Practice But the latter clause that they teach obedience active in all lawful things and passive in things unlawful enjoyned by the higher power may justly make an impartial Reader that reflects upon their actions for several years together to wonder what this man means by the higher power by things unlawful by obedience active and passive If in the days of the Long Parliament Presbyterian Doctrines and practices in this point were suitable and correspondent the words must be thus paraphrasad Presbyterians taught obedience active in things unlawful enjoyned by the two Houses whom Mr. Herle's as 't is reported seditious invention made only co-ordinate with the King and disobedience active even to bloudy Rebellion in things lawful enjoyned by the King whom by Oath they acknowledged to be the only Supreme Governour of this Kingdom I have read in Philips his Veritas inconcussa p. 23. that in 1642 Presbyterian Pulpits flamed with seditious invectives against the King and incitements to Rebellion and that the people running headlong into it had all manner of countenance and encouragement but those Ministers that preacht obedience and sought to prevent Rebellion were sure to be imprisoned and put out of their places for it Was this for Presbyterians to preach either Faith or Holiness or Obedience active to the King or were those men so good Subjects so good Christians as either actively or passively to obey his Majesty or preach such obedience when they took themselves and exhorted others to take that Solemn League and Covenant which the King in his Proclamation against it calls a Traiterous and Seditious combination against himself and the establisht Religion and Laws of the Kingdom We do therefore says his Majesty strictly charge and command all our loving Subjects of what degree or quality soever upon their Allegiance that they presume not to take the said seditious and traiterous Covenant And we do likewise hereby forbid and inhibit all our Subjects to impose administer or tender the said Covenant as they and every of them will answer the contrary at their utmost and extremest peril What therefore was the taking of this Covenant and tendering of it to others was it obedience either active or passive to the King No but on the contrary 't was active disobedience to his Majesties command and the taking up Arms against the King in prosecution of this Covenant thus taken and cursing those that did not was Treason and Rebellion by the Lawes of the Land and damnable resistance by the Law of Christ And these and other Presbyterian practices were such a palpable contradiction to the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance that in some late reflexions on those Oaths 't is admired with what face presbyterians can now either take or urge them It 's a wonderful mystery p. 41. how it should come to pass that our English Presbyterians c. should especially now of late with so much willingness and greediness themselves swallow these Oaths and so clamorously urge them on others Is it because the Oath of Supremacy has so peculiar a conformity to their principles and that of Allegiance to their practices or that they are so ready and pressing to disclaim and condemn all that themselves have done these last twenty years And a little after Who ever heard or knew to flow from the Tongue or drop from the Pen of a Presbyterian so Christian a Position as is sincerely avouched both by English Protestants and the general body of Roman Catholicks viz. that even in case a Christian or Heathen Prince should make use of his Civil Power to persecute Truth that power ought not upon any pretences to be actively resisted by violence or force of Arms but though they cannot approve they must at least patiently suffer the effects of his mis-used Authority leaving the judgment to God only If this Rector can answer this Question in the affirmative and then prove it true of any one Covenanting Presbyterian Scotch or English within the compass of this last twenty years let him I shall be glad to see it Whether he can do so much or no I doubt as I do likewise whether that Reflecter can prove that that Position as he has worded it is owned by the general body of Roman Catholicks but that he cannot do it of Presbyterians generally or any considerable number of them I am pretty well assured if he can 't will follow that the generality of Presbyterians or a considerable number of them most wretchedly detained that Truth in unrighteousness and for several years together acted most horrid things contrary to their Light Knowledge and Conscience But 't is observable that this crafty Impostor instead of proving that Presbyterians teach obedience active in things lawful and passive in things unlawful enjoyned by the King's Majesty affirms only that they teach such obedience in things enjoyned by the Higher power not telling us whether they mean the higher power de jure or de facto only nor whether their Doctrine will not comprehend the higher power de facto though themselves acknowledge it no power de jure if so be that power will in the main comply with the advancement of the Presbyterian Interest What the presbyterians meant by the higher power in the late divisions was too evident by their practises viz. that parcel minor part of the Long Parliament which favoured Presbytery which opposed the King and made War against him which elected a multitude of new Members by vertue of a counterfeit treasonable Seal Prove that the King was the Higher power in the time of the Divisions says Mr. Baxter Pref. to his Holy Commonwealth p. 23. They declared May 26. 1642. that the Soveraign power resides in both Houses of Parliament as the Author of Veritas Inconcussa quotes them p. 29. who also p. 91. informs us That the Parliament could not be called a Parliament when they had driven away the King who is the Head and Life of it nor they be said to be two Houses of Parliament when there was not at that time when they first raised a War above a third part of the House of Peers nor the half part of the House of Commons remaining in them and what those few did in their absence was either forced by a Faction of their own or a party of Seditious Londoners for indeed the War rightly considered was not betwixt the Parliament and the King but a War made by a Factious and Seditious party of the Parliament against the King and the major part of the Parliament So that a factious seditious part of a parliament was heretofore owned by Presbyterians as the Higher power Nay the chief Presbyterian Advocate was such a learned man such a good Subject and Christian he did so fear God and honour the King as to be able and willing to distinguish between the supreme Governour and the supreme Power of this Nation Sover power of Parl. p. 104. and to teach that the King was indeed the
THE Presbyterians Unmask'd OR ANIMADVERSIONS UPON A Nonconformist Book CALLED The Interest of ENGLAND IN THE Matter of RELIÌ„GION Nihil â—cci diciâ— 3 Iâ—o Nihil Fateris QVISEQVITUR ME NON AMBULAT IN TENâ—â—RIS Non Quis sed Quid. Not Who but What. LONDON Printed for R. Royston Bookseller to his most Sacred Majesty at the Angel in Amen-Corner 1676. THE PREFACE THough perhaps there have been several Junctures since 1661. wherein the publishing of these Animadversions which were then finished would have been judged more seasonable yet I must profess my self in the number of those men who believe nothing of this nature can come out unseasonably till either the Old cause cease to be thought good or else the good old cause cease to be on the Anvile And who can imagine but that it is so still when men still endeavour to support factious Parties in opposition to the Laws of the Land Nay have the impudence to inveigh even against the Laws themselves that were designed to secure the State for the future against the malignant influences and the disturbing pernicious attempts of Presbyterian as well as other Sectarian Spirits witness that late vile Letter from a Person of Quality to his Friend in the Countrey in which the able but more daring Author accuses the Act for regulating Corporations as keeping many of the wealthiest worthiest and soberest men out of the Magistracy of those places The Act which settled the Militia as establishing a standing Army by a Law and swearing us into a Military Government Whereas nothing does more justify the necessity of a standing Army of which such a jealousie is pretended than the cross-grain'd seditious humours of those men who exclaim most against it The Five-mile Oxford Act as imposing a most unlawful and unjustifiable Oath and the Act for Uniformity as that which rendered Bartholomew-day fatal to our Church and Religion in throwing out a very great number of worthy learned pious and Orthodox Divines In which glorious Titles the Presbyterian Divines were without doubt intended to have the greatest share and the Lay-Presbyterians in the forementioned character of the Wealthiest Worthiest and Soberest men 'T is a wonder he did not add and most loyal Subjects but it may be he was not so intimately acquainted with them as this John Corbet was who is so profuse and lavish of his praises as to commend Presbyterians Interest of England p. 66. 2. Edit even on this score too We affirm boldly says he that those for whom we plead viz. Presbyterians must needs be good Subjects to a Christian King and good members of a Christian Commonwealth The Man I confess has an excellent knack at whitening Aethiopians and putting Wolves into sheeps clothing But he must not be angry if we endeavour for our own and other mens security to strip them of that covering lest under the specious disguises of Religion Reformation and Liberty they once more rend and tear us and make us a prey to Atheism Confusion and Tyranny It concerns us to have the Presbyterian vizor taken off and these worthy learned sober serious Gentlemen of the padd exposed in their proper shape and features that so they may be too well known to be suffered to rob us any more of our Laws Government Order Peace and tranquillity And therefore he does a very good office who at any time gives men warning to take heed of these devouring Sepulchres And because this demure Author had taken so much pains to make them appear beautiful outwardly I thought it worth mine to pare away the grass and to set a fresh mark upon them that so honest men might not fall into them unawares nor permit themselves to be again defiled with Presbyterian uncleanness Imprimatur Maii 2. 1676. G. Jane R. P. D. Henr. Episcopo Lond. Ã Sac. Dom. ANIMADVERSIONS on a Book Entitled The Interest of ENGLAND in the matter of RELIGION THE Author having told us Page 16. 26. 2. Edit that among the various disagreeing Parties within this Kingdom two main ones appear above the rest viz. the Episcopal and Presbyterian and that the disunion between these Parties must be removed either by the abolition of one Party or by the coalition of both into one or by a toleration indulg'd to the weaker side he proceeds p. 17. 27. without staying to inform us how disunion of Parties may be said to be remov'd either by the abolition or toleration of one Party to that which he presumes the great case of the time and therefore proposes it as the subject of his discourse viz. in which of these three ways Abolition Coalition or Toleration the true Interest of the King and Kingdom lies And the first thing that he enquires into is Whether in Justice or reason of State the Presbyterian Party should be rejected and depressed or protected and encouraged Which Party he distinguishes from Prelatists by these Characters which p. 20. 30. he calls their main and rooted Principles 1. They admire and magnify the holy Scriptures and take them for the absolute perfect Rule of Faith and life without the supplement of Ecclesiastical Tradition yet they deny not due respect and reverence to venerable Antiquity 2. They assert the study and knowledge of the Scriptures to be the duty and priviledge of all Christians yet they acknowledge the necessity of a standing Gospel-ministery and receive the directive Authority of the Church not with implicit Faith but the Judgment of Discretion 3. They hold the teaching of the Spirit necessary to the saving knowledge of Christ yet they hold not that the spirit brings new Revelations 4. They exalt divine ordinances but debase humane inventions in Gods worship particularly Ceremonies properly religious and of instituted mystical signification yet they allow the natural expressions of reverence and devotion as kneeling and lifting up of the hands and eyes in prayer as also those meer circumstances of decency and order the omission whereof would make the service of God either undecent or less decent 5. They rejoyce in Christ Jesus having no confidence in a legal righteousness but desire to be found in him who is made unto us righteousness by gracious imputation yet withal they affirm constantly that good works of piety towards God and of justice and charity towards men are necessary to salvation 6. Their Doctrine bears full conformity with that of the Reformed Churches held forth in their publick confessions and particularly with that of the Church of England in the 39 Articles only one or two passages peradventure excepted so far as they may import the asserting of Prelacy and humane mystical Ceremonies 7. They insist much on the necessity of Regeneration and therein lay the ground-work for the practice of Godliness 8. They press upon themselves and others the severe exercise not of a Popish outside formal but a spiritual and real mortification and self denial according to the power of Christianity 9. They are strict observers of the Lords
Book is scarce exceeded by Knot 's Volume against Chillingworth In it several hypothetical majors are to be met with but the minors are either not mentioned or else presumed to be true without any attempt made to prove them so Now Zachary Crofton tells us in his Berith Anti-Baal p. 62. that Ifs are no proofs or demonstrations What good duty justice morality or religion may not be ruined if a mans fancied If be reason enough against it This way of disputing as apparently Jesuitical irrational Machiavellian barbarous The Rector of Bramshot thus proceeds with reverence to soveraign Majesty I crave leave to speak this word of truth and soberness Parturiunt Montes one would think some very sage and important Oracle should forthwith drop from the Pen of this Reverend Dictator In a knowing age quoth he flattery doth not really exalt or secure the Royal Prerogative Quid nascitur Such a Triobolary Truth as I believe there 's scarce any Presbyterian so simple as to be ignorant of it But there 's something suggested in it that I am afraid will one day be found a notorious and fatal falshood viz. that this hath been a knowing Age as to those parties who have opposed and sought against the Royal interest whereas I doubt 't is far easier to prove that in that respect it hath been either the most ignorant I mean of most grand concerning Truths or the most maliciously wicked profligated and debauched Age that ever Protestant England knew The Authority of Parliaments being depressed and undervalued is the more searched into and urged By Parliaments here 't is evident enough he means the two Houses in contradistinction yea opposition to the King But says Lex Terrae p. 80. The Lords and Commons make no more a Parliament by the Law of the Land than a Body without a Head makes a man for a Parliament is a body composed of a King their head Lords and Commons the members all three together make one body and that is the Parliament and none other The two Houses are not the Parliament but only parts thereof and by the abuse and misunderstanding of this word Parliament they have miserably deceived the people And his late Majesty in answer to their Declaration of May 19. 1642. and to that part of it wherein they complain that the Heads of the Malignant party have with much Art and Industry advised him to suffer divers unjust scandals and imputations upon the Parliament to be published in his Name has these words If we were guilty of that aspersion we must not only be active in raising the scandal but passive in the mischief begotten by that scandal We being an essential part of the Parliament And we hope the just defence of our self and our Authority and the necessary Vindication of our innocence and justice from the imputation laid on us by a major part then present of either or both Houses shall no more be called a scandal upon the Parliament than the opinion of such a part be reputed an Act of Parliament And we hope our good Subjects will not be long misled by that common expression in all the Declarations wherein they usurp the word Parliament and apply it to countenance any resolution or Vote some few have a mind to make by calling it the resolution of Parliament which can never be without our consent p. 5. Neither can the vote of either or both Houses make a greater alteration in the Laws of this Kingdom either by commanding or inhibiting any thing besides the known Rule of the Law than our single direction or mandate can do to which we do not ascribe the Authority And now let this Author search his Law-Books with the exactest diligence and skill he can and then let him tell us by what Law the two Houses abstracted from the King have any Parliamentary Authority Indeed his own following words do clearly enough imply that they have no such Authority For p. 51. 61. he is so inconsiderately bold as to assert that Concerning the utmost bounds and limits of Royal Prerogative and Parliamentary power the Law in deep wisdom chooses to keep silence for it always supposes union not division between King and Parliament Whence all that I shall conclude is that the power of a Parliament truly so called viz. King Lords Spiritual Temporal and Commons is not limited by Law and thence I gather either that some Acts of Parliament are no Laws or that that part of some Acts wherein 't is declared that any following statutes contrariant to such and such preceding statutes shall be utterly void is vain and ridiculous But 2. That the two Houses when they usurped the power of a Parliament as well as the name and acted in opposition to the King had no Law on their side to justifie their actings For if the Law always supposes union between King and Parliament it speaks nothing of the Rights and Priviledges of the two Houses in case of their division from and opposition to the King And 3. That the Kings power and prerogative is absolute and notwithstanding all Law of this Nation infinite for if the Law be silent and that in deep wisdom too as to the utmost bounds of the Royal Prerogative it hath very wisely lest it unbounded which latter conclusions and the first also are so prejudicial to the Presbyterian Interest and Party that I doubt they will conclude him either the veryest Fool if indeed he knew not that the Kings Prerogative was bounded by Law or the most Malignant Flatterer that this knowing Age hath brought forth His next Argument to evince Presbyterian Loyalty is that The subversion of the Fundamental Government of this Kingdom could never be effected till those Members of Parliament that were Presbyterian were many of them imprisoned others forcibly secluded by the violence of the Army and the rest thereupon withdrew from the House of Commons An assertion so notoriously false that it puts me in mind of the proverb in the late War that some men would not swear but they would lye basely The truth is the subversion of the Fundamental Government of this Kingdom both in Church and State was the great work of the Long-Parliament which they effected in the Church by overthrowing the Hierarchy and that Prelacy in which the Holy Church of England was founded Stat. of Carlisle 25 Edw. 1. recited 25 Edw. 3. in the State by passing and pressing upon the King that Bill against the Bishops sitting and voting in Parliament who were in all Parliaments either personally or by Proxy since we had any who were once of the States of Parliament and in the Act of Parliament 8 Eliz. c. 1. acknowledged one of the greatest States of this Realm all whose Liberties and Priviledges and consequently that of sitting in Parliament to which they ought to be summoned ex debito Justitiae Cookes Institut 4. c. 9. are confirmed to them by Magna Charta which was it self ratified by 32 Acts