passi non aliud perfugium haâ—…bant quam ut Aâ—…licorum libidâ—…i se dederâ—…nt he sayeth The Bishops were so hard put to it that they had no other refuge but thus to satisfie the Court give away their revenues to their lusts Anno 1590. The Generall Assembly doeth abrogate the power of Commissioners devolveth the work on Presbytâ—…ries Anno 1591. The Recantation of Mr Patrick Adamson is presented unto the Assembly where among other things he confessed he had eâ—…red in thinking the governement of the Church was like other civil governements in labouring to have the Church in maters Ecclesiastick subject to the Kings lawes And with all he confesseth that the Earle of Arran had a minde to have burnt the Registers of the Assembly Anno 1584. that at Falkland before they were delivered to his Maj. a Bishop Mr Henry Hammilton took out some leaves which spoke against the Governement by Bishops that he had consented thereunto Anno 1592. in May the Generall Assembly doth meet resolveth on some propoâ—…itions to be presented to the ensuing Parliament As 1. That the Acts of Parliament made Anno 1584. against the discipline liberty authority of the Church be annulled 2. That the Discipline of the Church be raâ—…isied 3. That the Act of Annexation be repealed and 4. That the Abbots Pâ—…iors other Prelats bearing the titles of Church-men giving voice in Parl. in name of the Church without her consent be discharged to vote any more When the parliament conveeneth in June The liberties of the Church are ratified all her Courts Generall provinciall and presbiteriall Assemblies Church Sessionâ—… the Juâ—…sdiction Discipline thero â—…s declared to be just good godly in it self in all time coming not â—…anding of whatsoever sâ—…atutes acts canons â—…vilier municipâ—…ll lawes made in the contrare All acts fomerly made for establishing the Popes authority are abolished It is likeways declared that the 129. act Anno 1584. anent the Kings Supremacy against declining of the King his Councill in Church maters shall be no wayes prejudâ—…iall nor derâ—…gate any thing to the previledge that God hath given to the sâ—…rituall office-bearers in the kâ—…k concerning heads of Religion maters of heresy Excommunication collation or deprivation of Ministers or any such like 〈◊〉 â—…all censures specially grounded having warrant of the word of God Item they abrogate annull that act of parl 1584. which did grant Commission to Bishops other Iudges constitute iâ—… Ecclesiasticaell causes to receive his Highness presentations to benefices to give collation there upon to put order to all causes Ecclesiasticall And they ordaine that all presentations to Benefices be directed to the particular Presbiteries in all time coming with full power to give Collation thereupon to putt order to all maters causes Ecclesiasticall within their bounds according to the Discipline of the Kirk Thus did the Lord cary on his work unto this period notwithstanding of much opposition which was made thereunto by men of corrupt principles wicked lives who loved not to part with the Church rents the sweet morsell which they desired alwayes to enjoy now is the Churâ—…h there become a shineing Church being reformed both in Doctrine in Discipline now is she become a pleasant vineyaird well dressed hedged about defended from the wilde boars of the forrest King Iames himself was convinced of this when he gave this reason to an English divine why that Church was not troubled with heresie viz because if it spring up in a parish there is an Eldership there to take notice of it suppresse it if it be too strong for theÌ„ the psesbitery is ready to crush it if the presbitery cannot provide against the obstinate heshall finde moe witty he ads in the Synod if he be not convinced there the Generall Assembly will not spare him yea seldome or never did any errour trouble all those Courts for usually it was crushed by presbiteries except what some Bishops did maintaine And thus that Church was indeed as an army with banners terrible to the adversaries of the truth Then were there endevours to have a through worke of Reformation caried on the iniquities of the land were searched out corruptions in Ministers other ranks of people were taken notice of effectuall courses were laid down for preventing such abuses in time coming Publick Fasts were indicted keeped whole eight dayes together And thus the Lord created upon every dwelling place of Mount Zion upon her Assemblies a cloud smoak by day the shineing of a flaming fire by night for upon all the glory was a defence Isai. 4. 5. But this faire Summer Suneshine did not long last The infinitely wise God saw it sitt to bring that Church unto a wilderness againe to cause her meet with a dark dreadfull long lasting winter night Satan stirreth up Papists upon the one hand who saw that if this hedg of discipline were keeped up they could not enjoy the liberty peace they desired prophane politicians Courteours upon the other hand who saw that by this Discipline their licentiousnes would be curbed to bestirre themselves against this established discipline And accordingly they use their power with the King at length prevaile to get him to oppose the discipline to prosecute that designe piece piece till at length Prelats were established in all their power as the following discourse will clearly evince When Anno 1596. the Popish Lords who had conspired with Spaine against the countrey and had been upon that acount banished viz Huntly Arrol Angus were called home the Church saw Religion in danger ordained that particular flocks should be advertised hereof indicted a Fast appointed that some out of each Presbitery should concurre with the Presbitery of Edenburgh in considering of the most expedient way for securing of Religion and now because the Church would not consent unto the Kings calling home those popish Lords he is stirred up by his popish Courteours against the Church incroacheth dayly more more upon her liberties For Mr D. Black minister at St Andr. is cited before the Councill for some alledged expressions in his sermon The ministry seeing that the spirituall Governement of the house of God was intended to be quite subverted thought it best that he give in a Declinatour there in shew that though he was able to defend all that he spoke yet seing his answering to that accusation before them might import a prejudice to the liberties of the Church be taken for an acknowledgement of his Maj jurisdiction in maters meerly spirituall he was constrained to decline that Judicatorie 1. because the Lord Jesus had given to him his word for a Rule so he could not fall under any civill law but in so farr as he should be found after triall to have passed from his Instructions which triall belongeth
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
Printed records They declare that in their undertakings they should preferre no earthly consideration to their dutâ—…es for preserving of religion in Scotland in doctrine worshipe discipline government as it is already established to endeavvour to setle it in England Ireland according to the Covenant also in their answere to some committees of Shires they declare that they had nothing before their eyes in that undertaking but the preservation good of religion the endeavouring the setling of it in England Ireland according to the Covenant in the first place before all worldly respects his Maj. rescue from â—…his base imprisonment his re-establishment upon his throne in all his just powers the saiftie of this Kingdome from danger on all hands the preservation of the union brotherly correspondence betwixt the Kingdomes under the governement of his Maj. of his royall posterity according to the Covenant So that the gentleman the author of this pamphlet publisheth his mistakes to the world when he would inferre thus was this right that where our alleagiance binds us to duty to a greater latitude this should be held out to people as the only standard of their loyally duty to the King Was it found Doctrine to insinuat to the sense of intelligent men that we were not otherwise bound to defend him Was it well by such a clause to give occasion to wicked men to think they were no furder obliged to him then he should desend that which they accounted religion And that the folly of his consequencesmay furder appear it would be considered that there is a clear difference betwixt these two Owneing of the King defending his authority never but when he is actually owneing active for the cause interest of Christ And owneing of the King defending his authority alwayes but when he is in actuall opposition in a stated contradiction to the work interest of Christ So is there a difference betwixt these two Non-concurrence in defending promoveing of the King's authority when he is opposeing the work of God And actuall anulling diminishing or utter overthrowing of his power authority when he is so stated And so when the Covenanters say That they are not bound to contribute their power in their places capacities to promove or defend his Maj. power authority when he is in a stated opposition to the work of God when the advanceing of him to his full power authority would cetanely tend to the ruine desruction of the cause people of God yet they do not say that they are never bound to defend him but when he is actually promoveing advanceing the work of God according to his full power place Nor do they say that when he opposeth the work of God they are at liberty to destroy his person or to spoile rob him of all his just power authority And therefore both that clause in the Covenant their proceedings may be abundantly justified without laying down any ground for the taking away of the late King's life without clashing with or contradicting the confessions of protestant Churches or of their owne soâ—… still they acknowledge that difference in Religion doth not make void the Magistrat's just legall Authority not free the people from subjection But that this may be a little more clear let this example be considered A Father turneth phrenticke mad seeketh to destroy the whole family calling for a sword liberty to execute his cruelty His sones rise up binde his hands withhold the sword from him withall sweare to stand together in their own defence to defend their Father's just right power in the defence of the family Now in this case can any say that they were undutifull children or that their covenanting so adding that clause in the Covenant sayeth they were free to cast off the relation that is betwixt him them except he guide the family in all poynts as they would have him doing No in no wayes Here then it is clear that their refuseing to put the sword in their Father's hand while under this distemper is no act of undutifulnesse It is no lessening of the Father's just power over the family nor doth it say that they thinke themselves not bound to owne him as a Father except when he is actively promoveing the good of the family far lesse doth it say that they think because of this distemper they may destroy him or that the relation betwixt them him is broken up for ever So then though this Advocat thought he had a faire sield to walk upon a faire occasion to vent his anger against that Church to make her odious to all Churches about yet wise men who easily see that there is no such strong relation betwixt King subjects as betwixt Parents Children will acknowledge that his ranting is without reall ground And that Scotland in their treaties with the King at the Hage at Breda in their actions at home did nothing but what they may hold up their faces for both before God Man doing nothing herein which either contradicteth their own confession of faith or the confession of faith of other Churches Not their own confession of faith For if the large confession of faith be viewed which was approved by the Parliament insert in their registres In that head of the civill Magistrate these words shall be found We confesse and avow that such at resist the supreme power doing that thing which appertaineth to his charge do resist God's ordinance and therefore cannot be guiltlesse furder we affirme that whosoever deny unto them their aide counsell and comfort whiles the Princes and rulers vigilantly travell in execution of their office that the same men deny their help support and counsell to God who by the presence of his lifetenant doth crave it of them So that all the resisting which is there condemned is resisting of him while doing his duty executing his office not while he is seaking to destroy Religion the interests of Christ. Nor the confession of other Churches for in the former confession of Helvetia upon that head of the civill Magistrate they say as it is in the English edition We know that though we be free we ought wholly in a true faith holily to submit ourselves to the Magistrate both with our body and with all our goods and endeavour of minde also to performe faithfulnesse and the oath which we made to him so far forth N. B. as his government is not evidently repugnant to him for whose sake we do reverence the Magistrate So the French in their confession Art 40. say 〈◊〉 must willingly suffer the yocke of subjection although the Magistrats be infidels so that N. B. the soveraigne Authority of God do remaine whole and entire and nothing diminished And which is worth the noticeing the practice of
he may not execute the fiercenesse of his anger nor returne to destroy Ephraim seing he is God not man For he is a God who is gracious long suffering slow to anger of great kindenesse repenteth him of the evil who knoweth if he will returne repent leave a blessing behinde him That poor Church will be very far disappoynted of â—…et expectation if in stead of Christian sympathy pity compassion she shall meet with unbrotherly unchristian dealing at the hands of any if there shall be any such as will be ready to condemne her as suffering upon very slender inconsiderable grounds as it will be no small matter of grief sorrow unto the already sorrowfull mourning Church yea an addition unto her affliction so it will yeeld these little comfort in the day when the cup shall passe over unto them to reflect upon their unchristian thoughts sharpe censures of a poor member of Christ's body while lying under the feet of oppressours such as said to her soul bow down that we may goeover It is true the infinitly wise God hath thought fit to try that Church with more searching tryalls then he did England Irland it was the policy of her adversaries to beginne with such small things to the end they might get such as they desired drawne into their net then they weresure piece piece to get them brought alongs to countenance them in all their courses as sad experience hath proved For some who at the first resolved to goe some length for peace cause having no purpose to move one foot further to whom if it had been then said that ere all were done they would go such a length as now they have gone with Hazael they would have replyed are we dogs to do such things are now going all the length desired scrupleing at nothing which is a warning to all to beware of the beginnings of a defection And indeed for as great as the defection apostasie in that Church is at present for as great a conspiracy as is found among her prophets If the tryall had been nothing more searching then that wherewith the Neigh bour Churches were tryed there would not have been so many that would have depairted from their former principles as there are this day And therefore it was a mercy unto many in these Neighbour Churches that their sieve was not more narrow searching it is no small mercy unto particular persons when they see their enemies in their owne colours the baite is not able to cover the hook wherewith their adversaries think to catch them And it is likewise a mercy will be so found acknowledged in end unto the Church of Scotl that God hath followed such a way with her as shall prove most discovering consequently most purging by making her drosse to appear bringing to light in a short time more corruption â—…aughtinesse then in all probability would have been found out many a yeer if God had not taken this course But now let none blame those who have desired to keep their garments clean to adhere zealously constantly unto their former principles therefore have refused complyance in the least would not willingly quite with a hoof or sell a bit of the precious truth of God There is a time when such things are very momentous considerable which at other times seem not to be of much concernment Armies may yeeld more unto their enemies at another time place then when they are keeping a considerable passe the loseing of which would prove of great disadvantage unto themselves an in-let unto all the enemies forces There is a time when such things must be stood at which if abstracted from that time place would signifie little or nothing whether done or not done The giving of a book or of a piece of paper out of the hands of the martyres was at that time as so circumstantiated a maine businesse when they were upon the poynt of avouching truth for God A little matter when it becometh Casus confessionis is of great moment Mordecay's beck is no small matter Daniel's closeing of his windowes is a great businesse as it was then circumstantiated And doolfull experience in all ages hath made it appear what mischief hath followed upon yeelding unto the adversaries in small-like matters in the begining of a defection what through inadvertancy what otherwayes by little little the pope came to his throne not in one day by little little came prelats formerly to their height in that Church therefore as before so now the honest party thought themselves called of God to withstand beginnings not to cede in the smallest-like matters when they saw that the opening of never so smal a passage would be enough to occasion the drowning of all as according to the proverb the brunt child doth scar the fire so that Church cannot be blamed for keeping such a distance from that plague of prelacy which formerly had brunt up consumed all the vitals of religion the whole power of Godlinesse had made that Church to look like an harlot not like the spouse of Christ Especially after God had wrought such wonderfull deliverances unto her had graciously delivered her from that yron furnace with his out-stretched arme had brought downe all her enemies Should they againe break his commandements joyn in affinity with the people of those abhominations would not God be angry with them till he had consumed them so that there should be no remnant nor escapeing And it is very remarkable that there are none who have hitherto rued their suffering upon that account but rather they are all blessing the name of the Lord for that he hath keeped them from yeelding in the least And though their adversaries the prelats be useing barbarous inhumane let be unchristian wayes to afflict them still more more by procureing acts to be made dischargeing any Charity to be extended to them or their families who are now suffering for the cause of God Yet they have no cause to compleane God for whose sake they are suffering is provideing for them with all is comforting them with the consolations of the Holy ghost supporting their spirits keeping them from fainting encourageing them so that they resolve through his grace never to comply with these workers of iniquity lest they partake of their judgments Yea they are perswaded that if any members of the Christian Churches abroad who had the root of the matter within them were in their souls stead they would no more comply with this present course of defection then they have done or desire to do So that what ever can be looked for from men of corrupt mindes such as are enemies to the truth to the power of godlinesse Yet they are sure that such as know what it is to walk 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
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
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
other reason then if he keep the conditions on which he was created emperour By the lawes themselves it is provided that the superiour Magistrat shall not infringe the right of the inferiour and if the supriour Magistrat exceed the limits of his power and command that which is wicked not onely we need not obey him but if he offer force we may resist him Upon these grounds did those worthies resolve to defend themselves by armes 2. Next they have the exemple precedent of the protestants in France who in the reigne of Francis 2. Anno 1559. being oppressed with the Guisian faction assembled themselves consulted lawyers divines concerning resisting of the king in that case it was resolved That they might lawfully oppose themselves against the governement which the house of Guise had usurped when needfull take armes to repulse their violence If the princes who in this case are borne magistrats or some one of them would undertake it being ordered by the states of the realme or by the sounder part thereof See Gen. history of France pag. 682. 683. So Anno 1614. The prince of Condee with other princes Peers dukes noblemen officers of the crown conveening at Meziers wrote to the Queen compleaning of diverse grievances wrongs sought remedy redresse by the assembly of the three estates protesting that they desired nothing but peace and the good of the realme that they would attempte nothing to the contrary unlesse by the rash resolution of their enemies who covered themselves with the cloak of state under the Queen regents authority they should be provoked to repell the injuries done unto the King state by a naturall just and necessary defence see the continuation of the life of Lewis the 13. pag. 59. c. So in the reigne of Charles 9 when all Acts of pacification were broken after many fruitlesse petitions and vaine promises they take up armes whereupon a bloody civill warre ensued when this King contrary to his oath An. 1572. caused that massacre at Paris the protestants in Languedoc Rochel other parts took up armes in their own defence So when Henry the 3 came to the crown the protestants saw a necessity of standing to their defence being assaulted they manfully defended themselves againe when the peace which was now concluded was broken by the instigation of the Catholick Leaguers The King of Navarre the Prince of Condee the Marshall of Montmorancy others resolved to defend themselves whereupon followed a sixt civill warre which ended in a new peace Anno 1580. So in the reigne of Lewis his son when the Queen mother who was then regent would give no redresse unto the protestants just grievances The prince of Condee divers others raised forces in their owne defence the duke of Rhoan other protestants did joyne with them A peace was concluded Anno 1616. but the very next year the prince of Condee is seized upon whereupon the princes meeting at Soyssons resolved to defend themselves by warre which continued Anno 1621 1622. at last a peace was concluded but it lasted not long by cardinal Richelien's meanes 3. They have in the third place the practice of the Netherlands mentioned in the Generall history of the Netherlands Lib. 9 p. 369 c. who being oppressed in bodies states by the duk of Alva the Spanyards tyranny their consciences tyrannized over by the spanish inquisition introduced of purpose to extirpat religion after serious deliberation consultation with lawyers divines learned men of all sorts did unanimously conclude to enter into a solemne covenant to defend religion lives liberties by force of armes and Anno 1572. the Prince of Orange his confederats published a protestation shewing the grounds of their riseing up in armes viz. for zeal to the countrey for the glory of God because of the inhumanities and oppressions and more then barbarous and insupportable tyranny and incroachments upon their privileges liberties and freedâ—…mes 4. They have the practice of the Waldenses in Piemont Anno 1558 1561. who being persecuted by the Lords of Trinity other Popish soveraignes assembled solemnely together to consult how they might prevent danger after long prayer calling upon God they concluded to enter into a solemne mutuall Covenant for defence of themselves their Religion did so with successe obtaining many notable victories against their persecutors See Fox Acts Mon. Vol. 2. pag. 208 209. So Anno 1571. Nov. 11. There is a league made for mutuall assistance of each other in times of persecution a copy whereof is to be seen in Mr Morland's History of Piemond pag. 252 253. 5. They have the practice of the people of Arragon mentioned by Blanca in his Comment pag. 661 652. An. 1286. in the dayes of Alphonso 3. who when there fell out a contest betwixt him the Parliament through the evill counsell of his courteours resolved to associat themselves together to raise forces it being lawfull for the common cause of liberty to contend not only with words but with armes and their suprarbiense forum or Iustitia Aragoniae which was erected of purpose to with stand the tyranny of Kings had power to resist their King with force of armes So Anno 1283. they tell Pedro 3. their King that if he would not containe himself within the Limites of the lawes they would pursue him by armes 6. They have the practice of other Spainyards as may be seen in the generall History of Spaine lib. 13 14 15. who rose in armes severall times against Pedro the I. King of Castile 7. They have the practice of the Hungarians Anno. 1608. in the dayes of Mathias for when he denyed free exercise of Religion unto the Protestants of Austria they took up armes in their own defence assembling at Horne sent a protestation unto the Estates of Hungary requireing assistance conforme to the offensive defensive League See Grimstons Imp. Hist. pag. 730. c. 8. They have the practice of the Polonians who oftintimes levied warre against their Kings as Grimstone in his Hist. Imp. Chytraeus in Chron. Sax. shew 9. They have the practice of the Danes riseing in armes against Christierne the 2. who Anno 1524. was solemnely deposed as may be seen in Chytraeus Chron. Sax. lib. 10. 10. They have the practice of the Sweds riseing up in armes against Christierne the I. for breach of his Covenant made at his coronation this was about the year 1499. See Chythraeus ubi supra 11. They have the practice of the Helvetians first three of their Cantons viz. The Suitians Vrjaus Vndervaldians Anno 1260. levied warre against their oppressing Nobles did prosecute the same twelve years Anno 1308. They joyne in Covenant to defend themselves against the House of Austria defended themselves most resolutely against the hudge armies of their adversaries upon the 16 of Nov. 1315.
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
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
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
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
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
be base Ezek. 17 14. yet being taken it must be keeped So then his second case will not make much for him The third is in short this When it hindereth a greater good if the standing to it be found impeditive of a greater good to which we are bound by a prior obligation then the oath ceaseth to binde so is it here for supponing the indifferencie of episcopacy by adhereing to the oath we hinder our own obedience to the Magistrat in things not against God's law unto which we are pre-obliged as also it hindereth the great duety of preaching the Gospel unto which Ministers were bound before the taking of Covenant Ans 1. This man would disput strongly if he had his will and if men would yeeld him all which he demandeth he would fight wonderfully Grant him once that Episcopacy is a thing indifferent you see how he will disput to admiration for the looseing of all Covenants but iâ—… that be not yeelded what will he do then He hath no more to say for all his arguments run on this supposition when this ground faileth all is wrong with him But to discover his weaknesse yet more let this once againe be granted let it be supponed that Episcopacy is not against God's law yet it is Ans. 2. If this ground hold good men shall have a door opened for looseing of 〈◊〉 from all their oaths vowes Himself conâ—…esseth that by this meanes a wide gap may be opened to all perjury what course taketh he to prevent this Doth he limit 〈◊〉 this position in any thing No not to all for all this hazard which he cannot but see May not any at their pleasure loose themselves from the oath of alleagiance by alledging that the keeping thereof doth hinder a greater good to which they are bound by a prior obligation viz. the liberating freeing of the countrey from oppression tyranny 3. Had not Ioshua more to say for looseing of his oath seing the keeping of the oath made to the â—…ibeonits did hinder obedien ce unto a particular command which God had given unto his people yet God would dispense with that particular command in this case when it could not be obeyed without perjury which is directly against the law light of nature when the obeying thereof would have giveÌ„ the heathens great occasion of blaspheming the name of the Lord though he will not dispense with the breach of any morall law upon that account 4. Had not Zedekiaâ—… as much to say for the looseing of himself from his oath viz. that the keeping of the oath did hinder him from performing that duty to his Kingdome countrey unto which he was pre-obliged ' But this new coined divinity was not of force in those dayes his bare word will not make it passe now with tender consciences 5. What is the greater good which it will hinder It will hinder as he thinketh their obedience to the civill Magistrat But are all bound to obey the Magistrat in all things that are indifferent Doth every law of the Magistrat binde the conscience subjection it is true is necessary but not obedience Active subjection may consist with obedience passive that is in suffering the penalty when Active obedience cannot be given to the command passive obedience is consistent with the publick peace doth no way hurt the majesty honour or credite of the ruler So that though standing to this oath may now hinder Active obedience unto that command of the Magistrat enjoyning a countenanceing of a concurring with the abjured prelacy yet it will not hinder subjection or passive obedience this is all which in those positive indifferent things they can be said to be obliged unto unlesse he would say which yet he darre not that the prelacy which was abjured is a government commanded of God to be perpetually practised in the Church 6. It would be considered also that their standing to this oath doth no way hinder their obedience to the Magistrat in any thing commanded of God or in any indifferent positive thing save in this one particular if so be this must goe under that name of indifferent things then the true question is not whether is it a greater good to disobey Magistrats then to keep an oath But whether is it a greater good to obey the Magist. in this one particular of imoraceing that prelacy which was abjured or to stand to the oath And that will come to this whether is it a greater good for Church or common wealth to have prelats then to want them if this advocat will make this the question there will be some found who shall willingly undertake the disput But if what is past what is present be called in to give judgment in this matter the question will quickly be decided yea appear to indifferent beholders to be already determined If the persecution of godly faithfull Ministers of the Gospell If the laying of countreysides waste desolate If the feeding of people with winde lies If the great increase of atheisme arminianisme popery ignorance prophanity of all sorts If the persecuting of the godly of godlinesse If the hindering of the exercise of religion Christian dueties the like may have any weight in casting the scale 7. As for the preaching of the Gospell it is true it is the duety of Ministers to be mindeing that But God hath need of no man's sin to worke his work he calleth no man to preach the Gospell by the way of perjury yea their suffering now for truth tenddeth to the furtherance of the Gospell as phil 1 12. is much more edifying then all their preaching could be after they had proclamed their perjury unto the would 2. Whose fault is it that Ministers cannot have liberty to preach the Gospell Is their keeping of the oath the thing which standeth in the way Is there no other way for one to have liberty to preach the Gospell but by breaking his oath what influence hath the conscientions observing of the oath upon non-preaching What if that iniquity which is established for a law were taken out of the way Would there not be preaching of the Gospell notwithstanding of a conscientious observation of the oath there is no doubt of this So that it is not the observation of the oath which hindereth the preaching of the Gospell otherwayes it would alwayes have done it will alwayes do it which is false But some other thing now let the blame of not preaching the Gospell lye where it should lye for there it will lye whether he will or not Yea the conscientious observation of this oath is so far from lying in the way of preaching the Gospell that on the contrary the breach of the oath doth incapacitate a man for preaching of the Gospell both before God men perjury is no qualification of a minister before the Lord who can