close up this Head of Objections drawn from the Confession foresaid it is to be considered that the famous and â—earned Doctors of Aberdeen Anno 1638. in their Demands and Duplys do in Demand 11. declare and take God to witness that they and other people were willing to subscribe this very Confession of Faith And 11 Duply They assert that they are ready not only to subscribe but to swear this National Confession of Faith so they call it ratified and registred in Parliament To which Declaration they add the Oath sworn by them when they received the degree of Doctorat in Theology which Oath they solemnly again renew in the 7. Duply And this they judged necessary for them to do to satisfie the world that they were no favourers of Popery which as then so now is the Engine whereby to calumniate loyal Subjects and soundest Protestants as Papists in masquerade By which we understand that these learned loyal Divines and Orthodox the glory of the Reformed Church in their Age who well understood the Protestant Doctrine the unlawfulness of resisting the supreme Magistrate upon any pretence whatsoever the intrinsik power of the Church together with the Interests and Rights of Episcopal Government did not scruple to subscribe and swear this Confession of Faith and that as a Test against Popish Errors and Supersition So that they who shall now refuse to swear to own and believe the true Protestant Religion reformed from Popery contained in this Confession do occasion too much umbrage of suspicion and jealousie that they are not sound nor solid Protestants As to the second Head or Classis of Objections drawn from the Oath of Allegiance and Supremacy which together with the maintenance of the Kings Prerogative is asserted and sworn in the Test the great stress of the Objections founded thereupon lies in these two Particulars That the Kings Supremacy as it is asserted by the Act of Parliament viz 16 Anno 1669. seems to deprive and devest the Church of all its intrinsick Power as if all Ecclesiastical Authority were derived not from Jesus Christ the alone Prince and Vital Head of his Church but from secular Princes and Magistrates And 2. That by the foresaid Act there seems to be a Power lodged in the King to alter and change the established Episcopal Government of the Church at his Royal pleasure which they can never swear to maintain as a Prerogative of the Crown who believe Episcopacy to be of Divine Right and Apostolical Institution and by consequence an oecumenick and unalterable Government by any power on earth For the more clear satisfaction of these Objections it will be convenient to read and consider that Act of Parliament November the 16th 1669 in which upon due perusal and examination nothing new or dangerous to the setlement of our National Church will be found comprehended Our Saviour was very unconcerned to regulate the bounds of Soveraign Powers he doth not examine Pilate's Power to judg of Blasphemy or Treason but acknowledgeth and submits unto it And so his Apostles neither enquire into the Rights of the Roman Emperors nor limit the exercise of their Power but seriously recommend to all good Subjects as their duty submission and obedience to the higher Powers and they leave the secular Powers of the world in possession of whatever Authority either over persons or matters they found them invested with The Magistrate doth not intitle himself to the Spiritual Function in preaching the Word administring the Sacraments exercising the Power of Ordination or the Keys c. Our gracious King never challenged these spiritual Powers which indeed belong to the Bishops and other Ministers of the Church The holiest and best Kings of Israel and Judah are famous for abolishing false Worship asserting and setling of the Truth Many excellent Ordinances concerning Religion were made by Moses Ioshua David Solomon Asa Iosiab c. which are recorded and applauded by the Spirit of God in the Scriptures These ordered and regulated divine worship Sacraments and Covenants with God they erected Altars Temples and Tabernacles and dedicated them to God They destroyed Idolatry reformed abuses in Gods House and service and both setled the standing worship and ordained Thanksgivings and Humiliations so that the ordering of matters of Religion was not exempted from the supreme secular Power under the Law nor did the Emperors and Sovereign Princes of the earth by imbracing Christianity lose their Power injoyed by all their Predecessors which if they had they should have been thereby inevitably exposed to the disturbances of their Government by Seditions and Rebellions upon every frantick eruption of religious Melancholy If Constantine had not interposed his Authority for suppressing the Arrian Heresie what had become either of Government or Religion The drawing up of Canons for regulating Religion our Lord committed to the Apostles and their Successors the Bishops with other Ecclesiastical persons but that these Canons should be inforced as Laws by temporal sanctions and penalties this flowed from the authority of the Civil Power And accordingly in the second oecumenical Council the Bishops and Fathers assembled at Constantinople beseech Theodosius the elder to ratifie the Decrees of that Synod Justinian established the main Canon or Codâ—x of the Universal Church consisting of the Canons of the first general and five Ancient provincial Councils commanding them to be keept as Laws As matters of Religion have not been exempted from the cognizance and regulation of the Supreme Civil Powers much less can the exemption of Ecclesiastical persons be pretended Under the Law we find Solomon judging an High Priest offending viz. Abiathar whom he turned out and placed Zadock in his Room and Office 1 King 2. 27 35. and as single persons so if we consider Church-Officers in their Ecclesiastical Meetings and Assemblies we find the Calling thereof lodged in the supreme Magistrate for Moses not Aaron David not Abiathar Solomon not Zadock summoned the Priests and Levites to the Meetings so under the Gospel in the pure and primitive times we find no Councils nor Synods called by the Bishop of Rome nor by any other Bishop or by any other Ministers forming themselves into Classical and Synodical Meetings against or without the Consent of the Christan Prince or Magistrate To any who will be at the pains to consult Antiquty or Ecclesiastical History it will evidently appear that the indiction of times and places the convocating of persons the precedency the ordering of debates the dismission of Assemblies the confirmation of Canons so as to enforce them as Laws in the General or Provincial Councils were all performed by the supreme Magistrate St. Paul himself appealed to Caesar when arraigned and called in question for his Religion and Athanasius appealed from the Synod at Tyre to Constantine to whom were two appeals made in the case of Cassianus and Donatus besides many other instances of the like nature And it were heartily to be wished that all Church-men and Ministers
to understand it notwithstanding all these exce 〈…〉 on s in the Parliaments which is its true and genuine sense I take it therefore notwithstanding any scruple made by any as far as it is consistent with it self and the Protestant Religion which is wholly in the Parliaments sense and their true meaning which being present I am sure was owned by all to be the securing of the Protestant Religion founded on the word of God and contained in the Confession of Faith recorded I. 6 p. 1. c. 4. And not out of scruple as if any thing in the Test did import the contrary but to clear my self from all cavils as if thereby I were bound up further then the true meaning of the Oath I doe declare that by that part of the Test that there lyes no obligation on me c. I mean not to bind up my self in my station and in a lawfull way still disclaming all unlawful endeavours to wish and endeavour any alteration I think according to my conscience to the advantage of Church or State not repugnant to the Protestant Religion and my Loyalty and by my Loyalty I understand no other thing then the words plainly bear to wit the duty and allegiance of all Loyal Subjects and this explanation I understand as a part not of the Test or Act of Parliament but as a qualifying part of my Oath that I am to swear and with it I am willing to take the Test if Your Royal Highness and Your Lordships allow me or otherwise in submission to Your Highness and the Councils pleasure I am content to be held as a refuser at present The Councils Letter to His Majesty concerning their having committed the Earl of Argyle May it please your Sacred Majesty THE last Parliament having made so many and so advantageous Acts for securing the Protestant Religion the Imperial Crown of this Kingdom and your Majesties Sacred Person whom God Almighty long preserve and having for the last and as the best way for securing all these appointed a Test to be taken by all who should be entrusted with the Government which bears expresly That the same should be taken in the plain and genuine sense and meaning of the words We were very careful not to suffer any to take the said Oath or Test with their own Glosses or Explications but the Earl of Argyle having after some delays come to Council to take the said Oath as a Privy-Councellor spoke some things which were not then heard nor adverted to and when his Lordship at his next offering to take it in Coâ—ncil as one of the Commissioners of your Majesties Tresury was commanded to take it simply he refused to do so but gave in a Paper shewing the only sense in which he would take it which Paper we all considered as that which had in it gross and scandalous Reflections upon that excellent Act of Parliament making it to contain things contradictory and inconsistent and thereby depraving your Majesties Laws misrepresenting your Parliament and teaching your Subjects to evacuate and disappoint all Laws and Securities that can be enacted for the preservation of the Government suitable to which his Lordship declares in that Paper That he means not to bind up himself from making any alterations he shall think fit for the advantage of Church or State and which Paper he desires may be looked upon as a part of his Oath as if he were the Legislator and able to add a part to the Act of Parliament Upon serious perusal of which Paper we found our selves obliged to send the said Earl to the Castle of Edenburgh and to to transmit the Paper to your Majesty being expresly obliged to both these by your Majesties express Laws And we have commanded your Majesties Advocate to raise a pursuit against the said Earl forbeing Author and having given in the said Paper And for the further prosecution of all relating to this Affair we expect your Majesties Commands which shall be most humbly and faithfully obeyed by Your Majesties most Humble most Faithful and most Obedient Subjects and Servants Edenburgh Nov. 8. 1681. Sic Subscribitur Glencairne Winton Linlithgow Perth Roxburgh Ancram Airlie Levingstoun Io. Edinburgen Ross Geo. Gordoun Ch. Maitland G. M ckenzie Ja. Foulis I. Drumond The Kings Answer to the Councils Letter C. R. Novemb. 15. 1681. MOst dear c. having in one of your Letters directed unto us of the 8. Instant received a particular account of the Earl of Argyle's refusing to take the Test simply and of your proceedings against him upon the occasion of his giving in a Paper shewing the only sense in which he will take it which had in it gross and scandalous Reflections upon that excellent late Act of our Parliament there by which the said Test was enjoyned to be taken we have now thought fit to let you know that as we do hereby approve these your Proceedings particularly your sending the said Earl to our Castle of Edenburgh and your commanding our Advocate to raise a Pursuit against him for being Author of and having given in the said Paper so we do also authorize you to do all things that may concern the further prosecution of all relating to this Affair Nevertheless it is our express will and pleasure That before any Sentence shall be pronounced against him at the Conclusion of the Process you send us a particular account of what he shall be found guilty of to the end that after our being fully informed thereof we may signifie our further pleasure in this matter For doing whereof c. But as notwithstanding the Councils demanding by their letter His Majestie 's allowance for prosecuting the Earl they before any return caused His Majestie 's Advocat exhibit ane indictment against him upon the points of slandering and depraving as hath been already remarked so after having receaved His Majestie 's answer the design growes and they thought fit to order a new indictment containing beside the former Points the crimes of treason and perjury which accordingly was exhibit and is here subjoyned the difference betwixt the tvvo indictments being only in the particulars above noted The Copy of the Indictment against the Earl of Argyle Archibald Earl of Argyle YOU are indicted and accused That albeit by the Common Law of all well-govern'd Nations and by the Municipal Law and Acts of Parliament of this Kingdom and particularly by the 21 and by the 43d Act Par. 2 James 1. and by the 83d Act Par. 6. James 5. and by the 34th Act Par. 8. James 6. and the 134th Act Par 8 James 6. and the 205th Act Par. 14. James 6. All leasing-makers and tellers of them are punishable with tinsel of Life and Goods like as by the 107th Act. Par. 7. James 1 it is statuted That no man interpret the Kings Statutes otherwise than the Statute bears and to the intent and effect that they were made for and as the makers of them understood and
is neither just nor equall so to all interested it is the meanest of Securities For His Majesties Advocate hath already told us that His Majesties Officers can never wrong him And although the Lords and He should conceal what others had done it might make themselves more guilty But not prove any Exoneration to those concerned without a down-right Remission Whereas it is manifest that if their Lordships had admitted the Earl's Exculpation upon the sure and evident grounds therein contained it would not only have answered the Justice of his case but vindicated all concerned And lastly he was to tell them that possibly they might be inclined to go on because they were already so far engaged as they knew not how to retreat with their honour but as there can be no true honour where there is manifest wrong and injustice so in the frail and fallible condition of human things there can be no delusion more dangerous and pernicious then this that unum scelus est alio scelere tegendum And here the Earl thought to lay before them very plainly and pertinently some remarkable and excellent Rules whereby L. Chief justice Hales a renouned judge of our nighbour nation tells he did govern himself in all criminal cases which adds the Earl if they took a due impression would certainly give them peace and joy when all the vain considerations that now amuse will avail them nothing The Rules are these I. Not to be rigid in matters purely consciencions where all the harm is diversity of judgment II. That Popular or Court applause or distaste have no influence on any thing is to be done in point of distribution of justice III. In a criminal case if it be a measuring cast then to incline to mercie and acquital IV. In criminal things that consist only of words where no more harm ensues moderation is then no injustice V. To abhor all privat solicitations of what kynd soever and by whomsoever VI. In maters depending not to be solicitous what men will say or think so long as the rule of justice is exactly kept VII And lastly never to ingage themselves in the begining of a cause but reserve themselves un-prejudged till the whole bussines be heard Then the Earl goes on and makes notes for additional defences reducible to these heads I. The absolute innocence of his Explication in its true and genuine meaning from all crime or offence far more from the horrible crimes libelled II. The impertinency and absurdity of His Majesties Advocat's arguings for inferring the crimes libelled from the Earl's words III. The reasonableness of the Exculpation IV. The Earl's Answers to the Advocat's groundlesse pretences for aggravating of his case As to the first the Earl waving what hath been said from common reason and humanity it self and from the whole tenour and circumstances of his life comes closs to the point by offering that just and genuine Explanation of his Explication which you have above Num. 21. I have delayed hitherto to take the Oath appointed by the Parliament to be taken betwixt and the first of January nixt But now being required near two moneths sooner to take it this day peremptorly or to refuse I have considered the Test and have seen several objections moved against it especially by many of the Orthodox clergie notwithstanding whereof I have endeavoured to satisfie my self with a just explication which I haâ—e offer that I may both satisfie my Conscience and obey Your Highness and Your Lordships Commands in taking the Test though the Act of Parliament do not simply command the thing but only under a certification which I could easily submit to if it were with Your Highness favour and might be without offence But I love not to be singular and I am very desirous to give obedience in this and every thing as far as I can and that which clears me is that I am confident what ever any man may think or say to the prejudice of this Oath the Parliament never intended to impose contradictory Oaths and because their sense they being the framers and imposers is the true sense and that this Test enjoyned is of no privat interpretation nor are the Kings Statuts to be Interpreted but as they bear and to the intent they are made therefore I think no man that is no privat Person can Explain it for another to amuse or trouble him with It may be mistaken glosses But every man as he is to take it so is to explain it For himself and to endeavour to understand iâ— notwithstanding all these exceptions in the Parliaments which is its true and genuine sense I take it therefore notwithstanding any scruple made by any As far as it is consistent with it self and the Protestant Religion which is wholly in the Parliaments sense and their true meaning Which being present I am sure was owned by all to be the securing of the Protestant Religion founded on the Word of God and contained in the Confession of Faith recorded I. 6. p. 1. c. 4. And not out of Scruple as if any thing in the Test did import the contrair But to clear my self from Cavils as if thereby I were bound up further then the true meaning of the Oath I doe declare that by that part of the Test that there lyes no Oblgation on me c. I mean not to bind up my self in my station and in a lawfull way still disclaiming all unlawfull endeavours To wish and endeavour any alteration I think According to my conscience to the advantage of Church or State not repugnant to the Protestant Religion and my Loyalty And by my Loyalty I understand no other thing then the words plainly bear to wit the duty and allegiance of all Loyal Subjects and this Explanation I understand as a part not of the Test or Act of Parliament but as a qualifying part of my Oath that I am to swear and with it I am willing to take the Test if your Royall Highness and your Lordships allow me Or otherwise in submission to Your Highness and the Councils pleasure I am content to be held as a refuser at present Which Explanation doth manifestly appear to be so just and true without violence or straining so clear full without the least impertinency so notour and obvious to common sense without any Commentary so Loyal and honest without ambiguity and lastly so far from all or any of the crimes libelled that it most evidently evinceth that the words thereby explained are altogether innocent And therefore it were lost time to use any arguments to enforce it Yet seing this is no trial of wit but to find out Common sense let us examine the Advocats fantastical paraphrase upon which he bottoms all the alledged crimes and see whether it agrees in one jot with the true and right meaning of the Earl's words and as you may gather from the indictment It is plainly thus I have Considered the Test which ought not to be done
and when his Highness was told it was hard measure by such a process and on such pretensions to thereaten life and fortune his Highness said life and fortune God forbid What happened after these things and how the processe was carried on followes now in order and for your more clear and distinct information I have sent you several very necessary and useful papers with indexes on the margin pointing at such passages as more remarkably concern this affair And the papers are I. Act Char. 2. P. 3. C. 6 Aug. 31. 1681. Anent Religion and the Test. II. Act I. 6. P. 1. C. 3. Anno 1567. Anent the annulling of the Acts of Parliament made against God's Word and for maintainance of Idolatry in any times by past III. Act I. 6. P. 1. C. 4. Anno 1567. The Confession of the Faith and Doctrine c. IV. Act I. 6. P. 1 C. 8. Anno 1567. Anent the Kings Oath to be given at his Coronation V. Act I 6. P. 1. C. 9. No Person may be judge Procurator Notar nor member of Court who professeth not the Religion c. VI. Part of the Act I. 6. P. 2. C. 5. Anno 1609. entituled Act against Jesuits seminary Priests sayers or hearers of Messe Papists and receptors of them VII Act I 6. P 3. C. 47. Anno 1572. Adversaries of the true Religion are not Subjects to the King Of Apostats VIII Act Char. 2. P. 2. C 1. 16 Nov. 1669. Act asserting his Majesties Supremacy over all persons and in all causes ecclesiastical IX The Bishop of Aberdeens explication of the Test. X. The explication of the Test by the Synod and Clergie of Perth XI Paraphrase on the Test XII Grounds wherupon some of the conform Ministers scruple to take the Test. XIII Sederunt of the Council 22. September 1681. XIV The Earl of Queensberries explanation XV. Sederunt 21 October 1681. XVI The Bishop of Edinburgh's paper and vindication of the Test. XVII Sederunt 3 November 1681. XVIII Privy Councils explanation XIX Sederunt 4. Nov. 1681. XX. The Earl of Argyl's explication of the Test. XXI The explanation of his explication XXII The Councils Letter to the King XXIII The Kings Answer XXIV The inditement XXV Abstract of the Acts of Parliament whereupon the inditment is founded XXVI The Earl of Argyl's first Petition for Advocats XXVII The Councils Answer XXVIII The Earl of Argyl's second Petition XXIX The Councils Answer XXX The Earl of Argyl's Letter of Atturney XXXI Instrument thereon XXXII Opinion of Lawyers of the Earl's Case Which Papers may give you much light in this whole matter Anâ— ACT For securing the Protestant Religion and enjoyning a Test. OUR Soveraign Lord with his Estates of Parliament considering That albeit by many good and wholsom Laws made by his Royal Grandfather and Father of glorious Memory and by himself in this and the other Parliaments since his happy restauration The Protestant Religion is carefully asserted established and secured against Popery and Fanaticisme yet the restless Adversaries of our Religion do not cease to propagate their errors and to seduce His Majesties Subjects from their duty to God and loyalty to his Vicegerent and to overturn the established Religion by introducing their superstitions and delusions into this Church and Kingdom And knowing that nothing can more encrease the numbers and confidence of Papists and Schismatical Dissenters from the established Church then the supine neglect of putting in execution the good Laws provided against them together with their hopes to insinuate themselves into Offices and places of trust and publick employment Therefore His Majesty from his Princely and pious Zeal to maintain and preserve the true Protestant Religion contained in the Confession of Faith recorded in the first Parliament of King James the VI. which is founded on and agreeable to the written word of God Doeth with advice and consent of his Estates of Parliament require and command all his Officers Judges and Magistrates to put the Laws made against Popery and Papists Priests Jesuits and all persons of any other Order in the Popish Church especially against all sayers and hearers of Messe venters and dispensers of forbidden books and resetters of popish Priests and excommunicat Papists as also against all fanitical Separatists from this National Church against Preachers at house or field Conventicles and the resetters and harbourers of preachers who are intercommuned against disorderly Baptisms and Marriages and irregular Ordinations and all other schismatical disorders to full and vigorous execution according to the tenor of the respective Acts of Parliament thereanent provided And that His Majesties Princely Care to have these Laws put in execution against these enemies of the Protestant Religion may the more clearly appear He doth with aduice and consent foresaid statute and ordain that the Ministers of each Parish give up in October yearly to their respective Ordinaries true and compleat Lists of all Papists and schismatical with-drawers from the publick worship in their respective Parishes which Lists are to be subscribed by them and that the Bishops give in a double of the said Lists subscribed by them to the respective Sheriffs Steuards Bayliffs of Royalty and Regality and Magistrates of Burghs to the effect the said Judges may proceed against them according to Law As also the Sheriffs and other Magistrats foresaid are hereby ordained to give an accompt to His Majesties Privy Council in December yearly of their prooceedings against those Papists and fanatical separatists as they will be answerable at their highest peril And that the diligence done by the Sheriffs Baylies of Regalities and other Magistrates foresaid may be the better enquired into by the Council the Bishops of the respective Diocesses are to send exact doubles of the Lists of the Papists and Fanatiks to the Clerk of the Privy Council whereby the diligence of the Sheriffs and other Iudges of Courts may be comptrolled and examined And to cut off all hopes from Papists and Fanatiks of their being imployed in Offices and Places of publick trust It is hereby statute and ordained That the following Oath shall be taken by all persons in Offices and Places of publick trust Civil Ecclesiastical and Military especially by all Members of Parliament and all Electors of Members of Parliament all Privy-Councellors Lords of Session Members of the Exchequer Lords of Justitiary and all other Members of these Courts all Officers of the Crown and State all Archbishops and Bishops and all Preachers and Ministers of the Gospel whatsoever all persons of this Kingdom named or to be named Commissioners of the Borders all Members of the Commission for Church affaires all Sheriffs Steuards Baylies of of Royalties and Regalities Iustices of Peace Officers of the Mint Commisaries and their Deputies their Clerks and Fiscals all Advocats and Procurators before any of these Courts all Writers to the Signet all publick Notars and other persons imployed in writing and agenting The Lyon King at arms Heraulds Pursevants Messengers at
nane shall be repute as loyal and faithful Subjects to our said Soveraign Lord or his Authority but be punishable as Rebellars and Gainstanders of the samine quhilk shall not give their confession and make their profession of the said true Religion And that all sik as makes profession thereof and yet hes made defection fra their dew obedience ought to our Soveraign Lord shall be admonished be the Pastors and Ministers of the Kirk to acknowledge their offence and turn to their dutieful obedience And if they failzie therein to be excommunicat and secluded from the Society of the Kirk as rebellious and corrupt Members betwixt and the first of Jun nixt to come and that alwayes before sik persons as hes made defection be received to our Soveraign Lords mercie and favour they shall give the Confession of their Faith of new and promise to continue in the Confession of the true Religion in time coming and maintaine our Soveraign Lords Authoritie and that they shall at the utmost of their power fortifie assist and maintaine the true Preachers and Professors of Christs Religion against whatsomever enemies and gainstanders of the same and namely against all sik of whatsomever Nation Estate or degree they be of that hes joyned and bound themselves or hes assisted or assist to set forward and execut the cruel decreits of the Councel of Trent quhilk most injuriously is called by the adversaries of Gods Truth the halie league contrary the Preachers and true Professors of the Word of God Many other Acts and these most peremptory and strict against the Popish Religion as Idolatrie and very pernicious to the Kingdom might here be added But these are set down as most apposite to the purpose and the rest may be seen at length in the printed Acts of Parliament Act Ch. 2. P. 2. C. 1. Anno 1669. Act asserting His Majesties Supremacy over all Persons and in all Causes Ecclesiastik THE Estates of Parliament having seriously considered how necessary it is for the good and peace of Church and State that His Majesties Power and Authoritie in relation to maters and Persons Ecclesiastical be more clearly asserted by ane Act of Parliament Have therefore thought fit it be enacted asserted and declared Likeas His Majestie with advice and consent of his Estates of Parliament doth hereby enact assert and declare that His Majesty hath the supreme Authority and Supremacie over all Persons and in all causes Ecclesiastical within this his Kingdom And that by vertue thereof the ordering and disposal of the external Government and Policie of the Church doth properly belong to His Majestie and his Successors as ane inherent right of the Crown and that His Majesty and his Successors may setle enact and emit such Constitutions Acts and Orders concerning the administration of the external Government of the Church and the Persons imployed in the same and concerning all Ecclesiastical meetings and maters to be proposed and determined therein as they in their Royal Wisdom shall think fit Which Acts Orders and Constitutions being recorded in the Books of Councel and duelie published are to be observed and obeyed by all His Majesties Subjects any Law Act or Custom to the contrary notwithstanding likeas His Majesty with advice and consent foresaid doth rescind and annull all Lawes Acts and Clauses thereof and all Customs and Constitions Civil or Ecclesiastick which are contrary to or inconsistent with His Majesties Supremacy as it is hereby asserted and declares the same void and null in all time coming The Bishop of Aberdeen and the Synods Explanation of the Test. I. WE do not hereby swear to all the particular Assertions and Expressions of the Confession of Faith mentioned in the Test but only to the uniform Doctrine of the Reformed Churches contained therein II. We do not hereby prejudg the Church's Right to and Power of making any alteration in the said Confession as to the ambiguity and obscure expressions thereof or of making a more unexceptionable frame III. When we swear That the King is Supreme Governour over all Persons and in all Causes as well Ecclesiastick as Civil and when we swear to assert and defend all His Majesties Rights and Prerogatives this is reserving always the intrinsick unalterable power of the Church immediately derived from Jesus Christ to wit the power of the Keys consisting in the preaching of the Word administration of the Sacraments ordaining of Pastors exercise of Discipline and the holding of such Assemblies as are necessary for preservation of Peace and Unity Truth and Purity in the Church and withal we do not hereby think that the King has a power to alter the Government of the Church at his pleasure IV. When we swear That it is unlawful for subjects to meet or conveen to treat or consult c. about matters of State Civil and Ecclesiastick this is excepting meetings for Ordination publick Worship and Discipline and such meetings as are necessary for the conservation of the Church and true Protestant Religion V. When we swear there lyes no obligation on us c. to endeavour any change or alteration in Government either in Church or State we mean by Arms or any seditious way VI. When we swear That we take the Test in the plain and genuine sense of the words c. we understand it only in so far as it does not contradict these Exceptions The Explanation of the Test by the Synode and Clergy of Perth BEcause our Consciences require the publishing and declaring of that express meaning we have in taking the Test that we be not mis-interpreted to swear it in these glosses which men uncharitable to it and enemies to us are apt to put upon it and because some men ill affected to the Government who are daily broachers of odious and calumnious slanders against our Persons and Ministry are apt to deduce inferences and conclusions from the alledged ambiguity of some Propositions of the Test that we charitably and firmly do believe were never intended by the Imposers nor received by the Takers Therefore to satisfie our Consciences and to save our Credit from these unjust imputations we expresly declare That we swear the Test in this following meaning I. By taking the Test we do not swear to every Proposition and Clause contained in the Confession of Faith but only to the true Protestant Religion founded upon the Word of God contained in that Confession as it is opposed to Popery and Fanaticism II. By swearing the Ecclesiastick Supremacy we swear it as we have done formerly without any reference to the assertory Act we also reserve intire unto the Church it s own intrinsick and unalterable power of the Keys as it was exercised by the Apostles and the pure primitive Church for the first three Centuries III. By swearing That it is unlawful to convocate conveen or assemble in any Councils Conventions or Assemblies to treat consult c. in any matter of State Civil or Ecclesiastick as
we do not evacuate our natural liberty whereby we are in freedom innocently without reflection upon or derogation to Authority or persons intrusted with it to discourse in any occasional meeting of these things so we exclude not those other meetings which are necessary for the well-being and Discipline of the Church IV. By our swearing it unlawful to endeavour any change or alteration in the Government either of Church or State we mean that it is unlawfal for us to endeavour the alteration of the specifick Government of Monarchy in the true and lineal Descent and Episcopacy V. When we swear in the genuine and literal sense c. we understand it so far as it is not opposite or contradictory to the foresaid exceptions They were allowed to insert after the Oath before their Subscriptions these words or to this purpose We Under-written do take this Oath according to the Explanation made by the Council approved by His Majesties Letter and we declare we are no further bound by this Oath A Paraphrase on the Test emitted by one of the conformed Clergy I A. B. solemnly swear in presence of the Eternal God whom I invocate as judge and witness of my sincere intention of this my Oath That I A. B. being fully assured without the least doubt or hesitation of the truth of all that I am now to assert and of the lawfulness of all that I am now to promise Do in the most solemn manner swear in the sight and presence of the Eternal God whom I here call upon to witness against me in the Great Day and to pass Sentence of Condemnation upon me if I affirm any thing by this my Oath of the certainty whereof I am not fully assured or promise any thing of the lawfulness whereof I have any scruples and which I am not sincerely resolved to perform viz. That I own and sincerely profess the true Protestant Religion contained in the Confession of Faith recorded in the first Parliament of James the VI c. That I cordially own without any dissimulation profess the true Protestant Religion And because there are many doctrines and opinions that pass under that name that it may be known what I do mean by the true Protestant Religion I declare That I own that Confession of Faith which is recorded in the first Parliament of King James the VI. as the true test and standard thereof And that I believe the same to be founded on and agreeable to the written Word of God And because it would not be a just standard if some part of it were taken and others left unless these parts that are to be sworn to were expresly condescended on by the same Authority whereby it is imposed For if it were left arbitrary for every one to pitch on these parts of it he pleases as the measure of his Faith it would be useless for the end for which it is adduced Therefore I embrace the whole Confession and do swear by the same solemn Oath That I believe every Article and every Proposition therein to be true as being evidently founded on and agreeable to the Word of God As for instance Art 3. I swear by this my solemn Oath That Adam's Transgression is commonly called Original Sin And Art 12. That men have as little hand in their Regeneration and Sanctification as they have in their Creation and Redemption And Art 14. That to suppress Tyranny is one of the good works of the Second Table most pleasing and acceptable to God and commanded by himself the contrary whereof is 〈◊〉 sin most odious which always displeaseth and provokes him to anger that is When the Civil Mastrate comes to act arbitrarily and against Law when he invades the established Religion the Priviledges of Parliament or the Liberties and Properties of Subjects he is to be opposed and resisted Or when our Ecclesiastical Superiors usurp a Dominion over the Inferior Clergy or behave themselves as Lords over Gods Heritage or require absolute obedience to their Dictates and Determinations they are to be withstood and born down And as it is in the same Article I swear That I believe our resistance of these whom God hath placed in Authority over us is a sin when they do not pass over the bounds of their Office but if they pass over these bounds it is a duty to resist them which is evident being compared with the former Proposition and the practices of them who composed the Confession And in the same Article I swear and believe all these to be evil works in matters of Religion and the worship of God which have no other assurance but the invention and opinion of men So that whatsoever our Superiors determine in this matter tho only for Decency if they cannot shew it to be clearly founded on the Word of God it is to be looked on as an evil work And I swear I shall so reckon it Art 16. I swear That I think it blasphemy to affirm that men who live acording to natural light and moral equity shall be saved unless they profess the Christian Religion And that out of the true Church there is neither life nor eternal felicity So that I not only condemn all Pagans and Papists to Hell fire but I declare upon Oath That I think it Blasphemy to affirm the contrary And Art 18. I believe That Ecclesiastical Discipline rightly administred as Gods Word prescribeth is as essential a note of the true Church as the right administration of the Word and Sacraments So that the Church of England or any other Church that has not Discipline rightly administred tho they have the Word and Sacraments pure and uncorrupted wants an essential Note of a true a Church And Art 21. I declare That I perfectly understand this Proposition and do solemnly swear that it 's true that the faithful in the right use of the Lords Table are so made flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone that as the eternal Godhead has given to the flesh of Iesus Christ which of its own condition and nature was mortal and corruptible Life and Immortality so does Christ Iesus his flesh and blood eaten and drunken by us give unto us the same Prerogatives And Art 22. I declare and swear by this my solemn Oath That the Ministers of the Church of Rome are not Ministers of Iesus Christ and that they have no true Sacraments So that our first Reformers having both their Baptism and Ordination from them we have neither among us truly baptized persons nor rightly ordained Ministers And Art 24 I believe That the resisting the Supreme Power doing that which appertains to his charge is to resist the Ordinance of God So that to resist when he goes beyond his charge is not to resist the Ordinance of God but to repress Tyranny according to Art 14 And I promise and swear That I shall adhere thereto during all the days of my life shall endeavour to educate my
whatsoever were throughly convinced of the doctrine and duty of their obedience to the Supreme Powers otherways as they grow popular they become dangerous Sacerdoces eo quidem sunt ingenio ut ni pareant territent St. Chrysostom comments excellently on Rom. 13 v. 1. 2. Let every soul be subject saying whether he be an Apostle or Evangelist a Prophet c. let him be subject to the higher Powers Our blessed Saviour and the Apostles were the most eminent Ecclesiastical persons yet did not think themselves exempted from the Authority and Jurisdiction of the Civil Powers and if the 24th Article of the Confession of Faith mentioned in the Test be considered it will be found to grant as much to the Civil Magistrate as here is asserted and yeelded Yet all this power belonging to the supreme Magistrate over religious persons and matters doth not interfer with nor suppress the intrinsik and essential Power and Authority of the Church for the Church's power is internal and spiritual and the power of the supreme Magistrate is external coercive and temporal which when duely weighed in a just balance will be found not only to be poised of just different kinds and natures but so far from interfering with or destroying one another that if duely and rightly managed they do mutually assist and support each other Beside the sense of the Oath of Supremacy asserted in a Speech delivered by B. James Usher then Bishop of Meath and afterwards Primate of Ireland at Dublin Novemb. 22. 1622. for which he received the thinks of King James the sixth the Solomon of his Age by a Letter from His Majesty dated the 11. day of January 1623. is so clear and plain that it leaves no place for any manner of scruple concerning the intrinsick power of the Church as if it were invaded and incroached upon by the foresaid Oath where it is said That the Kings Supremacy reacheth the outward man only but the spiritual and intrinsick power of the Church reacheth to the inward this binding or loosing the soul that laying hold only on the body and things belonging thereto Yea there is an Act of the Parliament of England 13. Eliz. declaring That by the supreme Government given to the Prince is understood that kind of Government only which is exercised with the Civil Sword So that there is nothing can be more evident than that by the Kings Supremacy as asserted by the Act November 16. 1669. no incroachment or invasion is made upon the spiritual intrinsick power of the Church Besides by the very express words of that assertory Act No more is declared to belong to the King save the ordering and disposal of the external Government and Policy of the Church And again The administration of the external Government of the Church where not a syllable can be found touching upon the internal spiritual and essential power and iurisdiction thereof And as to the word matters contained in that Act the Kings emitting Orders concerning religious matters as well as persons it needs stumble no thinking person as if our Religion were thereby exposed to dangers at the pleasure of the Prince if we consider the following words viz. Matters to be proposed and determined in Ecclesiastical Meetings or Assemblies which reserves the power of determining matters of Religion still in the hands of that Meeting or Assembly So that tho the King may by vertue of his RoyalSupremacy propose any matter of Religion to a National Asâ— Yet it is not to pass unto an act till first it be determined by the deliberate and free consent vote and suffrage of the major part of that Ecclesiastical Meeting And now let the Impartial Judg if any so great security for the true Protestant Religion can be devised as to have all Bishops Ministers and Members of a National Synod to whom the determining of matters of Religion by Law belongs solemnly sworn and bound by this Oath and Test to adhere to the same Protestant Religion all the days of their lives and never to consent to any alteration or change thereof As for the other Objection of these who think that by this assertory Act 1669. there is a power declared to be vested in the King to alter and change the Established Episcopal Government of this National Church which these who believe Episcopacy to be of Divine Right and Apostolical Institution and by consequence unalterable by any humane Authority can never swear to belong to the Crown as an Inherent Right and Prerogative thereof For answer Tho this point of the Divine Right of Episcopacy is tenderly to be touched the Phrase of Jus Divinum being in terms subject to misconstruction yet it must be acknowledged that no form of Church Government was ever yet modelled or set up which hath not claimed to a Jus Divinum as well as Episcopacy tho every one of them with far more noise but with far less reason than this hath done For the Papists ground the Popes Oecumenical Supremacy upon Christs Commands to St. Peter to execute it and to all the Flock of Christ Soveraign Princes as well as others to submit to him as to their Universal Pastor The Presbyterians cry up their model of Government tho of a very late Edition as the very Scepter of Christs Kingdom to which all Kings are bound to submit theirs making it also unalterable and as inevitably necessary to the being of a Church as the Word and Sacraments The Independents assert that any single Confederate Congregation is Jure Divino free and absolute within it self to govern it self by such Rules as shall be consented to by its Members without dependance from any except Jesus Christ alone or subjection to any Prince Bishop or any other Person or Consistory whatsoever So that all these other flatly deny the Kings Supremacy and claim a Power and Jurisdiction over him The Presbyterians agreeing with the Papists in this branch of Antichristianism and claiming to their Consistories as full and absolute Jurisdiction over Princes even to the highest censure by Excommunication as the Romanists challenge to belong to the Pope or pleading at least a priviledg of exemption from the Kings Authority and Jurisdiction The Independents exempting their Congregations from all Ecclesiastical subjection to Christian Kings in asample manner as ther Papists do their Clergy whereas the Protestant Bishop and regular Ministers as becometh good Christians and dutiful Subjects do neither pretend to any Jurisdiction over the King nor withdraw their Subjection from him but humbly acknowledg His Majesty to have Soveraign Power over them as well as over his other Subjects and that in all matters Ecclesiastical as well as Temporal But for a more closse Answer to this Objection They who believe the Indifferency of the forms and models of Church-Goverment cannot have any scruple on this Head in regard of the present Church-Government For should it be changed by Authority then are they not obliged by this Oath any longer
thereof Hence it appears a meer quible to cavil upon the Particle as it is established which some think had been better expressed by which is established by Law since by what is said the Particle as is not to be taken reduplicative but specificative relating to the species and substance of the Government And it is a cavil no less fâ—ivoious which is made upon the Particle in â—he Government which they say had been been better expressed of the Government since that Particle in must neither relate to the substance species and fundamentals of these Governments to endeavour the alteration or change whereof is entirely unlawful by this Oath or it must be interpreted by the Parricle of by which the sinfulness of any Subjects endeavouring the change or subversion of the setled Monarchy and Episcopacy is sworn and asserted The last clause in the Test â—â—eâ—â—ing it to be taken in the plain and genuine sense and meaning of the words without any equivocation or men tal reservation c doth not exclude the sensing and interpreting the same by the common Rules of Speech as well as of Iustice and equity This Interpretation imports no more than singly to make clear and plain any word or sentence therein which may seem to any to be dark or dubious which serves only to disco ver the genuine sense of the Oath and the true design and meaning of the imposers thereof which is all that by this essay is undertaken and endeavoured And if a man may swear to believe the Articles of the Apostolik Creed or the several petitions of the Lords Prayer or the Doctrine contained in the Ten Commands of the Moral Law without any equivocation mental reservation or evasion c. which yet he cannot do without an interpretation put upon some Articles of the Creed viz. of the descent into Hell and upon some Petitions in the Lords Prayer as Give us this day our dayly bread and on some of the Ten Commandments as the Fifth and the words of the Fourth Commandment then may we also swear this Oath thâ— some words or phrases in it need a sense or illustration to be put on them Must a Christian abstain therefore from saying the Lords Prayer No. Neither for this need we to admit any ambiguity or equivocation The word certainly hath but one true sense and signification but divers persons understand them according to the different measures of their light These are the most ordinary and popular scruples of greatest seeming force which are commonly offered against this Oath and Test and upon the issue they appear to be founded upon mistakes of the true sense and meaning of some words and clauses therein and misconstructing of the design Authority had in framing and imposing the same And now we having been in duty so tender and compassionate toward the Loyaland Regular Protestant Subjects this Vindication being intended for the satisfaction neither of Papists nor Fanatiks as to endeavour by this short essay to clear these doubts and scruples which might arise in their minds upon the Oath that thereby they may perceive the genuine sense of the same whereby it clearly appears that we are not Sworn by it to maintain or believe every Article assertion or clause in the Confession of Faith therein mentioned but only the true Christian Protestant Religion as it is reformed from the errours and superstitions of the Romish Church and other Heresies and that by it no power is asserted to belong to the Prince which is inconsistent with or destructive of the Specifik Established Government of the Church or the intrinsik or Spiritual Jurisdiction thereof it may be fairly hoped that all good Peaceable Subjects with their Ministers others will meekly receive the Satisfaction here offered unto them and compose their minds to a chearful acquiescence in the Wisdom of their Governours who have judged this Oath so necessary for defeating the pretended Obligations of many former unlawful and Treasonable Oaths and the best mean and expedient for securing the Church and Protestant Religion together with the Monarchy from all danger of Subversion from the Papists on the one hand and the Fanatiks on the other It cannot but be lookt on as a fatal thing if any Conformist Ministers or truly Loyal Protestants for whose interest Peace and Security this Oath was chiefly formed and injoyned should not only after what is said continue to entertain peevish scruples themselves but undutifully to fill the minds of the Populacie with prejudices as unjust as uncharitable against it contrary to the Rules of our most peaceable Religion and therein following the steps of these incendiaries who fatally fired the Kingdom in the late Age by instilling prejudices into the unwary Mobile from the Pulpits or other ways branding the Actions of the K. and Par. as imposing things sinful and unlawful This sure will prove the greatest advantage the promoters of the Romish Interest will propose to themselves against our Church and Religion in as much as every Schism and Breach amongst us and concussion in the Ancient Government of our Church doth visibly hazard the dissolution of the whole fabrick of our Religion And if things still go on at this rate the explanation that some in our late Distractions and Rebellion made of that passage St. John 11. v. 45. Venient Romani capient gentem nostram will prove too true a Prophecy and Popery will overturn all at last It is a wonder indeed to see how the Fanatical adversaries of this poor Church have in so short a time been so strangely multiplied in their number and divided and subdivided into so many special opinions and Principles crumbled into factions and fractions biting and ready to devour one another And if loyal Protestants also fall in pieces and by the ears among themselves upon most unseasonable and uncharitable scruples may it not be feared that the vigilant adversary who is intent upon all manner of advantages will when he spieth his time over-master all with the more ease and less resistance It cannot in charity be doubted but the love of the Church's Peace and Unity Loyalty to the best of Monarchs pious care for preserving and securing our excellent Religion from Popery Disloyalty and Enthusiasm with the zeal of loyal and regular Ministers for the benefit and education of Christian Schools under their spiritual conduct and the dutiful regard and deference men owe to their spiritual and temporal Governours will prevail with humble meek and teachable minds by interpreting all the actions of Authority in the best and most favourable sense to resolve and overcome all scruples that stand in the way of their duty and frankly and readily to embrace what the most transcendent Authority of this Nation hath from sincere and pious intentions enjoyned and imposed for so pious and excellent ends If this small Apology be read without gall or prejudice the Reader will not catch at Particles or Syllables but
libelled does not at all import all or any of the Crimes contained in the said Libel so by the common Principles of all Law where a person does emit words for the clearing and exoneration of his own Conscience altho there were any ambiguity or unclearness or involvedness in the tenor or import of the expressions or words yet they are ever to be interpreted Interpretatione benigna favorab ili according to the general Principles of Law and Reason And it never was nor can be refused to any person to interpret and put a congruous sense upon his own words especially the Pannel being a person of eminent Quality and who hath given great demonstration and undeniable evidences of his fixt and unalterable Loyalty to His Majesties Interest and Service and at the time of emiting the said Explication was invested and entrusted in publik Capacites And it is a just and rational interpretation and caution which Sanderson that judicious and eminent Casuist gives Praelect 2. That dicta facta principum parentum rectorum are ever to be looked upon as benignae Interpretationis and that Dubia sunt interpretanda in meliorem partem And there is nothing in the Explication libelled which without detortion and violence and in the true sense and design of the Pannel is not capable of this benign Interpretation and construction especially respect being had to the Circumstances wherein it was emitted and given after a great many Objections Scruples and alledged Inconsistencies were owned vented and spread abroad which was a rise to the Earl for using the expressions contained in the pretended Declaration libelled 10. These words whereby it is pretended the Pannel declares he was ready to give obedience as far as he could first do not in the least import That the Parliament had imposed any Oath which was in it self unlawful but only the Pannel's scrupulosity and unclearness in matter of Conscience And it is hoped it cannot be a Crime because all men cannot go the same length And if any such thing were argued it might be argued ten times more strongly from a simple refusing of the Oath as if any thing were enjoyned which were so hard that it is not possible to comply with it And yet such Implications are most irrational and inconsequential and neither in the case of a simple and absolute refusing or the Oath nor in the case of an Explication of the parties sense wherein he is willing to take the Oath is there any impeachment of the Justice and prudence of the Legislator who imposeth this Oath but singly a declaration of the scrupulosity and weakness of the party why he cannot take the Oath in other terms and such Explications have been allowed by the Laws and Customs of all Nations and are advised by all Divines of whatsoever Principles for the solace and security of a Man's Conscience 2. As to that point of the Explication libelled That I am confident the Parliament never intended to impose contradictory Oaths it respects the former answer which considering the plain and down right Objections which were spread abroad and made against the Oath as containing inconsistencies and contradictions was an high Vindication of the Justice and Prudence of the Parliament 3. As to these words And therefore I think no body can explain it but for himself The plain and clear meaning is nothing else but that the Oath being imposed by Act of Parliament it was of no private interpretation And that therefore every man who was to take it behooved to take it in that sense which he apprehended to be the genuine sense of the Parliament And it is impossible without impugning common sense that any man could take it in any other sense it being as impossible to see with another mans eyes as to see with his private Reason And a mans own private sense and apprehension of the genuine sense was the only proper way wherein any man could rationally take the Oath And as to these words That he takes it as far as it is consistent with it self and the Protestant Religion The Pannel neither intended nor exprest more but that he did take it as a true Protestant and he hopes all men have taken it as such And as to that Clause Wherein the Pannel is made to declare That he does not bind up himself in his station in a lawful way to wish and endeavour any alteration he thinks to the advantage of Church or State not repugnant to the Protestant Religion and his Loyalty It is answered There is nothing in this expression that can import the least Crime or give the least umbrage for any Mistake For 1. It is most certain it is impossible to elicite any such thing from the Oath but that it was the intention of the Parliament That persons notwithstanding of the Oath might concur in their stations and in a lawful way in any Law to the advantage of Church and State And no rational man ever did or can take the Oath in other terms that being contrary to his Allegiance and Duty to His Sacred Majesty and Prince 2. There is nothing in the said Expression which does in the least point at any alteration in the Fundamentals of Government either in Church or State but on the contrary by the plain and clear words and meaning rather for its perpetuity stability and security The Expression being cautioned to the utmost scrupulosity as that it was to be done in a lawful manner that it was to be to the advantage of Church or State that it was to be consistent with the Protestant Religion and with his Loyalty which was no other but the duty and Loyalty of all faithful Subjects and which he has signally and eminently expressed upon all occasions So that how such an expression can be drawn to import all or any of the Crimes libelled passeth all Natural Understanding And as to the last words And this I understand as a part of my Oath which is libelled to be a treasonable Invasion and assuming of the Legislative Power It is answered It is most unwarrantable and a Parties declaring the sense and meaning in which he was free to take an Oath does not at all respect or invade the Legislative Power of which the Pannel never entertained a thought but has an absolute abhorrence and detestation of such practices But the plain and clear meaning is That the Sense and Explication was a part of his Oath and not of the Law imposing the Oath these being as distant as the Two Poles and which Sense was taken off the Earl's Hands and he accordingly was allowed to take his Place at the Council-Board and therefore repeats the former general Defences And to convince the Lords of Justitiary that there is nothing in the pretended Explication libelled which can be drawn to import any Crime even of the lowest size and degree and that there is no expression therein contained that can be detorted or wrested to import the same is
And am very desirous to give obedience as far as I can but am not willing to give full obedience I am confident the Parliament never intended to impose contradictory Oaths that is I am confident they did intend to impose contradictory Oaths And therefor I think no man can explain it but for himself that is to say every man may take it in any sense he pleases to devise and thereby render this Law and also all other Laws though not at all concerned in this affair useless And so make himself a Legislator and usurp the supreme Authority And I take it in so far as it is consistent with it self and the Protestant Religion whereby I suppose that it is not at all consistent with either nor was ever intended by the Parliament it should be consistent And I declare that by taking this Test I mean not to bind up my self in my station and in a lawfull way to wish or endeavour any alteration I think to the advantage of Church or State not repugnant to the Protestant Religion and my Loyalty Whereby I declare my self and all others free from all obligation to the Government either of Church or State as by law established and from the duty and Loyalty of good Subjects Resolving of my self to alter all the Fundamentals both of Law and Religion as I shall think fit And this I understand as a part of my Oath that is as a part of the Act of Parliament by which I take upon me and usurp the Royal Legislative power Which sense and Explanation as it consists of the Advocat's own words and was indeed every word necessar to infer these horrible crimes contained in the Indictment So to speak with all the modesty that truth will allow I am sure it is so violent false and absurd that the greatest difficulty must be to beleeve that any such thing was alledged far more receaved and sustained in Judgment by men professing only Reason far less Religion But thirdly if neither the Earl's true genuine and honest sense nor this violent corrupt and false sense will satisfy let us try what transprosing the Earl's Explanation will do and see how the just contrary will look And it must be thus I Have considered the Test nor am I at all desirous to give Obedience so far as I can I am confident the Parliament intended to impose contradictory Oaths And therefor I think every man can explain it for others as well as for himself and take it without reconciling it either to it self or his own sense of it And I doe take it though it be inconsistent with it self and the Protestant Religion And I declare that I mean thereby to bind up my self never either in my station or in any lawfull way whatsoever to wish or endeavour in the least any alteration tho to the advantage of Church or State and tho never so suitable and no way repugnant to the Protestant Religion and my Loyalty And though this be the express quality of my swearing yet I understand it to be no part of my Oath Now whether this contradictory conversion be not treason or highly criminal at best I leave all the World to Judge and to make both sâ—â—es of a contradiction that is both the Affirmative and Negative of the same proposition treason is beyond ordinary Logik Escobar finds two contrary wayes may both be probable and safe wayes to go to heaven but neither he nor the Devil himself have hâ—thâ—rto adventured to declare two contradictory propositions both damnable and either of them a just cause to take away mens Lives Honours and Fortunes But where the disease is in the will it is lost Labour to apply Remedies to the understanding and must not this be indeed either the oddest treason or strangest discovery that ever was hear'd of The Bishop of Edinburgh sees it not witnesse his Vindication saying the same and more Nor many of the Orthodox Clergie witness their Explanations Nor his Royall Highness in privat nor at first in Council nor all the Councellors when together at the Council-board Nor the President of the Council nor the then President of the Session now Chancellour though He rose from his seat to be sure to hear nor any of the most learned lawyers witness their signed Opinion nor the most learned of the Judges on the bench nor the Generality of the knowing persons either in Scotland or England wonderfull treason one day seen by none another day seen by so many A stander-by hearing the trial and the Sentence said he beleeved the Earl's words were by Popish magik transsubstantiat for he saw them the same as before Another answered that he verily thought it was so for he was confident none could see Treason in the words that would not when ever it was a proper time readily also profess his beleefe of transubstantiation but he beleeved many that professed both beleeved neither The second Head of the Earl's additional defences contains the impertinencies absurdities of the Advocat's Arguings And here you must not expect any solid debate For as there is no disputing with those that deny Principles so as litle with those who heap up Phantastical and inconsequential inferences without all shadow of Reason If a stone be thrown though it may do hurt yet having some weight it may be thrown back with equall or more force But if a man trig up a feather and fling it It is in vain to throw it back and the more strength the less success It shall therefor serve by acursoâ—y discourse to expose his arguments which are in effect easier answered then understood and without any serious arguing which they cannot bear rather leave him to be wise in his own eyes then by too much empty talk hazard to be like him He alledges first that the Earl instead of taking the Test in its plain and genuine meaning as he ought doth declare against and defame the Act that enjoyned it which is certainly a great crime But how In as much sayes the Advocate as he tells us That he had considered the Test Which I have indeed hear'd say was his greatest crime and that he ought to have taken it with a profound and devout ignorance as some of our most inventive Politicians boasted they had done But the Earl sayes that he was desirous to give obedience as far as he could whereby sayes the Advcat He insinuats that he was not able to give full obedience This is not the meaning but what if it were and that indeed he coud not Have not thousands given no obedience yet even in law are guiltlesse And ought not that to please his Highnesse and the Council that is accepted of God Almighty and is all any Mortal can perform But the Earl sayes the Advocate Goes on that he was confident the Parliament never intended to impose contradictory Oaths whereby sayes the Advocat He abuses the people with a beleef that the Parliament did intend to impose such
is consistent with it self and the Protestant Religion do so openly import that in some things it is inconsistent that vvhosoever vvould persuade him to the contrary must think him Fool or Idiote But. 1. Since the Earl doth not say what our Author would have openly imported either positively or designedly it is impossible he could say it Criminally 2ly Since his words do manifestly referr to the many Exceptions that were abroad against the Test And that it is no less evident that by his Explanation he singlely intended to clear his own Conscience and deal candidly with the Government Whosoever would perswade that there is in it any ground of Offence or Crime specially after it was accepted by the Council must be really either Fool or Worse Our Author indeed tells us That the words vvere spoke by the Earl to inflame the people That they reflect upon the Prudence and Conduct of the Parliament and so prove Defaming and Depraving unansvverably And vvhat can be more Depraving of a Law then to make it Pravam Legem And vvhat Law can be more prava or pernicious then that vvhich is inconsistent vvith the Protestant Religion and vvhich tyes to svvear things contradictory And the having svvorn and dispersed his Explications shevves a firm and passionat Design to poyson the People vvith a belief of all these ill things of the Parliament But seeing the common and certain understanding of Depraving is to wrest by a false and malicious construction to a bad end what was designed for a good That for certain there is no falshood so much as alledged by our Author to be in the Earl's vvords And for malice all the circumstances above adduced do undoubtedly purge them of it That no man in a studied Apology can say The Parliament did not intend contradictions but his vvords by this calumnious Logick may be charged with the same train of absurd Consequences That the Councils Explication is in every respect more obnoxious to them then the Earl's That our Author knows Dispersing neither was nor could be proven And that in effect the Earl's Explanation was accepted by and so became the Councils more then his as you have fully heard in the Narrative This groundless violent Invective is already answered But if I may take a little more liberty then my Narrator thought fit to use Dare our Author state the controversie upon this issue Whether there be Contradictions and Inconsistencies in the Test or not Or if they be as the Council hath implicitly granted and all men may explicitly see in the Paraphrase above set doun will he have it a Crime for a man to say He believes the Parliament intended no Contradictions and that he is content to take the Test in so far as it is consistent Or would he have us to believe either that all Scotch Parliaments or at least the Last by reason of an extraordinary assistance are infallible Or if they be fallible as they confess themselves thinks he the People either so Blockish as not to see their Failings tho never so palpable and also important to mens salvation or so Brutal as to break all Measures if once they conceive their Rulers to be but Men But though here you may indeed perceive the Grounds whereupon all our Author's discourses in this Pamphlet do proceed Yet seeing they are manifestly calculate to some mens unhappy Designes who on purpose inveigh against the People as either ignorant or insolent that they may be arbitrary and would have all Dissenters from their designes to be Suspect and all Suspect to be Traitors that they may be uncontrollable I hope men are not yet brought to that pass either of Simplicity or Terrour as to be cajolled or cudgelled into a complyance with such pernicious Insinuations The third Crime wherewith the Earl was charged was Treason A Crime now become with us and so much the more pity that we live under a Prince so quite different as it was of old said to be under Tiberius Omnium accusationum complementum And which sayes our Author was inferred against the Earl from these words I doe declare I mean not to bind up my self in my station and in a Lawfull way to wish and endeavour any Alteration I think to the advantage of Church and State not repugnant to the Protestant Religion and my Loyalty And this I understand as a part of my Oath And this our Author tells us he will make out in a plain familiar unanswerable way And for that effect gives us this demonstration in Mode and Figure He that reserves to himself the power of reforming Church or State commits Treason But the Earl in his Explication reserves to himself a povver of reforming Ergo. And not to amuse you with repeating what is already so fully said in answer to this Pretence equally ridiculous and pernicious To this formal Argument take this formall Answer He that reserves to himself the povver of reforming c. By asserting or assuming to himself the povver of reforming either proper to the Prince alone or in a way without his line or without warrant of Law or to the hurt of Church and State and repugnant to the Protestant Religion and his Loyalty commits Treason Transeat be it so He that reserves to himself the povver of reforming c. By declaring he minds not to bind up himself in his Station and in a lawfull way to endeavour Alterations he thinks to the advantage of Church and State not repugnant to the Protestant Religion and his Loyalty commits Treason Is denyed Nay in effect this is so far from being Treason that the thing thus reserved is the indispensible duty of our Allegiance And for a subject specially a privy Councellor not to wish and endeavour in his station and in a lawfull way such Alterations as he thinks to the advantage of Church and State and not repugnant to the Protestant Religion his Loyalty were a Lash Disloyalty and plain Perjury But so it is that the Earl in his Explication reserves to himself a povver of reforming in the former sense is false and the very thing denyed by his vvords In the later and second sense it is indeed true but in steed of being a Crime a most clear and certain duty But our Author sayes That any is as comprehensive as all which he gravely proves by several instances and thence infers That therefore the Earl has reserved to himself to endeavour all Alterations And sayes he If that be not Treason nothing can be Treason But albeit to endeavour any or all Alterations simply as our Author sophistically and calumniously divides the Earl's words may be Treason dare he affirm That for a man in his station and in a lawfull way to endeavour any or all alterations to the better and not repugnant to Religion and Loyalty which are the Earl's words is Treason Or can he or any man deny that the doing of this very thing may be the necessary duty of
the Council appeared surprised and in some confusion The first thing came to be treated of in Council after the Earl had taken his seat was the Concils Explanation at that time intended and resolved to be allowed to the Clergie only and no other and withall not to be printed To which the Earl refused to vote which was afterwards made a ground of challenge A little after it being the post night The Earl slept out and went to his lodging and though he acknowledges he did not decline to give some friends ane accompt of what had past vet he was so far from spreading copies of his Explanation at takeing the Oath That he flatly refused to give a kind and discreet friend then in his chamber a copie of it lest it might go abroad And the words being few and publictly spoke it is not strange they might be almost perfectly repeated as it s known the Clerks pretended to do but the Kings Advocat having past from the accusation of Spreading this is only mentioned to evidence howsingly studious the Earl was to satisfie his own conscience and how tender of giving offence for I can say truly for him he was never heard to disswade any to take the Test nor to disparage it after it past in an Act Only he refused to take it himselfe without ane Explanation which to stretch to a crime is beyond all example I confess he never cry'd it up as superexcellent or divine as some have done that can alter their toon and decry it as much when ever there shall be occasion Nixt morning the Earl waited on His Highness expecting yesternights countenance and indeed nothing lesse then what he met with for begining to speak with His Highness in privat his Highness interrupted him and said he was not pleased with his explanation The Earl said he did not presume to give it till his Highness allowed him His Highness acknowledged that the Bishop of Edinburgh had told him that the Earl intended ane explanation But sayes His Highness I thought it had been some short one like Earl Queesburries The Earl answered that his Highness heard what he said His Highness said he did but he was surprised Then the Earl said he had said the same thing in privat to his Highness wherewith he at that time appeared satisfied And the Earl being about to say more in his own vindication his Highness interrupting him said well it is past with yow but it shall pass so with no other which words the Earl thought did both confirm the Councils acceptance and his explanation and sufficiently clear him of all offence if he had incurred any And whatever hath been his Highness resolution or the Earl's misfortune since the Earl is perswaded that his Highness was resolved then to presse the affair no further For though some had still the same animosities and prejudices against the Earl yet hitherto they had not adventured to undertake to extract and forge such crimes out of his words as afterwards they did And it was not till privat suggestions were made that Advocats were asked as they were if these words could be stretched to treason and that when the ablest denyed the Kings Advocat complyed and was ordered to draw the inditement and some judges were engaged and secured about it as will appear when ever his Majesty thinks it his interest to take ane exact triall of that whole affair The Earl did think as I just now said his Highness saying it was past as to him was enough and he was resolved to say no more for justifying himselfe but seing he is so hardly pressed and his life and honour at the stake it is hoped his Highness will not disown what the Earl hath hitherto so respectfully concealed and is now no less necessary to be spoke out for his vindication And that is that besids that his Highness did allow the Earl to explain and did hear his explanation in Council and approve it The Earl did twice in privat once before and once after his Oath in Council repeat to his Highness the same words that the treason is now founded on viz. That the Earl meant not to bind up himself to wish and endeavour in a Lawfulway and in his station any alteration he thought to the advantage of Church and state not repugnant to the Protestant Religion and his Loyalty and that His Highness was so far from charging them with treason that he said plainly both times the Earl's scruples were unnecessary and that the Test did not bind him up as he imagined adding further the last time that the Earl had cheated himself for notwithstanding the explanation he had taken the Test. To which the Earl only answered that then His Highness should be satisfied Now after all this that treason should be so earnestly searched for and so groundlesly found in those words Is it not strange beyond all example could it be treason for the Earl to say he wil not bind up himself where His Highness sayes so oft and so plainly it was not intended that he or any man should be bound up What past the nixt day after the Earl had taken the Test and was receaved by the Council is also proper for you to know The Earl being to take it as one of the Commissioners of the Treasury it was commonly thought that he and the other Commissioners were to take it in the Exchequer but after ten of the clock about two hours after the Earl had parted from His Highness one told him there was a design upon him to make him swear once more befor the Council and accordingly at twelve there was an extraordinary Council called in the Abbay and there it was found That the Commissioners of Treasury as officers of the Croun were to take the Test before the Council and it was told the Earl that the Exchequer could not that day sit without him And to make the matter more solemn It was resolved that the Council should meet that after noon and that His Highness should be present So as soon as they were mett the Oath was tendered and the Earl offering to take it and saying only these words as before The Earl of Roxburgh never heard to speak in Council till then stood up behind His Highness chair and with Clamour asked what was said To whom His Highness was pleased to turn and inform him Upon which Roxburgh prepared for the purpose desired that what the Earl of Argyll had said the day before might be repeated Which the Earl seing a design upon him did at first decline till he was peremptorily put to it by His Highness and he being ingenuous and thinking no course more proper to prevent mistakes of words He said he had a note of what he had said in his pocket which His Highness called for very earnestly and Commanded him to produce which being done and the paper read so secure was the Earl of his innocency that he was willing upon the
we consess that we make a distinction betwixt Christ Iesus in his Eternal substance and betwixt the Elements in the sacramental signs so that we will neither worship the signs in the place of that which is signified by them neither yet do we despise and interpret them as junprofitable and vain but do use them with all reverence examining our selves diligently before that so we do because we are assured by the mouth of the Apostle that such as eat of that Bread and drink of that Cup unworthily are guilty of the Body and Blood of Christ Iesus XXII Of the right Administration of the Sacraments THAT Sacraments be rightly ministred we judge two things requisite the one that they be ministred by lawful Ministers whom we affirm to be only these that are appointed to the preaching of the word into whose mouths God has put some sermon of Exhortation they being men lawfully chosen thereto by some Kirk The other that they be ministred in such Elements and in such sort as God has appointed else we affirm that they cease to be the right Sacraments of Christ Jesus And therefore it is that we fly the Doctrine of the Papistical Kirk in participation of their Sacraments First because their Ministers are no Ministers of Christ Jesus yea which is more horrible they suffer Women whom the Holy Ghost will not suffer to teach in the Congregation to Baptize And secondly because they have so adulterated both the one Sacrament and the other with their own inventions that no part of Christs Action abides in the original purity For Oyl Salt Spitle and such like in Baptism are but mens inventions Adoration Veneration bearing throw Streets and Towns and keeping of bread in boxes are Prophanation of Christs Sacraments and no use of the same For Christ Jesus said Take eat c. do ye this in rememberance of me By which words and charge he sanctified Bread and Wine to the Sacrament of his Holy Body and Blood to the end that the one should be eaten and that all should drink of the other and not that they should be keeped to be worshipped and honoured as God as the Papists have done heretofore who also commited Sacriledg stealing from the people the one part of the Sacrament to wit the blessed Cup. Moreover that the Sacraments be rightly used it is required that the end and cause why the Sacraments were institute be understood and observed as well of the Ministers as the Receivers For if the opinion be changed in the Receiver the right use ceases which is most evident by the rejection of the Sacrifice as also if the Teacher plainly teach false Doctrines which were odious and abominable before God albeit they were his own Ordinance because that wicked men use them to another end than God has ordained The same affirm we of the Sacraments in the Papistical Kirk in which we affirm the whole action of the Lord Iesus to be adulterated as well in the external form as in the end and opinion What Christ Iesus did and commanded to be done is evident by the Evangelists and by Saint Paul What the Priest does at his Altar we need not to rehearse The end and cause of Christs institution and why the selfsame should be used is expressed in these words Do ye this in rememberance of me as oft as ye shall eat of this bread and drink of this cup ye shall shew forth that is extol preach magnifie and praise the Lords death till he come But to what end and in what opinion the Priests say their Mass let the words of the same their own Doctors and Writings witness to wit that they as Mediators betwixt Christ and his Kirk do offer unto God the Father a Sacrifice propitiatory for the sins of the quick and the dead Which Doctrine as blasphemous to Christ Jesus and making derogation to the sufficiency of his only sacrifice once oftered for Purgation of all these that shall be sanctified we utterly abhor detest and renounce XXIII To whom Sacraments appertain WE confess and acknowledg that Baptism appertains as well to the Infants of the faithful as unto them that be of age and discretion and so we damn the error of the Anabaptists who deny Baptism to appertain to children before that they have Faith and Understanding but the Supper of the Lord we confess to appertain to such only as be of the houshold of Faith and can try and examine themselves as well in their Faith as in their duty towards their Neighbours Such as eat and drink at that holy Table without Faith or being at dissension and division with their brethren do eat unworthily And therefore it is that in our Kirk our Ministers take publick and particular examination of the knowledg and conversation of such as are to be admitted to the Table of the Lord Jesus XXIV Of the Civil Magistrate WE confess and acknowledg Empires Kingdoms Dominions and Cities to be distincted and ordained by God the powers and authority in the same be it of Emperors in their Empires of Kings in their Realms Dukes and Princes in their Dominions and of other Magistrates in the Cities to be Gods holy Ordinance ordained for manifestation of his own Glory and for the singular profit and commodity of Mankind So that whosoever goeth about to take away or to confound the whole state of Civil Policies now long established we affirm the same men not only to be enemies to mankind but also wickedly to fight against God's express will We farther confess and acknowledg that such persons as are placed in Authority are to be loved honoured feared and holden in most reverent estimation because that they are the Lieutenants of God in whose Sessions God himself does sit and judg yea even the Iudges and Princes themselves to whom by God is given the sword to the praise and defence of good men and to revenge and punish all open malefactors Moreover to Kings Princes Rulers and Magistrates we affirm that chiefly and most principally the conservation and purgation of the Religion appertains so that not only they are appointed for Civil Policy but also for maintenance of the true Religion and for suppressing of Idolatry and Superstition whatsoever as in David Iehosaphat Ezechias Iâ—sias and others highly commended for their zeal in that case may be espied And therefore we confess and avow that such as resist the supreme Power doing that thing which appertains to his charge do resist Gods Ordinance and therefore cannot be guiltless And farther we affirm that whosoever denies unto them their aid counsel and comfort whist the Princes and Rulers vigilantly travel in execution of their Office that the same men deny their help support and counsel to God who by the presence of his Lieutenant does crave it of them XXV Of the gifts freely given to the Kirk ALbeit the word of God truly preached and the Sacraments rightly ministred and Discipline executed according to the
word of God be the certain and infallible signs of the true Kirk we mean not that every particular person joyned with such company be an elect member of Christ iesus For we acknowledg and confess that dornel cockle and chaff may be sown grow and in great abundancely in the midst of the wheat that is the Reprobate may be joyned in the society of the Elect and may externally use with them the benefits of the word and Sacraments But such being but temporal professors in mouth but not in heart do fall back and continue not to the end And therefore have they no fruit of Christs Death Resurrection nor Ascension but such as with heart unfeignedly believe with mouth boldly confess the Lord Iesus as before we have said shall most assuredly receive these gifts First In this life remission of sins and that by only Faith in Christs blood in so much that albeit sin remains and continually abides in these our mortal bodies yet it is not imputed unto us but is remitted and covered with Christs Justice Secondly in the general Judgment there shall be given to everyman and woman resurrection of the flesh for the Sea shall give her dead the Earth these that therein be inclosed yea the Eternal God shall stretch out his hand on the dust and the dead shall arise uncorruptible and that in the substance of the self-same flesh that every man now bears to receive according to their works glory or punishment For such as now delight in vanity cruelty filthiness superstition or idolatry shall be adjudged to the fire unquenchable in which they shall be tormented for ever as well in their bodies as in their souls which now they give to serve the Devil in all abomination But such as continue in well-doing to the end boldly professing the Lord Jesus we constantly believe that they shall receive glory honour and immortality to reign for ever in life everlasting with Christ Iesus to whose glorified body all his Elect shall be made like when he shall appear again in Iudgment shall render up the Kingdom to God his Father who then shall be and ever shall remain in all things God blessed for ever To whom with the Son and with the Holy Ghost se all honour and glory now and ever So be it Arise O Lord and let thine enemies be confounded let them flee from thy presence that hate thy godly Name Give thy Servants strength to speak thy VVord in boldnessâ— and let all Nations cleave to thy true Knowledge Amen Thir Acts and Articles were read in the face of Parliament and ratified by the three Estates at Edinburgh the 17. day of August the year of God 1560. years Act I. 6. P. 1. C. 8. Anno 1567. Anent the Kings Aith to be given at His Coronation ITem Because that the increase of vertue suppressing of Idolatrie craves that the Prince and the People be of ane perfite Religion quhilk of Gods mercie is now presently professed within this Realm Therefore it is statute and ordained be our Soveraign Lord my Lord Regent and the three Estates of this present Parliament that all Kings and Princes or Magistrats whatsoever holding their place quhilk hereafter in any time sall happen to reigne and bear rule over this realm at the time of their Coronation and receipt of their Princely Authoritie make their faithfull promise be aith in presence of the eternal God that during the haill course of their lives they sall serve the samin eternall God to the uttermost of their power according as he hes required in his maist haly Word revieled and contained in the new and auld Testaments And according to the samin word sall maintaine the trew Religion of Christ Iesus the preaching of his halie word and due and right ministration of the Sacraments now received and preached within this realme And sall abolish and gainstand all false Religion contrare to the samin And sall rule the people committed to their charge according to the will and command of God revealed in his foresaid Word and according to the laudable Lawes and Constitutions received in this realme nawise repugnant to the said Word of the eternal God And sall procure to the uttermaist of their power to the Kirk of God and haill Christian people trew and perfite peace in all time cumming The Rights and rents with all just Priviledges of the Croun of Scotland to preserve and keep inviolated nouther sall they transfer nor alienate the samin They sall forbid and represse in all estates and degrees reife oppression and all kinde of wrang In all judgements they sall command and procure that justice and equitie de keeped to all creatures without exception as the Lord and father of all mercies be mereyful to them And out of their Lands and Empyre they sall be carefull to root out all heretikes and enemies to the trew worship of God that shall be convict be the trew Kirk of God of the foresaid crymes And that they fall faithfullie affirme the things above written be their solemn aith Act. J. 6. P. 1. C. 9. Anno 1567. No person may be judge Procurator Notar nor Member of Court quha professis not the Religion ITem The Kings grace with advice of my Lord Regent and the three Estates of this present Parliament statutes and ordains That no manner of person nor persons be received in any times hereafter to bear publick office removabill of judgment within this Realm but sik as profess the puritie of Religion and Doctrine now presently established And that nane be permitted to procure nor admitted Notar or created a Mâ—mber of Court in any time coming without he in likewise professe the Evangel and Religion foresaid Providing alwayes that this Act be on no wise extended to any manner of person or persons havand their offices heritable or in life-rent but that they may use the samin conforme to their infeftments and dispositions granted to them thereof Which Act was thereafter Anno 1609. explained and extended in this manner Part of the Act I. 6. P. 2. C. 5. Anno 1609. intituled c. AND that the Act made in His Highness first Parliament bearing that nane that professe not the true Religion presently professed within this Realm may be judge Procurator or Member of Court be extended to all and whatsomever offices without any exception or restriction in all time coming Act. J. 6. P. 3. C. 47. Anno 1572. Adversaries of the true Religion are not Subjects of the King Of Apostats ITem Forsameikle as there hes been great rebellion and disobedience against our Soveraign Lords authoritie in time bypast and seeing the cause of Gods true Religion and His Highness authoritie foresaid are so joyned as the hurt of the ane is common to baith It is therefore declared statute and ordained by our Soveraign Lord with advice and consent of his Regents grace with the three Estates and hail bodie of this present Parliament That
children therein shall never consent to any change contrary thereto And that I disown all such Doctrines whether Popish or Fanatical which are contrary to inconsistent with the true Protestant Religion this Confession of Faith All these Propositions and every thing contained therein I firmly believe and embrace and I promise and swear that I shall adhere to them so long as I live without ever changing my opinion about them and that I shall carefully educate my children according to them i. e. I shall teach them to repress Tyranny and if the Authority should make any alteration in the said Confession or any of the Propositions therein I swear that I shall neuer consent thereto And I swear also That I shall renounce all Principles Doctrines and Practices whether Popish or Fanatical which are contrary to any Article or proposition of the foresaid Confession of Faith And for testification of my obedience to my most Gracious Soveraign Charles the Second I do affirm and swear by this my solemn Oath That the Kings Majesty is the only Supreme Governour over this Realm over all Persons and Causes as well Ecclesiastick as Civil and that no Foreign Prince c. As I have declared my Faith toward God so now to testifie that I am a good Subject to the King I affirm and swear by this my solemn Oath That the Kings Majesty is the onely Supreme Governour over all Persons not only Civil but also Ecclesiastical By which I understand that Ecclesiastical Supremacy which the Parliament by Act Nov. 1669. has declared to belong to him as an inherent Right of the Crown By vertue whereof His Majesty and Successors may dispose of the external Governement and Policy of the Church as they please i. e. of all Church-Government there being no other Government exercised in the Church by men but that which is external And that they may settle enact and emit any Constitutions Acts or Orders concerning the Government or persons employed therein and concerning all Ecclesiastical meetings and matters to be proposed and determined therein as they shall think fit So that I affirm that His Majesty and Successors may alter change or abolish the form of Church-Government now established by Law that he may commit it into the hands of persons of a different Religion from what is presently professed in this Realm that he may discharge all meetings of Synods Presbyteries and Sessions for ever Or if he shall please to continue them that he may chuse one delegated or deputed by himself to propose and determine all-matters therein as he thinks â—it That he may by vertue of his Supreme Power iuhibit Church-Officers to meet or meddle in any matter eisher Doctrine or Discipline without his special Order to persue or process any Delinquent or to consider of means to prevent any change or alteration in Religion tho it should be in never so great hazard except only as he shall determine and appoint therein All which he may do by himself and his Councill without any new Law or Act of Parliament And I affirm swear that tho any of His Majesties Successors shall happen to be of another Religion as God forbid yet all this Ecclesiastical Power does belong to him it being declared to be an inherent Right in the Crown and so not to belong to him as a Christian or Protestant Magistrate but as a Magistrate precisely And to my power I shall defend all Rights Jurisdictions Prerogatives Priviledges Preheminencies belonging to His Majesty and lawful Successors And also I swear by this my solemn Oath that so far as I am able I shall assist and defend His Majesties Rights and Prerogatives which because I do not know therefore whatsoever the King and Parliament or King and Council shall declare to belong to him as a Right Jurisdiction and Prerogative either in Civil or Ecclesiastical Affairs either concerning Religion Liberty or Property by Ecclesiastical Supremacy I swear I shall own and approve assist and defend the same as far as possibly I can And further I affirm and swear by this my solemn Oath That I judge it unlawful for Subjects upon pretext of Reformation or any other pretence whatsoever to enter into Covenants or Leagues or to convocate conveene or assemble in any Council Convocation or Assembly to treat consult or determine in any matter of State Civil or Ecclesiastick without His Majesties special Licence or express Warrant had thereto or to take up Arms against the King or those commissionated by him And that I shall never so rise in Arms nor enter into such Covenants or Assemblies c And I further swear That I think it utterly unlawful for any Subject of whatsoever quality or condition many or few for whatsoever Cause not only to make any Covenants but not so much as to meet together in any kind of Meeting to hear see or consult about any matter belonging to the Civil or Ecclesiastical Estate without His Majesties special Command and express Licence So that whatsoever corruption or abuse may be in the Civil Government through the fault of the King or Council or whatsoever hazard or danger the true Religion and Church of God within this land may be in I judg it unlawful for any Subject whether Pastors or others to meet together that they may consider what way to remedy or prevent the same tho it were only by humble Addresses and Petitions And I sâ—ear That there can never fall out a Case wherein Subjects may rise in Arms against their King or any Commissionated by him even though it were meerly to defend themselves tho never so cruelly persecuted and invaded by any who pretend his Name and Authority And I promise and swear That if any shall rise in Arms or meet together in a peaceable way for the ends foresaid that I shall never joyn with them And that there lies no Obligation on me from the National Covenant or the Solemn League and Covenant so commonly called or any manner of way whatsoever to endeavour any change or alteration in the Government either in Church or State as it is now established by the Laws of this Kingdom c. And I also affirm and swear by this Oath That there lies no Obligation on me either by the National or Solemn League and Covenant or any other way imaginable whatsoever to endeavour the least change or alteration in the Government either in Church or State as they are now established So that I am never to endeavour any alteration not only in the Civil Government but also in the Govern of the Church as it is now established among us though it should be found never so prejudicial to Religion to His Majesties Service or to the good of the Countrey Yea whatever corruptions may come to be in either of the Govern I swear That I am obliged never to endeavour the least alteration of them And particularly 1. As to the Ecclesiastical Govern it being established by
for reforming the Church if one man who may happen to be an enemy both to Truth and Vertue shall dissent And how can honest conscientious Church-men swear they shall never endeavour to have this helped By the same Act no matter is to be debated consulted or concluded but what shall be allowed by His Majesty What now if the Prince come to be Popish or altogether unconcerned about Religion shall we can we in Conscience bind our selves to propose treat and conclude nothing but what he pleases By the explicatory Act itis put in the Kings power to cut and carve in the external Government of the Church at his pleasure And so he may without consent of Parliament or Clergy restore Presbytery he may turn out all the Bishops and Pastors and plant in their room men of his own persuasion whatever it be he may casheer all our spiritual Fathers and substitute Noble-men Gentle-men Lawyers or any other kind of Laiks to be Superintendents of the Church or his Commissioners in Ecclesiastical affairs And shall we oblige our selves by an Oath to endeavour no rectification of so unreasonable a Statute If we see and it cannot be denied that Episcopal Government might contribute more to maintain Truth and advance Piety and Peace than hitherto it has done might we not ought we not to use our utmost endeavours to procure such Laws and Canons to be enacted as should oblige Bishops to manage their Power and Authority to such noble and excellent ends and not put off the respect to the souls committed to their charge We are to endeavour such a change which might conduce mightily for changing and reforming them Out of the veneration we bear to Episcopacy we cannot but pray and with for such a change and do our best to effectuate it because otherways Episcopal Government would come to be despised and derided not only as useless but pernicious Unless then we would intirely abandon Episcopacy unless we would express no regard for or concern our selves with the flourishing of piety unless we would sit down contented and satisfied without ever complaining of and opposing the corruptions of the Church we can by no means swear this Clause of the Test But we would with a very good Conscience testifie by our Solemn Oath if we were put to it that we judge our selvès obliged to endeavour a change both of the Government and Governors of the Church There are several other things that beget in our minds an utter dislike of the Act anent Religion We shall touch Two or Three things more It commands us to become a kind of Sycophants Delators and Informers against Dissenters Hardly could our mortal enemies fall upon a course more likely to blast our Ministry and expose us to hatred and obloquy Had it been designed we should give an account of Schismatical Withdrawers that our spiritual Fathers might bear with them in the spirit of meekness and charity for clearing their prejudices we would have most readily and joyfully served them in so worthy an enterprise But to delate them that they may be fined and imprisoned or banished or sustain any bodily or temporal damages is a thing we abhor We judg it more eligible to be no Pastors than to be on such terms 2. It weakens the Protestant Interest by dividing Protestants and treating sober Dissenters with as great severity as Papists or wildest Fanatiks 3. It leaves a wide postern for Popery for it exempts from the Test such as should have been first of all put to it and so provides most effectually for perpetuating Popery in the Royal Family And what could have been contrived more grateful and advantageous to the Church of Rome and what more grievous and fatal to the Reformed Grounds wherupon some of the Conformed Ministers scruple to take the Test. FIrst passing by the danger of Oaths when pressed so generally men of the least tenderness ordinarily swallow them easily and make small Conscience of observing them while they that fear Oaths are hardly induced to take them and by their strict observance make themselves a Prey we think it strange that this Oath should be injoyned to us who cannot be suspected rationally to incline either to Fanaticism or Popery since by our Subscriptions to the Oath of Supremacy and canonical obedience we have sufficiently purged our selves of the first and by our refuting Popish errors daily in our Pulpits do shew an utter abhorrence of the other and further since meerly our owning of Episcopal Government has begot and still increases in the minds of our People such an Aversion from and dislike of us we would have expected that our spiritual Fathers would not have exposed us to greater loathing and contempt by such engagements which although it should be granted to be causeless and unjust yet we think our selves bound to shun it that our Ministry may be the more taking with them since the thing pressed upon us is neither absolutely necessarie nor yet so evident in what is asserted for truth as may incourage us for to underlie their prejudice conceived thereupon And finallie since it is known that abjuring the Covenant did hinder many Ministers to conform and People to joyn in Ordinances dispensed by Conformists and our Parliaments had hitherto shewed such civil Moderation as to free us from the Declaration we cannot look at it but as bad and fatal that our Church should be dashed on this Rock which may occasion its splitting and instead of quenching this former evil create new Flames Secondly as we wish for the suppressing of the growth of Popery a more particular way had been made use of even for the discovering of such as are of no publick Trust so we cannot but regret that this Test has been so framed as to divide the sound sober Presbyterians amongst themselves whereby our Common Enemies are gratify'd and the true Faith indangered we being perswaded that there are many Presbyterians in the Kingdom Gentlemen Ministers and others who cannot in conscience take this Test who yet do dayly come and are ready to joyne with us in Ordinances We think it had been fitter to have condescended something for gaining of such then to have put such a brand upon them which may more alienate them and weaken us Thirdly that Confession of Faith Recorded in the first Parliament of King James the 6th has some things in it which may scarre the Swearing to it without Limitation as 1. Section 15th it Asserts those to be evil works which are done not only contra but praeter verbum Dei 2dly Section 25th It Asserts such as resist the Supreme Power doing that which pertains to his charge and while he vigilantly travels in his office doe resist the Ordinance of God which clauses may bear an exclusive sense especially when in the 5th Section it is reckoned among good works to suppress Tyranny 3dly Section 15th Jesus Christ is asserted to be the only Head and Law-giver of his Kirk and it
us were judged by all both in Articles and Parliament and that after long and strenuous application and endeavour in contriving ane new Act for these ends not only sufficient but the best security for our Religion against all hazards and contingencies in which the best and wisest part of the Parliament acquiesced till the importunity and repeated clamours of some who needs would appear more warmly concerned in this mater than others they offering new overtures to the Articles for the securing of the Protestant Religion of which they often received an account in open Parliament did awaken a more narrow inspection into this more concerning Affair And therefore for the farther security of Religion from the danger of Popery on the one hand and of Principles and Practices of Rebellion and fanatical Schism on the other did judg it necessary that ane Act should be past disabling Papists and Fanaticks from any power or capacity to subvert or overthrow it which in their deep wisdom they found could never be so effectually done as by keeping all such out of places of publik Trust and Employment Civil Ecclesiastik or Military And in regard that the good and wholesom Laws and the steady and vigorus execution thereof are the best and most firm human security of Religion Therefore such wise provisions were piously made by that Act as might bar all disaffected to the Protestant Religion from electing or being elected Members of Parliament wherein the Law making power is lodged or from creeping into any Office or Trust whereby the execution of the Law is managed So that our established Religion might never be endangered or subverted by evil or corrupt Laws or by the remiss and negligent execution of good ones Notwithstanding such is the fate of the best of human Constitutions that nothing can be so piously intended or prudently contrived but either through ignorance or malice misprision or mistake it may be misrepresented misconstrued and many groundless and unaccountable jealousies by scruples and prejudices entertained against it as is but too clearly instanced in the matter of the present Oath and Test which the wisdom of our Governours hath enacted and appointed to be taken by all persons employed in Offices of publik Trust as the best fence of the Church and security of the Protestant Religion against the invasion and encroachments they stand in danger of from the restless adversaries Some of the Regular and Orthodox Clergy and other well-meaning Subjects having entertained some jealousies which far exceed their causes and vented some scruples and objections against it which are most part founded on mistakes and unnecessary not to say uncharitable stretching and extending the meaning thereof far beyond either the genuine sense of the words or design and intention of the Parliament in framing and enjoyning that Test tenderness and compassion towards these conform and loyal persons who may either be imposed upon by the malice and craft of the Church's Adversaries to stumble at or by their own fears and misapprehensions may be led into mistakes of the meaning and design of this excellent mean for securing our Church and Religion hath prevailed with us to endeavour a short Essay for vindicating this Oath and Test from all mistakes and scruples by answering and satisfying the Objections which are commonly moved against it and that thereby the plain and genuine sense in which this Oath is required by Authority to be taken by all persons in Trust may be clear and apparent Pursuant to this it will be fit to read and consider the Oath or Test it self as it is contained in the sixth Act of the last Session of this Currant Parliament In the next place it will not be amiss to rank up the doubts and objections moved against it in their several Heads and Classes and to resolve and answer them accordingly in their respective place and order Of these Scruples and Objections some are founded upon the Consession of Faith contained in the foresaid Oath others arise from the Oath of Allegiance and Supremacy and the asserting therein of the Kings Prerogative some are taken from that part of the Test wherein the unlawfulness of assembling in any Councils or Conventions to treat consult or determine in any mater of State Civil or Ecclesiastik without the Kings special command and license had thereto is asserted and sworn and finally others arise from the Clause asserting that no obligation lyes from the late Covenants or any other manner of way whatsoever to endeavour any change or alteration in the Government either in Church or State as the same is now established by the Laws of this Kingdom It is beyond all peradventure that as Conscience is the most tender thing in the Soul of man so Oaths are of the strictest force and obligation and are to be taken in Truth Righteousness and Iudgment which is the Doctrine of all sound Casuists Juramenti obligatio est stricti juris yet this strictum jus is not so to be understood as if it did exclude all sensing and interpreting of it the interpretation thereof amounting to no more than meerly to make clear and plain any word or sentence therein which may seem to be dark doubtful and ambiguous It is excellently said by that judicious Casuist Doctor Sandersone Prel 2. De juramenti obligatione p. 8. De lege Charitatis aliena dicta facta praesertim Principum Parentum aliorumque Rectorum sunt benignae interpretationis Juxta id quod dici solet dubia esse interpretanda in meliorem partem That is by the Law of Charity the words and deeds of others especially of our Princes Parents and other Governours are to be moderated by a favourable interpretation according to the usual maxim That things doubtful are to be interpreted to the best sense This being premised the Objections of the first Classis arising upon the Confession of Faith are to be first considered and in order to this it must be remembered that this Confession is not to be lookt upon as fully comprehensive of all the Protestant Doctrine in opposition to all the Errors and Superstition of the Romish Church and other Heresies nor is there any one amongst the Harmony of the Confessions of the Reformed Churches which can challenge this perfection to it self nor is it to be thought strange that in many things it should be defective if we consider that it was hastily compiled in the short space of four days by a select number of Barons and Ministers in the very Infancy of our Reformation as the History of the Reformation of the Church of Scotland commonly ascribed to John Knox Printed at London in the Year 1644 in Fol. p. 252. doth inform Nor are the Authors of the foresaid Confession so prositive as to look upon all therein contained as infallible or to be received as Articles of Faith as appears from the Preface prefixed thereto as it is set down in the History of the Reformation
foresaid p. 253. wherein they promise upon their Honours and Fidelity Reformation of any Article or Sentence therein which shall be proved to be amisle or Erroneous so that it is not to be considered as the compleat Standard of the Protestant Faith and Doctrine in which nothing is wanting but is inserted in the body of this Oath as being the only Protestant Confession in this Church which is stamped with the impress of Lawful Authority it being ratified by the first Parliament James the VI Anno 1567. and is the most Ancient being received for six score years without any contradiction in this Kingdom and is only used in this Oath designotive to express that as a particular systeme wherein the main Substantials of the Protestant Religion sworn unto are contained If it be asked What or where is the Protestant Religion The answer is plain that it is the true Christian Religion as it is reformed from the Errors and Superstitions of the Popish Church and is contained in the harmony of the Protestant Church's Confessions which agree in the chief and principal Substantials tho they may differ in lesser maters and opinions disputable among which this our Confession is recorded But tho we are under no obligation to justifie every Sentence or Article thereof yet it deserves so much reverence from us as to justifie it so far as we may from any charge of Error or Heterodoxy and the rather that upon due tryal and examination there seemeth nothing to be contained in it which is not agreeable to the charitable Analogy of Faith and may not admit of a very fair true and orthodox sense and interpretation as the following Answers to the Scruples and Objections arising upon it will sufficiently evince It is objected by some then 1. That in the third Arâ— of Original Sin it is said That by it the Image of God was utterly defaced in man which seems to run cross to the stream of the Protestant Doctrine which aslerts That the Remains of the Divine Image still abide in the Soul notwithstanding of mans fall The answer is easie if we shall carefully distinguish betwixt defacing of the Image of God which imports no more than a darkning or maiming thereof and utter destroying of that Image which implies the total subversion or abolition of it and that the former is allowed by all sound Protestants It is objected 2. That Art 17. it is said That it is blasphemy to affirm that men who live according to equity and justice shall be saved whatsoever Religion they professe since without Christ Jesus there is neither life nor salvation which some think a very uncharitable doctrine barring all the Ancient Philosophers and Moralists such as Plato Seneca Socrates Plutarch c. from eternal life and salvation Answer 1. That Clause is but a consequence drawn from the 16 th Article rather than any essential part of its doctrine as will appear upon the perusal 2. It is most infallibly true that there is no Name under Heaven by which salvation can be obtained but the Name of Jesus which imports at least a sense of sin and of the necessity of expiating the same and of propitiating God toward the sinner in every one that shall be saved which by some is termed an implicite knowledg of Christ Jesus who alone is the grand Propitiation and such a knowledg as the moral Gentiles and even the Jews had before the Revelation and Exhibition of the Person of the Messiah in the fulness of time and how far an implicite knowledg of Jesus Christ in his Doctrine and Offices before his exhibition in time is necessary to salvation is not of easie determination And therefore 3. This Clause must be supposed to respect the Gospel Oeconomy and Evangelical dispensation and to extend to such as are blessed with the manifestation of the Gospel and clear revelation of Jesus Christ thereby And in this sense it is beyond all doubt that none come to age and the clear exercise of Reason in an ordinary way shall be saved but such only as believe in him own his Doctrine and sincerely obey his holy Precepts It is objected 3. That from the 19 th Article the interpretation of the sacred Scripture appertaineth to the Spirit of God by which the Scripture was dictate and written and noâ— to any person or Church for any Preheminence or Prerogative personal or local which seems to cut off all power of interpreting Scriptures from the Ancient Fathers or General Councils Answ. The harmonious Doctrine of the Protestant Church is That the Spirit of God speaking in the Scriptures is as the best Judg so the only best and infallible Interpreter of Scripture whereby tho the primary and authoritative Interpretation of the Scripture is ascribed to that blessed Spirit yet thereby is not denied to the Fathers and Councils a ministerial and declaratory power in expounding the sacred Word which is of great weight and authority with all Christians who needs must believe these holy persons and Assemblies to be ordinarily assisted by the light and conduct of his holy Spirit who promised to be with his Church to the end of the world It is objected 4. That Article 19. the right administration of the Sacraments is one of the Notes of the true Church of God And Art 23. requires to the right administration of the Sacraments that they be ministred in such Elements and in such sort as God hath appointed whence some would infer That all such Churches as use circumstances in the administration thereof which are not appointed by God as the mixing of Water with Wine in the holy Eucharist or of Oyl with Water in Baptism must be by this Doctrine unchurched Ans. When the 23 d. Article requireth to a true Church that the Sacraments be administred in such sort as God has appointed it mainly relateth to the words of Consecration and to the institution which indeed are essentially requisite to the very being of the Sacraments these being null which are celebrated without them and not according to the institution As for the Elements tho these be necessary at least in ordinary cases yet the mixtures and superadditions to these appointed Elements do not absolutely nullifie tho they do corrupt the Sacraments And that this is the meaning of the 23 d Article appears clear from the words immediately following viz. else we affirm that they cease to be the right Sacraments of Christ Jesus where they are not denied simply to be Sacraments but are charged as Sacraments not rightly and duely administred as these are which are not vitiated and adulterated by superstitious mixtures It is objected 5. from that same Article 23. That to the being of lawful Ministers it is required that they be men lawfully chosen thereto by some Kirk which seems to import the necessity of popular Elections and to cancel the Rights of Patronages and to unminister such as are presented by them Answ. All Ministers presented by Patrons are elected
by the Churh in as much as Edicts are served whereby the peoples consent is legally obtained before the person presented be collated or inducted to the particular Flock or Congregation And that by this Article Laik Patronages are not annulled appears evident by the seventh Act of the Parliament 1667. wherein the same Confession of Faith and all its Articles are authorised and therefor cannot be supposed by any Article of the foresaid Confession to have been intended to be cast and overturned It is objected 6. That in the 15. Article amongst works which are reputed to be good before God to repress Tyranny is enumerate for one which seems to encourage resistance and rebellion against the Supreme Civil Powers Answ. Besides what may be said concerning Tyranny in inferior Judges Magistrates and other subordinate Superiors the repression whereof is certainly a good work If we consider Tyranny in the Supreme Magistrate it can only be said repressable by fair just and lawful means For iâ— possumus quod jure possumus To suppress Tyranny by resistance or rebellion were to do evill that good may come of it contrary to the Apostolical Rule and injunction but to suppress Tyranny by a regular assisting to make good Laws by devout prayers and pious Instructions and exhortations may well be reckoned among good works It is objected 7. That in the 23. Article the Popish Ministers are no Ministers of Jesus Christ which is contrary both to the doctrine and practice of all sound Protestant Churches Answ. 1. That Assertion is not contained in the doctrinal part of that Article 23. but is a Corollary illogically deduced from the first part thereof and we are not concerned in the ill Consequences and Paralogisms which may be found in any of these Articles 2. All Protestant Churches do acknowledg the Bishops Priests and Deacons in the Romish Church to be real and ordained Ministers of the Catholick Church owning the Ordination of their Ministers to be derived in its succession from them So that without unchurching themselves they must needs believe these to be really Ministers and the practice of Protestants doth universally demonstrate this Inso much that when a Romish Priest comes over from them and reconciles himself to the Protestant Church he is allowed to exercise all the parts and functions of the holy Ministry without any new ordination So that the meaning must be either 1. That many are reputed Ministers in the Romish Church which indeed â—â—o no Ministers of Jesus Christ viz Deacons Acolyths and Exorcists c. and as follows in the Article even women among them are allowed to baptize who sure are none of Christs Ministers Or 2. That they are no pious and faithful Ministers nor such as Christ will own to be his as is insinuate in the foresaid History of Reformation of the Church of Scotland p. 251. where it calls all Popish Ministers then in this Kingdom Thieves Murderers Rebels Traitors c Or 3. That they were not duely elected Ministers as is asserted ibid. Or in fine That they are not sound or incorrupted Ministers For according to the harmony of the Protestant Confessions among which this Confession of ours is inserted the Ministers of the Popish Church are owned to be true and real Ministers in the same sense wherein that Church is acknowledg'd to be a true and real Church tho not a sound and pure one even as we say that a Leprous or Paralitik man is a true and real man tho not a healthful and sound man as this same Confession Article 17. calls the Church at Jerusalem consisting of Priests Scribes Pharisees c. no Church of God by reason of the corruptions thereof wherein must be meaned no sound or incorrupt Church of God as appears from the Title viz. Of the Notes by which c. Many other Particulars may perhaps be excepted against which are contained in that Confession besides these which are here considered and which we are not concerned much to notice or to dip upon the Authority enacting or authorising that Confession at the first forming thereof since it is inserted in the Test only designative as pointing to that Ancient system wherein the substantials of the Protestant Religion are to be found as was declared openly in Parliament when some more zealous than considerate would needs press the mentioning of it in this Oath which must be presumed to be the alone use of that Confession in this Test since upon this account the Articles thereof were refused so much as to be read in Parliament as being no part of our Oath and formerly ratified by Law at the passing of the Act enjoyâ—ing the same For if the words of the Oath be seriously weighed we shall find that by this Test we swear to own prosess and believe not every Article or every Proposition or every Consequence in that Confession but only the true Protestant Religion contained therein and which Religion we believe to be founded on and agreeable to he written word of God to the which Religion we bind our selves to adhere all the days of our life and to educate our children therein c So that if there be any Article or proposition or consequence contained in that Consession which is contrary or repugnant to the true Protestant â—eligion to be found in the harmony of Confessions We do not swear to own oâ— believe it If it be replied that by that Oath and Test we swear to disown and renounce all Principles Doctrines and Practices which are contrary to and inconsistent with the said Protestant Religion and Confession of Faith and that therefore we are bound to own and believe all Principles and Doctrines which are contained in the Confession foresaid Ans 1. The Confession of Faith repeated in this clause cannot be supposed to be understood otherways than as it is taken in the former which is only designative and denoting the system where the Protestant Doctrine is to be found ut supra 2 The words of the Oath do sufficiently clear up this seeming difficulty which are That I disown and renounce all such Doctrines Principles and Practices Popish or Fanatical which are contrary to c. So that unless there be errors or Heterodox Doctrines which are neither Popish nor Fanatical discovered to be contained in the Confession foresaid no shadow of scruple can be rationally entertained upon this account and tho there were yet it is apparent that the intention of the Parliament in inserting that Confession into this Oath was only so far as it stands in opposition to Popery and Fanticism and no further So that if there be any Doctrines which oppose any part or Article of that Confession which are neither Popish nor Fanatical we are not bound by this part of the Oath to renounce them and no sound loyal Protestant will scruple to renounce all such Doctrines and Principles which are either Popish or Fanatical which are repugnant to this Confession foresaid To
studying the peace of this Church and Kingdom will receive without peevishnesse prejudice or partiality the satisfaction which herein is with so much affection and charity endeavoured and tendered then the pains herein taken shall be thought well placed and imployed EDENBURGH Sederunt tertio Die Novembris 1681. His Royal Highness c. Athol Praeses Montrose Argyle Winton Linlithgow Perth Strathmore Roxburgh Ancram Airley Balcarres Lorn Levingston Bishop of Edenburgh Elphinston Rosse Dalziel President of Session Treasurer Deputy Register Advocate Justice Clerk Collintoun Lundie This day the Earl of Argyll having first openly declared his sense as you have it hereafter set down in his explication took the Test as a Privy Councellor and after he was called to and had taken his place the Councils explication which I have already mentioned having been formerly read and debated was put to the vote and passed the Earl not voting thereto as hath been remarked Edenburgh the 3d day of November 1681. The Privy Councils Explanation of the Test. FOrasmuch as some have entertained jealousies and prejudices aganst the Oath and Test appointed to be taken by all persons in publik Trust. Civil Ecclesiastical or Military in this Kingdom by the Sixth Act of His Maje 〈…〉 ies Third Parliament as if thereby they were to swear to every Proposition or Clause of the Confession of Faith therein mentioned or that invasion were made by it upon the intrinsik spiritual Power of the Church or Power of the Keys or as if the present Episcopal Government of this National Church by Law established were thereby exposed to the hazard of alteration or subversion All which are far from the intention or design of the Parliament's imposing this Oath and from the genuine sense and meaning thereof Therefore His Royal Highness His Majesties High Commissioner and Lords of Privy-Council do allow authorise and impower the Archbishops and Bishops to administer this Oath and Test to the Ministers in their respective Diocesses in this express sense 1. That tho the Confession of Faith ratified in Parliament 1567. was framed in the Infancy of Reformation and deserves its due praise yet by the Test we do not swear to every Proposition or clause therein contained but only to the true Protestant Religion founded on the word of God contained in that Confession as it as opposed to Popery and Fanaticism 2. That by the Test or any clause therein contained no invasion or encroatchment is made or intended upon the intrinsik spiritual power of the Church or power of the Keys as it was exercised by the Apostles and the most pure and primitive Church in the first three Centuries after Christ and which is still reserved intirely to the Church 3. That the Oath and Test is without any prejudice to the Episcopal Government of this National Church which is declared by the first Act of the second Session of His Majesties first Parliament to be most agreeable to the word of God and most suitable to Monarchy and which upon all occasions His Majesty hath declared he will inviolably and unalterably preserve And appoint the Archbishops and Bishops to require the Ministers in their respective Diocesses with their first conveniency to obey the Law in swearing and subscribing the foresaid Oath and Test with certification that the refusers shall be esteemed persons disaffected to the Protestant Religion and to his Majesties Government and that the punishment appointed by the foresaid sixth Act of His Majesties third Parliament shall be impartially and without delay inflicted upon them By me Pet. Menzeis Sederunt quarto Die Novembris 1681. His Royal Highness c. Montrose Praeses Perth Ancram Levingston President of Session Advocate Winton Strathmore Airley Bishop of Edenburgh Treasurer Deputy Lundie Linlithgow Roxburgh Balcaras Elphynstoun Register This day the Earl of Argyle being about to take the Test as a Commissioner of the Treasury and having uponcommand produced a paper bearing the sense in which he took the Test the preceeding day and in which he would take the same as a Commissioner of the Treasury Upon consideration thereof it was resolved that he cannot sit in Council not having taken the Test in thesense and meaning of the Act of Parliament and therefore was removed The Earl of Argyle's Explication of the Test vvhen he took it I Have considered the Test and I am very desirous to give obedience as far as I can I 'm confident the Parliament never intended to impose contradictory Oaths Therefore I think no man can explain it but for himself Accordingly I take it as far as it is consistent with it self and the Protestant Religion And I do declare That I mean not to bind up my self in my station and in a lawful way to wish and endeavour any alteration I think to the advantage of Church or State not repugnant to the Protestant Religion and my Loyalty And this I understand as a part of my Oath But the Earl finding as hath been narrated this his Explication though accepted and approven by His Highness and Council the day before to be this day carped and offended at and advantages thereupon sought and designed against him did immediatlie draw up the following Explanation of his Explication and for his own vindication did first communicat it to some privatlie and thereafter intended to have offered it at his trial for clearing of his defences The Explanation of his Explication I Have delayed hitherto to take the Oath appointed by the Pa 〈…〉 ent to be taken betwixt and the first of January nixt but now being required 〈◊〉 two moneths sooner to take it this day peremptourly or to refuse I have considered the Test and have seen several Objections moved against it especially by many of the Orthodox Clergy notwithstanding whereof I have endeavoured to satisfie my self with a just explanation which I here offer that I may both satisfie my conscience and obey Your Highness and Your Lordships commands in taking the Test though the Act of Parliament do not simply command the thing but only under a certification which I could easily submit to if it were with Your Highness favour and might be without offence but I love not to be singular and I am very desirous to give obedience in this and everything as far as I can and that which clears me is that I am confident whatever any man may think or say to the prejudice of this Oath the Parliament never intended to impose contradictory Oaths and because their sense they being the framers and imposers is the true sense and that this Test injoyned is of no privat interpretation nor are the Kings Statuts to be interpreted but as they â—ear and to the intent they are made Therefor I 〈…〉 nk no man that is no privat person can explain it for another to amuse or trouble â—im with it may be mistaken glosses But every man as he is to take it so is to ex 〈…〉 ain it for himself and to endeavour
all Oaths and Obedience And consequently strikes at the root of all Laws as well as this Whereas to shun all this not only this excellent Statute 107. has secured all the rest but this is common Reason And in the opinion of all Divines as well as Lawyers in all Nations Verba juramenti intelliguntur secundum ment em intentionem ejus cui fit juramentum Which is set down as the grand position by Sandersone whom they cite Pag. 137. and is founded upon that Mother-Law Leg. 10. cui interrogatus f. f. de interrogationibus in Iure faciendis and without which no man can have sense of Government in his head or practise it in any Nation Whereas on the other hand there is no danger to any tender Conscience since there was no force upon the Earl to take the Oath but he took it for his own advantage and might have abstained 2. It is inferred from the above-written matter of Fact That the Earl is clearly guilty of contravention of the 10. Act Parl. 10. James VI. Whereby the Liedges are commanded not to write any purpose of Reproach of His Majesties Government or misconstrue his Proceedings whereby any misliking may be raised betwixt his Highness his Nobility or his People And who can read this Paper without seeing the King and Parliament reproached openly in it For who can hear that the Oath is only taken as far as it is consistent with it self and the Protestant Religion but must necessarily conclude that in several things it is inconsistent with it self and the Protestant Religion For if it were not inconsistent with it self and the Protestant Religion why this Clause at all but it might have been simply taken For the only reason of hindering it to be taken simply was because of the inconsistency ergo there behoved necessarily to be an inconsistency And if there be any inconsistency with the Protestant Religion or any contradiction in the Oath it self can there be any thing a greater Reproach on the Parliament or a greater ground of mislike to the People And whereas it is pretended That all Laws and Subsumptions should be clear and these are only Inferences It is answered That there are some things which the Law can only forbid in general And there are many Inferences which are as strong and natural and reproach as soon or sooner than the plainest defamations in the world do For what is openly said of reproach to the King does not wound him so much as many seditious Insinuations have done in this Age and the last So that whatever was the Earl's design albeit it is always conceived to be unkind to the Act against which himself debated in Parliament yet certainly the Law in such cases is only to consider what essect this may have amongst the People And therefore the Acts of Parliament that were to guard against the misconstruing of His Majesties Government do not only speak of what was designed but where a disliking may be caused and so judgeth ab effectu And consequentially to the same emergent Reason it makes all things tending to the raising of dislike to be punishable by the Act 60. Parl. 6. Queen Mary and the 9. Act. Parl. 20. James VI. So that the Law designed to deter all men by these indefinite and comprehensive Expressions And both in this and all the Laws of Leasing-making the Iudges are to consider what falls under these general and comprehensive words Nor could the Law be more special here since the makers of Reproach and Slander are so various that they could not be bound up or exprest in any Law But as it evidently appears that no man can hear the words exprest if he believe this Paper but he must think the Parliament has made a very ridiculous Oath inconsistent with it self and the Protestant Religion the words allowing no other sense and having that natural tendency Even as if a man would say I love such a man only in so far as he is an honest man he behoved certainly to conclude that the man was not every way honest So if your Lordships will take measures by other Parliaments or your Predecessors ye will clearly see That they thought less than this a defaming of the Government and misconstruing His Majesties Proceedings For in Balmerino's Case the Justices find an humble Supplication made to the King himself to fall under these Acts now cited Albeit as that was a Supplication so it contained the greatest expressions of Loyalty and offers of Life and Fortune that could be exprest Yet because it insinuates darkly That the King in the preceeding Parliament had not favoured the Protestant Religion and they were sorry he should have taken Notes with his own hands of what they said which seems to be most innocent yet he was found guilty upon those same very Acts. And the Parliament 1661. found his Lordship himself guilty of Leasing making tho he had only written a Letter to a private Friend which requires no great care nor observation but this Paper which was to be a part of his own Oath does because after he had spoken of the Parliament in the first part of this Letter he thereafter added That the King would know their Tricks Which words might be much more applicable to the private Persons therein designed than that the words now insisted on can be capable of any such Interpretation And if either Interpretations upon pretext of exonering of Conscience or otherwise be allowed a man may easily defame as much as he pleases And have we not seen the King most defamed by Covenants entered into upon pretence to make him great and glorious By Remonstrances made to take away his Brother and best Friend upon pretence of preserving the Protestant Religion and His Sacred Person And did not all who rebelled against him in the last Age declare That they thought themselves bound in duty to obey him but still as far as that could consist with their respect to the Protestant Religion and the Laws and Liberties which made all the rest ineffectual And whereas it is pretended That by these words I take the same in as far as it is consistent with it self and the Protestant Religion nothing more is meant but that he takes it as a true Protestant His Majesties Advocate appeals to your Lordships and all the Hearers if upon hearing this Expression they should take it in this sense and not rather think that there is an inconsistency For if that were possible to be the sense what need he say at all as far as it is consistent with it self Nor had the other part as far as it is consistent with the Protestant Religion been necessary For it is either consistent with the Protestant Religion or otherwise they were Enemies to the Protestant Religion that made it Nor are any Lawyers or others in danger by pleading or writing For these are very different from and may be very easily pleaded without defaming a Law and an
Explanation no addition or extention of the Oath So that for all this Explanation the Oath is neither broader nor longer than it was And as to these words I do not mean to bind up my self in my station and in a lawful way to wish and endeavour any alteration I think to the advantage of Church or State not repugnant to the Protestant Religion and my Loyalty It is a strange thing how this Clause can be drawn in question as treasonable when it may with better Reason be alledged That there is no good Subject but is bound to say it And albeit the words to endeavour in my station be words contained in the Covenant yet that is no Reason why two words in the Covenant may not be made use of in another very good and loyal sense And there is no man that shall have the honour either to be entrusted by His Majesty in his Council or any other Judicature or to be a Member of Parliament but he is bound by his Loyalty to say the same thing And there was never a Clause more cautiously exprest for the words run to endeavour any alteration I shall think to the advantage of Church and State And tho that was sufficient yet the Clause is so cautiously conceived that it contains another Restriction not repugnant to Religion and his Loyalty So that except it could be alledged That a man by lawful means to the advantage of Church and State consistent with his Religion and Loyalty could make treasonable alterations and invasions upon the Government and Monarchy which are the highest Contradictions imaginable there can be nothing against the Pannel And albeit the Clause any alterations might without the Restrictions and Qualifications foresaid be generally extended yet the preceeding words of lawful way and the rational Interpretation of the emission of words especially before a solemn Judicatory leaves no place or shadow to doubt that these alterations were no fundamental or treasonable alterations but such as the frailty of humane Affairs and Constitutions and vicissitude of things and circumstances do constantly require in the most exact Constitutions under Heaven And the clause does not so much as import that there is a present necessity of alteration but it was a necessary and rational prospect That albeit at present all things under Heaven had been done to secure the Religion and Government yet there might occur Cases that would require new helps alterations and remedies And it is not pretended in this Case for the Pannel That he desires to alleviate or take off words truly treasonable or having an ill design by the mixing of fair and safe dutiful and submissive Expressions which indeed are Protestations contrariâ— facto For there is nothing in his Explanation that either in his design or in the words themselves being rationally and naturally interpreted can infer the Crimes libelled or any of them And the Pannel's known Principles and known Practices do not only clear that Loyalty that he has profest before the Lords of Justitiary and instructed by unquestionable Documents but they put him far from the suspicion of these damnable Principles related in the Reply Of which the whole tract of his Life hath been an intire evidence of his abhorrency and detestation And in the last place It is thought strange why that should be represented as an affront or disgrace to the Government That the Parliament imposed a Test which the Pannel is not able to take simply And it is not pretended That he hath defamed written or spoken against the Test it self or for the inconvenience of it but only that he hath not been able to see the good ground upon which it may be simply taken And this were to condemn him for want of sight or sense when the Law hath punished no man for not taking the Test but only turned him out of the Government And it is as strange an Inference That because the Pannel declares He believes the Parliament meaned no Contradiction and would take the Test in as far as it is consistent that therefore he said the Parliament imposed Contradictions Which is so far from a rational Induction that the Contradiction of these Subsumptions in all congruity of Language and Sense is necessarily true And therefore the last part of that Clause in so far as it is consistent is a Consequence inferred upon the former viz. I believe the Parliament designed to impose no Contradictions ergo I take the Test as consistent and in so far as it must be consistent if the Parliament did not impose Contradictions as certainly they have not and to convince the world that in this sense this Explanation is receivable it was proposed in Council and allowed and therefore without the highest reflection it cannot now be quarrelled Sir George Lockhart's second Plea for the Earl of Argyle by way of Reply upon the King's Advocate SIR George Lockhart Duplies That the Defender repeats and oppones his former Defences which are no ways elided nor satisfied by the Reply made by His Majesties Advocate And altho it be easie for the Kings Advocate out of his zeal to pretend and argue Crimes of the highest Nature upon Inferences and Consequences neither consistent with the Pannel's design nor with his words and expressions yet there cannot be a more dangerous foundation laid for the security and interest of the Government and the security and protection of the Subjects than that Crimes should be inferred but from clear evident and express Laws and plain palpable Contravention of these Laws It being both against the Laws of God and Man that a Man should be made an Offender for a word and especially for expressions which according to Sense and Reason and considering the time and place where they were spoken by the Pannel viz. as a Member of His Majesties Privy-Council and in presence of his Royal Highnes and the Members of Council and when required to take the Test were safe and Innocent and it were against all Law and Reason to suppose that the Pannel either did or designed to do any thing which may or did import the Crimes libelled against him And whereas it is pretended That the Oath required and imposed by Act of Parliament was for the security of the Government and that the Pannel by his Explication does evade the Oath by taking it only so far as it is consistent with the Protestant Religon and his own Loyalty whereof he was Judge It is answered That the pretence is most unwarrantable and the security of His Majesties Government is not at all endangered as God forbid it should tho the Pannel and a Thousand more had simply refused the Test or had taken it in a sense which does not satisfie the Law it being competent to publik Authority to consider whether the Pannels Oath in the terms of the Explication wherein he did take it does satisfie the Act of Parliament or not And if not there can be no rational consequence inferred thereupon but
reproach and ranverse the standard make void the very security that the Parliament intended then to say That he swears the Test as it agrees with it self the Protestant Religion which imports no such insinuation But from these pleasant Principles He jumps in to this Fantastik Conclusion That therefore it cannot be denyed but the Earl's interpretation destroyes not only this Act but all Government and makes every mans conscience or humour the Rule of his obedience But first as to the whole of his arguing the Earl neither invents sayes nor does any thing except that he offered his Explanation to the Council which they likewise accepted 2ly What mad inferences are these You say you will explain this Oath for your self therefore you overturn all Government and vvhat not Whereas it is manifest on the other hand that if the Earl apprehending as he had reason the Oath to be ambiguous and in some things inconsistent had taken it vvithout explaining it for himself or respect to its inconsistency it might have been most rationally concluded that in so doing he was both impious and perjured 3ly It is false that the Earl doth make his Conscience any other way the rule of his obedience then as all honest men ought to do That is as they say To be Regula regulata in conformity to the undoubted Regula regulans the eternal rules of truth and righteousness as is manifest by his plain words As for what the Advocate insinuats of humour insteed of Conscience it is very well known to be the Ordinary reproach whereby men that have no Conscience endeavour to defame it in others But the Advocate is again at it and having run himself out of all consequences he insists and inculcats that the Earl hath sworn nothing But it is plain that to swear nothing is none of the crimes libelled 2ly The Earl swears positivly to the Test as it is consistent vvith it self and the Protestant Religion which certainly is something unless the Advocate prove as he insinuats that there is nothing in the Test consistent with either And 3ly if the Protestant Religion and the Earl his reference to it be nothing then is not only the Council sadly reproached who in their Explanation declare this to be the only thing sworn to in the first part of the Test but our Religion quite subverted as far as this Test can do it But next for the treason the Advocate sayes That the Earl expresly declares he means not by the Test to bind up himself from vvishing or endeavouring in his station and in a lavvful vvay any alteration he shall think for the advantage of Church or State whereby sayes he the Earl declares himself and others loosed from any obligation to the Government and from the duty of all good Subjects and that they may make vvhat alterations they please A direct contrariety insteed of a just consequence as if to be tyed to Lavv Religion and Loyalty were to be loosed from all three can there be a flatter and more ridiculous contradiction Next the Advocate pretends to found upon the fundamental Laws of this and all nations whereby it is treason for any man to make any alteration he thinks fit for the advantage of Church or State But first The Earl is not nor cannot be accused of so much as wishing much less endeavouring or making any alteration either in Church or State only he reserves to himself the same freedom for wishing which he had before his Oath and that all that have taken it do in effect say they still retain 2ly For a man to endeavour in his station and in a lavvful vvay such alterations in Church or state as he conceives to their advantage not repugnant to Religion and Loyalty is so far from being treason that it is the duty of every subject and the Svvorn duty of all His Majesties Councellors and of all Members of Parliament But the Advocate by fancying and misapplying Lavvs of Nations wresting Acts of Parliaments adding taking away chopping and changing words thinks to conclude what he pleases And thus he proceeds That the treason of making alterations is not taken off by such qualifications of making them in a lavvful vvay in ones station to the advantage of Church or State and not repugnant to Religion or Loyalty But how then Here is a strange matter Hundreds of alterations have been made within these few years in our Government in very material points the Kings best Subjects and greatest Favourits have both endeavoured and effectuat them And yet because the things were done according to the Earl's qualifications insteed of being accounted treason they have been highly commended rewarded The Treasury hath been sometimes in the hands of a Treasurer sometimes put into a Commission backward and forward And the Senators of the Colledge of Iustice the right of whose places was thought to be founded on an Act of Parliament giving His Majestie the Prerogative onely of presenting are now commissioned by a Patent under the great Seal both which are considerable alterations in the Government which some have opposed others have vvished and endeavoured and yet without all fear of treason on either hand only because they acted according to these qualifications in a lawful way and not repugnant to Religion and Loyalty But that which the Advocate wilfully mistakes for it is impossible he could do it ignorantly is that he will have the endeavouring of alteractions in general not to be of it self a thing indifferent only determinable to be good or evil by its qualifications as all men see it plainly to be but to be forsooth in this very generality intrinsecally evil a notion never to be admitted on earth in the frail and fallible condition of human affairs And then he would establish this wise Position by an example he adduces That rising in arms against the King for so sure he means it being otherwise certain that rising in arms in general is also a thing indifferent and plainly determinable to be either good or evil as done with or against the Kings Authority is treason and sayes If the Earl had reserved to himself a liberty to rise in arms against the King though he had added in a lavvful manner yet it would not have availed because and he sayes well This being in it self unlavvful the qualifications had been but shamms and contrariae facto But why then doth not his own reason convince him â—here the difference lyes viz. That rising in arms against the King is in itself unlawful whereas endeavouring alterations is only lawful or unlawful as it is qualified and if qualified in the Earl's Terms can never be unlawful But sayes the Advocate The Earl declares himself free to make all alterations and so he would make men beleeve that the Earl is for making All or Any without any reserve whereas the Earl's words are most express that he is Neither for making all or any but only for wishing and
endeavouring for such as are good and lawful and in a lawful way which no man can disown without denying common reason nor no sworn Councellour disclaime without manifest perjury But the Advocat's last conceit is That the Earl's restriction is not as the King shall think fitt or as is consistent with the Law but that himself is still to be judge of this and his Loyalty to be the standard But first The Earl's restriction is expresly according to Loyalty which in good sense is the same with according to Law and the very thing that the King is ever supposed to think Secondly as neither the Advocate nor any other hitherto have had reason to distinguish the exercise and actings of the Earl's Loyalty from those of His Majesties best Subjects so is it not a marvellous thing that the Advocate should prosesse to think for in reality he cannot think it the Earl's words His Loyalty which all men see to to be the same with his duty and sidelity or what else can bind him to his Prince capable of any quible farr more to be a ground of so horrid an accusation And whereas the Advocate sayes The Earl is still to be judge of this It is but an insipid calumny it being as plain as any thing can be that the Earl doth nowise design His thinking to be the rule of right and wrong but only mentions it as the necessary application of these excellent and unerring rules of Religion Law and Reason to which he plainly resers and subjects both his thinking and himself to be judged accordingly By which it is evident that the Earl's restriction is rather better and more dutyful then that which the Advocate seems to desiderat And if the Earl's restrictions had not been full eneugh it was the Advocat's part before administrating the Oath to have craved what more he thought necessary which the Earl in the case would not have refused But it is beleeved the Advocate can yet hardly propose restrictions more full and suitable to duty then the fore-mentioned of Religion Law and Reason which the Earl did of himself profer As for what His Majesties Advocate add's That under such professions and reserves the late Rebellions and disorders have all been carried on and fomented It is but meer vapour for no rebellion ever was or can be without a breach of one or other of the Earl's Qualifications which doth sufficiently vindicat that part of the Earl's Explanation The Advocate insists much that Any is equivalent to All and that All comprehends Every particular under it which he would have to be the deadly poyson in the Earl's words And yet the Earl may defy him and all his detracters to find out a case of the least undutifulness much less of rebellion that a man can be guilty of while he keeps within the excellent Rules and limitations wherewith his words are cautioned I could tell you further that so imaginary or rather extravagant and ridiculous is this pretended Treason that there is not a person in Scotland either of these who have refused or who by the Act are not called to take the Test that may not upon the same ground and words be impeach't viz. That they are not bound and so without doubt both may and do saâ— it by the Test in their station c. to wish and endeavour any alteration c. Nay I desire the Advocate to produce the man among those that have taken the Test that will affirm that by taking it he hath bound up himself never to wish or endeavour any alteration c. according to the Earl's Qualifications and I shall name hundreds to Whom his Highness as you have heard may be added that will say they are not bound up So that by this conclusion if it were yeelded all Scotland are equally guilty of treason the Advocate himself to say nothing of His Royal Highness not excepted Or if he still think he is I wish he would testify under his hand to the World that by his Oath he is bound up never to wish nor endeavour any alteration he thinks to the advantage of Church or State in a lavvful way nor in his station though neither repugnant to the Protestant Religion nor his Loyalty And if this he do he does as a man if not of sense at least of honour but if not I leave a blank for his Epithets But that you may see that this whole affair is a deep Mystery Pray notice what is objected against the last part of the Explanation This I understand as a part of my Oath Which sayes the Advocate Is a treasonable invasion upon the Royal Legislative power as if the Earl could make to himself an Act of Parliament since he who can make any part of an Act may make the whole And then say I farewell all Takers of the Test with an Explanation whether the Orthodox clergy or Earl Queensberry tho himself Justice generall who were allowed by the Council so to do seing that whether they hold their Explanation for a part of their Oath or not yet others may and in effect all men of sense doe understand it so and thus in the Advocat's Opinion they have treasonably invaded the Legislative povver and made an Act of Parliament to themselves Neither in that case can the Councils allovvance excuse them seing not only the Earl had it as well as they but even the Council it self cannot make an Act of Parliament either for themselves or others But Sir I protest I am both ashamed and wearied of this trifling And therefore to shut up this Head I shall only give a few remarks First you may see by the Acts of Parliament upon which the Advocate sounds his indictment that as to Leasing-making and depraving Laws all of them run in these plain and sensible terms The inventing of narrations the making and telling of lyes the uttering of wicked and untrue calumnies to the slander of King and Government the depraving of his Laws and misconstruing his proceedings to the engendering of discord moving and raising of hatred and dislike betwixt the King and his People And as to treason in these yet more positive terms That none impugne the dignity and authority of the three Estats or seek or procure the innovation or diminution thereof Which are things so palpbale and easily discerned and withall so infinitly remote both from the Earl's words and intentions or any tolerable construction can be put on either that I confess I never read this indictment but I was made to wonder that its forget and maker was not in looking on it deterred by the just apprehensions he might have not only to be sometime accused as a manifest depraver of all Law but to be for ever accounted a gross and most disingenuous perverter of common sense The Earl's words are sober respectful and duty fully spoken for the exoneration of his own Conscience without the least insinuation of either reflection or slander much less
the impugning of the Authority of Parliament as the Earl may appeal not only to his Majesties true and Royal sense but to the most scrupulous and nyce affecters of the exactest discerning besids that they were first formally tendered in Council for their approbation and by them directly allowed How then can any man think that they could be charged with the greatest and vilest of crimes Leasing-making depraving perjury and treason But the Advocate tells us That there are some things which the law commonly forbids in general and that some inferences are as natural and strong and reproach as soon or sooner then the plainest defamations But what of all this Must therefore such generalls be left to the phantastik application of every wild imagination to the confounding of the use of speach and subverting of of humane Society and not rather be still submitted to the Judgement of common sense for their true and right understanding and the deducing thence these strong and natural inferences talk't of Of which good sense if the Advocate do but allow a grain weight it is evident that the inferences he here libells against the Earl must infallibly be cast and by all rational unbyassed men be found strange unnaturall and monstrous For S r 2ly pray observe these rational and sound Maxims he sounds his inferences on and they are manifestly these First That he who sayes he will onely obey as far as he can invents a new way whereby no man is at all bound to obey 2ly That he who in the midst of hundreds of exceptions and contradictions objected against on Oath injoyned by Act of Parliament and still unanswered sayes that he is confident the Parliament never intended to impose contradictory Oaths reproaches the Parliament 3ly That he that sayes he must explain an ambiguous Oath for himself before he take it renders all Laws and Oaths useless and makes himself the Legislator 4ly That he that sayes that he takes this Oath as far as it is consistent with it self and the Protestant Religion swears nothing 5ly That he that declars himself not tyed up by the Test from endeavouring in a lawful way such alterations as he thinks to the advantage of Church and State consistent with Religion and Loyalty declares himself and all others loosed from the Government and all duty to it and free to make any and all alterations that he pleases And 6ly That he that takes the Test with an explanation and holds it to be a part of his Oath invads the Legislative power and makes Acts of Parliament Upon which rare and excellent propositions I dar say The Earl is content according to the best Judgment that you and all unbyassed men can make either of their truth or of my ingenuity in excerping them to be adjudged guilty or not guilty without the least fear or apprehension of the issue And in the third and last place I shall only intreat you to try how the Advocat's reasoning will proceed in other cases and what brave work may be wrought by so usefull a tool Suppose then a man refuse the Test simply or falls into any other kind of non-conformity either civil or Ecclesiastik or pay's not the Kings custom or other dues or lastly understands an Act otherwise then the Advocate thinks he should is not his Indictement already formed and his process as good as made viz. That he reguards not the Law that he thinks it is unjustly or foolishly enacted that he will only obey as far as he can and as he pleases and thereby renders all Laws useless and so reproaches the King and Parliament and impugns their Authority and assumes to himself the Legislative power and therefore is guilty of Leasing-making depraving his Majesties Lavvs and of treason of which crimes above mentioned or one or other of them he is actor art and part Which being found by an Assize he ought to be punished with the pains of death forfaulture and escheat of lands and goods to the terror of others to doe or commit the like hereafter And if there be found a convenient Judge the poor man is undoubtedly lost But Sir having drawn this parallel rather to retrive the Earl's case then to make it a precedent which I hope it shall never be and choosing rather to leave the Advocate then follow him in his follies I forbear to urge it further These things considered must it not appear strange beyond expression how the Earl's Explanation such as it is did fall under such enormous and grievous misconstructions For setting aside the Councils allowance and approbation which comes to be considered under the next head suppose the Earl or any other person called before the Council and there required to take the Test had in all due humility said either that he could not at all take it or at least not without an Explanation because the Test did contain such things as not only he but many other and those the best of the Loyal and Orthodox Clergy did apprehend to be contradictions and inconsistencies And thereupon had proponed one or two such as the Papers above set down do plainly eneugh hold out and the Bishop in his Explanation rather evades then answers would it not be hard beyond all the measures of equity and charity to look upon this as a designed reflection far more a malicious and wicked slander and the blackest treason We see the Act of Parliament doth not absolutly injoyn the taking of the Test but only proposeth it to such as are intrusted in the Government with the ordinary certification either of losing or holding their Trusts at their option We know also that in cases of this nature it is far more suitable both to our christian liberty and the respect we ow to a christian Magistrat to give a reason of our consciencious non-complyance with meekness and fear then by a mute compearance to fall under the censure of a stubborn obstinacy And lastly it is certain and may safely be affirmed without the least reproach that Parliaments are not infallible as witness the frequent changes and abrogations of their own Acts and their altering of Oaths imposed by themselves and even of this Oath after it was presented which the Earl was not for altering so much as it was done as I told you before How then can it be that the Earl appearing befor a christian Council and there declaring in terms at the worst a litle obscure because too tender modest his Scruples at an Oath presented to him either to be freely taken or refused should fall under any censure If the Earl had in this occasion said he could not take the Test. unless liberty were given him first to explain himself as to some contradictions inconsistencies which he conceaved to be in it though he had said far more then is contained in his contraverted Explanation yet he had said nothing but what Christian liberty hath often freely allowed and christian charity would readily construe
Confession was designedly left out of it But it being again debated that the bare naming of the Protestant Religion without condescending on a Standard for it was not sufficient the Confession of Faith was of new added And after the affirmative clause for owning it and adhering to it was insert upon a new motion the negative never to consent to any alteration contrary to or inconsistent with the said Protestant Religion and Confession of Faith was also subjoyned But not without a new debate and opposition made against the words And Confession of Faith by the Bishop of Edinburgh until at length he also yeelded All which it is hoped was done for some purpose And if at that time any had doubted of the thing he had certainly been judged most ridiculous For it was by that addition concluded by all that the Confession was to be sworn and further it appears plainly by the Bishop of Edinburgh his vindication that when he wrote it he believed the Confession was to be sworn to for he takes pains to justify it though calumniously enough alledging That it was hastily compiled in the short space of four dayes by some Barrons and Ministers in the infancy of our Reformation Where by the by you see that he makes no reckoning of what the Act of Parliament to which the Test refers expresly bears viz. That that second Ratification 1567. which we only have recorded was no less then seven years after this Confession was first exhibited and approven Anno 1560. But moreover he tells us That the Doctors of Aberdeen who refused the Covenant vvere yet vvilling not only to subscribe but to svvear this Confession of Faith Which again to answer the Bishops critik of four dayes was more then 70. years after it was universally received It 's true that when the Bishop finds himself straitned how to answer objections he is forced to make use of the new Gloss I shall not call it of Orelans whereby the Protestant Religion is made to be sworn to only as far as every man pleases to interpret as far as may be consistent with any new principles of state But the Parliament certainly I do not speak ironically did intend by this Test to swear assert the True Protestant Religion and the said Confession of Faith whatever may be now pretended The Earl could not also but very well remember what His Highness had said to himself about the inserting of the Confession and no doubt the Advocate if ingenuous knows all this For the thing was at that time mater of common talk and indeed till Papers objecting contradictions and inconsistencies betwixt the Confession and the rest of the Test began to be so numerous which was about the end of October that there was no possibility left to answer them but by alledging That in the Test men do not swear to every article and proposition of the Confession but only to the Protestant Religion therein contained this point was never doubted And whether this answer be true and a solid Vindication consonant to the words of the Test or a circulating evasion enervating all its force let others judge But the Advocate sayes When it was moved in Parliament to read the Confession it was waved Most true the reason given by the Bishops for it was that it was notour they knew it and it was already insert in the Acts of Parliament And the truth was the reading of it would have spent more time then was allowed on examining the whole Test. It was likewise late after a long Sederunt and it was resolved to have the Act passed that night so it went on But it was likewise moved to read the Covenant seing it was to be disclaimed and this was flatly refused And will the Advocate thence infer That by the Test the Covenant is not abjured albeit it be most certain that many in the Parliament at that time had never read the one or the other But to follow the Advocat's excursions and answer them more particularly The motion for reading the Confession being made on this very occasion because it was to be insert in the Test and sworn to concluds enough against him For no body can be so effronted as to say it was used in Parliament as an argument not to read it because it was not to be sworn to but though it cost a debate it was plainly agreed to be sworn to and therefore insert 2ly Can any man doubt the Confession was to be sworn to when it is notour that severalls who were members of Parliament and by reason of offices they enjoyed were called to swear the Test pretending with reason tenderness of an Oath did before swearing make a fashion at least of reading and studying the Confession to satisfy themselves how far they might swear it And that this was done by an hundred I can attest themselves Lastly it is certain that vvhen in the end of October the Bishop of Edenburgh did quarrel S r George Lockhart for causing the Confession to be insert in the Test he answered that without it a Turk might sign the Test it vvas not then pretended by the Bishop that the Confession vvas not to be svvorn to and therefore he at that time had no reply But this is a debate I confess not altogether necessary for my present task only thereby you may see ground enough for the Earl to believe the Confession vvas svvorn to And all that did svvear before the Councils Explanation having svvorn in that sense and for ought I knovv all except the Clergy being by the Councils Act still bound to do so It vvas not strange the Earl might be of this Opinion And seeing that many of the Contradictions vvere alledged to arise hence and the Earl being a dissenter it vvas yet less strange that the Earl did scruple nor is it unreasonable that his modest Explanation should have a most benign acceptance The second pretence of aggravation is That his Majesty did not only bestow on the Earl his Lands and Iurisdictions fallen into his Majesties hands by the forfaulture of his Father but also pardon him the crimes of Leasing-making and Misconstruing whereof he was found guilty by the Parliament 1662. And raised him to the title and dignity of an Earl and to be a member of all his Majesties Iudicatories All vvhich the Earl as he hath ever doth still most thankfully acknovvledge But seeing the Advocate hath no vvarrand to upbraid him vvith his Majesties favours and that these things are novv remembred vvith a manifest design to raise dust and blind strangers and to add a very ill thing Ingratitude to the heap of groundless calumnies cast upon him I must crave leave to ansvver a little more particularly and refute this new tout as the scots proverb is in an old horn This old Leasing-making is then novv brought in seriously after it hath been treated in ridicule for 18 years by the very Actors vvho did never pretend
Explanation at or before his taking of the Test Which emitting as it plainly differs from the point of Acceptance so was the proving of it justly neglected by the Earl because the Emission notour and the charge of Perjury ridiculous as you have it more fully in the Narrative But these things our Author willfully mistakes that he may the more easily abuse strangers As for what our Author here adds That the Earl's Explanation made the Oath no Oath and the Test no Test and would have evacuated the whole Act as he sayes he will prove shall be noticed when he comes to his proofs Only where he sayes The greatest Fanatiks in Scotland owned they would take the Test in the Earl's Sense without prejudice to their Principles It is a groundless assertion and by all of them utterly denyed He sayes The Mist puts a strange abuse upon the world as if the scruples that he sets down were only the scruples of the conformed Clergy whereas many Papers bearing that title were drawn by the Presbyterians But seeing the Paper that the Mist sets down was certainly emitted by one of the conformed Clergy and doth fully homologat with the Rest above-insert in the Narrative which without doubt are all of their fabrik the pretended abuse is altogether groundless But now our Author comes to make good the Earl's Indictment in point of Law And though here we find nothing new or repeated with any advantage and though all be already fully answered in the Narrative yet lest he complain of neglect I shall run over what he alledges as briefly as I can And having set down the words of the Earl's Explanation The first Crime sayes he charged upon the Earl from this Paper is that albeit it be statut That no man interpret the King's Statuts otherways then they bear and to the intent and effect they were made for And that the King and Parliament did appoint the Test to be taken for securing the Protestant Religion and the King's Prerogative without any evasion Yet notwithstanding thereof the Earl did take the Oath in such a sense as did not only evacuate his own taking but learn others how to do the like and evacuate all Acts of the same nature that can be made But seeing that in matter of crimes Statuts are certainly designed for Beacons Land-marks and the most clear distinctive Directions that could be invented as well to hinder men from transgressing as to guard them against the Pains and therefore are to be understood in the most obvious signification that the words do bear Is it not an odd stretch for our Author to think that a man's taking of an Oath enjoined by a Statut in any sense whether true or false pertinent or impertinent if simply offered by him for expeding of his own Conscience should be look't upon as an interpreting or misinterpreting of the Statute which oftentimes happens to be but to clear when the Oath is confessedly ambiguous Thus as to the sense and meaning of the Act in hand viz. That all men therein comprehended should take the Test in manner and under the certification therein contained the Earl never had the least hesitation about it All his difficulty was to clear himself and his own Oath as to the ambiguities acknowledged even by the Council to be in the Test though not in the Act and this he does by referring explicitly to the Parliaments sense and design as it stands expressed in the Act without ranversing either the words of the Test or meaning of the Act as an other approven Explication doth How is it then possible that for this he should be thought concern'd in this Statute as a Misinterpreter And is it not on the other hand very evident that both the Advocate and our Author and their Associats in wresting this Statute which seems principally to have been made against the misinterpreting and wresting of Laws in Iudgment to so remote and extraneous a case are themselves the only Misinterpreters and Transgressours But waving the connexion let us hear how our Author proves the subsumption viz. That the Earl did take the Test in such a sense as did evacuate his own and teach others to do the like and evacuate all other Acts of that nature And to repeat as little as possible he sayes That the design of Laws and Oaths is to procure a certainty of obedience and performance but the Earl's qualified Oath everts this design Wonderfull The Test is in it self granted to be ambiguous and reaches not this design The Earl that he may deal more clearly with God and the Government declares explicitly a plain and certain sense wherein he is willing to take it and the Council who might and ought to have rejected it if not satisfieing do accept of it And yet hereupon he is immediatly by them staged as an Everter Depraver and Traitour And wherefore Because forsooth the Earl promises only to obey the Act as far as he can A most absurd and ridiculous pretence And tells us not in what he will obey Which albeit no crime though true is yet a great falshood For the Earl immediatly subjoins a very certain and congruous sense in which he is willing to take the Test all the obedience here in controversie 2ly Because the Earl sayes that no body can explain it but for himself and reconcile it as it is geuuine c. which adds our Author implyes that it had no plain genuine sense But though the Council did explain this Oath and in so far grant that it had no plain genuine sense for what is already plain without doubt needs no Explanation yet the Earl goes not so far But all he meant was that in the midst of so many Objections made against the Test he could only clear it for himself Which also he does most safely and soundly in referring to its self-consistency and the Parliaments sense and scope the best Rules of interpretation 3ly Because the Parliament designed the Test as a security for the Protestant Religion But sayes our Author The Earl by saying He did only take it in as far as it is consistent with itself and with the Protestant Religion implyes that in some things it is not consistent But 1. Implications which may be so easily strained and oftentimes are found to be as the Fool thinks are terrible grounds of Crimes 2ly If the Parliament designed the Test as a security for the Protestant Religion and the Earl did take it in so far as it is consistent with the same Protestant Religion what can be more agreeable And 3ly It was neither the Earl's words nor intention that the Parliament had framed a Test in some things not consistent with it self and the Protestant Religion but the true sense of his words was and is That however many did alledge both yet he took it in as far as it was consistent which he vvas sure as our Author sayes vvas the Parliaments purpose 4ly Because the design of this
Oath being to preclude the Takers from reserving a liberty to rise in arms upon any pretext whatsoever The Earl sayes our Author by his Explication reserves to himself a power to make any alterations that he shall think for the advantage of Church and State But not to stay you here with what you have so fully cleared in the Narrative Dare any man even our Author not excepted say That he who reserves a liberty to himself in his station and in a lawfull way to wish and endeavour any alteration he thinks to the advantage of Church and State not repugnant to the Protestant Religion and his Loyalty which are the Earl's words eo ipso reserves to himself a liberty to rise in arms upon any pretext whatsoever Certainly to assert this as our Author here does is not only to deny common sense but desperatly to affirm That to rise in arms upon any pretence whatsoever is a lavvful thing advantageous to Church and State and agreeable both to Religion and Loyalty The most traiterous and irreligious Position that can be devised and which one day or other our Author may be more straitned to answer then at present he is to maintain the grosâ—est absurdities Now whether by all these fyne Remarks our Author hes concluded as he alledges that the Earl hes interpret his Oath otherwise then it bears although this be also a wide and weak impertinency as to the inferring of any crime let the world judge But. 2ly Sayes our Author If the Earl's glossing vvere allovvable then there vvere no need to propose doubts in Parliament but Oaths might be left to be formed at the Takers pleasure But. 1. Is not this consequence far more clearly deducible from the Councils emitting their Explanation 2ly What sense or non-sense could induce our Author to dream that because Inadvertency may necessarily occasion Explications therefore men should be still Inadvertent Our Author desires to knovv from any man of sense if the Earl vvould have obtained from the Parliament at the passing of the Test That everyman should be allovved to take it as far as it was consistent with it self and the Protestant Religion and with the Earl's other Qualifications And if I in this contest may pretend to this quality I would answer him roundly That albeit I think hardly any man of sense could make a proposition in thir terms to that soveraign Court that had full power to change the Test at their pleasure Yet I am very confident that had any man suggested the half of the objections that have since been started against it they would very readyly have endeavoured to obviat all reasonable exceptions of Inconsistency though neither by our Author 's wise Expedient nor yet by reserring them to the Councils just and accurate Explanation And for the other Qualifications in the Earl's words I am most assured and have his Highness for my Voucher that had the Parliament been ask't Whether or not the Test did bind up a man in a lawfull way and in his station c They would have answered Not and that therefore though they might have judged the Reservation not necessary yet for the greater ease of conscience they would never have stuck to allow any honest man in swearing to express it or not at his pleasure 3ly Our Author asks If a man should by Oath oblige himself simply to make me a Right to Lands could this sense be consistent with it I 'le make it as far as I can Or would a Right so qualified satisfy the Obligation But if I were to oblige a man simply by his Oath to make me a Right and he should answer I le do all I can to satisfy you and then tell me distinctly what he would sweat to do and what not which is the plain parallel of the Earl's case cleared from our Author's Inversions I should think my self bound whether I accepted his offer or not to judge him a fair plain-dealing man But if once I accepted and should afterward call him a Cheat certainly all men would esteem me the greater Cheat of the two 4ly 5ly and 6ly Sayes Our Author Oaths should be so taken as that the Taker may be persued for perjury That the Covenanters would not have suffered a man to take the Covenant as far as consistent with his Loyalty And are not the enemies of the King's Supremacy content to swear in so far as is consistent with the Word of God So that if the Earl's sense were allowed every man should swear upon his own terms and upon contrary terms But 1. Without question the Earl turning either Papist or Disloyal might have been persued for perjury upon his Oath as qualified 2ly Albeit the Covenanters might have laughed at a man for adjecting a caution which they thought expressed yet I am sure at worst they would never have judged the offer a crime much less accused the offerer after having accepted it 3ly It is nothing to the purpose what Declarations the enemies of the Supremacy make But if these our Author mentions be criminal as he would have us to believe I would intreat him to tell us why their makers are not persued and unless he say It is because these Declarations were not made before accepted by the Council I hope he will be so ingenuous as to confess that it is because albeit these Declarations be judged eversive of the Oath yet they are not accounted Crimes in respect they are only well mean't proposals which when rejected evanish And 4ly Our Author's Consequence If the Earl's sense be allowed then every man should swear upon his own terms as it doth not at all concern the Earl so hath it no connexion except in so far as it reflects on His Majesties Council the alone Masters of such Allowances 7ly Sayes Our Author Former Statuts having discharged Conventions or Convocations and Bonds or Leagues without the Kings consent The Covenanters protested that their Covenant was not against these Acts because they could not be meaned of Meetings and Bonds for preservation of the King Religion and Laws And the 4. Act Par 1661. Declares all such glosses false and disloyal And therefore the Earl's gloss must be so too But 1. The Earl's gloss is no such gloss it doth not at all touch these Conventions or Bonds said to be discharged therefore it must not be so 2ly The Earl's Explanation is expresly qualified in a lawful way and not repugnant to his Loyalty which words plainly respect the Act 1661. as well as all other Acts made for defining our allegiance and duty And therefore it cannot possibly fall under its compass as a Contravention But now after we have done with our Author's Critique which he sayes makes his subsumption clear and undeniable I freely appeal to all men of ordinary ingenuitie whether he hath proved so much as the first Article of it viz. That the Earl took the Test in such a sense as did evacuate his own Oath much less the
every good subject much more of one of his Majesties svvorn Councellors Our Author sayes indeed well but to no purpose That it is Treason L. 1. § Majestatis ff ad L. Iuliam Majestatis to attempt against the security of the Government But can he or any man in his right senses conceive that for a man to endeavour any or all Alterations as above qualified by the Earl is to attempt against the Government Certainly he may as soon prove that to assist and advance the Government faithfully and strenuously the true and obvious import of the Earl's words is to overturn it traiterously But our Author hath a clear Statut for him viz. P. 1. Sess 2. Act. 2. Ch. 2. Whereby it is declared that these Positions That it is lawfull for subjects upon any pretence to enter into Leagues or take up Arms against the King Or that it is lawfull for subjects pretending his Authority to take up Arms against his Person or those commissionat by him Or to suspend him from the exercise of his Royal Government Or to put Limitations on their due Obedience and Allegiance are rebellious and treasonable From vvhich vvords sayes he I infer most clearly That for a subject to declare he is not tyed up from wishing any Alteration is Treason For any Alteration comprehending all Alterations can any man of sense and ingenuity deny but this is a putting Limitations upon his Obedience why not due obedience and Allegiance But admitting any to be comprehensive of all Alterations can any man of common ingenuity say That he that declares himself not tyed up from endeavouring in his station and in a lawfull way all Alterations to the advantage of Church and State not repugnant to Religion and Loyalty declares himself not tyed up from endeavouring all simply Which is a quite different thing Or that he that purposely declares in the former manner that he may preserve the just latitude of his Allegiance doth put Limitations upon his due Obedience and Allegiance when in effect he most expressly ampliats and explains it But our Author coming to see that the deadly thing in the Eal's vvords is neither the Any nor the All addes For vvhat is a greater Limitation then to reserve to himself to be Iudge hovv far he is tyed But because the Earl in his sincerity professes that he minded to endeavour in his Station and in a Lawfull way such Alterations as he should truly think and not barely alledge to be to the advantage of Church and State Doth he therefore make Himself or his Opinion the only Rule of his Oath and performance and not rather the Lavv to which he so plainly refers Or hath our Author either so little Understanding or so little Honesty as not to acknowledge that though de jure all men be obliged to regard Lavv and Reason as the great Directors of duty Yet de facto they can only apply them providing they would do it ingenuously according to their ovvn conceptions So that to accuse a man for such an Expression is to put off all professions of Sincerity and to subvert the very use of thinking among men as is more fully above held forth Our Author in the next place gives us many reasons why the Earl's Cautions in my Station and in a Lawfull way not repugnant to Religion and Loyalty cannot salve his Reservation But still seduced by one and the same foolish and wretched Error viz. That because such Cautions do not justify the contrarie Transgressions therefore all Professions so cautioned are a crime Thus he tells us first That the Covenant as criminal as it was vvas so qualified But who ever thought that these qualified Professions in the Covenant condescended on by our Author were the Covenanters guilt Sure I am it is only for the opposite Practices and not at all for these Professions that the Act of Parliament condemns them 2ly He sayes These Cautions never hindered any man to committ Treason And what then Have not the best Cautions and highest Professions in the world been in like manner violate Whereas the thing our Author should have said is That an Endeavour every vvay qualified as the Earl professes hath been found treasonable But knowing this to be certainly false you see how he here declines to averr it 3ly He tells us That they that rebelled in the 1666 and 1679. professed great love to his Majesty And had they never said or done more does our Author think they had been found guilty of Treason 4ly He tells us That the adjecting of such Cautions is reckoned by Lawyers as Protestatio contraria facto And so indeed they may justly be as they only are when any Fact is committed contrary to them as for example when the Earl shall turn Papist But was it ever heard since Law was named or Reason understood amongst men that a man's declaration That he did not mean to bind up himself in his Station and in a lawfull way to endeavour Alterations he should think to the advantage of Church and State not repugnant to Religion and Loyalty was judged either Protestatio illicita aut cuivis facto licito contraria And 5ly Our Author repeats the Statut condemning glosses put upon the Laws by the late Rebellious Parliaments to the prejudice of their Allegiance But I have already told you there is no such gloss contained in the Earl's words And I further appeal to all men our Author not excepted whether ever these Parliaments if they had only professed That in their station and in a lawfull way they would endeavour any Alteration they thought to the advantage of Church and State not repugnant to Religion and Loyalty would have incurred his late Majesties displeasure much less the atrocious Character of Rebellious here cast upon them But sayes our Author Their Explanation declaring that what they did was for the preservation of Religion which is the very Explanation put by the Earl upon this Oath was particularly condemned as false and disloyal But not to tell you that by our Author's words a man would think that even to say The Test was made for the preservation of Religion may be found both false and disloyal which I heartily wish may never come to pass may not this passage alone convince our Author That it neither was nor could be the Parliaments precise professing themselves to be for Religion but only their professing and justifying of what they did to be for Religion which was judged false and disloyal And that because their Profession or Protestation was thought contrary to their Deed with which the Earl's case Qui adeo factorum innocens ut verba ejus arguantur as a noble Roman said in the like case and who is not so much as accused of having done any thing holds not the least similitude And yet sayes our Author From all this it clearly follows That the Earl by reserving a power to himself to endeavour Alterations did committ Treason notwithstanding all his
Cautions Where that you may understand the Man and then see how fairly and justly he draâ—s this Conclusion be pleased to notice That where the Earl declares in one speach That he meanes not to bind up himself in his Station and in a lawfull way to endeavour Alterations not repugnant to Religion and Loyalty Our Author not to speak of his changing first honestly divides the Earl's words whereby he or any man may with the same ease turn Scripture into Blasphemy telling us That the Earl reserves to himself a power to make any Alterations Just as if he had said this simply and no more Then straining and affirming these words to be Treason he rejects all the Earl's Cautions in the same manner as if they had not been manifest parts of his Declaration uttered with one and the same breath but adjected ex post facto to palliate some high Rebellion According to the Candor and Justice of which Procedure it is obvious That a man's professing he would take up Arms at his Majesties Command for the advantage of Church and State conform to his Allegiance and Loyalty might be equally judged to be Traiterous and Rebellious For Rising in Arms sounding evidently much worse then the endeavouring of Alterations Let our Author once divide the words and affirm That the first Part of them is Treason and then all that followes shall be held for Insufficient Cheating and contrary Cautions and the man irrecoverably cast as guilty of Treason How justly or unjustly let all men judge But our Author proceeds to answer what the Mist objects And. 1. Where the Mist sayes That Treason requires a special Law Our Author denyes it telling us That so soon as Kings were and before there was Law it was Treason to rise in Arms against them That Treason is the fence of the Government as murder is of private mens lives as our Author strangely words it That Law thought it unnecessary to provide against the greatest Treasons and that Traitors vvould easily elude the expressvvords of a Statut. Which things albeit they be partly true Yet 1. I hope these who in the beginnings of Kingdoms died for Treason died by lesse then bills of Attainder viz. by bare Royall Decrees which I cannot think our Author imagines were then drawn in Exemplum 2ly It is to be considered that because in these beginnings of Kingdoms some Crimes that are such by the light of Reason were necessarily punished without Statut it will not follow That therefore Crimes may now be made at Random and punished at Pleasure 3ly It is without controversy That whatever at present is not Treason jure gentium ought not to be persued and punished as such without a positive Lavv Specially to inferr the pains of For faulture which exceeding the prescript of common Reason do certainly in all cases require an Express Statut. 4ly It is most dangerons and tends visibly to defeate all the providence and security of Law to alledge That even in the case of an express Statut Traitors may elude its vvords And that therefore something else no doubt the Judge's arbitrary Arbitriment must be necessary And 5ly It is most certain and evident that neither by Statut Law Reason nor Sense the Earl's words are chargeable with the smallest delinquency much less the heavy Crime of Treason 2ly Where it is objected That the Earl by his Oath as a Privy Councellour is obliged in that his Station and in a Lawful way to propone and advise and so to wish and endeavour any Alteration he thinks to the advantage of Church and State not repugnant to Religion and Loyalty And that therefore his Reservation in these terms was necessary at least unde nyably good and lawful Our Author knowing this to be an unanswer able Defence against this imaginary Treason first propones it most lamely and overly and then for a Reply returns us a full Concession Which that you may the better perceive take the Argument for the Earl thus What the Earl is certainly bound to both by his Peerage and Oath as a Councellour the Reservation of a freedom to do it cannot be Treason But to wish and endeavour in his Station and in a lawful way any Alteration he thinks to the advantage of Church and State not repugnant to Religion and Loyalty is that which the Earl is bound to both by his Peerage and Oath as a Councellour Therefore the Reservation of a freedom to do it cannot be Treason The Proposition is founded on clear Law and Reason it being evidently impossible to conceive that the Reservation of a freedom to do what is my bound duty by Oath should fall under the construction of Treason The Subsumption is proven thus The Earl is bound by his Peerage and by his Oath as a Councellour to assist His Majesty with his best advice and concurrence in all things Ergo By his Peerage and Oath he is bound to wish and endeavour in his Station and in a lawful way any Alteration he shall think to the advantage of Church and State not repugnant to Religion and Loyalty The reason of the Connexion is because as our Author sayes All comprehends Any and Things no doubt includs Alterations and Wishes and Endeavours in a lawful way for Alterations to seen advantage not only may but must be imported by the Advice and Assistance sworn to when ever His Majesties Command or undoubted Interest shall call for them It being undenyable that as Wishes and Endeavours are included in Advice and Concurrence so for a sworn Member of His Majesties Privie Council not to give His Majesty in such an exigent his best Wishes and Advice and his most heartie Endeavour and Concurrence would be manifest Perjury and Disloyalty Nor does it at all alter the Case though we restrict the Quality precisely to His Majesties Pleasure For if that be the only Lawful and Loyal Way of Wishing Advising Endeavouring and Concurring It is evident that the Earl's words do reserve this alone and no other way beside So that there could be nothing more justly said by him for asserting that due liberty which his Peerage and Oath do indispensibly require and consequently his Words being plain Duty and Conscience could never be made Treason Now after our Author hath shuffled over this Defence and Exception as you may see in his Vindication For an easie answer as he calls it he tells us frankly That no Oath doth hinder a man from doing what is lawful and so there needed be no Reservation nor Exception on that Consideration And again that the Oath did not exclude any Lawful Endeavours at the Desire or Command of the Prince which the Earl as I have told you is here as well content to admit for the qualification of Lawfulness as our Author and so there needed no Exception as to these And thus you see that the Earl for a Reservation even in our Author's judgment neither false nor unlawful but only judged by him to be
needless is found guilty condemned of high Treason which is as full a Concession in my opinion as could have been desired Ay but sayes our Author The former argument still recurs viz. He that will not bind up himself as to any thing reserves a power as to all things which must at least be interpret of unlawful things for lavvful things need no Exception But not to notice our Authors Christian charity and far more observable justice that because Lavvful things need not be reserved though in all cases dubious it be certainly the more tender part to reserve them will therefore have the Earl's Reservation to be of Things unlawful and treasonable The Earl's Reservation is most expresly of Things lawfull in so far as he only refuses to bind up himself in his Station and in a lawfull way as to things advantageous to Church and State not repugnant to Religion and Loyalty Which is a full and cumulative Expression of their Lawfulness And as to what our Author subjoyns of the Earl's putting Limitations on his Allegiance in so far as what he sayes is intelligible it is already answered It being manifest that the Earl's words in stead of being a Limitation are a designed and ample Extension In the next place our Author comes to tell us That the Earl's Qualifications take off the whole force of his Oath either as to rising in Arms or any other unlawfull thing For. 1. Sayes he He takes the Oath only in so far as it is consistent with it self and the Protestant Religion So that if he think the Protestant Religion shall require rising in Arms he is not tyed But. 1. I have told you how false it is that the Earl resolves the force of his Oath upon his own thinking which here he doth not so much as mention 2ly Is it not strange how our Author should judge that the Protestant Religion may not make as certain a Qualification in the Earl's Explanation as it doth in the Councils Where yet in liew of the Confession of Faith the standard appointed by the Parliament it is made the only bar against Popery 3ly What a ridiculous Conceit it is to think that the Earl by offering to take the Test in as far as it is consistent with it self and the Protestant Religion did reserve to himself a liberty to rise in Arms when by an Article of the Test which can neither be taken off nor eluded by any part of the Earl's Explanation he was to swear liquidly and distinctly not to rise in Arms 2ly Sayes our Author The Earl's Oath only tyes him as far as he can which may leave him yet bound by the Covenant But I have already cleared how the Earl did only profess his readiness to obey the Act of Parliament as far as he could without intending by these Words any restriction of his Oath and that to wrest them as if designed for that end is an absurd and willfull errour 3ly Sayes he The Earl takes it only as far as it is consistent with it self And God and the Earl only know how far that is A noble Testimony to the Test And as plain a declaration that our Author neither knows nor caâ—es to know how far it is consistent But having already told you that the Earl did certainly use this Expression to vindicate the Test and his own Conscience from other mens Exceptions and Scruples And that no man in reason either ought to take it or can be bound by it otherwise I shall not here adde any thing And lastly our Author repeates the danger of Limitations telling us That if after the dreadfull effects we have seen produced by them and that Parliaments have condemned them as Treason we should still be secure and unconcerned all the vvorld might laugh at our ruine But seeing it is 1. Most ridiculous to call a manifest Extension an undue Limitation 2ly Most false that ever the Parliament condemned any Limitation of the nature of the Earl's Reservation or that ever a Deed qualified in the Earl's terms was or can be thought dangerous far less rebellious 3ly Most certain that nothing in all times hath so much ruined Government and Governours as the unjust Iealousies and pretended legal but really violent Proceedings of its Ministers I shall not trouble our Author with any further Remarks In the close of his Discourse he thinks fit to instigate Judges to Severity and to guard them against insolent Pity as he calls it which truly after what all men have seen of their frank Procedure against the Earl appeared to me at first reading a very superfluous Caution But my Surprise was only from the want of our Author's fore-sight and was soon intirely discussed For just as I am writing there is come to my hand His Majesties gracious Proclamation for compleeting no doubt the selicity of our Author 's happy Kingdom by ordering the Prosecution of all Rebells and their Resetters c. In the Execution whereof now after the Government had for severall years connived at many hundreds of these Rebells and out-Lavvs and thereby rendered the people secure and careless It is easy to demonstrate that more then ten thousand of his Majesties peaceable Subjects may be prosecute and punished as Traitors and above fourty thousand beside made liable to Fining and Imprisonment at the Councils pleasure A work which I confess requires the highest measures of severity that our Author could prompt to doth indeed leave the far better part of the Kingdom without all refuge or relief save in his Majesties Clemency But where I also hope they shall seasonably and comfortably find it notwithstanding all our Author 's many sly and mischievous Insinuations to the contrair He vvishes the Earl had come in vvill as if forsooth he had proven him to be guilty And as falsly insinuats this to be usual that he may represent him not only as Criminal but a Contemner of his Majesties Mercy He likewise tells us That he doth not admire that this Author and these of his vvay see not this Paper to be Treason since they vvill not acknovvledge it to be Treason to oppose the Succession and to say that it can be altered by a Parliament Which yet the Scotch Parliament thought to be Treason Nor in the last age thought they it Treason to rise in arms against the King and call Parliaments vvithout him So that sayes our Author The fault is only in the depraved Intellectuals of such as have by a long custome of hating Authority bred in themselves a hatred of every Person and thing that can maintain it But not to stay here to discuss all the Calumny and Envy wrap't up in this passage I shall only desire you to consider 1. That our Author would have it a transcendent wonder that the Author of the Mist should say The Succession can be altered by a Parliament And yet he cannot but know that that Person lives under an express Act of Parliament declaring it Treason to say the contrary 2ly He sayes The Scotch Parliament thought it to be Treason to oppose the Succession and to say that it can be altered by Parliament And yet the same Scotch Parliament judged it proper for them to declare and confirm the Succession And Law and Reason say that Constituere destituere sunt ejusdem facultatis But not to insist upon these things For a Conclusion I shall only take the liberty to protest for my self without offering to anticipate the better judgment of others as our Author visibly doth That were I as clear for the Succession as his Royal Highness As dissatisfied with the old Statut and late Proceedings of the English Parliaments about it as our Author As zealous for the Honour and Infallibility of the last Scotch Parliament as his Majesties Advocate As enraged against former Practices as the greatest Torry in Britain And yet more tender and respective of Authority then my ovvn heart I could not have imagined that either Misinterpreting Defaming Depraving or Treason should have been found in the Earl's words And am very apprehensive that the Judgment so given against him may prove a greater bar to the Succession and Reflection on Scotch Parliaments and Judges then all that our Author hath laboured to squeese out of them COPPY OF His Majesties Letter ordering the passing of his two former Signatures for the Earl's Offices and Jurisdictions AT Edinburgh the fifteenth day of January 1669 Years His Majesties Letter under-vvritten direct to the Lords Commissioners of his Treasury and Exchequer vvas presented and read and ordained to be recorded whereof the Tenor followeth Sic suprascribitur CHARLES R. Right trusty and right well beloved Cousins and Councellors and right trusty and well beloved Councellors we greet you well Wee did upon the fyfteenth day of October 1667 sign a Signature in favours of the Earl of Argyle and another shortly after for the Lands of Knoydart The Signatures we are informed are not past And in August last our Secretary acquainted us with a Letter which he had received from our Advocate bearing date the thirteenth day of August 1668 Years together with an Information containing thirteen Reasons against some heritable Offices comprehended in the said Signature We are also acquainted vvith the Earl of Argyle's Ansvvers All vvhich vve have taken into our consideration And although we are very well satisfied with our Advocate in his doing of his duty in representing to us what he conceives to be fit for our service in this particular as also vvith his Fiaelity and Diligence in other things relating to his Place Yet upon serious Consideration of the vvhole matter It is our Gracious Pleasure That the said Signatures vvith these Offices be past our Exchequer and that in the terms exprest in our Letter signed by us soon after the signature any thing in our Instructions to the contrary notvvithstanding For all vvhich this shall be your vvarant And so we bid you farewel Given at our Court at Whiteâ—al the seventh day of January 166 9 8 and of our Reign the 20 Year By His Majesties Command Sic subscribitur Lawderdale Extractum de Libris Actorum Scacarii per me Sic subscribitur THO. MURRAY Clericus Reg. FINIS ☜ ☞ ☞ ☜ ☜ ☜ ☜ ☞ ☜ ☜ ☞ ☞ ☜ ☜ ☞ ☞ ☜ ☜ ☜ ☜ ☜ ☜ ☞ ☞ ☞ ☞ ☞ ☜ ☜ ☜ ☜ ☜ ☜ ☜ ☜ ☜