10. insert likewise in their
The grounds ends of this undertaking SECTION 1. Pag. 5. Sheweth When the Christian religion began first in Scotland That Palladius was the first prelate in Scotland No prelats among the Culdees How when reformation from popery began Superintendents no prelats Nationall Assemblies from the beginning of the reformation How the Tulchan Bishops came in over the Church her belly The Church wrestleth till these be put away presbyterian Government be setled in all her judicatories Anno 1592. The King thereafter incroacheth upon the privileges of the Church Prevaileth with some of the Ministers who betray the Church yeeld to Parliament-Bishops hinder the Church from enjoying her privileges liberties in her free Assemblies The faithfull Zealous are persecuted Parliaments carry on the King's designe with violence Corrupt Assemblies are convocated to further his Maj. designe to give Church power unto these Parliamentary Prelats Parliaments ratifie all The Church protesteth striveth against all this what she can The prelats being now inthroned tyrannize over oppresse the faithfull laboure to have ceremonies imposed upon the Church with force acts made in Parliament for bringing in the surplice Corner cap unto which some worthy nobles could not assent Anno 1633. Who are therefore accounted rebels traitours And Balmerino is condemned The prelats rage without all law draw up a service book book of canans c. SECT 2. Pag. 44. Sheweth How the use of the service book was hindered in Edenburgh Ministers people from all parts of the Kingdome petitioned against it The King favoureth not the petitioners They not withstanding continue in petitioning against the service book high Commission prelats c. Renew the nationall Covenant thorow the whole land The King intendeth a war An Assembly is indicted at Glasgow Nov. 21. And opened up This Assembly condemneth anulleth severall pretended Assemblies the book of common prayer the book of canons the book of consecration ordination the high commission court the ceremonies excommunicateth some deposeth all the prelats War is prepared against them They defend themselves A pacification is concluded another Assembly promised a Parliament thereafter The Assembly is opened up The Parliament is convocated but quickly adjourned Commissioners are sent to London imprisoned A new war is raised by the King Scotland prepareth for defence A new pacification The Parliament meeteth ratifieth all which the Covenanters had done Those acts are againe ratified The Parl. of Engl. beginneth a work of reformation entereth into a Covenant with Scotland the two nations joyntly proceed in the begun work of reformation A party in England strengthen themselves alter the judicatures take away the King's life Scotland bringeth home the prince who sweareth the Covenants is overcome by the Englishes in battell keeped in bondage ten yeers till the exiled King returned Anno 1660. SECT 3. Pag. 69. Sheweth Why these Ministers others who met Agust 23. 1660 were incarcerated what their supplication was And how unjustly they suffered upon that account SECT 4. Pag. 77. Sheweth What were the grounds upon which the Marquise of Argilâ—… suffered how insufficient in poynt of law from severall considerations SECT 5. Pag. 83. Sheweth What were the grounds upon which the life of precious Mr Guthry was taken how insufficient Either in law or conscience SECT 6. Pag. 86. Sheweth Upon what account other Ministers were persecuted And how unjustly Some banished for righteousnesse sake some indictâ causâ An extract of the sentence was refused to thosâ—… to all others SECT 7. Pag. 88. Sheweth The grounds why conscientious Ministers could not observe the anniversary day SECT 8. Pag. 91. Sheweth The reasons why Ministers could not observe the prelatâ—… meetings The author of the seasonable case c. Answered SECT 9. Pag. 101. Sheweth The reasons why ministers could not seek presentations from patrons nor collations from prelats The author of the seasonable case answered SECT 10. Pag. 114. Sheweth The true sense of the oath of alleagiance which was tendered Anno 1661. c. Compared with the former how it holdeth forth a great civil supremacie in the King cleared by the act 11 parl 1661. Which at least is much to be questioned from nine severall grounds And cannot lawfully be acknowledged because of ten dreadfull consequences which shall necessarily follow thereupon The former proceedings of the Church state of Scotland vindicated cleared SECT 11. Pag. 140. Sheweth The lawfulnesse of Scotlands defensive war first from the former practices of Scotland other Kingdomes King Iames King Charles confessions of adversaries next from a true clearing of the state of that war in Six Particulars which obviat all the objections of adversaries And lastly from lawyers adversaries the law of nature the law of nations the law of God sound reason SECT 12. Pag. 169. Sheweth What is the meaning of the oath of alleagiance as to its Ecclesiasticall part What way the King's supremacy over Church persons in Church causes began was carryed on in England How the same was advanced to a great height in Scotland What sense this King the late Parliament did put upon the oath of alleagianee by their Acts Actings How it were sinfull to acknowledge by taking the oath That so much Church power belongeth unto the civil Magistrate cleared by Nineteen particulars SECT 13. Pag. 200. Sheweth The groundlesnesse of Mr Stilling fleet 's notion concerning the divine right of formes of Church governement by making it appear how he overturneth his owne grounds how he misstateth the question the practice of the Apostles ground a jus divinum here Christ's institution the institution of the Apostles is for a particular species Christ's faithfulnesse in his office speaketh much for this The hazard is great in leaving the species undetermined The confession of the faith of severall Churches for a Species How he misseth his pretended end arme And how unseasonable his book is at this time uselesse so long as the league Covenant standeth in force though his notion were true in thesi SECT 14. Pag. 254. Sheweth How weak the Reasons are which plead for the taking of the oath of alleagiance by answereing Sixteen of them SECT 15. Pag. 270 Sheweth How unlawfull it is to owne acknowledge the curats foâ—… lawfull Ministers by fourteen reasons Foure objections answered SECT 16. Pag. 298. Sheweth That it is lawfull for Ministers banished from their owne flocks by a sentence of the civil Magistrate to preach in publick or private as God calleth by Eight reasons Thrâ—… objections are answered SECT 17. Pag 305. Sheweth That it is lawfull for Ministers though censured by the pretended prelate to preach as God giveth a call whether in publick or in private by Six reasons Foure objections are answered SECT 18. Pag. 310. Sheweth That it is lawfull for people to meet together for hearing honest Ministers preach publickly or privately And for other Christian duties notwithstanding of Acts made against it by severall reasons One objection answered SECT 19. Pag. 316. Sheweth How unlawfull it is to acknowledge the high commission court by compeering before it by Eleven reasons Foure or five objections are answered SECT 20. Pag. 327. Sheweth How dreadfull a sin it is to abjure the Covenant a sin aggravated by twelue particulars SECT 21. Pag. 347. Sheweth What judgements perjury hath brought on in all ages out of history sacred prophane SECT 22. Pag. 359. Sheweth The lawfulnesse binding force of the solemne league Covenant notwithstanding of all which the author of the seasonable case c. hath said against it SECT 23. Pag. 391. Sheweth The lawfulnesse of the nationall Covenant as it was sworne subscribed Anno 1638 1639 c. Notwithstanding of all which the author of the seasonable case c. Hath said to the contrary The CONCLUSION Pag. 416. Sheweth What the now afflicted Church of Scotland expecteth from strangers what use they should make of this sad dispensation c. FINIS Whence may not men destruction feare Who with deceitfull hearts do sweare This age wherein we live is void of faith For writes are signed twelue witnesses before The notar writt'th both time place what more Yet come'th a man of words who all deny'th King's words have weight great respect More then all oaths which men exact
called God the King lately reprinted published by his Maj. royall proclaâ—…tion for the instruction of all his subjects in their duty alleagiance for thus is that oath worded I A. B. Do truely sincerely acknowledge professe tostifie declare in my conscience before God the world that our Soveraigne Lord King Iames is lawfull and â—…ightfull King of this realme of all other his Maj. dominions countreyes that the pope neither of himself nor by any authority by the Church see of Rome or by any other meanes with any other hath any power or authority to depose the King or to dispose of any of his Maj. dominions or Kingdomes or to authorize any forraigne prince to invade or annoy him or his countreyes or to discharge any of his subjects of their alleagiance obedience to his Maj. or to give license or leave to any of them to bear armes raise tumults or to offer any violence or hurt to his Maj. royall person state or government or to any of his Maj. subjects within his Maj. dominions Also I do swear from my heart that notwithstanding any declaration or sentence of excommunication or deprivation made or granted or to be made or granted by the pope or his successours or by any authority derived or pretended to be derived from him or his see against the said King his 〈◊〉 or successours or any absolution of the saids subjects from their obedience I will beâ—… faith true alleagiance to his Maj. his aires successours him them will defend to the uttermost of my power against all conspiracies attempts whatsoever which shall be made against his or their persones their crowne dignity by â—…easone or colour of any such sentence declaration or otherwise will do my best endeavour to disclose make known unto his Maj. his aires successours all treasons or treitours or conspiracies which I shall know or hear of to be against him or any of them And I do furder swear that I do from my heart abhoâ—…e detest abjure as impious hereticall this damnable doctrine position That princes which be excommunicated or deprived by the pope may be deposed or murdered by their subjects or any other whatsomever And I do beleeve in conscience am resolved That neither the Pope nor any person what somever hath power to absolve me of this oath or any part thereof which I acknowledge by good lawfull authority to be lawfully Ministered unto me And do reâ—…unce all pardons dispensations to the contray And all these things I do planely sincerely acknowledge swear according to these expresse words by me spoken according to the plaine common sense understanding of the same words without any equivocation or mentall evasion or secret reservation whatsoever And I do make this recognition acknowledgment heartily willingly truely upon the true faith of a Christian. So help me God This is the oath of alleagiance how far it differeth from the former which was lately tendered is easily discerned These few words in the short oath only supreme governour in this Kingdome over all persones in all causes containe the main difference betwixt the two the main grounds of scruple for they hold forth two things The King's supremacy in matters civill his supremacy in matters ecclesiasticke It is true Ministers ought both to be to carry duti fully as becometh subjects to refuise nothing lawfull which is required of subjects but oathes being matters about which much tendernesse carefulnesse ought to be used it becometh Ministers to look well to this not to engadge in any oath rashly Advisement deliberation is most requisite here especially in a time when snares abound when there is good ground to suppose that the oath is tendered of purpose to be a snare to the conscience The oath as to it is substance or maine thing intended which lyeth wrapped up in those few words last cited is not as is obvious to any so clear as oaths ought to be yea the imposers themselves will not deny this but are forced to acknowledge that as it is worded in respect of that part thereof which is onely scrupled at which containeth the substance maine thing intended it is at best ambiguous generall for this cause if there were no more every Christian ought to forbear to swear the same And that because every oath must be sworne in truth in judgment in righteousnesse Ier. 4 2. but an unclear ambiguous oath cannot be sworne in truth because it hath no truth in it for what is ambiguous is not true as doctor Sanderson sayeth de jur promis oblig prael 6. § 10. a preposition of an ambiguous indefinite sense before the matter be distinguished is not a true proposition yea nor a proposition at all for a proposition as its definition cleareth should signify either a truth or a falshood without any ambiguity And therefore this proposition that the King is onely supreme governous over all persones in all causes being ambiguous till it be clared by some distinctions cannot be sworne in truth because the truth thereof cannot be known Nor can it be sworne in righteousnesse because such as swear it cannot be sure but that in taking that oath they may be wronging others wronging Parliaments which is worse wronging the Lord Iesus Christ who is King head of his Church Nor can it be sworne in judgment because its meaning cannot be known But now seing the oath in respect of its substantiall part as it is now worded is ambiguous unclear reason would require that the tenderers thereof should explaine the meaning thereof make it as clear as may be But when this is refuised what can such do who are pressed to take that oath but refuise the same partly because of its ambiguity partly because by the sense which by their other Acts Actings they who tender it do put upon it it appeareth to to be most unlawful all divines casuists do grant that an oath must be taken in his sense meaning in whose favours for whose sake faifty it is conceived who tendereth it And therefore it is not only lawfull but necessary to enquire what sense the Acts Actings of the Parliament do put upon it And as to the civill part of the oath which here is to be examined no other explication needeth to be enquired after then what they give forth in their Acts on record all which to cite here at length would be tedious The citeing of the acknowledgement of his Maj. prorogative which is a part of the 11 Act Anno 1661. where the substance of many preceeding Acts is summed up will be a sufficient evidence and here it is declared That it is an inherent privilege of the crown an undowbted part of the royall prerogative of the Kings of