approved there the same may be with publick humiliation all Religious answerable solemnity sworne subscribed by all true professors of the Reformed Religion all his Maj. good subjects in both Kingdoms Thereafter on the same day it was approvedby the Convention of estates then sent unto the kingdome of England where after mature deliberation it was approved by the learned assembly of Divines by Both Howses of Parliament by them in their solemne assemblies after sermon solemnely sworne subscribed by Ordinance of Parliament sworne suhscribed in all the parishes of the Kingdome a copy thereof appointed to be affixed in every parish Church also a faire Copy thereof with all the names of the members of Parliament who subscribed the same is ordained to be affixed at the end of the great Hall of Westminster When thus it was sworne subscribed in England The Commissioners of the Gen. Assembly Octob. 11. 1643. ordained the same to be with publick Humiliation all Religious solemnities received sworne subscribed by all ministers professours within the Kirk for this effect it is ordained That the League Covenant be forthwith printed that the printed copies bound with some clean sheets of paper be sent unto the ministry that every minister upon the first Lords day after the same shall come to his hands read explaine it by Exhortation prepare the people to the swearing subscribing thereof solemnely the Lords day next immediately following ordaine that presbiteries proceed with the censures of the church against all such as shall refuse or shift to swear subscribe the same And the Commissioners thinke it very convenient for good example the better encouragement of others that it be solemnely sworne subscribed by themselves now present before the Congregation in the East kirk upon friday next the 13 of this instant after sermon exhortation to be made by Mr Robert Douglas Moderator that the Commissioners of the Convention of estates now in towne the Commissioners from the Parliament of England Divines of that kingdome here present be earnestly desired to joyne with them in this solemne Religion action Upon the 12 of Octob. the Commissioners of the convention of Estates did also ordaine the same to be sworne subscribed under the paine of being punished as enemies to Religion his Maj. honour peace of the kingdoms to have their goods â—…ents confiscate c. also ordaine all Sheriffs Stuarts others his Maj. magistrates in Brugh land Committies in the severall shires to be assisting to ministers and presbiteries in procuriing reall obedience hereunto Which deed of the Commission of the Church was ratified approved by the Gen. assembly Jun. 28. 1645. So is the deed of the convention of estates their commissioners approved ratified by act of Parl. July 15. 1644. where the League Covenant is insert in the Registers Thus the kingdoms of Scotland England after other meanes of Supplication remonstrance Protestation and sufferings to the end they might preserve themselves and their Religion from utter ruine and destruction according to the commendable practises of these Kingdomes in former times and the example of Gods people in other Nations after mature deliberation resolved and determined to enter into a mutuall and solemne League and Covenant wherein all did subscribe and with hands lifted up to the most High God did swear as they should answer at that great day to God the searcher of all hearts That sincerly really and constantly they should endevour in their severall places and callings 1. To preserve the Reformed Religion in the Church of Scotland in Doctrine worship Discipline and Governement and to Reforme England and Ireland according to the word of God and the example of the best Reformed Churches and to bring the three kingdoms to the nearest conjunction and uniformity in Religion Confession of Faith forme of Church governement Directory for worship and Catechising 2. To endevour the extirpation of popery Prelacy Superstition Heresy Schisme Prophaness and whatsoever shall be found contrary to sound doctrine and the power of godliness 3. To preserve the Rights and privileges of the Parliaments liberties of the Kingdomes and the Kings Maj. person and authority in the preservation and defence of the true Religion and liberties of the Kingdomes 4. To discover all such as have been or shall be incendiaries Malignants or evill Instruments hindering the Resermation of Religion dividing the king from his people and the kingdomes one from another or making any fâ—…on or parties among the people contrary to this League and Covenant that they may be brought to triall and condigne punishment 5. To endevour that these kingdomes may remaine conjoyned in a firme place union to all posterity 6. To assist such as enter into this Covenant and not to suffer themselves any maner of way to be divided or to make defection or to give themselves to a detestable indifferency and neutrality in this cause but shall continue â—…in against all opposition and promote the same according to their power against all sets and impedimentes whatsoever When these hands did thus enter in Covenant with the great God of heaven earth many of soul was converted which was as the finite of this noble Marriage when they saw the wonderfull works of the Lords right hand whereby he openly â—…nyably owned that Covenant such as entred into 〈◊〉 Then did these Churches flourish begin to have a beautifull countenance to be admired abroad by strangers who stood astonished at the report of what they did hear dayly of the Lords owneing fighting for that Covenant seconding the Covenanters in carrying on the Ends of the same But at length after the Lord had by many signes wonders testified his displeasure against broken the whole strength force of the Popish Prelaticall Malignant faction wrought deliverances in all the three kingdoms for the people that engadged in Covenant with him It seemed good in his eyes who doth all things according to the counsell of his own will to suffer another enemy to arise to trouble his Church to try his people viz. the Sectarian party who grew to such an hieght in the English Army that they over-ruled the Parliament of England putting away the House of Peers they modelled the House of Commons as they thought good erected a New Court which they called an High Court of Iustice before which they did Impannel the King at length did violently take away his life Januar. 30. 1649. against which deed the Commissioners both from the Church State of Scotland did protest were therefore hardly used at London When the report of this cometh to the eares of the Parliament of Scotland which was then sitting They upon the 5. of Febr. 1649. considering that for as much as the kings Maj. who lately reigned
displeasure of many at court when Ministers were freely rebuking sin in about the court they were accounted railers traitours And being accused of treason before the King his Councill They declined them as incompetent Judges Upon this account in this houre of darknesse by the meanes of the Earle of Arran This Parliament is suddenly called wherby there were two Parliaments in one year 1584. the one meeting May 22. the other which is called the ninth Parliament as the former was called the eight Agust 22. which granteth this supremacy to the King over persones ecclesiastick for formalities sake civil therefore in the end of that act it is declared to be treason to decline his Maj. or his Council in any case So then the question was not betwixt the King the Parliament But betwixt the King or his Councel the Church in spirituall matters It is true also that in the 1. Act of Parliament 18. Anno 1606. His Maj. soveraigne authority Princely power Royall prerogative and privilege of his Crowne over all Estates persones and causes whatsoever is acknowledged But this act is of the same nature with the former no prerogative over above the Estates of Parliament is acknowledged here to belong properly to the Crown And moreover these words are but faire flourishes parliamentary complements Finally the prerogative here spoken of is founded upon personal qualifications where with they say he was endued far beyond his predecessours such as extraordinary graces most rare and excellent vertues singular judgment for sight Princely wisdome the like these may be wanting in one possessing the crowne therefore it could not be the minde of the Parliament to give a supremacy founded upon such qualifications to these who had not those qualifications so they could not annex it unto the Crowne 9. Together with these particulars let this be considered That in 3 Article of the league Covenant they did all swear Sincerly really and constantly in their severall vocations to endeavour the preservation of the rights and privileges of the Parliaments And then it shall appear that there was good ground of scrupleing at that oath which as explained by their acts tendeth to the overturning of those rights privileges For none who desired to make conscience of the oath of the Covenant might swear an oath so apparently opposite thereunto It is true those questions concerning the power of Princes Parliaments are dark ticklish Ministers not being lawyers by profession can not be supposed to be well acquanted with the lawes constitutions of the realme or with the nature extent of the same in all points Yet it concerneth them to see to this that they run not themselves upon the rocks of contradictory oaths And having sworne to endeavour in their places callings the preservation of the rights privileges of Parl. it concerneth them all not alitle to search so far into the rights privileges of Parl. as that they may know when an oath is tendered unto them which crosseth the same being once engadged in an oath in a matter not sinfull not to change or to swear that which destroyeth contradicteth the former oath But leaving those things not laying more weight on them then they will bear other particulars more weighty pressing must be spoken to therefore let it be considered 10. What dreadfull consequences will follow upon the taking of this oath thus explained as to its civil part by the forementioned act concerning the prerogative other acts now to be mentioned as 1. A condemning of the convention of Estates Anno 1643. conform to the Act 6. of this Parliament 2. A condemning of the Parliaments Anno 1640 1641 1644 1645 1646 1647 1648. conforme to their Act 15. as also the committees Parliaments thereafter Anno 1649 1650 1651. conforme to their Act 9. 3. A condemning of all the Acts made by these Parliaments conforme to their Act 3. 4. A condemning of all the meetings Councells Conventions of the subjects at the beginning of the late work of Reformation conforme to their 4 Act. 5. A condemning of the League Covenant conforme to their Act 7. 6. A condemning of Scotlands joyning with helping of England in the day of their straite conforme to their Act 7. 7. A condemning of the renueing of the Nationall Covenant Anno 1638 1639. conforme to the last words of the 11 Act. 8. A condemning of the Generall Assembly 1638 severall others thereafter conforme to their 4 Act. 9. A condemning of Scotlands riseing in armes in their own defence against the Popish Prelaticall malignant Party conforme to their 5 Act. 10. A condemning of their seizing upon forts castles in their own defence conforme to the said 5 Act. Was there not then cause to scruple at the taking of this oath which would have imported a condemning of all those things sure there was as shall be showne in speaking to each of the particulars mentioned Now it is clear that the taking of this oath would have imported a condemning of all these particulars from this That the Parliament doth condemne all these mentioned particulars as the acts specified do clear because done without his Maj consent which ought say they to have been had by vertue of his prerogative royall and supremacy the perogative doth explaine his supremacy in things civill as shall be showne more fully hereafter But to come to the particulars first There was no ground for condemning that convention of Estates 1643. notwithstanding that the Kings consent was not had therto 1. Because in poynt of conscience the Estates of the land being essentially judges are bound when the publict affaires of the Kingdom do require to conveen consult thereanent when Religion lawes liberties are in hazard when the necessitie is such as will admit of no delay pure legall formalities of state must be dispensed with when they cannot be gotten followed as in this case it was clear The true protestant religion his Maj. honour the peace of the Kingdomes were in hazard by papists their adherents in armes in England Irland The King refuised to call a Parliament at that time though he was oftin requeested there unto In this case what could the states of the Land do who were bound by the lawes of God of nature of nations to see to the preservation of the Kingdom to their own interests to religion that should be dearâ—… to them then any thingâ—… else were bound by the law of God to judge governe the land but obey God disâ—…ense with state formalities according to the many examples of the Estates of Scotland before who did conveen in Parliament whether the King would or not as that Parliament which did imprison donald the 70. King the Parliament at Scone which summoned King Culenus before them that Parliament which
the advice of the Estates of parliament be furnished used for the kingdome 3. That all Scottish men within England Irland shall be free from censure for subscribing the Covenant shall be no more pressed with oaths subscriptions unwarranted by their lawes contrary to their Nationall oath Covenant approved by his Maj. 4. That all his Maj. Courts of Justice shall be free open to all men parliaments of the respective kingdoms may try and judge Incendiaries and that he will employ none in his service without consent of parliament 5. That their ships and goods and all dammage shall be restored 6. That the summe of three hundreth thousand pound sterline should be given to them for their losses 7. That all Declarations proclamations acts books libells and pamphlets that have been made published against the loyalty dutiefulness of his Maj. subjects of Scotland should be recalled suppressed and forbidden in England and Irland that their loyalty shall be made known in all the parish Churches of his Maj. Dominions 8. That the garrisons of Berwick Carlile be removed As also there is an act of pacification oblivion aggreed upon out of which the Scottish prelats are excepted as also Traquair Sr Robert Spotiswood Sr Iohn Hay Mr Walter Balcanquell who were cited pursued as Incendiaries In which act his Majesty declareth that the ensueing Parliament of Scotland shall have full free power as the nature of a free parliament of that kingdom doth import to ratify confirme the Treaty Thus at length were these officers which Christ had never appointed cast out of Gods house where they had formerly caused so much desolation layd the vineyaird of the Lord waste as a wilderness both by Church State The King all ranks of People consenting thereunto For which God who is wonderfull in Counsell excellent in working ought to be acknowledged for ever exalted Seing he raised up such as were brought low brought down these who had set their nests on high whose wayes had been alwayes grievous who said in their hearts they should never be moved God hath forgotten he hideth his face he will never see it Now God arose lifted up his hand did not forget the humble he did behold mischief spite to require it did breake the arme of the wicked The memory of which should be still fresh with refreshing unto all the people of God ground of hope that he who did then make the names of these Prelats to â—…ot to stinke in the noâ—…rils both of Church State can will againe pursue his controversy against these who now dare be so bold as to attempt what they have attempted after that the Lord hath put such notes of disgrace infamy upon their predecessours While the Parliament of England is sitting there are severall complaints given in against the Earle of Strafford Deputy of Irland the Archbishop of Canterbury both being sound guilty of points of High Treason are condemned to die Severall Courts of Judicatory are abridged in their power the High Commission Court is taken away and the Starchamber Court the coâ—…ive power of Prelats their Courts The Prelats are ejected from the House of Peers Bils are presented to his Maj. for the punishment of the scandalous Clergy for the abolition of Episcopacy the calling of an Assembly At length there is a civill war begun between the King the Parliament occasioned through his Maj. withdrawing from his Houses of Parliament North towards Hull The warr is continued In the mean time the Parliament calleth together an Assembly of Divines to consult about matters of Religion Church-governement so carry on the begun work of Reformation And Anno 1643. They appoint Iohn Earle of Rutland Sir William Armin Baronet Sir Henry Vane Iunior Knights Thomas Hatcher Henry Darley Esquires with Mr Stephen Marshall Mr Philip Nye members of the Assembly of Divines their Commissioners to repear unto the kingdom States of Scotland to the Generall assembly there their Commissioners to propone consult with them in all occasions which may furder the so much desired work of Reformation in ecclesiastical matters a nearer conjunction betwixt both Churches Accordingly these Commissioners came presented their propositions a Declaration of the Lords and Commons in Parliament unto the Generall assembly Aug. 10. 1643. So is there a letter sent from some brethren of the ministry in the Church of England subscribed by very many hands showing how low that poor Church was now brought being ready to be swallowed up by Satan his Instruments that the Protestant Religion was in great hazard desiring very affectionately their aide help August 15. those Commissioners presente some propositions to the Assembly which they had a little before August 12. presented unto the honorable Convention of Estates desiring that because the Popish Prelaticall faction is still pursueing their designe of corrupting altering the Religion through the whole Iland the two Nations might be strictly united for their mutuall defence against the Papists Prelaticall Faction their adherents in both Kingdoms not to lay down armes till those their implacable enemies be disarmed subjected to the authority justice of Parliament in both Kingdoms respectively And that the two Kingdoms might be brought into a near conjunction into one forme of Church governement one Directory for worship one Catechisme c. the foundation laid of the utter extirpation of Popery Prelacy out of both Kingdoms The most effectuall ready means whereunto is now conceived to be That both Nations enter into a strict Union League according to the desire of both Houses of Parliament that for prosecuting the Ends of that Union against the Papists Prelaticall faction Malignants now in armes in the kingdom of England their brethren of Scotland would raise a considerable force of horse foot for their aide assistance For which Ends there are Committees appointed by the convention of Estates the Gen. assembly to meet with the commissioners of the parliament of England by whom the forme of the League Covenant is aggreed unto resolved upon Which draught Aug. 17. 1643. was approven by the Gen. assembly With all their hearts with the beginnings of the feelings of that joy which they did finde in so great measure upon the renovation of the Nationall Covenant of the Kirk kingdom as the most powerfull mean by the blessing of God for setling preserving the true Protestant Religion with perfect peace in his Maj. Dominions and propagating the same to other nations and for establishing his Maj. throne to all ages generations recommended unto the Right Honorable convention of Estates that being examined approved by them it may be sent with all diligence to the Kingdome of England that being received
it may not be a supersede as to an Act a ground of exemption to the subject from the rigour thereof till the law be revived by a posteriour act which was never yet done lawyers may judge But which is more there is an Act of Parl. Anno 1592. declareing that that former Act shall no wayes be prejudiciall nor derogat any thing to the privilege that God hath given to the spirituall office bearers of the church concerning heads of religion matters of heresy excommunication collation or deprivation of ministers or any such like essentiall censures specially grounded have and warrand of the word of God And which is more considerable The parliament 1648. did disclaime any such power of judging in church matters took it for an unjust challenge charge to say that they took an antecedent judgment in maters of religion for in their letter to the presbyteries of Scotland being their Act 16. May 11. 1648. they have these words Neither can it be with any truth or justice in any sort alleidged that we have in the least measure wronged or violated the true privileges or liberties of the church or any way taken upon us the determination or decision of any matters of faith or church discipline though we be unjustly charged with taking an antecedent judgment in matters of religion By which every one may see that the parliament did looke upon themselves as an incompetent judge in matters of faith or religion Primo instanti or antecedently unto the decision determination of the church And now let lawyers judge whether when the parliament the supreme judicature of that land doth declare themselves incompetent judges in matters of religion The Privy Councell which is a judicature inferiour to the parliament by the fundamentall lawes of that land having its originall power antiquity from the Kings Maj. the estates of parliament so is subordinat there to ought to be countable to censureable by them according to the 12 Act of Parl. 2. King Iames 4. See for this Act 27. Parl 2. of King Charl I. 1640. may become judges thereof whether seing by confession of Parliament they can be no lesse incompetent judges then the parliament it self it can be truely treasonable to decline them Though it were granted that that Act of Parliament 1584. were no way weakened by the other Act 1592. which yet is expressely explicatory thereof yet it could no wayes be treasonable in him to decline the councell as an incompetent judge to him in that case because the Act 1584. is to be understod in such cases only in which they are propper judges But it will be replyed that the Act maketh them judges competent to all persones spirituall or tempâ—…rall in all matters wherin they or any of them shall be apprehended summoned or charged Answ. True the act speaks so in the generall yet it is well known that notwithstanding thereof any of his majesties subjects might decline them when cited for causes the cognition whereof did popperly belong to another distinct judicature such as the court of exchequer or the Lords of the Session so that this all is to be restricted to such causes as do belong to them And under it causes purely ecclesiastike cannot be understood because of that which the Parliament Anno 1648. said Parliaments know best what causes belong to their cognition what doth not belong to a Parliament will never belong to the Privy Councell If it be replyed againe that the meaning of the Parliament 1584. was to give the councell power in church matters because this act was devised of purpose to hinder ministers to protest against the King his counsell as they had done before Ans. that is true But that will say nothing now when the Parliament 1648. hath declined to be judges in such matters and Parliaments can best expound their own lawes and acts can best explaine the extent of their own power and consequently can best declare what causes these are of which the Privie Councell is competent judge what not when they declare that themselves are not competent judges in matters of doctrine religion they do more then sufficiently declare that the Privie Councell is not a competent judge in those matters But for all this this worthy man must die he dieth a martyr for the truth against the Erastian abomination SECTION VI. The sufferings of some other Ministers related AMong other acts of the Committy of Estates there was a proclamation which they caused be read at all the church doores of the Kingdome upon the Lord's day in which they discharged ministers to speak or preach any thing against them or their proceedings this was to command them to handle the word of the Lord deceitfully to become false prophets to preach smooth things and to prophecy deceits wherby the malicious ill affected people who did not love their ministers were encouraged to give in delations of such such things as they thought good to allaidge against them as uttered in their sermones bring in any prophane persones they pleased for witnesses By which meanes some though many were in no hazard thinking it commendable prudence to be silent at such a time were brought to trouble both by the Committe of Estates by the Parliament being imprisoned or confined and other wayes hardly used though litle of what was allaidged could be proved against them More over ther was one minister who after the Parliament had annulled the covenant passed many other acts against the work of reformation thought himself bound in conscience to give faithfull free warning to shew the greatnesse of the sin of backslideing defection from the cause and truth of God to protest publikely in a Ministeriall way for his own exoneration after the example of Samuel at the comandement of God against the course of defection carryed on all acts made in prejudice of the covenanted worke of reformation for which cause he was summoned before the Parliament and at length condemned of treason sedition onely upon that acount therafter was banished out of all his Maj. dominions And if any say that ministers should have been silent not meddled with state affairs let the answers which famous doct Voet giveth in his Politia Eccles. pag. 982. 983. c. be considered which are these 1. It is the duty of Ministers to give faithfull warning unto people Ezek. 3 17 22. 2. This was not to meddle with the politie but with the abuse of it by men in power 3. Rulers no lesse then others must be touched when they provoke God to wrath by their carriage 1 Thes. 5 11. Iam. 5 20. 1 Sam. 15 14. Isa. 58. 1. 4. Then they should never speake to a hundered places of scripture which do speake so directly against Magistrats abuseing their power See what he sayeth furder to this purpose there in answering therest of the
that was left for the saifty of religion of all that was dear unto them So then their case not being a prosecution of adesigne of some privat persons upon some privat injuries received to destroy ' cut off the King or to denude him of his just power privilege but a nationall defence of religion lives liberties against the Kings armies unjustly seeking to destroy violently to overturne all None of the arguments of adversaries taken from 1. Sam. 24 6 10. 26 9 11 23. 2. Sam. 1 12 16. do conclude against them or speake to their case 5. There is also a great difference betwixt a warre contrived carryed on by privat persons when grievously oppressed And a warre carryed on by the body of a land in their representatives in Parliament against a king Suppose the first could not well be defended which yet is not absolutely denyed yet this last is clear for a Parliament hath more power over a king then any privat person or subject how great so ever hath judicious Calvin is clear for this in his institutions lib. 4. cap. 20 n 39. saying if there be inferiour Magistrats such as the Ephori among the Lacedaemonians Tribuns among the Romans The demarchi among the Athenians and as the Estates of Parliament in kingdomes now if these connive at the king's oppressing of the people they become persidious because they betray the peoples liberty which by God's appoyntment they are to protect Thus Scotland is cleared for their warre was carryed on by the body of the land in their representatives by their Parliament acting in its publick parliamentary capacity and so the arguments drawn by adversaries from the practice of the primitive Christians speak nothing against the Parliament of Scotland Their levying warre against the king in their own defence in the defence of the liberties lawes of the land 6. There is a difference betwixt a warre raised by a Parliament of purpose to cut off the king to depose him from his throne governement which hath been severall times practised by the Parliaments of Scotland when their kings turned tyrants vitious in their lives as was showne above their case which was a case of pure defence there being no intention to offer the least violence to his Maj. person crowne or dignity but only to defend religion the kingdome against the popish malignant invading plundering forces which were sent forth to destroy all for their armies advanced with petitions seeking redresses of wrongs with all humility shewing their willingnesse readinesse to lay down armes so soon as they were secured in the peaceable enjoyment of the religion sworne to freed from the just fears of these bloody invading forces who were seeking the destruction of their lives liberties So then when their adversaries reason against riseing in armes against the King they speak not to the poynt none of these arguments come near to their case which was a case of naturall sinlesse self defence 7. It would be considered that the warre did not begin upon the Parliaments side but they were forced constrained to it The King commanded all the English Nobility with all their power forces to meet him at York April 1639. that they might advance with him towards Scotland The Scottish Noble Men who were at court were also sent down towards Scotland to raise their friends having some expert forraigne Officers with them There were three thousand Men sent down with the navy six hundered Horsemen were sent down to the Borderes to make incursions all which preparations of warre did clearly speak out his Maj. intention did necessitate them to bestir themselves in their own defence against those invaders to keep their own rights unviolated And yet with all they had their supplications ready to presente after the granting of which viz. a quyet peacable enjoyment of their Religion Lives Lawes Liberties they resolved to lay down armes accordingly did so for after the pacification Iun. 18. 1639. their army was disbanded Againe when the Parliament which was convocated by his Maj. command conforme to the pacification was contrary to the articles contrary to the liberties of the land privileges of the Parliament prorogued the Castles of Edinburgh Dumbritton were fortified with men ammunition Theis friends travelling to England Irland were constrained to swear unlawfull oaths or to góe to prisons The sea was stopped no liberty was granted to trassique so the land was blocked up The articles of pacification were broken Berwick and Carlile were fortified The Commissioners who were sent from the Parliament to the King were imprisoned contrary to the law of Nations The Castle of Edinburgh was killing many threatening to destroy the whole city with their cannon their ships were intecepted by sea their merchands spoiled of their goods sea men were taken prisoners miserably handled When matters went thus were they not constrained to take up armes againe to advance towards England that they might seek peace from his Maj. not being able to maintaine an army on the borders after they had been so impoverished through the long want of fine tradeing and not to lay downe armes untill their necessary and just desires were granted Now let any judge whether they can be justly blamed for standing to their defence being thus necessitated as they would not betray the Land their Lawes their Liberties their Religion so sell their soul consciences all into the hands of their malitious enemies So then when this shall be made the state of the question whether or not the Parliament body of the Kingdome of Scotland may not lawfully take up armes having no purpose to wronge his Maj. person or to spoile him of his just rights privileges to defend themselves Lands Liberties no lesse then their Religion after it had been setled by law When the King in stead of granting their just necessary desires viz. security that they should be ruled by lawfull generall Assemblies other inferiour Church judicatories in Church matters according to the ancient discipline of the Church And by a free Parliament in civill matters according to the foundamentall lawes of the Land And that they might be free from illegall courts alteration in their Religion that the articles of agreement should be keeped that granted which was promised under hand seal is raising a strong army of forraigners Irish Popish prelaticall malignant enemies to the Church kingdome of Scotland intending to destroy their Land Liyes liberties to overturn their Religion Privileges for this end blocketh them up by sea Land fortifyeth Castles in their bosome giving them commission to destroy all they could denunceth them all rebells treatours Sure it may be supposed that seing this is the true state of the question it shall easily be granted that this
Covenant And presbyterian Government was no way secured it not being once named but wrapped up in generall under the reformation in doctrine worship discipline Government unto which independents separatists might assent purposeing to preserve the same against the common enemy yea even such as entered into the Covenant could not agree in its sense as may be seen in the Parliament of England's baffling the Scottish Commissioner's declaration Anno 1647. other papers Ans. 1. To say that the Covenant was purposely framed in generall termes that severall parties might be fast united against prelacy is a base slanderous imputation But suteth him well who pleadeth for such a cause If the Covenant for the most part be thus conceived in generall ambiguous termes how cometh it to passe that he produceth not instances thereof no not so much as one Was it not as cleare as the sun shineth at noon day that the reformed government of the Church of Scotland at that time was presbyteriall And did not himself say a little before that at that time there was no such officers in the Church of Scotl. as are mentioned in the second article of the league Covenant And whereas he sayeth that severall sects did lurk under the lap thereof doth â—…he think this a cogent argument to prove it's ambiguity What sect is it which doth not plead scripture Shall scripture therefore be accounted ambiguous 〈◊〉 No not at all Let men of corrupt mindes principles wrest words in the Covenant as they please the Covenant to any who shall reade it is plaine clear enough he who will wink may wander at noon day let men imagine put what glosses they will on scripture It is plaine hath but one sense But what will all this make to the businesse Will the obligation of a Covenant in which some men think there lyeth some ambiguities be loosed upon that account This must be proved ere it be received off his hand as a truth neither he nor any of his party hath hit hertill attempted any such thing Lastly is there any ambiguity in the second article Yet sayeth he were it not better to lay aside when now it is disclamed by Kiâ—…g Parliament all persons of trust in the land a human for me which in respect of the composure of it is apt to be hath been is like to be a seminary of variety of parties worse evills then prelacy is imagined to be When he hath made it to appear that this composure is apt of its own nature to be such a seminary of worse evills then prelacy his advice may be taken to consideration but till then which will be ad Calendas gracas he must excuse the Covenanters for neither King nor Parliament though they had the pope with them can give a dispensation in a matter of an oath And King Parliament with all the persones of trust will have enough to do to hold the broad roll the curse off themselves their houses their posterity to keep themselves out of his hands Who will be a swift witnesse against false swearers though they undertake not to protect others from the wrath vengeance of God The last particular which he exaggerateth is the limited or conditionall preservation of the King's Maj. person authority viz. in the preservation defence of the true religion c. He enquireth whether this was right or not And if difference in religion loose a people from their duty to the King To which a short reply will suffice 1. Though it were granted that there were some thing wrong here this will not ground the non-obligation of the Covenant in other particulars what hath he gained then 2. What ever wrong may be in wording this article thus The blame is not be laid upon the first authors of this league Covenant For in the nationall Covenant which was subscribed at first by King Iames his houshold Anno 1580. And in obedience to an act of Councell together with an Act of the Generall Assembly by persons of all rankes Anno 1581. And againe subscribed by all sorts of persons Anno 1590. 1591. The Covenanters duety towards the King is so qualified in these words We protest promise with our hearts under the same oath hand write paines that we shall defend his person authority with our gear bodyes lives in the defence of Christ's evangell liberties of our contrey ministration of justice punishment of iniquity against all enemies within thâ—… realme or without So that if he annull the leagué Covenant upon this account he must much more annull the nationall Covenant whereof King Iames was the author For in that there is more addâ—…d to the qualification of their duty to the King viz. his minisiration of justice and punishment of juiquity So then this clause in the league being consonant unto that in the nationall Covenant needeth not be so much quarrelled at 3. It is like he is displeased with any such qualification but his reason is not very forceable viz. because it would insinuat that they were no otherwayes bound to defend him for it will only insinuat that the Covenanters are to preferre that which is of greater moment unto that which is of lesser concernment that they are to preferre the end unto the mean leading to the end That is when the King is in direct opposition unto the cause work of God it becometh them to preferre the interest of Christ before man's not to help the mighty against the Lord but the Lord against the mighty And when defending promoveing or any way advanceing the authority of the King shall directly tend to the ruine of the interest of Christ religion no Christian is bound to concurre And this was granted even by the Parliament Anno 1648. So that the question betwixt the Parliament the Church at that time was not whether religion the interests of Christ should be preferred to the interest of the King or not But whether the Engadgement which was then carryed on was not a preferring of Man's interests to Christ's for as to the thesâ—…s or major proposition it was granted by the Parliament viz. That Christ's interest should be sought before man's the King's interests only in a subordination to Christ's Thus they did professe openly their owneing of the Covenant their resolution to prosecute the ends of the covenant to seek to secure establish the King's interests only in subordination to the interests of Christ for in their letter to the presbyteries Printed in their records May. 11. They shew that they were resolved to proceed for the preservation defence of religion before all other worldly interests whatsoever to carry on sincerely really constantly the Covenant all the ends of it And againe in their answer to the supplications from Synods presbyteries Iun. 10. insert likewise in their
had to write so I know not except he did build upon that which Iohannes Major sayeth But from the instruction of the Scots in the faith to conclude that the Church after it was gathered had no other for me of governement will not stand with reason for be it as they speak that by the travelle of some pions monks the Scots were first converted unto Christ it cannot be said that the Church was ruled by monks seing long after those times it was not permitted to monks to medle with the maters of the Church nor were they reckoned among the Clergy thus he To which it is easily answered 1. That the sole word of a late Historian of an Excommunicated forsworne Prelate speaking in his own cause will have lesse weight with every rationall man then the Testimony of so many famous eminent Historyographers known through the world 2. All the Prelat's logick will not conclude from these words of Boetius that there was Episcopall governement among the Culdees if Boetius himself may be heard whom all are bound to beleeve better then this Prelate who reasoneth according to his skill for he lib. 7. c. 28. sayeth erat Palladius primus omnium c. i. e. Palladius was the first of all who did bear holy Magistracy among the Scots being made Bishop by the great Pope thus he affirmeth clearly that Palladius was the first who had Episcopall Power or exercised a Magistraticall domineering power in Church maters 3. Could Buchanan a man many stages beyond the Arch-prelate know no reason or ground for what he said but what this Archprelat could perceave who had no will to open his Eyes 4. As this Archprelat doeth wrong his own credite as an Historian when without warrant he contradicteth so many famous Historians so doeth he discover much weakness in reasoning for to say that the monks did not governe the Church befor Palladius landed in Scotland because after Palladius came they were putt out of all accompt got not liberty to do so is such a ridiculous consequence as can hardly be paralleled as if one should reason now say the Church of Scotland was not governed by Ministers befor the year 1661. becaus after Bishops got all the power into their hands the Ministers had no power of governement in the Church Much more might be said here against the reasoning of this late Historian were it sitt to insist upon every such frivolous argument of his So then from these forocited Historians from Baronius in his Annal it appeareth that the Church of Scotland was severall hundereths of years without a domineering Prelate after this time that this Palladius came she was still in a decaying condition through the increase of popery which at length did overspread the whole land in which Romish darkness she did ly untill about the year 1494. About which time the Lord began to visite that poor Church with his salvation to cause some light of the Gospel to break up in severall places of the land but no sooner did the light appear but as soon did those Antichristian Prelats vassals of the Pope begin to rage to raise persecution against the young professors of the truth followers of the lamb so with fire faggot they sought to destroy all who prosessed the true Religion untill about the year 1550. when notwithstanding of all this rage cruelty of the Beast his followers the knowledge of the trueth did spread through the land a farther worke of Reformation began to he caryed on by worthies whom the Lord raised up such as famous Mr Knox others who were singularly owned of God in that work Though Mr Spotiswood according to his usuall maner of mistaking the works of God of venting his enmity to piety purity is pleased in the 60. page of his history to say that this Reformation was violent disorderly And albert at that time the Queen was endevouring by all means possible to keep up the Idolatry of Rome to suppresse the Reformed Religion so powerfully did the Lord in his goodness assist these worthves that in the year 1560. there was a large Confession of Faith drawn up at the command of the Parlament which did conveen that year in which Confession all the Popish errours were renounced after it was exhibited to the Parliament there read when it was read the Prelats who were there present had not one word to speak against it which when the Earle of Marshall did perceave he said Seing the Bishops who by their learning can for the zeal they should have to the truth would gain say if they knew any things repugnant say nothing against the said Confession I cannot but thinke that it is the very truth of God Thus this Confession was openly avowed professed by this Parliament as is clear by the act 6. parl 1. King Ja. 6. Au. 1567. act 86. par 6. An. 1579. where these words are found in both acts and decerns declairs that all sundry who either gainesayeth the word of the Evangell receaved approved as the heads of the Confession of faith professed in parliament of befor in the year of God 1560. At this Parliament there are severall acts made against popery as against the Masse against the Popes authority jurisdiction for such as were for the Reformation or the Congregation as they were then called did supplicate that they would condemne the Antichristian doctrine would restore the Discipline of the ancient Church discharge the popes jurisdiction accordingly as was said there is an act made ordaining that the Bishop of Rome called the Pope have no jurisdiction nor authority within the Realme in any time coming and that no Bishop or other prelate of the Realme use any jurisdiction in time coming by the said Bishop of Romes authority under the pain c. which was afterwards ratified by severall acts in the dayes of King James And thus by act of Parliament the Reformed Religion is established the church governement by Prelats is virtually discharged because Prelats then had no power but what they had from Rome when the current is cut off at the head it must needs cease in the streams But this will be the more clear if we consider how the Reformers were dealing for the establishment of Discipline together with the Doctrine knowing that the doctrine would not be long keeped pure if the Popish discipline governement were still retained upon this the great council giveth a charge dated April 29 1560. requiring commanding them in the name of the Eternall God as they would answer in his presence to committ to writing in a book deliver their judgements touching the Reformation of Religion which heretofore in this Realme as in others hath been utterly corrupted According unto which charge the first Booke of Discipline as it was called in which book the governement
of the church by Prelats is overturned church Sessions are established the way of Election tryall of Ministers contrary to the Episcopall way is appoynted severall other things tending to the right governing of the church are determined is drawne up presented to the conncell May 20. 1560. Whereupon there is an act of councill to this effect We who have subscribed these presents having advised with the Articles therein specified as is above mentioned from the begining of this book thinke the same good conforme to Godâ—… word in all points conforme to the notes additions here to eeked promise to sett the samme forward to the uttermost of our Power providing that the Bishops Abbots Priors other Prelats Beneficed men who else have adjoyned them to us bruik the revenues of their benefices during their life times they sustaining upholding the Ministry and ministers as herein is specified for the preaching of the word and administrating of the Sacraments and this act is subscribed by twenty six Noblemen among the rest by Mr. Gordon who was Bishop of Galloway by the Dean of Murray Spottswood in his History is so convinced that this book was directly against the Prelats that he sayeth pag. 174. it was framed by Iohn Knox partly in imitation of the Reformed Churches of Germany partly of that which he had seen at Geneva nather of which Churches did favoure Prelats It is true the late Historian the Archprelate would make the world beleeve that the Superintendents which are spoken of in that Book of Discipline were nothing else but Bishops But his fondo mistake in this will appear to any who will but consider these particulars 1. What the thoughts were which this Archprelate had of this book which treateth of those Superintendents as 1. That it was framed by Iohn Knox famous Knox first nor last was never a friend to prelats or prelacy 2. he sayeth that it was done in imitation of reformed Churches such as Geneva and those of Germany these Churches knew no prelats 3. He sayeth it was no better nor a dreame so could never take effect but had it been an establishing of Prelacy it had been no dreame in his accompt and he would have said that it had taken effect 4. He willed wished that Iohn Knox had retained the old Policie so this book contained a policie distinct from the old policie a Policie which was not the same with Prelacy 2. What the thoughts were which such as were for the Reformed Religion had of it Now they looked on it as the Discipline of the ancient Church therefor after it was drawn up they did supplicate the Parliament for the restauration of the Discipline of the ancient Church for the discharging of the Popes usurpation of all that Discipline which did flow there from as being inconsistent with the Discipline of the ancient Church with the Discipline contained in that book But 3. It cannot enter into the heart of any rationall man to think that these Reformers were so inconsiderate asâ—… to sett up Prelats with the one hand when they were doing what lay in their power to pull them down with the other It was not popish Prelats alone which they were labouring to turn out of the Church of Christ for when some of those who had been popish Prelats before had relinquished Popery embraced the Reformed Religion and had subscribed unto the book of Discipline as Mr Gordoun in Galloway yet they would not suffer such to exerce the power of superintendents Mr Gordoun with all his moyen could not obtaine that power so that Spotiswood when he sayeth in his Latin Pamphlet called Refutatio libelli de Regimine Ecclesiae Scoticanae pag. 4. also in the Epistle Dedicatorie that the former Bishops who joyned with the Reformers keeped still their full power jurisdiction bewrayeth his impudence falshood His words in his Epistle are these Et prasulibus pristiâ—…s modo â—…idei orthodoxa non restitissent nec ademptâ—… dignitas nec imminuta fuisset jurisdictio quod ita liquet ut hoc vel inâ—…iciari sit nâ—…gare Solem in ipsa meridie lucere in the book he sayeth quotquot autem a puriore cultu non abâ—…orrebant â—…is jâ—… utendi fruendi Episcopatuum fructibus privilegiis omnibus jurisdictio etiam quam ante usurpabant quatâ—…nus Religionis incolumâ—…t as pateretur continuata This is the height of impudency thus to avow palpable untrueths that the faithfulness of this Historian may for ever after be suspected let it be observed that in his History which he wrote in English which every one might have more easily understood so discovered his falshood he durst say no more but that these Bishops enjoyed the rents of their benefices See pag. 175. Moreover 4. The book of Discipline it self giveth the clear ground of their appointing of these Superintendents in these words We consider that if the Ministers whom God hath â—…ndued with his singular graces among us should be appointed to severall places there to make their continuall residence that then the greatest part of the Realm should be destitute of all doctrine which should not onely be the occasion of great murmure but also be dangerous to the salvation of many and therefor we have thought it expedient at this time by this means the simple and ignorant who perchance have never heard of Iesus truelie preached shall com to some knowledge and many that are dead in superstition and ignorance shall attaine to some feeling of godliness by the which they shall be provoked to seek farther knowledge of God and his true Religion and worship and therefor we desire nothing more earnestly then that Christ Iesus be once universally preached throughout the Realm c. From whence it appeareth that these Superintendents were onely chosen for that present exigent when there were so few learned able Ministers so many places of the countrey destitute of Ministers so that the harvest was great the labourers very few Superstition popery was remaining in many places of the countrey people were in hazard to continow therin having either no Minister to clear the trueth to them or such onely who were ready to harden them in their superstitious courses therefor there was a necessity at that time while the Church was but in siâ—…ri that some of the most able of the Ministry should be appointed to travell through such such places of the countrey to preach the Gospel to see to the planting of faithfull able Ministers according to the rules sett down in the book of Discipline But 5. so cautious were the Reformers that they would not acknowledge those to be Bishops either in name or thing for as their worke was extraordinary so they gave them an extraordinary name They would not suffer any who had been Bishops before in time of popery to
flee About this time in other pairts of the Kingdome the ministers honest people who were urged could not give obedience resolved to follow a more regular way and to supplicat the Councell to give in a note of the errours contained in these books which accordingly they did so from severall pairts of the Kingdome there came Ministers professours with supplications sheweing how erroâ—…ons both the liturgy the other books were how dangerous a thing it was to bring in Innovations in a Church how the Reformed Churches of Austria were undone by the violent obtiusion of a liturgy how in the time of Charles the Great the Church was miserably rent some adhering to the Ambrosian Liâ—…gy others choosing the Romane of Oregorian Liturgy how dangerous it was to change the Worship bring in a worse how the King foure years before at his Coronation did solemly swear that he would alter nothing in the Kingdome of Scotland without the free consent advice of those having Interest Unto these Supplications the Councill at first gave a favourable answere told that it was not their minde to presse the publick use of these books that they had forbidden the Bishops to presse the use of these books any more that they had signified their minde to his Maj were expecting a returne The petitioners likewise sent their supplications to his Maj. with the Duke of Lennox who was then returning to London withall did wreastle with God by prayer faâ—…ing that he would incline the Kings heart to hearken unto their just desires would frustrate the endeavours of their adversaries But when the expresse cometh from his Maj. all the answere they get is an Edict published Octobr 18. commanding them to go out of the towne of Edenburgh within few hours under the paine of Rebellion When the Petitioners see this the next day they resolve to act all together joyntly that his Maj. might know it was not a few Puritanes as the impure Prelats were pleased to nickname them but a great mulitude of his Maj. most loyall subjects of all ranks who were dissatisfied And they draw up a complaint against the prelats desire liberty of the Councell to pursue them legally as being the onely authors of the Book of Canons liturgy which containe the seeds of Superstition Idolatry as being guilty of many other crimes that under the highest perrill And withall they shew the Councell that they could not leave the towne untill they saw some course taken for delivering the land from the present imminent dangers When the Councell saw that the number of the Petitioners was great dayly increasing fearing the worst they desired the petitoners would choose some of their number as their Commissioners to prosecute their business that the multitude might depairt this was yeelded unto But ere long the Councell is discharged by an Expresse from his Maj. to meddle any more in that matter Whereupon the Supplicants are necessitated to draw up a Protestation declaring that if any tumult arose through their prosecution of the Cause the Councell onely might be blamed as refusing justice When the Counsell heareth of this they resolve to hear the desire of the Commissioners advise the Bishops to withdraw themselves When the Commissioners compeer they show their Intention was to prosecute their business against the Prelats whom they would prove guilty of grievous crimes under the highest perrill therefore desired the prelats might be excluded it not being fit that parties should be judges The Councell because of the forementioned Expresse might do nothing Onely they write to his Maj. who thereafter sendeth for the Earle of Traquair but he for fear of the Prelats did misrepresent the Cause of the Supplicants returned with a Proclamation from his Maj. which he caused publish at Sterlin where the Councell was sitting in Febr. 1638 In which Proclamation the King owned the books which the petitioners did supplicat against and condemned the meetings of the Supplicants as conspiracies contrary to the lawes of the Land Against this the petitioners prepared a Protestation a copy wherof was affixed at the Crosse of Sterlin herein protested against these Books as full of errours as Innovations against their refusing to receive libells against the Prelats against the High Commission Court obtruded on Scotland contrary to the fundamentall lawes of the land without any Municipall law That prelate should not be judges in their own cause And that all their own meetings were lawfull And that they could not forbear with a good conscience unlesse they should wrong the Glory of God the honour of his Maj. the liberties of kirk Kingdome And because they were commanded to depart forth of the town of Sterlin they go together towards Edenburg there after serious thoughts they finde the maine procureing cause of all these calamities to be the violation of the Nationall Covenant therefore unanimously they resolve to renew that Covenant accordingly they draw it up with some explicatory additions confirmations out of the acts of Parliament binde themselves to adhere unto defend the true Religion forbearâ—…g the practise of all novations already introduced in the matters of the worship of God or approbation of the corruptions of the publick government of the Kirke or civill places power of Kirkmen till they be tried allowed in free Assemblies in Parliaments to labour by all meanes lawfull to to recover the purity liberty of the Gospell as it was established professed before the foresaid Innovations promise swear to continoâ—… in the profession and obedience of the foresaid Religon â—…resist all contrarie errours and corruptions ând that they had no intention to attempt any thing that might turne to the dishonour of God or to the diminution of the Kings greatness and authority and to defend themselves mutually in the same cause c. When the Covenant is thus drawn up it was subscribed by all present copies thereof were sent to such as were absent being read in the Churches was heartily embraced sworne subscribed with tears great joy Great was this day of the Lords power for much willingness chearfulness was among the people so as in a short time few in all the land did refuse except some Papists some aspiring Courteours who had no will to displease the King some who were addicted unto the English rites Ceremonies some few Ministers who had sworne the oath at their entry which was mentioned Anno 1612. Yea such willingness was among the nobles others that they had their own copies of the Covenant subscribed by others of the Nobles Barons ministry laid up in their Charter chists where possibly many of them are at this day When matters are at this passe the Prelats do animate his Maj. to a war and the Covenanters desireing his Maj. might be rightly
to make way for repaireing of the ruines building up the breaches thereof for establishing the same on right sure foundations in your Maj. person family and to do those things when they were so litle expected in so quyet peaceable a way and without the effusion of Christian blood imbroyling the Kingdomes in the misery calamities of a new war And as we adore the wonderfull wise hand of God blesse his name who hath done these things so it is not only our practice for the present but our sincere resolution for the time to come to pouâ—… forth the fervent desires supplicatioâ—… of our soull unto the most high by whom kings reigne for the preservation saiftie of your Maj. person for the multiplication of his spirit increase of it upon you that you may imploy your power to his praise the comfort of his people for the Establishing of your just power greatnesse in subordination to him to be faithfull loyall rendering all the dutyes of honour subjection obedience to your Maj. that are due from humble loving subjects unto their native lawfull prince soveraigne And we desire to be perswaded with confidence to promise to ourselves that your Maj. will accept of those our professions as proceeding from loyall honest hearts allow us the protection countenance incouragement in our station callings that may be expected from a gracious king And considering the great happinesse that ariseth both to kirk and state all the members thereof by the mutuall good understanding betuixt the supreme Magistrat the faithfull of the land when it pleaseth divine providence so to dispose the many calamities miseries that in the holy justice just indignation of God do attend the separating or violating of these only sure foundations of states and 〈◊〉 kingdomes We are bold in the integrity of our hearts in the zeal of the glory of the Lord of the good of his church of your Maj. honour happinesse from the sense of manifold great obligations that be upon us before the Lord so to do particularly that of the Covenant That what lets we are not able of our selves to suppresse and overcome we shall reveal and make known that they may be prevented remedied Humbly to presente unto your Maj. and make known the great danger that threateneth religion and the work of reformation in the churches of God in these kingdomes from the desires and endeavour of the remanent of the popish prelaticall and malignant party therein which is begining to lift up the head not only to render hatefull but to bear downe many of your Maj. good subjects who have been imployed as instruments in the work have keeped within the bounds of their duty in promoveing preserving the same so far as humane frailty would permit but also to overthrow that blessed work it self and to reintroduce prelacy the ceremonies the service book and all these corruptions which were formerly cast out as inconsistent with that pure and spotelesse rule of church governement discipline and divine worshipe delivered to us in the word of God as a yoke of bondage that neither we nor our fathers were able to bear and though we know that that Spirit will not want its specious pretences plausible insinuations for compassing these ends yet as there cannot readily be greater disservice to the church of God to these Kingdoms to your Maj. honour happinesse then actings of that nature so we cannot without horrour of Spirit astonishment of heart think upon what dreadfull guiltinesse King Princes Ministers People shall be involved into what fearfull wrath shall attend them from the face of an angry jealous God if after all the light that he hath made to shine in these kingdomes from his blessed word for discovery of the error Impiety of these things after his hand hath been lifted up so high for casting out of the same after solemne vowes engadgments taken upon themselves before God angels men against them if they should againe lick up the vomit thereof God forbid that we should either hear or see such heart astonishing bitter things which would turne the mirth of the Lords people into mourning their songs into most sad lamentations Neither are we lesse apprehensive of the endeavours of the spirit of errour that possesseth Sectaries in these Nations which as it did at first promove a vast tolleration in things religious and afterwards did proceed to the frameing of mischief into a law so we doubt not but it will still be active unto the promoving procuring of the same under the specious pretext of liberty to tender consciences the effects whereof have in a few years past been so dreadfull that we cannot think of the continuing thereof but with much trembling fear Therefore knowing that to Kings Princes Rulers Magistrats appertaineth the purgation preservation of religion that nothing can contribute more unto the preserving and promoveing of religion the work of reformation then that all places of power trust be filled with men of a blamelesse christian conversation approven integrity known affection to the cause of God We your Maj. most humble supplicants subjects with bowed knees bended affections humbly supplicat your Maj. that you would imploy your royall power unto the preservation of the reformed religion in the church of Scotland in doctrine worship discipline governement for the reformation of Religion in the Kingdome of England Irland in doctrine worshipe discipline goverment and to the carrying on of the work of uniformity of religion in the church of God in the three Kingdomes in one confession of faith forme of church goverment directory of worshipe catechisâ—…ing and to the extirpation of popery prelacy superstition heresy schisme prophanesse whatsoever is contrary to sound doctrine the power of Godlinesse And that all places of trust under your Majest may be filled with such as have taken the Covenant are of approven integrity known affection to the cause of God If in a matter that so much concerneth the honour of God the good of his Church your Maj. honour happinesse we be jealous with a godly jealousy we know your Maj. wisdom lenity to be such as will easily pardon And the sense of our duty to God to your Maj. the fear of those kingdoms transgressions by building up againe the things that were destroyed constraineth us to be petitioners against the same earnestly to intreat that any beginnings of stumbling which already have been given in those things especially in the matter of Prelacy ceremonies the Servicebook in your Majesty chappell and family and other places of your Dominions may be removed and taken away And that there may be no
And seing ther can no instance be produced out of the History of Scotland since ever it was a Kingdome that any subject noble Man or other was accused of high treason for such a cause surely this noble Mans case was unparalleled 3. Is not this strange considering what the principle of Royallists is They say that Conquest giveth a just tittle to a crown So sayeth D. Ferne Aâ—…nisaeus Maxwell in his Sacro Sancta Regum Majestas Cap. 17. And by this principle Cromwell was the lawfull supreme Governour of the Kingdome of Scotland and had just tittle right to the Crowne thereof having now conquered the same if this principle of theirs be true which is much questioned by their opposites no complyance with him could by any law in the World be treason against any Prince whatsomever for obedience unto concurrence with a lawful supreme Magistrat can be treason against no man living How then could this noble Man be challenged upon the account of treason for complyance Let all the Royalists answer this without contradicting themselves if they can 4. Is there any lawyer who can produce such a definition of treason against a Prince or a supreme Magistrat out of the civil law as will condemne the deed of this worthy noble Man make complyance with a conquerour for the good saifty of the countrey after all meanes of defence are broken lost an act of treason And since the civil law can condemne no such deed as treasonable the sentence given out against his noble Man must be without all warrand of law 5. Are there not many countreyes Kingdomes cities that have been overrun by their enemies have had their own lawfull Governours put from them so have been forced to live under the feet of strangers hath it not been usuall for them to comply with such as had the present power in their hand for their own saifty the good of the place And was it ever yet heard that such were accused condemned of â—…reason against their own lawful Governours thrust from them sore against their wills for any such complyance And is it not wonderful that this eminent noble Man should become a preparative unto all the World So then to put a close to this let an appeal be made to all Governours of Commonwealths Statesmen Lawyers Casuists Politicians Canonists Quodlibâ—…tists yea Royalists if they will speak consonantly to their own principles their answer interloquutour be had in point of law unto this question Whether or not when a land is overcome in battel once againe a thrid time a fourth time so aâ—… they are forced to lie under the feet of the conquerour and expect his mercy their own supreme Magistrat is forced to flee away for his life without all hope of returning so they left without all goverment but what they have from the conquerour when it might have been expected that he would have ruled them disposed of them jure conquestus as conquered according to his own pleasure yet he did admit such as they thought sit to choise to sit in his supreme Councel for giving their advice for regulating the affaires of that Kingdom common wealth which is now conquered subdued Can it be treason in any when chosen by the countrey to sit in these Councells advise what they think best for the good of the countrey Or can they or any of them be challenged or accused condemned as guilty of heigh treason when providence bringeth back the prince after ten yeers absence for acting so under the conquerour for the good of the land to prevent its utter ruine destruction And if the answer shall as certainly it will be negative then it is beyond all question that the sentence execution of this worthy noble Man upon this sole account shall be matter of astonishment to all that hear of it know the cause thereof Thus a great prince falleth within five dayes therafter a great prophet falleth as shall be shown in the next section SECTION V. The groundes of the suffering of Mr Iames Guthry Minister at Sterlin who was executed the first Day of Iune 1661. examined AFter the parliament is assembled Mr Iames Guthry minister at Sterlin who was one of those ministers who were incarcerated for the cause above mentioned Sect. 3. who after some weeks imprisonement in the castle of Edenburgh was carryed thence imprisoned in Dundee from thence is sent for by the parliament impannalled before them being accused of high treason He was a man who had been honoured of God to be zealous singularly faithfull in carrying on the work of reformation had carryed himself streightly under all changes revolutions because he had been such an eminent one he must live no longer for he is condemned to die most basely handled as if he had been a notorious thief oâ—… malefactor he is hanged afterward his head is stuck up upon one of the ports of the city of Edinbrugh where it abideth unto this day preaching the shamefull defection of these who dealt thus with him calling to all who goe out in at the gate of the city to remember their covenant with God for which he died a martyr But it is like many will think it behoved to be some great crime for which this eminent servant of the Lord was thus handled but what if it be no such crime yea what if it was a duty for which he was thus put to suffer Reader thou shall hear ir then thou mayest judge Some ten years before he was challenged by the King his councell for a doctrinall thesis which he had maintained spoken to in sermon because he found them incompetent judges in matters purely ecclesiasticall such as is the examination and censureing of doctrinall poynts primo instanti he did decline them upon that account This is his crime for this he is condemned as guilty of high treason this will be the more wonderfull if thou consider how as thou hast heard many worthy precious servants of christ did decline the King his councell in the dayes of King Iames such as Mr Baleanqual Mr Melvin Mr Blake Mr Welch Mr Forbes others as incompetent judges in causes meerly ecclesiasticke and yet ther was never one of them put to death It is true there was an act of Parliament Anno 1584. dischargeing such declinatures under the paine of treason but the very next year Anâ—…o 1585. King Iames himself did emit a declaration shewing that he for his pairt should never that his posterity ought never to cite summond or apprehend any paster for matters of doctrine in religion salvation heresies or true interpretation of scripture but avoucheth it to be a mater meerly ecclesiasticall altogether impertinent to his calling Which though not equivalent to an Act of parliament yet whether
because when she was present as Act 1. Parl. 2. of Queen Mary both she the Governour are mentioned thus The which day the Queen's grace with advice of the Lord Governour three Estates of Par. moreover it is not usuall to have any Acts running in the name of a Commissioner For where a Commissioner is present the King is supposed to be present therefore to this day all the Acts of Parl. made were a commissioner is present except such as are wholly concerning the King himself Run in the name of our soveraigne Lord with advice consent of his Estates of Parl. but where neither King nor Commissioner is present then the Acts run thus The Estates of Parl. enact c. So that this Stilus curiae being punctually observed to this day consirmeth the observation concerning the fore mentioned parl viz. That they were holden without King or Queen when neither King nor Queen is mentioned in the Acts. 3. Is it not strange how they could annull the parl 1648. among the rest seing the Acts of that parl were more homogenious with their own Acts then the Acts of the rest For the Acts of designe carryed on by that parl were no such injurious violation of his Maj. power authority nor were they Acts of rebellion as they suppose the Acts of the other parl to have been So that the ground upon which they rescinde the rest of these Parl. will not warrand them to rescinde this so it is not upon the ground of their Acts that they rescinde these parl Because then they would not have rescinded this parl 1648. What grounds then they will seek out next who can tell For all the grounds which they have hitherto to given whether from their Acts deeds oâ—… from informalities through the want of the presence of the King or his Commissioner are declared null of no effect by themselves 4. It is yet more strange how they could annul the Parl. 16â—…8 When all the members of that parl some of whom no doubt were members of this did Iun. 10. declare and testify their resolution and obligation to acknowledge that Parliamentre have been a free and lawfull Parliament likeas they did oblige themselves upon their honours and credit and as they desired to be to be holden true lovers of their countrey and of the religion lawes libertâ—…es thereof efauldly faithfully to the uttermost of their power to joyn and concurre with their persones and estates every one according to their severall stations and callings in the maintenance of the freedome and lawfulnesse of that Parliament and they ordained that that Act should be subscribed by all the members of Parliament present and absent and by all noblemen Barons and all other subjects inhabitants of the Kingdome in their thires and brughs 5. It is yet more strange that this Parliament had so far forgot it self as to reckon up the Parliament 1648. among the rest in the Act rescissory when in their 9. Act they had acknowledged it to have been a Parliament for there when they are approveing the Engadgment the all onely bussinesse which that Parliament 1648. was carrying on they stile them the estates of Parliament of this kingdome which is a title agrying to none but to lawfull Parliaments Thus it is clear that there is no ground warranding a consent unto these Acts rescissory but good ground to scruple at that oath the taking whereof would have imported a consenting unto the annuling of these Parliaments considering 6. How King Charles the first in the large treaty in his answer to the first demand sayeth that at the humble desire of his subjects he did call conveen a Parliament to beholden at Edinburgh Iun. 2. 1640. so that this Parliament was lawfully convocated acknowledged to have been so by King Charles the first himself Thirdly nor is there ground for assenting consenting unto the anulling of those Acts done and concluded in these Parliaments for 1. They are Acts made by Parliaments lawfully conveened 2. They are Acts not repugnant to the word of God but Acts made for the carrying on advanceing of the work of reformation except those made by the Parliament 1648 which every one according to his place power is sworne to maintaine promove this the very vieuing of them will evince how ever that whole work be now branded as rebellion sedition So that none could swear that oath as now tendered by Acts explained but withall he must condemne the whole work of reformation all Acts made for establishing of the same in doctrine worshipe discipline governement 3. did not King Charles 1 in the large treaty give this answere unto the first demand That for as much as the King's Maj. at the humble desire of his subjects did call and conveen a Parliament to be holden at Edenbrugh Iun. 2. 1640. wherein certaine Acts were made which Acts his Maj. for the peace and good of this kingdome is pleased to publish in his own name with consent of the Estates and therefore commands that the said Acts bearing date â—…un 27. 1640. be published with the Acts to be made in the next session of the same Parliament and that all the saids Acts as well of the precedent as of the next Session to be holden have in all time coming the strength of lawes and to be universally received and obeyed by all the subjects of the kingdome of Scotland His Maj. doth in the word of a king promise the publishing of the saids acts in such sort as is above specified And more over at that next Session of Parliament Anno 1641. when himself was present all those Acts were approved ratifyed fully did not King Charles 2 before at his coronation ratify approve the Covenant all Acts made in order to the carrying on of the ends of the Covenant So that now they are full compleat lawes wanting nothing even of formality which can be desired seing he hath ratified approved them all 5. Are there not many of these Acts made by those Parliaments very much for the glory of God the good of the countrey did not themselves see this when for shames cause they were forced to make some Acts of the same nature for curbing of vice since they would not be said to renew them so that it were hard to put Christians to condemne those Acts laudable lawes 6. Is it not strange how they could condemne make null void all the Acts done by the committees Parliaments after 1648. seing by this meanes they shall condemne all the applications which were made unto his Maj. while he was in Holland also they shall condemne the Kingdomes receiving of him yea their crowning of him both as null as done by a Non-Parliament And thus they will have the King no crowned King of Scotland how deep this may draw let lawyers judge It was
never yet heard of that a King was crowned in Scotland but by a lawfull Parliament whose deed was valide if this deed of that Parliament was not valid let wise men conjecture what the consequences will be It is true they except in their Act 9. All such Acts as were passed in any meeting of Parliament or committee of Estates authorized by his Maj. presence But his Maj. presence will not make every company of men a Parliament yea his being present with them at any of their Sessions sayeth he owned them as a lawfull Parliament 2. How ever all these Acts which concerne himself seing he was not present at their making are null 3. How cometâ—… it to passe that the Kings presence Anno 1641. did not availe to keep that session of Parliament from a stroke with the rest And furder it appeareth that they annull the Parliament 1650 1651. altogether because if that had been a Parliament it had been the first Parliament of King Charles 2 so the Parliament 1661. had been his second Parliament But the Parliament 1661. is called his first Parliament therefore there was never a lawfull Parliament before in his reigne thus by their principles he hath never been crowned in Scotland as yet What a Premunire they fall into here let lawyers judge Fourthly There was as little reason to condemne these meetings counsels conventions of the subjects at the begining of the late work Because those meetings were necessary for the defence of Religion against the bloody Prelates who were seeking the overthrow destruction of all 2. Nor is there any Act condemning such which can with any colour be allaiged except the Act of that Parliament 1584. wherein things were carryed on by a strong faction in great haste for they had five Sessions in three dayes with great secrecy for the Lords of the articles were sworne to secrecy the dooresâ—… were keeped closse all the time of Parliament See laborious Mr Petree his History pag. 442 and the Act of this Parliament did mainely strick against the assemblies of the Church for that was the thing designed 3. What ever can be made out of this Act against civill meetings it will not stricke against those meetings because the Parliament 1640 in their Act 29. hath showne the true meaning thereof to be otherwise saying It cannot be extended against any councells conventions assemblies committees or meetings made holden keeped by the subjects for mantenance and preservation of the kings Maj. Religion lawes and liberties of the kingdome or for the publick good either of Church or state this Act was approved by the large treaty againe by the next Session of Parl. An. 1641. where the King himself was present 4. The secret councell which then was did approve of these conventions or tables as they were called so did his Maj. commissioner thereafter So then these meetings might be warrantably keeped for God's glory the removeing of the just grievances of the subject being no wayes prohibited by the municipall lawes which onely disallow such conventions as are for disturbance of the peace or usurpation against authority neither of which can be allaiged here for no invasion violence offer of wrong by word or deed to any person no not even to these against whom they had justly complained followed thereupon And those meetings were onely to consult upon the most fit humble way of supplicating his Maj. for the most convenient propositions to be presented to his Maj. to the Parliament to the assembly all which are most compatible with the loyalty duty of good subjects do no wayes encroach upon authority seing they assumed not any judiciall determination in any matter of state civill or ecclesiasticall but by voluntary instructions and opinions every one to another in a common cause of religion did resolve what might be most conduceable to their lawfull and just ends To use the words of the protestation Decemb. 18. 1638. Fiftly Nor is there just warrand ground upon this account to annull the League Covenant Because 1. It was against no municipall law for as to that 12 Act of the Parl. 10 of King Iam. 6. Anno 1585. it is so explained by the 29 Act of Parl. 1640. as that it cannot be extended to any bands leagues made for the preservation of the Kings Maj. Religion lawes liberties of the Kingdome or for the publick good either of Church or state and this may be furder cleared by vieuing the 43 Act of Queen Mary which the forecited Act of King Iames 6. relateth unto ratifieth for that Act is to be understood of particular leagues or bonds of man-rent as they called it or maintenance respectivè that by privat persones in brugh land therefore cannot be understood of leagues or bonds made by the body of the land in their representatives in Parliament which hath so much power in making of leagues that without their consent the King cannot make a league as is clear by a league which King Robert 2. consented unto betwixt Scotland France England which was annulled because it wanted the Parliaments consent for sayeth Buch in the end of his 9 book neque enim ipse pacem vel inductas facere poterat nisi ex sententiâ publici conventus nec firmas polliceâ—… sine publico decreto He could neither make nor promise truce or peace without the Parliaments consent in the Parliament 10. King Iam. 6. Anno 1585. among the unprinted Acts there is one containing the assent of the Parliament for concludeing of a league with the Queen of England 2. The Parliaments of Scotland have made leagues with forraigne Princes without the Kings consent as that Parliament which deposed the Queen Mother from her regency did enter in a league with the Queen of England 3. All leagues bondes made by the Parliament were ratified by this King by his solemne oath both before at his coronation and therefore none in conscience could condemne these bonds or take an oath importing the same What is more allaidged against the league covenant shall be fully examined hereafter Sect. 2â—… Sextly Nor was there just cause upon this account to condemne Scotland for aideing assisting of England in their straite extreame danger Because 1. It is a most ordinary thing for one nation to send help relief unto another thus the french the Englishes helped the Hollanders The king of Britaine offered to helpe the Rotchell the Palatinat 2. It was against a common enemy a popish prelaticall malignant faction seeking the ruine of religion lawes liberties in Scotland as well as in Engl. By the light of nature a common fear uniteth even these who are furthest divided so while Scotland fought for England they fought for themselves their own saiftie what ever law will warrand nations now to joyn together against the Turk will
warrand Scotland their joyning with England against the common enemy Yea nature hath taught heathens to prevent their own ruine destruction by joyneing their forces with other nieghbours against one who designed nothing but the promoteing of his Empire Thus the Romans warred against Philip left Greece being subdued he should make warre against them Thus the Lacedamoniam warred against the Olyâ—…hii diverse other instances might be given 3. Scotland England used to joyne together before to enter in a league with other princes for the defence of the protestant religion as Anno 1586. againe 1587. 1588. they draw up a league among themselves But it will be replyed that this was with the consent of the supreme Magistrat Ans. True but the want of this consent will not make such aideing and supplying unlawfull so long as the law of nature is to the fore obligeing every man to defend his neighbour and are not Scotland England near nieghbours being in one Island under one King Neither did they waite for the consent of Scotlands supreme Magistrat when they helped them first against the French next against a faction of papists within their own bosome and therefore Scotland should not now waite for the consent of England's King when they were to help them against a popish and prelaticall faction Nor needed Scotland waite for the consent of their own supreme Magistrat because as the law of nature doth oblige every one to defend himself by force of armes against an army of bloody enemies though the King should not consent as shall be showne hereafter so the law of nature will warrand any to defend their brother though the King should not consent especially seing therby they are but defending themselves against such an enemy as would next fall on them 4. The law of God will warrand this communion of saints Prov. 24 11 12. the commendable practice of those who helped David 1. Chron 12 18. 1. Sam. 22 2. Seventhly nor was there ground for condemning the lands renewing of the nationall Covenant Anno 1638. 1639. Because 1. There is no absolute necessitie for asking obtaineing the Kings consent to the same as if a Kingdom once sworne obliged in covenant with God might not renew the same obligation as oft as they thought fit There is no such necessity of having his Maj. expresse consent approbation either to the first making or to the renewing of the same with God as shall be more fully showne hereafter There is no law of God for this 2. Nor is there any municipall law inhibiteing the renewing of that covenant Yea that warrand by which all the land took it at the first viz the King 's his councell's command to Ministers to put their parishoners to take it severall acts of Generall Assemblies stand still in force accordingly in each universitie the Covenant was renewed yearly 3. Moreover the Generall Assembly Anno 1639. enjoyned by ecclesiastical authority the subscription of the same the Assembly presented a supplication unto the privie Councell desireing their ordinance for the subscription of the same by all the subjects of the Kingdome this was granted Agust 30. Anno 1640. the parliament by their act 5. did ratifie the act of the Generall Assembly their supplication the act of Councill thereupon which act of Parliament was approved by the King in the large treaty thereafter by his personall presence at the next session of Parliament where all was ratified So that this deed of renewing the Nationall Covenant wanted nothing either in poynt of law or conscience to make it lawfull therefore it had been unlawfull to have taken such an oath as would have imported the condemning of that deed Eightly nor was there ground for condemning the Church Assemblies at which the King's commissioner was not present or which wanted his speciall approbation 1. Because there is no warrand in the word of God clearing this necessity but much to the contrary 2 No munipiall law of the land is against such meetings because the act 1584. Was taken away rescinded anno 1592. since that time there is no lawanulling all Assemblies which want his Maj. approbation consent 3. It was never either the profession or the practice of that Church as is clear by what is said Sect. 1. It will be a fitter place to speak to this when the ecclesiasticke part of the oath is spoken to which shall be done Sect. 12. SECTION XI The former purpose further prosecuted the lawfulness of Scotlands defensive warre demonstrated THere are other two Particulars or rather one for they are much to one purpose which virtually would have been condemned by the taking of this oath thus explained as to its civill part viz Scotland their riseing in armes in their owne defence against the King's armies of papists malignants their seizing on the castles which within their owne bosome were threatening their ruine when garisoned with adversaries These must now be spoken to and so Ninthly There is no ground to condemne that defensive warre Though much hath been said by court parasites others who were ambitious of gaine preferment to exaggerat aggraige that supposed crime thereby to make them their cause odious to all the World yet rationall indifferent persones will after serious pondering of a few particulars forbear to passe any rash sentence Much hath been already said in the defence of that bussinesse by the author of Lex Rex more then ever could or will be answered And therefore that book behoved to be answered by a fiery fagot by Mr Prins soveraigne power of Parliaments c. a book published by authority of Parliament never answered to this day And therefore there will not be a necessity of insisting much on it here only a short hint at some particulars will suffice 1. In point of conscience it will be hard to prove that the power of warre resideth only in the King that he only beareth the sword For 1. Rom. 13. The sword is given to all Magistrats for the Apostle there speaketh of heigher powers indefinitely in the plurall number without specifying any kinde it is certaine Rome had not two or moâ—… Kings at once And if the Apostle had intended only Nero he would have designed him in the singular number He speaketh of powers that are of God are ordained of God this agreeth to Inferiour Magistrats who are God's Deputies judge for him as well as others 2 Chron 19 v. 6 7. Deut. 1 v. 16. Numb 11 16 17. He speaketh of Rulers this name agreeth to inferiour Magistrats as may be seen Exod. 18 v. 21 22 25 26. 16 22. 34 31. 2 King 10 1. 1 Chron. 12 v. 14. 26 32. He speaketh of such as must not be resisted but subjected unto Peter sheweth who these are 1 Peter 2 v. 13 14. even
calling for God giveth no command to do evill nor to tyrannize He is not God's vicegerent when he playeth the tyrant therefore he may be resisted opposed without any violence done to the office or ordinance of God As the King's messinger may be resisted withstood when he crosseth his commission warrand without any wrong done to the office or to the King Every disobedience in things sinfull is not a resisting of the ordinance of God The office may be owned the person in the office honoured esteemed as he ought when yet his unjust violence may be resisted his sinfull commands disobeyed for it is onely powers that are ordained of God that must not be resisted tyrants or Magistrats turning tyrants and exerceing tyranny cannot be called the ordinance of God though the office abstracted from the tyranny be the ordinance of God And there is no hazard of damnation for refuseing to obey unjust lawes but rather hazard of damnation in willingly following after the command And so there is no danger in resisting such Acts of tyranny for tyrants exerceing tyranny are no terrour to evil doers But on the contrary they are a terrour to good works therefore that place Rom. 13. cannot be understood of tyrants It is a true a worthy saying of famous Mr Knox in his history of Soâ—…land Lib. 2. pag. 141. There is a great difference betwixt the authority which is Gods ordinance the persons of those who are placed in authority The authority God's ordinance can never do wrong but the corrupt person placed in authority may offend So that the King as king is one thing the king Acting tyranny is another thing They plead not for rebelling against the office or resisting that which is God's ordinance They did never intend to destroy Magistracy or to lessen the Kings Maj. just power lawfull authority or to wrong the office in the least And therefore all the arguments of their adversaries taken from Rom 13. or the like places which speak against withstanding opposeing of the office divine appoyntment of God are of no force against them their cause Tyranny is one thing the office of the King is another thing And what arguments speak well against resisting the office or the person duely legally dischargeing the duties belonging to that office will not conclude against resisting of tyranny So that all the arguments taken from Numb 16. Exod. 22 28. Eccles. 10 20. 8 2 3 4 Prov. 17 26. And the like places do not speak home to their case 2. There is also a great difference betwixt riseing up in armes without any just lawfull ground or for trissles or matters of small moment as for the exacting of some more tribute then is due by the law or the like riseing up in armes in extreme necessity when religion lawes lives liberties all that was dear to them as men as christians were in hazard and this was their case for the king came with an army upon them blocked them up both by sea land thus with forraigners was seeking to subdue them so to overturne religion lawes liberties all was not this extream necessity What more imminent danger could be expected then an army of bloody papists bent to prosecute their bloody designes coming with fire sword encouraged by a commission from the king so approaching their very borders Was there not then a necessity an extreme inevitable necessity to rise up in armes for the saiftie of religion lawes lives liberties when all was thus in most imminent danger Should the Parliament the whole body of the land give up unto the lust of these bloody irish popish prelaticall malignant enemies their own lives the lives of their wives children their liberties as men as christians Should they sell religion the land their soulls their consciences unto those men because for sooth they had a commission from the King there is no reason in the world for this Therefore seing there is nothing more dear to people then their religion their lives their liberties a warre raised in the defence of these cannot be accounted a warre raised upon trissles or sedition faction or mutiny but a necessary defensive warre not raised upon privat injuries discontents But upon matters of the greatest importance necessity viz to prevent the extirpation of religion the subversion of lawes liberties the destruction of lives all Cicero de officis lib. 2. can tell us that omnium societatum nulla est gratior mella carior quam ea quae cum republica est nui cuique nosirum cari sunt parentes cariliberi propiâ—…qui familiares sed omnes omnium caritates patria una complex a est pro qua quis bonus dubitat mortem oppetere si ei sit profuturus 3. There is also a difference betuixt a war raised of purpose to force the supreme Magistrat to be of the same religion with the subject or else to dethrone him and a war raised to defend that religion which both Magistrat subject owneth Betuixt a war raised in defence of that religion which hath never been established by the lawes of the land and a war raised in defence of that religion which is publickly owned by the lawes of the land which King subject both are sworne to maintaine which by the lawes becometh a civill right a part of the civill liberty of the subject Whatever may by said against a war raised in the former case yet in this last case a war defensive is most warrantable and this was the very case of Scotland for they were seeking to defend the religion which was established by the lawes of the land which popish prelaticall malignants were seeking to overturn So that any argument which adversaries can bring from the practice of the primitive christians will conclude nothing against them because the true religion was not then established by law the emperours had never consented therunto but it was otherwise in Scotland as hath been abundantly shown Sect. 1. 2. 4. There is also a difference betuixt a violent laying of hands upon the person of the King of purpose to destroy cut him off or to denude him of his just power privilege that in cold blood too by privat persons for some personall injuries This they abhore ever have abhored and betuixt a sinlesse self defence when unjustly assaulted by armies sent by the King to destroy cut them off In pleading for a sinlesse self defence they do not plead for an illegall taking away of the life of a King Their raising of forces in their own sinlesse self defence cannot be condemned there being an actuall invasion made upon their lives liberties which made their war to be tutela vitae proxima the last refuge for the life the only remedie
zealous Christian of servant of Christ consent unto this dreadfull incrouchment usurpation by subscribeing any oath which might import the same Who can but hear of it his heart not tremble Let all the arguments which the reformed divines make use of against the usurped headshipe of the Pope be considered they will with equall strength militat against this usurpation justifie the refuseing of this oath upon that account yea Arminius himself disp de pontif Rom. Thes 3. sayeth that the Church hath but one head otherwise she should be a monster 2. By this meanes they should upon the matter licke up popery which they have abjured againe againe for none will say that they have abjured such a piece of popery only as it was seated in the head of the man with the treeple crown that sitteth at Rome not simply in it self as a blasphemous tenent No reformed divine writeth against the Popes supremacy headshipe as a power usurped by him to the prejudice of some one prince or other but as a heigh insolent usurpation of that which belongeth unto him who is King of Kings Lord of Lords for this were not to speak against an incroachment made upon the privileges prerogatives of the King of his Church but against some civil wrongs done to a neighbour prince or state indeed the adversaries are not ashamed to say that the Pope in his usurpation of this Church jurisdiction wronged not Christ but more immediatly the King Princes unto whom that power did belong of right before therefore they say that King Henry 8. assumed but his own back againe that he neither took nor did the Parliament give him any new power which did not belong to him before So said Heylyn as was showne But if any should assent unto this they should consent only unto the change of the pope but not unto the change of the Popedome should shake off an ecclesiasticall Pope submit unto a civil Pope For Zepp◅rus speaketh with reason when he sayeth P◅lit Eccles. Lib. 3 c. 13. Quando tota Doctrinae cultus c i. e. When all the matter of Doctrine worship as also of the constitution of the Church is ordered according to the pleasure of the Prince alone the counsell advice of the ministers of the word of their synods being despised when such are declared rebels who will not assent unto all that which these polititians do when the whole Government of the Church is made over to them almost by an apostolick authority who only exerce an externall politicall power on the outward main Then doth themagistrat goe beyond his bounds the Popedomeis not taken away but changed yea made twofold worse yea the Arminians in their apologie do call this the very heart marrow of Popery which being granted all his other usurpations do necessarily follow 3 By this means they should grant that ministers is the very discharge of their ministeriall function are subordin◅ unto the supreme Magistat his power acting under him as his servants commissioners This is clear in the exercise of jurisdiction discipline The prelats are his Maj. Commissioners in matters of discipline they receive their commission from him to depose to silence to excommunicate so also they must Acte as his commissioners in lesser censures as in publick rebuking for sin the like seing both the keyes of doctrine discipline were given at once if the key of jurisdiction or discipline come from Christ mediatly from the King immediatly so must the key of doctrine for the scripture sheweth no distinction none may separat the keyes which Christ hath tyed together thus every minister must come forth preach exhort rebuke censure ex communicate not in the name of Christ immediatly but in the name of the King But to this they could not assent therefore they could not take the oath 4. By this meanes they should grant that the supreme Magistrat himself might immediatly in his own person rebuke publickly the scandalous debarr from the sacraments depose suspend excommunicate for what his commissioners do by vertue of a commission from him that he may do himself immediatly But this could no be yeelded to there being not the least warrand for it imaginable out of the word but much against it therefore none except an Erastian or Arminian will condemne such as refuse an oath which would import this see Voetius de politia ecclesi pag. 146. arg 12. 5. By this meanes they should have upon the matter opened a door unto the King 's bringing into the Church what popish rites externall superstitious ceremonies he pleaseth◅ By the act for the nationall Synod he hath as an inherent in the crown the ordering disposall of the externall government of the Church power to settle all things concerning doctrine worship discipline government by the advice of the nationall Synod which is but as his Councell so that the whole power of ordering setling the matter of the worship is in his own hand it was upon this ground that the former prelats did warrand their use of the ceremonies his supremacy was a basis unto this So said Camero in his prael Tom. 1. pag. 370. 371. Tom. 2. pag. 41. That in all things perteineing to externall order in religion Kings may command what they will pro authoritate And thus they should consent unto opening of a door unto all the trash of Rome the significāt ceremonies that are there for if the King have such power what ceremony may he not bring in who is there to controle him in any thing of that kinde who may ask whether lawfull or unlawfull seing no question he himself will call all that which he doth most lawfull he is not without the compasse of his power or authority or calling when he appoynteth the use of those ceremonies if he be thus rector Ecclesiae Now who can acknowledge that any such power doth belong unto the supreme Magistrat to institute any significant ceremony or part of God's worship this being the very sin of Ier◅oam 1. King 12 28 33. It was his fault to devise of his own heart those ceremonies of sacred signes places or persons times And therefore they could not take such an oath be guilt◅sse 6. By this meanes they should have granted that he had power to change the whole frame of religion so give way unto his bringing in the whole body of popery or what he would for by this oath he should have granted unto him the supreme power in matters concerning doctrine worshipe discipline government It was charged upon the Church of England by some adversaries that the great alteration of their religion that was made from popery to the truth back againe to popery so forth in the dayes of Henry 8. Edward
Printed records They declare that in their undertakings they should preferre no earthly consideration to their dutâ—…es for preserving of religion in Scotland in doctrine worshipe discipline government as it is already established to endeavvour to setle it in England Ireland according to the Covenant also in their answere to some committees of Shires they declare that they had nothing before their eyes in that undertaking but the preservation good of religion the endeavouring the setling of it in England Ireland according to the Covenant in the first place before all worldly respects his Maj. rescue from â—…his base imprisonment his re-establishment upon his throne in all his just powers the saiftie of this Kingdome from danger on all hands the preservation of the union brotherly correspondence betwixt the Kingdomes under the governement of his Maj. of his royall posterity according to the Covenant So that the gentleman the author of this pamphlet publisheth his mistakes to the world when he would inferre thus was this right that where our alleagiance binds us to duty to a greater latitude this should be held out to people as the only standard of their loyally duty to the King Was it found Doctrine to insinuat to the sense of intelligent men that we were not otherwise bound to defend him Was it well by such a clause to give occasion to wicked men to think they were no furder obliged to him then he should desend that which they accounted religion And that the folly of his consequencesmay furder appear it would be considered that there is a clear difference betwixt these two Owneing of the King defending his authority never but when he is actually owneing active for the cause interest of Christ And owneing of the King defending his authority alwayes but when he is in actuall opposition in a stated contradiction to the work interest of Christ So is there a difference betwixt these two Non-concurrence in defending promoveing of the King's authority when he is opposeing the work of God And actuall anulling diminishing or utter overthrowing of his power authority when he is so stated And so when the Covenanters say That they are not bound to contribute their power in their places capacities to promove or defend his Maj. power authority when he is in a stated opposition to the work of God when the advanceing of him to his full power authority would cetanely tend to the ruine desruction of the cause people of God yet they do not say that they are never bound to defend him but when he is actually promoveing advanceing the work of God according to his full power place Nor do they say that when he opposeth the work of God they are at liberty to destroy his person or to spoile rob him of all his just power authority And therefore both that clause in the Covenant their proceedings may be abundantly justified without laying down any ground for the taking away of the late King's life without clashing with or contradicting the confessions of protestant Churches or of their owne soâ—… still they acknowledge that difference in Religion doth not make void the Magistrat's just legall Authority not free the people from subjection But that this may be a little more clear let this example be considered A Father turneth phrenticke mad seeketh to destroy the whole family calling for a sword liberty to execute his cruelty His sones rise up binde his hands withhold the sword from him withall sweare to stand together in their own defence to defend their Father's just right power in the defence of the family Now in this case can any say that they were undutifull children or that their covenanting so adding that clause in the Covenant sayeth they were free to cast off the relation that is betwixt him them except he guide the family in all poynts as they would have him doing No in no wayes Here then it is clear that their refuseing to put the sword in their Father's hand while under this distemper is no act of undutifulnesse It is no lessening of the Father's just power over the family nor doth it say that they thinke themselves not bound to owne him as a Father except when he is actively promoveing the good of the family far lesse doth it say that they think because of this distemper they may destroy him or that the relation betwixt them him is broken up for ever So then though this Advocat thought he had a faire sield to walk upon a faire occasion to vent his anger against that Church to make her odious to all Churches about yet wise men who easily see that there is no such strong relation betwixt King subjects as betwixt Parents Children will acknowledge that his ranting is without reall ground And that Scotland in their treaties with the King at the Hage at Breda in their actions at home did nothing but what they may hold up their faces for both before God Man doing nothing herein which either contradicteth their own confession of faith or the confession of faith of other Churches Not their own confession of faith For if the large confession of faith be viewed which was approved by the Parliament insert in their registres In that head of the civill Magistrate these words shall be found We confesse and avow that such at resist the supreme power doing that thing which appertaineth to his charge do resist God's ordinance and therefore cannot be guiltlesse furder we affirme that whosoever deny unto them their aide counsell and comfort whiles the Princes and rulers vigilantly travell in execution of their office that the same men deny their help support and counsell to God who by the presence of his lifetenant doth crave it of them So that all the resisting which is there condemned is resisting of him while doing his duty executing his office not while he is seaking to destroy Religion the interests of Christ. Nor the confession of other Churches for in the former confession of Helvetia upon that head of the civill Magistrate they say as it is in the English edition We know that though we be free we ought wholly in a true faith holily to submit ourselves to the Magistrate both with our body and with all our goods and endeavour of minde also to performe faithfulnesse and the oath which we made to him so far forth N. B. as his government is not evidently repugnant to him for whose sake we do reverence the Magistrate So the French in their confession Art 40. say 〈◊〉 must willingly suffer the yocke of subjection although the Magistrats be infidels so that N. B. the soveraigne Authority of God do remaine whole and entire and nothing diminished And which is worth the noticeing the practice of
Scotland in this is consonant to the profession of the Parliament Anno 1648. which did Act most for the King his interest preferring it to the interest of Christ who in their declaration Aprile 29. insert in their Registres Act 17. say That they resolve not to put in his Maj. hands or any others whatsoever any such power whereby the forsaid ends of the Covenant or any of them may be obstructed or opposed Religion or Presbyterian government endangered But on the contrary before any agreement or condition be made with his Maj. having found his late concessions offers concerning religion not satisfactory that he give assurance by his solemne oath under his hand seal that he shall for himself his Successours give his Royall assent agree to such act or acts of Parliament or bills as shall be presented to him by his Parliaments of both or either Kingdoms respectivè for enjoyning the League Covenant fully establishing presbyteriall government directory of worship confession of faith in all his Maj. Dominions And that his Maj. shall never make any opposition to any of these nor endeavour any change thereof What this Author sayeth more in the three last Pages of his pamphlet is but partly a repetition of what he said before so is answered partly obviated by the preceeding discourse SECTION XXIII The nationall Covenant vindicated from the exceptions of the author of the seasonable case caet HIs plea against the Solemne league Covenant being thus examined In the next place his exceptions against the nationall Covenant pag. 30 31. c. must be considered This Covenant is not abjured in the declaration simply in it self but as it was sworne explained in the year 1638. thereafter And so the maine ground whereupon this Covenant is cast off is because of that explication which was then added in which therewas mention made of some things which were referred unto the Generall assembly in these words forbearing the practice of all novations already introduced in the matters of the worshipe of God or approbation of the corruptions of the publick governement of the kirk or civil places or power of kirkmen till they be tryed allowed in free generall assemblies in parliaments And then after the generall assembly had examined these particulars explained the true sense meaning of the Covenant this conclusion was added The article of this Covenant which was at the first subscription referred to the determination of the generall Assembly being determined And thereby the five Articles of Perth the government of the Kirk by Bishops the civill place power of Kirk-men upon the reasons grounds contained in the Acts of the generall Assembly declared to be unlawfull within this Kirk we subscribe according to the determination foresaid Theforesaid pleader for Eaal when he is produceing his grounds against the validity of this oath pitcheth only upon one of these three particulars mentioned viz. the government of the Church by Bishops in reference to this he attempteth two things in his confused discourse 1. He would if he could prove that by this oath as it was at first conceived Anno 1580. 1581 renewed Anno 1590. the governement of the Church by Bishops was not abjured And 2. That the Assembly Anno 1638. did wrong in giving such a glosse sense as they did But he must be followed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lest any thing should escape first what he bringeth to prove that Prelacy was not abjured by this Covenant must be examined He sayeth That if the Ministers who reasoned with the Doctors of Abâ—…rdeen be to be beleeved they were the prime promotters of the Covenant carryed with them the sense of the body of the Covenanters they who subscribed that Covenant knight with great liberty voice in an Assembly concerning Episcopacy without prejudice notwithstanding their â—…ath upon this ground would perswade the Doctors to subscribe the Covenant because in so doing they should not be taken as abjureing Episcopacy as the Doctors thought And he referreth his reader unto their answer unto the 4. 10. demands Unto which it is Ans. 1. That this is but the old answere brought on the field againe for it was alledged by the Prelats in a pamphlet â—…n 1638. emitted under the name of his Maj. commissioner as most if not all which he here alledgeth is borrowed out of that pamphlet what answers were then given may now suffice Viz. That these Ministers who reasoned with the Doctors of Aberdeen denyed indeed that Episcopacy was expresly specifically abjured in the later part of the Covenant which was the addition containeing the application unto the present times But did never say that it was not abjured in the negative confession or nationall Covenant Now it was about that application addition that the debate arose betwixt these Ministers the Doctors The Doctors never refused to subscribe the negative confession as it was called or the Covenant drawne up Anno 1580 1581. for when the privy Councell did emit a declaration enjoyning all to take the Covenant as it was taken Anno 1580 1581 1590 1591. as others did not so neither would they have scrupled at the same But they alwayes refused to subscribe to that part which was added and one of the grounds why they did scruple at the subscribeing of that was this They thought that by that addition they should be bound expresly directly specifically to abjure Episcopacy the ceremonies of Perth which as they sayd they could not in conscience do Because then they should not have liberty to vote freely according to their judgments Concerning those things in the Generall Assembly And unto this the Ministers answered that the words of that addition were purposely so contrived as none might scruple upon that account And indeed as to Prelacy the words run thus that they should forbear the approbation of the corruptions of the publick Government of the Kirk And the reason was because there were severall honest well minded people in the land who could not distinctly clearly see that the ceremonies the Government of the Church by prelats were directly contrary to the confession of faith abjured therein But were waiting for light in those matters from the ensueing Generall assembly who they knew could give most clearnesse in the matter of fact And could best show what was the Government of the Church at that time when the nationall Covenant was first subscribed And also what was the meaning of the reformers as to severall particulars in that Covenant So then though it be true that by taking of the oath or swearing that additionall explication Anno 1638 No man was bound up from reasoning debateing nor from free voteing in the matter of prelacy in the nationall Assembly Yet it will not follow that prelacy was not abjured by the negative confession or nationall