a supreame law there But at that time the supreamest humane law which according to these gentlemens opinions was ever made in England or Scotland or perhaps in all the world was made without the King in those Kingdomes and against his dissent For which reason the Covenant engages not so positively for King or Kingly Government as for the Vnion of the Covenanters in any forme and against any opposition Whereupon the Presbyterians when it was as most conceiv'd in their power to restablish King or Kingly Goveâ—nment they omitted both for many dayes of their lives without question because they conceiv'd it not a Government absolutely necessary by Covenant When D. Hamilton entred England so hostilely for that end and as he thought by vertue of Covenant yet he was excommunicated for it by the Oracles of the Covenant Lastly The reigne of the Covenant since the first day of its birth and obligation was never yet a Râ—gall reigne no not for one day anywhere so that the change which is is not determinatly contrary to that principle out of which according to the circumstances of security any Government may be moulded for any place For which reason if I should grant you that the Covenant were not expir'd and had not beene so palpably broken as it was betwixt the Nations yet Scotland if they had pleas'd might have beene Govern'd by a King and England by a free State yet both consonantly enough to Covenant and without any contrariety because the circumstances of securitie in one might have been different from the circumstances of security in the other which though different might as well have been mutually maintained as their discipline differing from ours might have beene preserv'd by us From all which it appears that that Oath is Cloudy in the positive or set Government which we ought to have and so cannot be justly called it's owne interpreter besides a reformation according to the word of God and the example of the best reformed Churches supposes such a latitude of Logick as would if all sides should be heard give us as much exercise as all our waâ—res have And certainly the Covenant is alike undefin'd in Religion and in civill Government For we swore to bring the Church Discipline in the three Kingdoms to as neer a similitude as the constitution of the places would bear not into the very same and as for the civill Government it was to receive its forme in the security of that just as water doth receive not onely the figure of the Pot or Glasse into which it is put but its conservation from being totally lost and spilt But how then will you free your selfe from this contradiction in asserting that the civill State is unalterable by Covenant when that of the Church which formes the other is so much alterable and seeing that of the State receives from this not only its form and being but what ever else you alone please to attribute to your security in it From whence I conclude again that a change of Government is consistent with Covenant that a submission to it in lawful things is much more and consequently it ingages not to any one determinate Government and so is not against this of ours I beleeve it hath been a frequent observation of many who have calmely converst with our Divines and others zealous for Presbytery That they have found them little satisfied with that sort of Presbytery which our Parliament modelled for us of this Nation as having little affinity with the Couenant My beliefe is that they in that discernd not the consequence of their own dissatisfaction For if their consciences regulated by Covenant can admit no civill Government but the Kingly which they so much argue for here and if the Covenant and a Scotch Presbytery whose right they hold to be Divine be essentially linkt together Then we and they may all of us learne not onely from direct inferences but from the declar'd experience of the Sonne the Father the Grandfather and great GrandMother that is of the three last Scotch Kings and one Queene That if the Scotch Presbitery come out of the Covenant then Kingly government cannot derive from it because they are jurisdictions incompatible and inconsistant in the same place and if one can conserve it then may we say as much of the other How much Mary Queene of Scotland experienced of this let the world judge by that which she wrote both with inke in her Letters and with her blood on the Scaffold For how came she to be Beheaded in England but by Mr. Knox and the Kirkes having done little better than put her into the hands of those who could not keepe her long alive with security to themselves King Iames hath writ and argued largely concerning his dangers sufferings under it it is yet remembred in what Dialect they of the Presbytery were wont to Preach and Pray against him to his face and he not know how to remedy it or by what right to top theirs When he came into England he profest his deliverance from that subjection not of small satisfaction to his minde and therefore at this diâ—tance he contrived how to extinguish or check that â—ate there after some progresse in that worke he himselfe dyed peaceably in a milder Country But K. Charles with that Crown inherited the consequences of that undertaking for his first troubles began in the controversie of that Presbytery and what a preservation he thought the Covenant from which it seemes their Presbytery is so inseparable might be to him and what his fate was and who helpt it on nay who diverted him from agreement here all the world knowes and in his writings likewise he hath showne to the world that he himselfe was not ignorant of it This only is the wonder that in the midst of this their specious zeale for Kingly Government the Covenant should be so silent concerning Royall Posterity or for their succession in case the Scots or English Souldiers had kill'd the King casually before he had given them the satisfaction which they required the consideration of all this with some other lately offer'd to the young Prince at the Hague by the Scotch Commissioners and the satisfaction which they in their late Declaration require from him as they did from his Father have questionlesse made him scruple so long at his adventure into that Country though so much invited For they told him p. 14.15 That for longer then these eight yeares yea ever since that Queene Mary their fundamentall priviledge hath beene to assemble in Parliament and to conclude there of themselves either without King or Kings Commissioners and that if his Majesty refuse those their reasonable desires they shall be constrained in so great an extremity to doe what is incumbent on them to preserve Religion and the Kingdom from ruine Here they plainly acknowledge and assume that supreame power and right
for acknowledging the Vsurping Stearesmans right which is still falsely suppos'd in our case Here I desire this Casuist to pull off his maske and speake plainly whether he doth not plead for his owne punishment as one who at the beginning of our warre principally incouraged us not to be guided by the then pretending Stearesman whom they of his party said aside and stear'd a while themselves the Scots declaring that he was not fit to touch the helme againe till hee had satisfied c. Besides this is true that they then required obedience from compounding Royalists although to them they seemed an unlawfull power and Magistracy as to the dispencing of publique and private justice Secondly the reason wherefore these marriners might not acknowledge him the right master as he hath varied the case is rather because this is in an inferiour thing de jure privato Master and Marriners being accountants to the Merchants who have a Court of Justice to judge the fact but what Court is there in this world to call that power which here is the supreamest to any account Thirdly he supposes the usurper and the complyers to be brought to account by the others but not till they come to shore whereas in our case we can do nothing but in the ship that is in the common-wealth when we leave that we go into another world our true patria where indeed we doe not call one another but are all called together to an account by our supreame Magistrate whose sentence we would faine prejudge here by a confusion of the ship in via The grand case of Conscience p. 9. Adviseth that seeing we are so unsetled we should use meanes for a settlement though by its procurement wee were more unsetled If a man be at the rivers brinke he would advise him to keepe out of the water but if at once he leap into the middle of the river he would perswade him to come to the bank although he wade through much water to come thither I see according to this horrid tenent that if God as the Scotch phrase hath it comes not to the whole length of our desire then there must be no peace betwixt man and man in this world Mr. Ste. Marshall preacht lately that God was to be thankt for some thing that Church doores were yet open to those who had a zeale and a will to congregate that they were not under their enemies swords nor compounding with them Hee saw how they might be worse if God should through their peevishnesse let them see forraigne armies at their doores who have both faces tongues religions affections different from ours and wil not care for firing our houses and Churches or for giving us lawes againe in an unknown tongue and perhaps Religion too Can he think the Notion of our Church government would be a charme to such swords and consciences Or rather can he assure us of his prophecy here that if we begin new troubles we shall certainly have victory For his argument supposes it must needs end so and that by his perswasion we shall wade to the bank If we were indeed in the midst of the water that is in the midst of warre and confusion then being engaged for life we might endeavour to wade through though the streame were running deepe with our own and Childrens innocent bloods for after all Metaphors that is the element which he means Thus in no diseases but those which are supposeddeadly may we use desperate remedies such as may endanger the destruction of the whole body But may a man indanger his whole body when it is not for the cure of himselfe but of another and by the killing also of others besides himselfe wife and children I will not name what sort of subtilty this Gentleman hath used in this Argument nor defâ—ne with what conscience here he seekes to satisfie anothers For lest we of the People should bogle at comming on the Stage to Act our late Tragedy over againe hee would impose it on our beleifes that we are still in the middle act of it and that we ought to finish it It is high time for him to consider whither if we run along with him in this we should not shut up compassion from our Brethren and shut out a great part of our gratitude towards God although I confesse some scars and haltings may remaine yet after the warre it selfe is ended Methinks he should finde every thing both in Nature and Christianity more favourable for our present Peace then for our third Warre especially seeing all our former warres have ended very contrary to the expectation of those who were hottest to begin them But I consider that passion is the last hold out of which we are beaten of which the fuller men are the lesse do they through a great judgement on their spirits perceive into what deformities they doe transport them it being the nature of all intoxications that their defects are better perceivd by any then by those who are opprest by them THE Second Part THAT This obedience to the present Government is not contrary to but consistent with our Solemn League and Covenant BY these steps we are come at last ad sacras columnas to those sacred Pillars on which the holy Covenant hangs almost in every Church as a sanctum aeternitati a law sacred to eternity The hands which hung it there have not they say power to take it downe againe Who therefore may undertake to tell these persons that they actually are or else may be freed from it seeing they finde themselves obliged if they can to tie all the world with them in the same sort of knot Here is certainly a zealâ— worthy to be â—ixt on that which should obliege alwayes and the world must confesse that there hath been no publique oath taken by any person anywhere who have been more scrupulously attent not to double with their God in relation to his part in contract But yet let not these consciences be scandalized if I say it was compild by none but mortall men taken onely by such and as a promissory oath cannot possibly be free from those exceptions and accidents wherewith time changes the constitution of all those things which it doth not absolutely destroy wherfore upon a sober review of al I doubt not but as many Oaths and Leagues are transient so to shew that this according to its nature and as it is originally a League or Covenant that is as it is a formall compact relating to the publique and united corporation of severall Nations and Magistracies by which each people were united together and without which neither people were respectively to act any thing separately within and against themselves I say I doubt not but to shew that such a Covenant uppon what hath interven'd is expir'd to us the People of England and that without any default of ours And though our Magistrate would give it a
viz. Of two Magistracies united as a meanes for the easier reaching the end of those respective reformations which they were obliged to make before they entred in league and of two people who by the union of their respective Magistracies passe for so much as is therein exprest into an union one with another and are to have their private capacities and endeavours managed by them and never against them by any virtue of this league Besides it is a considerable circumstance in the Magistrates managing the whole that states or civill constitutions by reason of the diseases of ambition and avarice are naturally as much subject to future changes as any other things are and without the supposition of tacite conditions we may as little sweare to preserve the State of a publique body as we may sweare to preserve the State of our own particular bodies or as a parent may to preserve his Childe which when it shall be taken away by diseases or by justice he may be sorry for the losse but may not justly complaine of it And indeed so it is come to passe without any default in us of the english People or of our publique Magistrate under whom we were to act in these private places and callings that neither of us can be said to have laid the Covenant aside although we could not keepe it from expiring because the failing was in that which was never suppos'd to be in our powers viz. in many conditionall things which camecr osse and in the breach of fidelity in another collaterall and concurring power If you please to object here as an aggravation and an incitement for us of the Covenanted people to rise kill and slay that the Covenant is buried not as a thing really expired and dead but that the people out of interest must be told so onely because the former Magistracy is really laid aside and changed which if people should throughly consider would quickly make them finde matter enough in the Covenant to take armes I shall not in the way of answer to this repeate any thing concerning the cause the meanes and the concurrences to this our present change every Covenanter both of England and Scotland knowing well that there was no change of Government here till the Covenant was Nationally broke and so many here were insnared both Royalists and Parliamentarians by the Scots who thought to have us'd it for a change of Government and as a stratagem to give law in another judicatory Neither shal I argue in this place how compatible any change may be with a Covenant so conditionall in which Kings as Parties are totally excluded from judging either for themselves or for others which point shall be further argued at last But I shall content my selfe to take what is here granted in the objection viz. That the Government is really changed The consequence then to us of the people will be that seeing by the fourth Article of the Covenant we may not without apparent breach of it act the sence of the Covenant but as we receive it from our respective and supream judicatory of England onely and that the said Government which it relates to is confest to be gone have you not then clearely confest that the obligation to act any thing publiquely by Covenant is likewise gone according to an old Axiome Sublato relatâ— tollitur correlatum If this present Government which we are chang'd to and which now protects us should thinke fit by the way of Covenant to give a new life to that remaining part of it which may be observed yet you will not allow any obedience to them though in things never so lawfull Neither will that fourth Article allow me to obey any forreigner nor those without whose consent the Covenant was made and consequently without whom it is to be interpreted as the late Proceedings of the Scots at the Hague plainely shew So that after all this if I in my private capacity be as you say still indispensibly obliged by it to begin or assist to publique troubles do you not fall into a worser absurdity and maintaine an Oath against the fifth Commandment or against all Magistracy which is an impossibility Nothing ever cautiond in termes more expressely for our duty of making discoveries of bringing to condigne punishment of our supreame respective Iudicatories and the like then the Covenant did which are things relating to none but our supream Magistracy unlesse you please plainly to assert another Absurdity that every single man who hath taken it is thereby absolvd from his Magistrate and is made one himselfe to judge of the other and thereby authorizd not by way of Toleration to professe but to establish what Religion he would to punish at his own tribunall whom he would and to reforme the state as he would For he to whom you will allow a capacity of making warre hath also a Capacity of making Peace and Lawes for the security of his Peace Thus we see how the Government is changed and the formall obligation of the Covenant at an end But what if I should grant you by the way of supposition that in case both the Covenant and the former Government were standing together in as full force as you desire and as it was when the Scots first delivered the King up to the Parliament of England I would then know of you whither if our Parliament had then for reasons best known to themselves and of which wee can never judge competently declared us of the People free from any further obligation of the Covenant might we justly have thought our solemne League at an end and that we ought to act nothing publiquely any longer by it If you will say we should have been still obliged to act upon it then I aske you againe under whom For I have proved it must be alwaies under a Magistrate and you have all along proved that it must onely be under our lawfull Magistrate how lawfull soever the thing be in it self which is commanded you would not allow the King to be the person to be obeyed whom you thought fit to keepe in an imprisonment The Parliament according to our supposition would not be any longer obliged to it or be obeyed in it and the Scots acknowledge themselves in the 4 Article to be the supreame judicatory onely of Scotland and I cannot act publiquely by a private Capacity or Magistracy Ergo in such a case the Covenant how good soever had not obliged any longer nor is it in it selfe eternall You will not deny perhaps but one man may free another from an Oath when it is for the worldly profit of him who pleases to release it as every man may throw away any thing of his owne right but you will not allow it in Sacred things where God is a Party I answer that though no Parent can dispence his wife or childe from the feare of God and the duties they owe to
so union to union and certainly that Union of the Parliaments of both Kingdoms was at an end ever since the Scotch Army here received their money and returned home leaving the Delinquents of both Nations dis-united and clearly reduced to receive condigne punishment as the Covenant calls it at the respective judicatories of both Kingdoms and if it ended not then yet it could not bee consistent with their Declaration and divisions presently after and if not then yet I am sure it could not be consistent with their Nationall invasion and tampering to divide all in England and Ireland the effect whereof hath been a change of Government here and hath made them totally distinct forrainers to us The Demurrers premisses in this Argument by a new logick relate onely to a State of publique Vnion and his conclusion relates only to a State of publique dis-union of the consequences whereof the Covenant saith nothing at all in any Article It enjoynâ—s the bringing of Delinquents to condigne punishment and those private persons likewise among our selves who should helpe on either divisions amongst us or the invasion of either Nation first But whether should they be brought to punishment The Covenant answers Either before the respective judicatories of each Kingdome who onely have power to judge of what is Condigne or before no body It speakes likewise how we should unitedly venture our lives against the Enemy which then was it doth not or at least ought not to sweare us to get the better of them for ever nor that we should in a rout or dis-union end our lives against all opposition and without quarter If the termes of our utmost endeavours and all the dayes of our lives are to be understood litterally and that we must not survive any violation of the Covenant then why do these Gentlemen who conclude themselves in the State of the Covenant thus understood thinke of living till to morow The termes of forever or for all the dayes of our lives are not in our contracts to be understood naturally but morally For we finde it plainly in the Judicial law that after a Jew had taken a servant and bor'd a hole through his eare he was as the Text saith to serve him for ever although one of them might possâ—bly have dyed the next day and both of them after a while might have beene made captives to others The law calls the league of Marriage individua vitae consueâ—udo a câ—habitaâ—ion for all the dayes of our lives For so it should be ex voto contrahentiâ—m in the sincere desires of the contractors Yet we know one ordinarily dyes before the other and that many conditions may happen to legitimate their divorce afterwards though the contract was never so religiously made in the presence of almighty God at first The Scots in their late proceedings with their King at the Hague pag. the 6. interpret the words of utmost endeavour as morally as we doe here For the Commissioners of the Kirk said they us'd their utmost endeavours to save the Kings life according to Covenant but how They answer that it was in Papers messages Declarations Testimonies and Protestations onely they name not warre or bloodshed for they protested against that way last yeare as contrary to Covenant when the Parliament of Scotland invaded us and I hope for the reputation of the religion they professe they have not altered their publique commentary of that sacred Text contradictorily so soone To conclude Either wee are still in the Vnion of the end of the Covenant or we are not If we be in it then these breake the Covenant by seeking to dis-unite us If we be not in it where then is the Article for our private forming a warre upon it and under whom if not under our English supreame iudicatory and if they call us not out to revenge that which was more then a bare falling off from the Covenant last yeare amongst ourselves when the Scots exercis'd such high hostilities and were the first shatterers of all our frame which otherwise might by Gods blessing have cemented againe how durst these private trumpets sound the alarum and open the wounds of the Nations once more Though the respective iudicatory of that Kingdome now cannot make that which was once done undone Yet by the present punishment of the Kirke it is acknowledged that they hold the Covenant to have been more then nationally broken in regard of the harme and damage which was done to us after it was broken For there is a great deale of difference betwixt ceasing to helpe according to a league and acting hostily contrary to it especially when no such penalty is in such a league exprest betwixt the parties But you will object that if the Covenant were so broken in one or two points by them yet it doth not follow that the whole Covenant is broken thereby and dead in every part I have answered before that we are no longer obliged to any thing in it by the way of League and Covenant The reason here is because here in leagues everything is to be observed conâ—unctively otherwise all is broken which is so true and cleare that if we looke upon Gods league and Covenant with Israel we shall finde the same thing pronounc't there God said If yee keepe my Commandements I will be your God and will maintaine you in your plenty and in your Land Yet he said that if they broke any one Commandement in their part of Covenant they were guilty of all and that all should be at an end betwixt them just as St. Iohn in the conclusion of his Revelation saith Who ever shall diminish but one word of that Booke defaceth the whole and looseth the whole benefit which he might expect thereby in the holy City by vertue of the second Covenant It is asserted that there is no clause in any Oath or Covenant which in a common sence forbids obedience to a present Government To this the grand case of Conscience answers That the Covenant engages to another Government therefore it forbids obedience to this and Oathes ought to bee their owne interpreters Here he at first begs the question whether the Covenant can now engage us or no seeing it hath beene proved that that which is now nothing cannot now engage us to any thing and conseqently our submitting to and acting under the present Government cannot be contrary to Covenant because things which are contrary one to the other must have actuall being together at the same time But the very being of this Government supposes the nullity of the Covenant whose death as it was other where contrived before gave life to that mutation here afterwards Secondly Though the Covenant were still valid and in force yet when we were sworne to it first it found us actually out of that Government here pointed at viz. Of King Lords and Commons For that is the supreame Government of a Country which makes
blood The Reader may be pleased to take notice that though these replyes for the most part touch but on simple obedience to a Government supposed unlawfull but commanding lawfull things yet they virtually extend to our acting under such a Government It is to be presumed that our adversaries not contesting profestly what hath been publiquely argued in that point do conceive the difficulties of acting under involved in those of our submission to such a power The distinction of Active and Passive obedience is but a nicety and if one be not a sin the other is not They are in a manner the same thing derive from the same Principle and differ but gradually just as the morning and the noone light do which derive both from the same planet For he who takes paines to furnish in a â—axe and he who tooke paines to execute the office of a Judge or of a Justice of peace in honest things by vertue of Commissions and Orders from the same supreame but illegall Magistracy doe both of them what they doe by vertue of the same originall submission which is a passive obedience If this be otherwise then according to these authors opinion we and all our forefathers have sinned in obeying those actively or passively who by unjust usurpation have come betwixt us and them who derive from the first who were in compact unlesse the Lapse of time can justifie the viciousnesse of an action which is impossible or that we may lawfully obey those who plenarily possesse and protect us and command us lawfull things FINIS ERRATA p. 2. losse r. loose imperciptibly r. imperceptibly insinuation r. insinuations p. 2. l. 2. may be not r. may not be beholding r. beholden p. 6. heneration r. generation p. 7. but in one r in one p. 9. understand r. understood offices r. officers p. 10. a businesses r. busines p. 11. pretends r. pretend thereof r. therefore p. 13. but it is a contradiction r. is it a contradiction p. 14. for detain'd r. attain'd for dislove r. disolve p. 15. best to take heed r. best take heed p. 16. King r. Kings p. 17. purpose r. propose p. 19. found r. swound p. 22. at last r. at least p. 31. drive r. derive p. 33. ply r. comply for or r. nor p. 34. large r. subjection p. 39. person r. persons next r. rest p. 4 r. change r. chance p. 42. true to religion r. to true religion p48 dispence him of it r. dispence with him for it whence the difficulty of perswading civill truth â—irst Demur Demur p 6. case of Con. p. 3.7 â— Pag. 2. The end of Magistracy subsevient to the end of our being All justice or just things relate not essentially to the legall Magistrate Of commutative justice Vid. p. 26.35 1 Cor. 6. of distributive justice This present Parliament is effectually a Parliament Vid p. 18. Necessity above formes of Government The difference betwixt conquest victory Vid. p. 33. Object Answer The State of Kingdoms as separated and as mixt in themselves Of the Riâ—ht of War betwixt Fundamentall Parties page 9. Of the House of Lords Of Secluded Members The negative when prevalent in equall partnarship Whither the transactions of the legall number of the house be invaled when any members are forct away Of the present consent of the Major part of the People Ob. Answ. Whither the present power be the suprem Whither it be a Parliament Object Ans. The case of the Kings comming to the house of Commons not parallel The case of the apprentices entring and forcing the house not parallel The Parl. votes against force still observed are the same still VVhy actions of Government must change How wrong hath been fitted for a title 〈…〉 Bac. H. 7. Ob. Object Of toleration Ob. Ans. The magistrate in a state not as a Father of a Family VVhy states cannot looke so strictly after vertue as after publique quiet Oâ— Ob. Ans. Of the Ecclips suspention and extinction of supream powers The union of people to a GoVernment not like a marriage Obj. Ans. A King of England why not as a husband to the people of England Ob. Answ. Of taking away the Kings life Ob. Ans. Of obedience for wrath and for conscience sake Tyrants in titles from whom Of our lawfull submission to a Magistrate who rules by Gods permissive will Ob. Ans. Obedience necessary to lawfull and unlawfull powers how different How we may have a right to take what another may not have aright to give The difference betwixt privat Title and publique Of possession Object Answer Of supream powers altering themselves by joynt concurrence How seperatly Ob. Ans. Demur p. 8. Of non obedience Ob. Ans. What time makes a form'd Government Obj. Ans. Our condition different from Israels betwixt David and Absalom Obedience to false Governours in the right or wrong Government varies not the sin of obedience Wherein Caesars case the Parl. disagree Wherein Cesars case the Parl. agree as to justifie our obedience Obj. Ans. In what senâ—â— the present submission 〈◊〉 legall Of the 〈◊〉 evidence of 〈◊〉 riâ—â—ts to as to satisfie conâ—â—â—eâ—ce for actions of wâ—r uâ—on them Ob. Ans. Object Demn p. 5. Ans. Obedience some times asserts not a Title but power They who obey a wrong authority râ—bbe not the riâ—hâ—â— Obj. Ans. Of the recovery of dubious Rights and the benefit which people get by most warres Obj. Answer The case of the Master of the Ship thrown over board Ob. Answ. Whether we be actually in the unsettlement deepes which he supposes When the whole body may be hazarded for a disperate remedy when not 1 Joh. 3.17 we are still obliged to many things of the Covenant but not qua league or Covenant Of promissory â—nd assertory Oathes VVhither a promissory Oath which alwaies involves a Tacite condition be lawfull Ob. Ans. Gen. 24.2.34 Of tacite conditions in Oathes concerning things possible The obligation of a pact or promise with an Oath or without an Oath is all one 1 Kâ—ngs 2 20. 21.22 1 Sam. 25.22 Jo. â— 10 Gen. 24.2.3.4 Argu. The Covenant a politicall or State Oath The subordinate conditions of this Oath Ob. Ans. Oâ— change of â—â—â—â—â—nment 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 cause or as an effect of â—â—â—hers forâ—â—â— breach of Covenant can â—â—â—her way authorize us to 〈◊〉 against this Government The Covenant obliges us not against the â—iâ—th Commandement Page 15. The Covenaâ—â— make 〈◊〉 eacâ— man a Magistrate Obj. Ans. Num 30. How a superiour may free an inferiour from â—n Oath even in that which belongs to God The difference btewixt this our league and those of Princeâ— for authorizing war The obligation of the Covenant how lesse then the obligation of a â—ra War how an unjust penalty for the meere breach of Covenant Object Ans. Of the obligation of such a promise as may be fulfill'd solely by the promiser Ob. Answ. Of the obligation for preserving the Kings person by covenant How the words of preservation in Covenant provided more for the Kings suffering then the words of punishment provided for Delinquents sufferings Ob. Ans. How 〈◊〉 that the excluding member ought to be brought by 〈◊〉 before the excluded Ob. Ans. The Coveant relates onely to a time of uâ—nion with and under the magistrate How the league of nationall union came to be ended Of bringing those who would divide us to condigne punishment The meaning of our utmost endeavours and of all the dayes of our lives in the Covenant The Covenant how more then broke by the Scots hostility Obj. Ans. whither the nationall breaking of one part of the Covenant put an end to the whole Ob. Ans. The Covenant of all oathes interprets itselfe least especially in the positive Government which it would establish and in Religion Though the Covenant were in Force yet a change of Government might be consistent with it How the Covenant necessarily points at some change of Government Scotch Presbytery fit for any Government but the kingly The judgement â—â— experience of Mary Queen of Scotland Of King Iames Of King Charles Vid. Scotch Declaration 27 July 1649. p. 14. Of the Prince Vid. Decla p. 8.10 Scotch proceed at the Hague with the Prince p. 14.15 The supream power in Scotland in whom How the Scots state the supremacy of England in Scotland How the Scotch Presbyterians ours oppose one another Two supremacies in the same place how inâ—â—â—sistent Whether atrue Title doth according to Covenant authorize obedience The King of â— Scotlands present case the actual change of Government there by their interpretation of the covenant Against Kings Page 18. Page 22. The interpretation of the Kirke is not recommendatory to the State The conclusion