The seasonable case of submission to the church-government as now re-established by law, briefly stated and determined by a lover of the peace of this church and kingdom.
         Honyman, Andrew, 1619-1676.
      
       
         
           1662
        
      
       Approx. 109 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 24 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images.
       
         Text Creation Partnership,
         Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) :
         2007-01 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1).
         A44304
         Wing H2602
         ESTC R4312
         13469702
         ocm 13469702
         99668
         
           
            This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of
             Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal
            . The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.
          
        
      
       
         Early English books online.
      
       
         (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A44304)
         Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 99668)
         Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1641-1700 ; 790:8)
      
       
         
           
             The seasonable case of submission to the church-government as now re-established by law, briefly stated and determined by a lover of the peace of this church and kingdom.
             Honyman, Andrew, 1619-1676.
          
           46 p.
           
             Printed by Evan Tyler ...,
             Edinburgh :
             1662.
          
           
             Written by Andrew Honyman. Cf. Wing.
             Caption title: The case anent submission to the present curch-government re-established by law, stated and considered.
             "Published by order."
             Errata: p. 46.
             Reproduction of original in Huntington Library.
          
        
      
    
     
       
         Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.
         Re-processed by University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. Gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors.
      
       
         EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.
         EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org).
         The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.
         Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.
         Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.
         Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.
         The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.
         Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).
         
          Keying and markup guidelines are available at the
           Text Creation Partnership web site
          .
        
      
       
         
         
      
    
     
       
         eng
      
       
         
           Church of England -- Government -- Early works to 1800.
           Church and state -- England -- Early works to 1800.
           Church and state -- Early works to 1800.
           Church and state -- Church of England -- Early works to 1800.
        
      
    
     
        2005-10 TCP
        Assigned for keying and markup
      
        2005-10 Aptara
        Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images
      
        2006-06 Ali Jakobson
        Sampled and proofread
      
        2006-06 Ali Jakobson
        Text and markup reviewed and edited
      
        2006-09 pfs
        Batch review (QC) and XML conversion
      
    
  
   
     
       
         
         
           The
           seasonable
           CASE
           of
           Submission
           to
           the
           Church-government
           ,
           As
           no●
           re-established
           by
           Law
           ,
           briefly
           stated
           and
           determined
           :
        
         
           By
           a
           Lover
           of
           the
           peace
           of
           this
           CHURCH
           and
           KINGDOM
           .
        
         
           1
           Sam.
           Chap.
           15.
           22.
           
        
         
           Behold
           ,
           to
           obey
           is
           better
           then
           sacrifice
           .
        
         
           Confess
           .
           
             Suec
             .
          
           Cap.
           14.
           
        
         
           Civilibus
           legibus
           ,
           quae
           cum
           pietate
           non
           pugnant
           ,
           eò
           quisque
           Christianus
           paret
           promptiùs
           ,
           quò
           fide
           Christi
           est
           imbutus
           pleniùs
           .
        
         
           Published
           by
           Order
           .
        
         
           
             EDINBURGH
             ,
          
           Printed
           by
           
             Evan
             Tyler
             ,
          
           Printer
           to
           the
           Kings
           most
           Excellent
           Majesty
           ,
           1662.
           
        
      
    
     
       
         
         
         
           The
           Case
           anent
           submission
           to
           the
           present
           Church-government
           ,
           re-established
           by
           Law
           ,
           stated
           and
           considered
           .
        
         
           THe
           exceeding
           great
           bitterness
           of
           the
           continued
           and
           increasing
           sad
           distractions
           amongst
           the
           people
           of
           God
           ,
           to
           the
           hindrance
           of
           their
           edification
           in
           faith
           and
           a
           godly
           life
           ,
           with
           charity
           and
           peace
           amongst
           themselves
           ,
           should
           put
           all
           the
           Ministers
           of
           Christ
           to
           most
           serious
           thoughts
           ,
           in
           considering
           how
           far
           they
           may
           ,
           under
           the
           present
           dispensations
           of
           God
           ,
           without
           sin
           ,
           accommodate
           in
           following
           unquestionable
           duties
           ,
           with
           ,
           and
           under
           ,
           the
           established
           Government
           of
           the
           Church
           .
           And
           although
           ,
           as
           to
           a
           cordial
           allowance
           of
           the
           present
           change
           ,
           they
           cannot
           yet
           attain
           ,
           something
           remaining
           ,
           whether
           of
           scruple
           or
           affection
           ,
           which
           maketh
           it
           unpleasing
           ,
           and
           their
           concurrence
           with
           it
           ,
           to
           ly
           heavy
           upon
           their
           spirits
           ;
           yet
           ,
           if
           there
           be
           found
           no
           manifest
           transgression
           in
           concurring
           under
           the
           same
           ,
           in
           matters
           of
           unquestionable
           duty
           ,
           they
           would
           wisely
           put
           difference
           between
           
             gravamen
             spiritus
          
           and
           
             ligamen
             conscientiae
             ,
          
           something
           in
           the
           will
           that
           rendreth
           them
           averse
           ,
           and
           the
           prevailing
           clear
           light
           of
           a
           well-informed
           conscience
           ,
           (
           to
           which
           ,
           how
           uneasie
           it
           is
           to
           attain
           in
           this
           point
           of
           controversie
           ,
           they
           can
           tell
           who
           have
           truly
           tryed
           it
           )
           binding
           them
           up
           from
           concurrence
           ,
           as
           a
           thing
           in
           it self
           unlawfull
           .
           Men
           ,
           who
           walk
           in
           the
           fear
           of
           God
           ▪
           and
           are
           zealous
           of
           His
           honour
           ,
           had
           need
           to
           be
           very
           jealous
           of
           their
           own
           zeal
           ,
           that
           it
           carry
           them
           not
           to
           the
           rejecting
           of
           a
           real
           duty
           ,
           which
           (
           to
           their
           apprehension
           )
           sits
           too
           near
           a
           sin
           :
           Ministers
           ,
           whom
           sober-mindedness
           doth
           greatly
           become
           ,
           would
           look
           to
           it
           ,
           that
           the
           censure
           of
           a
           grave
           Divine
           upon
           the
           spirits
           of
           our
           countrey-men
           (
           
             praefervidum
             Scotorum
             ingenium
          
           )
           do
           not
           too
           much
           touch
           them
           .
           It
           is
           their
           
           duty
           to
           advert
           ,
           lest
           ,
           at
           this
           time
           ,
           too
           great
           animosity
           contribute
           to
           the
           laying
           of
           the
           foundation
           of
           a
           wofull
           division
           ,
           to
           be
           entailed
           to
           the
           generations
           to
           come
           ;
           the
           evil
           whereof
           will
           preponder
           all
           the
           good
           that
           any
           one
           form
           of
           Church-government
           can
           ,
           of
           it self
           ,
           produce
           ,
           
             viz.
          
           the
           dishonour
           of
           God
           ,
           the
           weakning
           of
           the
           cause
           of
           the
           true
           protestant
           Religion
           ,
           against
           the
           common
           adversaries
           thereof
           ;
           the
           destroying
           of
           true
           charity
           and
           love
           amongst
           the
           people
           of
           God
           ,
           the
           hinderance
           of
           their
           profiting
           under
           the
           several
           Ministries
           they
           live
           under
           ,
           and
           the
           creating
           continual
           confusions
           and
           distractions
           in
           the
           Common-wealth
           (
           the
           ordinary
           fruit
           of
           schism
           in
           the
           Church
           )
           as
           too
           lamentable
           experience
           (
           whereof
           we
           carry
           the
           sad
           marks
           to
           this
           day
           )
           hath
           taught
           us
           .
        
         
           1.
           
           That
           there
           may
           ,
           and
           ought
           to
           be
           ,
           a
           brotherly
           accommodation
           and
           concurrence
           in
           matters
           of
           practice
           ,
           which
           are
           undoubted
           duty
           ,
           (
           albeit
           Brethren
           be
           of
           different
           judgments
           anent
           the
           constitution
           of
           Meetings
           ,
           or
           capacity
           of
           persons
           that
           act
           in
           these
           duties
           )
           grave
           and
           learned
           men
           have
           put
           it
           out
           of
           question
           .
           It
           is
           well
           known
           ,
           that
           in
           the
           Assembly
           of
           Divines
           at
           
             London
             ,
          
           accommodation
           was
           mainly
           laboured
           for
           (
           and
           far
           carried
           on
           )
           between
           
             Presbyterians
          
           and
           
             Independents
             ,
          
           that
           they
           might
           concur
           in
           common
           Actings
           for
           regulating
           the
           Church
           ,
           with
           a
           reserve
           of
           liberty
           of
           their
           own
           several
           principles
           .
           The
           
             Independents
          
           thought
           the
           
             Presbyterians
          
           had
           no
           judicial
           Authority
           in
           these
           Meetings
           .
           The
           
             Presbyterians
             ,
          
           though
           accounting
           this
           an
           errour
           ,
           yet
           ,
           were
           willing
           ,
           in
           common
           unquestionable
           duties
           ,
           to
           concur
           with
           them
           .
           Also
           ,
           several
           of
           the
           most
           eminent
           
             Presbyterians
          
           in
           
             England
             ,
          
           as
           Mr.
           
             Viner
             ,
          
           Mr.
           
             Baxter
          
           and
           others
           ,
           accounting
           of
           un-preaching
           Elders
           ,
           as
           of
           an
           humane
           device
           (
           as
           now
           the
           Office
           of
           a
           Bishop
           is
           accounted
           of
           by
           many
           Brethren
           )
           Yet
           ,
           not
           being
           able
           to
           attain
           to
           the
           exercise
           of
           presbyterial
           Government
           ,
           without
           the
           intermixture
           of
           these
           ;
           yea
           ,
           of
           them
           ,
           double
           the
           number
           to
           preaching
           Presbyters
           in
           each
           Meeting
           ,
           (
           which
           gave
           them
           an
           overswaying
           power
           in
           the
           Government
           )
           notwithstanding
           they
           did
           concur
           with
           them
           in
           matters
           of
           unquestionable
           duty
           .
           Is
           it
           not
           also
           well
           known
           ,
           that
           amongst
           our selves
           in
           this
           Church
           ,
           Brethren
           did
           ordinarily
           concur
           in
           Synods
           and
           Presbyteries
           ,
           in
           doing
           their
           duties
           with
           these
           whom
           they
           
           charged
           with
           a
           sinfull
           schisme
           ?
           (
           a
           thing
           as
           much
           against
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           as
           that
           which
           is
           now
           pretended
           for
           withdrawing
           from
           the
           Meetings
           of
           Synods
           and
           Presbyteries
           .
           )
           And
           when
           Brethren
           ,
           thus
           charged
           ,
           did
           withdraw
           their
           concurrence
           in
           some
           duties
           ,
           by
           several
           passages
           in
           that
           Paper
           ,
           entituled
           ,
           
             A
             Representation
             of
             the
             rise
             ,
             progress
             and
             state
             of
             the
             Divisions
             in
             the
             Church
             of
          
           Scotland
           ,
           how
           that
           practice
           of
           theirs
           was
           constructed
           of
           ,
           pag.
           21.
           it
           is
           affirmed
           that
           they
           homologate
           with
           the
           tenet
           and
           practice
           of
           Separatisme
           ,
           denying
           the
           lawfulness
           of
           concurrence
           in
           a
           lawfull
           necessary
           duty
           ,
           because
           of
           the
           personal
           sin
           of
           fellow-actors
           in
           it
           .
           And
           ,
           pag.
           28.
           speaking
           of
           their
           refusing
           to
           own
           the
           Judicatories
           as
           lawfull
           ,
           because
           the
           men
           whom
           they
           judged
           to
           be
           in
           a
           course
           of
           defection
           (
           the
           Commissioners
           of
           the
           Church
           they
           meant
           )
           were
           admitted
           to
           sit
           there
           ,
           it
           is
           said
           by
           the
           Representer
           ,
           that
           it
           is
           a
           principle
           that
           draweth
           very
           deep
           :
           for
           ,
           (
           saith
           he
           )
           by
           parity
           of
           reason
           ,
           they
           must
           not
           joyn
           with
           any
           inferiour
           Judicatories
           where
           they
           are
           ,
           nor
           in
           any
           lawful
           act
           of
           Religion
           or
           Worship
           ,
           more
           then
           in
           an
           Assembly
           .
           May
           not
           much
           of
           this
           be
           applyed
           to
           the
           present
           Withdrawers
           from
           concurrence
           in
           necessary
           duties
           ?
           
             Mutato
             nomine
             ,
             de
             te
             ,
          
           &c.
           
           It
           will
           be
           said
           ,
           there
           is
           a
           great
           disparity
           between
           those
           Commissioners
           and
           the
           Bishops
           ,
           who
           are
           looked
           on
           as
           new
           unwarranted
           Officers
           in
           the
           Church
           ;
           and
           therefore
           ,
           albeit
           there
           may
           be
           now
           reason
           for
           withdrawing
           from
           Meetings
           where
           they
           are
           ,
           there
           was
           no
           reason
           for
           withdrawing
           from
           Assemblies
           where
           these
           Commissioners
           sate
           .
           But
           ,
           (
           not
           to
           divert
           to
           a
           dispute
           here
           ,
           whether
           the
           Office
           of
           a
           Bishop
           be
           new
           ,
           or
           unwarrantable
           ,
           or
           lesse
           warrantable
           then
           the
           Office
           of
           these
           Commissioners
           ,
           which
           wise
           men
           looked
           upon
           as
           very
           like
           episcopal
           )
           there
           is
           herein
           a
           parity
           ,
           that
           as
           these
           now
           are
           judged
           ,
           so
           the
           other
           were
           judged
           by
           the
           Excepters
           against
           them
           ,
           to
           be
           in
           a
           course
           of
           defection
           ,
           and
           unlawfully
           officiating
           as
           members
           of
           the
           Assembly
           .
           And
           yet
           ,
           were
           these
           Quarrellers
           reproved
           for
           withdrawing
           from
           the
           general
           Assembly
           upon
           that
           account
           ?
           Should
           not
           that
           reproof
           be
           taken
           home
           in
           the
           present
           case
           ,
           by
           such
           as
           withdraw
           from
           Meetings
           of
           the
           Chruch
           ?
           why
           should
           there
           be
           divers
           weights
           ,
           and
           divers
           measures
           used
           in
           such
           parity
           of
           cases
           ?
           Again
           ,
           it
           is
           asserted
           ,
           (
           pag.
           37.
           )
           to
           be
           a
           divisive
           principle
           ,
           that
           men
           will
           not
           
           concur
           in
           lawfull
           duties
           ,
           because
           these
           ,
           with
           whom
           they
           joyn
           ,
           will
           not
           come
           up
           to
           their
           judgment
           in
           all
           other
           things
           :
           
             Ibid.
          
           They
           challenge
           them
           for
           refusing
           to
           joyn
           in
           an
           uncontroverted
           duty
           ,
           because
           the
           direction
           to
           it
           flowed
           from
           the
           authority
           of
           an
           Assembly
           ,
           which
           they
           could
           not
           own
           :
           It
           were
           good
           that
           these
           former
           principles
           ,
           were
           better
           remembred
           and
           used
           in
           the
           present
           case
           .
           Further
           ,
           the
           Presbytery
           of
           
             Edinburgh
             ;
          
           in
           their
           Paper
           ,
           printed
           ,
           
             Octob.
          
           5.
           1659.
           
           (
           pag.
           8.
           of
           that
           Paper
           )
           speak
           very
           soberly
           ,
           disclaiming
           it
           as
           none
           of
           their
           principles
           ,
           that
           no
           difference
           of
           opinion
           can
           be
           suffered
           by
           them
           .
           We
           are
           (
           say
           they
           )
           clear
           ,
           that
           in
           many
           things
           of
           common
           practice
           in
           a
           Church
           ,
           there
           may
           be
           agreement
           by
           accommodation
           ,
           though
           differences
           of
           judgment
           remain
           ,
           
             &c.
             
          
           Again
           ,
           say
           they
           ,
           we
           readily
           yield
           ,
           that
           ,
           as
           we
           prophesie
           but
           in
           part
           ,
           men
           in
           a
           Church
           may
           compose
           debates
           by
           putting
           end
           to
           contentions
           ,
           though
           they
           be
           not
           all
           of
           one
           judgment
           ;
           and
           therein
           we
           judge
           the
           Apostle
           hath
           set
           the
           rule
           before
           us
           ,
           1
           
             Cor.
          
           11.
           16.
           
           A
           Golden
           Rule
           indeed
           ,
           the
           practice
           whereof
           ,
           in
           its
           just
           sense
           ,
           might
           bring
           us
           much
           sweet
           peace
           .
           But
           ,
           not
           to
           insist
           upon
           the
           judgments
           of
           learned
           men
           concerning
           the
           Case
           of
           submission
           to
           ,
           and
           acting
           in
           duties
           ,
           with
           Meetings
           ,
           anent
           the
           constitution
           whereof
           ,
           or
           members
           ,
           there
           may
           be
           some
           difference
           in
           judgment
           .
           If
           we
           will
           hearken
           to
           a
           man
           ,
           greatly
           learn'd
           ,
           and
           known
           to
           be
           no
           great
           friend
           to
           Bishops
           ,
           we
           shall
           hear
           him
           perswading
           to
           obedience
           and
           submission
           to
           them
           in
           things
           lawful
           .
           
             Theodore
             Beza
             ,
          
           being
           written
           to
           by
           some
           Ministers
           in
           
             England
             ,
          
           who
           excepted
           against
           some
           customes
           in
           the
           discipline
           and
           order
           of
           that
           Church
           (
           their
           controversie
           had
           not
           then
           risen
           so
           high
           ,
           as
           to
           strike
           at
           the
           Office
           of
           Bishops
           ;
           only
           some
           customs
           in
           discipline
           and
           ceremonies
           in
           external
           order
           ,
           were
           most
           stood
           upon
           .
           )
           He
           ,
           (
           
             Beza
          
           Epist
           .
           12.
           )
           though
           disliking
           these
           things
           ;
           yet
           ,
           plainly
           averres
           to
           them
           ,
           that
           these
           customes
           are
           not
           
             tanti
             momenti
             ,
          
           as
           that
           for
           these
           they
           should
           leave
           their
           ministry
           ,
           and
           by
           deserting
           their
           Churches
           ,
           give
           advantage
           to
           Sathan
           ,
           who
           seeketh
           occasion
           to
           bring
           in
           greater
           and
           more
           dangerous
           evils
           :
           He
           wisheth
           them
           there
           to
           bear
           what
           they
           cannot
           amend
           ,
           to
           beware
           of
           all
           bitterness
           :
           And
           albeit
           they
           could
           not
           come
           to
           be
           of
           the
           same
           mind
           with
           others
           ;
           yet
           ,
           with
           a
           godly
           concord
           to
           resist
           Sathan
           ,
           who
           seeketh
           all
           occasions
           of
           tumults
           
           and
           infinit
           calamities
           .
           And
           he
           doth
           most
           gravely
           obtest
           the
           Ministers
           (
           with
           tears
           ▪
           as
           he
           saith
           )
           
             Vt
             Regiae
             Majestati
             ▪
             &
             omnibus
             Praesulibus
             suis
             ex
             animo
             obsequantur
             .
             Beza
          
           pleads
           for
           hearty
           obedience
           (
           in
           things
           lawful
           )
           to
           the
           Bishops
           ,
           of
           whom
           he
           speaks
           honourably
           in
           that
           Epistle
           ;
           not
           hinting
           at
           the
           unlawfulness
           of
           their
           Office
           ,
           nor
           offering
           to
           perswade
           the
           Ministers
           to
           do
           against
           their
           Office
           :
           
             Sunt
             maximi
             viri
          
           (
           saith
           he
           )
           
             qui
             singulari
             Dei
             Opt.
             Max.
             beneficio
             papisticis
             Episcopis
             successere
             :
          
           He
           accounts
           not
           them
           nor
           their
           Office
           popish
           ;
           but
           saith
           ,
           
             By
             the
             singular
             mercy
             of
             the
             most
             great
             and
             good
             God
             ,
             they
             have
             succeeded
             the
             popish
             Bishops
             ,
             or
             come
             in
             their
             place
             ;
          
           even
           as
           ,
           by
           the
           singular
           mercy
           of
           God
           ,
           protestant
           Ministers
           have
           come
           in
           the
           place
           and
           room
           of
           popish
           Priests
           .
           And
           how
           well
           he
           esteems
           of
           the
           Office
           and
           of
           the
           men
           in
           the
           Office
           (
           likely
           abating
           somewhat
           of
           his
           peremptoriness
           in
           the
           heat
           of
           dispute
           with
           some
           ,
           as
           he
           had
           cause
           )
           may
           appear
           not
           only
           by
           what
           he
           saith
           in
           that
           Epistle
           ,
           
             exhorrescimus
             ut
             contra
             Regiae
             Majestatis
             &
             Episcoporum
             voluntatem
             ,
             ministri
             suô
             ministeriô
             fungantur
             :
          
           But
           from
           his
           Epistles
           to
           
             Grindal
          
           Bishop
           of
           
             London
             ,
          
           Epist
           .
           23.
           commending
           
             Grindals
          
           Christians
           patience
           and
           lenity
           ,
           addeth
           ,
           
             Majori
             posthac
             paena
             digni
             erunt
             qui
             authoritatem
             iuam
             aspernabuntur
             ,
          
           closing
           his
           Epistle
           ,
           
             Deus
             te
             custodiat
             ,
             &
             intan●●
             commisso
             tibi
             munere
             sancto
             suo
             spiritu
             regat
             ,
             &
             magis
             a●
             magis
             confirmet
             .
          
           And
           in
           his
           58.
           
           Epistle
           ,
           to
           that
           same
           Bishop
           ,
           he
           saith
           ,
           
             Dominus
             te
             istic
          
           (
           at
           
             London
          
           )
           
             speculatorem
             &
             judicem
             constituit
             .
          
           By
           all
           which
           ,
           it
           may
           appear
           ,
           that
           it
           would
           have
           been
           far
           from
           
           Beza's
           mind
           ,
           that
           Ministers
           should
           give
           no
           obedience
           to
           Bishops
           established
           by
           the
           Laws
           of
           a
           Kingdom
           ,
           not
           so
           much
           as
           in
           things
           undoubtedly
           lawful
           ,
           or
           that
           they
           should
           have
           refus'd
           concurrence
           with
           Bishops
           in
           ordering
           the
           Church
           ,
           and
           acting
           in
           unquestionable
           duties
           .
        
         
           2.
           
           The
           present
           Question
           ,
           concerns
           the
           case
           and
           carriage
           of
           two
           kind
           of
           Ministers
           .
           1.
           
           Some
           refuse
           to
           come
           to
           Synods
           (
           although
           called
           by
           the
           Kings
           Majesties
           command
           ,
           signified
           by
           His
           most
           honourable
           privie
           Council
           )
           where
           Bishops
           do
           preside
           .
           They
           refuse
           also
           to
           come
           to
           Presbyteries
           ,
           where
           a
           Moderator
           ,
           pretending
           no
           more
           power
           then
           any
           of
           themselves
           ,
           presides
           ,
           being
           nominated
           by
           the
           Bishop
           in
           the
           Synod
           ,
           to
           continue
           till
           the
           next
           Meeting
           of
           the
           Synod
           .
        
         
         
           Such
           Meetings
           they
           withdraw
           from
           ;
           albeit
           nothing
           be
           required
           of
           them
           ,
           but
           to
           act
           in
           unquestionable
           duties
           ,
           for
           regulating
           the
           Church
           ,
           and
           suppressing
           ,
           according
           to
           their
           power
           ,
           of
           sinful
           disorder
           ;
           albeit
           there
           be
           no
           imposition
           upon
           their
           judgments
           ,
           nor
           subscription
           required
           ,
           nor
           declaration
           that
           they
           allow
           any
           thing
           they
           count
           amiss
           in
           the
           constitution
           of
           these
           Meetings
           ,
           or
           any
           constituent
           members
           thereof
           ;
           Yea
           ,
           where
           it
           might
           be
           permitted
           to
           them
           (
           if
           they
           intreated
           for
           this
           )
           to
           case
           their
           conscience
           by
           signifying
           their
           scruples
           (
           which
           they
           cannot
           overcome
           )
           anent
           the
           constitution
           of
           these
           Meetings
           ,
           or
           anent
           the
           members
           thereof
           ,
           so
           be
           they
           would
           do
           this
           with
           that
           inoffensive
           modesty
           ,
           humility
           and
           respect
           to
           the
           supreme
           Authority
           and
           the
           Laws
           of
           the
           Land
           ,
           and
           to
           such
           Meetings
           and
           the
           members
           thereof
           ,
           that
           becomes
           ;
           and
           after
           that
           ,
           to
           concur
           in
           their
           undoubted
           duties
           :
           Concerning
           such
           Ministers
           ,
           the
           question
           is
           ,
           whether
           they
           may
           and
           ought
           to
           concur
           with
           such
           Meetings
           of
           their
           Brethren
           ,
           in
           carrying
           on
           their
           undoubted
           duties
           ?
           or
           ,
           if
           it
           be
           unlawful
           so
           to
           do
           ?
           2.
           
           The
           other
           rank
           of
           Ministers
           are
           these
           ,
           who
           ,
           falling
           within
           the
           compasse
           of
           the
           Act
           of
           Council
           at
           
             Glasgow
             ,
          
           and
           of
           Parliament
           whereto
           it
           relates
           ,
           do
           rather
           choose
           to
           part
           with
           their
           Ministry
           then
           to
           seek
           a
           Presentation
           from
           the
           Patron
           ,
           and
           Collation
           thereupon
           from
           the
           Bishop
           ;
           yea
           ,
           who
           will
           quit
           their
           Ministry
           ,
           rather
           then
           that
           they
           will
           once
           come
           in
           terms
           of
           treating
           with
           a
           Bishop
           ,
           to
           try
           upon
           what
           conditions
           they
           may
           have
           the
           liberty
           to
           enjoy
           their
           Ministry
           ,
           and
           to
           serve
           God
           therein
           for
           the
           good
           and
           salvation
           of
           his
           people
           .
        
         
           3.
           
           As
           to
           the
           case
           of
           Brethren
           of
           the
           former
           sort
           ,
           several
           things
           are
           worthy
           their
           most
           serious
           consideration
           ,
           which
           may
           render
           them
           somewhat
           jealous
           of
           the
           unwarrantableness
           of
           their
           present
           way
           .
           1.
           
           Hath
           not
           the
           Supreme
           Magistrate
           (
           even
           according
           to
           their
           own
           principles
           )
           an
           undoubted
           power
           to
           convocate
           Synods
           when
           he
           sees
           it
           needfull
           ?
           Never
           were
           there
           any
           protestant
           Ministers
           (
           no
           nor
           christian
           Ministers
           )
           before
           this
           time
           ,
           who
           ,
           being
           convocated
           to
           a
           Synod
           or
           Church-meeting
           by
           the
           Soveraign
           Christian
           Magistrate
           ,
           did
           refuse
           to
           come
           at
           his
           command
           ;
           Nor
           is
           there
           any
           rank
           or
           degree
           of
           Subjects
           that
           can
           ,
           without
           the
           stain
           of
           sinful
           disobedience
           ,
           refuse
           to
           meet
           
           upon
           His
           Majesties
           command
           ;
           and
           Ministers
           cannot
           plead
           exemption
           from
           the
           common
           duties
           of
           Subjects
           .
           2.
           
           Brethren
           would
           consider
           ,
           whether
           it
           would
           prove
           a
           sufficient
           ground
           to
           justifie
           their
           not-coming
           to
           the
           Synod
           upon
           His
           Majesties
           command
           by
           His
           Council
           ,
           because
           that
           command
           to
           come
           to
           the
           Synod
           ,
           is
           joyned
           with
           another
           ,
           commanding
           to
           concur
           dutifully
           ,
           
             &c.
             
          
           And
           the
           command
           to
           come
           ,
           is
           only
           in
           order
           to
           the
           required
           concurrence
           ,
           which
           they
           cannot
           give
           ,
           as
           they
           say
           .
           Is
           this
           rational
           ,
           that
           where
           two
           commands
           of
           the
           Magistrate
           are
           joyn'd
           ,
           the
           one
           undoubtedly
           lawful
           to
           be
           obeyed
           ,
           the
           other
           doubted
           of
           ,
           that
           Subjects
           should
           disobey
           the
           Magistrate
           in
           that
           which
           is
           clearly
           lawfull
           ,
           because
           they
           have
           a
           doubt
           or
           unclearness
           anent
           obeying
           him
           in
           the
           other
           command
           ?
           Doth
           it
           not
           become
           Subjects
           to
           go
           as
           far
           on
           in
           obedience
           to
           lawfull
           Authority
           ,
           as
           they
           see
           they
           may
           without
           sin
           against
           God
           ?
           Then
           it
           is
           time
           to
           stop
           when
           any
           thing
           is
           put
           to
           them
           by
           vertue
           of
           the
           Kings
           Command
           ,
           which
           they
           clearly
           see
           they
           cannot
           do
           without
           sin
           .
           Had
           they
           come
           to
           the
           place
           ,
           it
           would
           ,
           
             pro
             tanto
             ,
          
           have
           shewed
           their
           respect
           to
           Authority
           ,
           albeit
           they
           had
           humbly
           declared
           themselves
           bound
           up
           from
           acting
           by
           their
           doubts
           .
           And
           yet
           ,
           it
           may
           be
           ,
           they
           will
           in
           end
           find
           ,
           that
           they
           might
           lawfully
           have
           concurred
           in
           unquestionable
           duty
           ,
           that
           there
           was
           no
           ground
           to
           refuse
           this
           ;
           and
           that
           they
           might
           have
           sufficiently
           salved
           their
           Conscience
           by
           a
           humble
           signification
           of
           their
           scruple
           ,
           as
           was
           said
           ,
           and
           yet
           not
           refused
           to
           concur
           in
           undoubted
           duties
           ,
           for
           the
           personal
           fault
           (
           as
           they
           apprehend
           )
           of
           any
           member
           of
           the
           Assembly
           .
           3.
           
           What
           ground
           could
           they
           have
           for
           separation
           from
           the
           Synod
           ?
           Is
           it
           the
           want
           of
           liberty
           to
           choose
           a
           Moderator
           ?
           Or
           ,
           Is
           it
           that
           he
           that
           presides
           ,
           is
           a
           Bishop
           ,
           and
           claims
           more
           power
           then
           they
           can
           allow
           ,
           more
           then
           they
           think
           is
           due
           ,
           as
           of
           a
           negative
           voice
           ?
           Or
           ,
           Is
           it
           the
           want
           of
           unpreaching
           Elders
           in
           the
           Meeting
           ?
           As
           to
           the
           ,
           1.
           
           Are
           they
           able
           to
           shew
           that
           every
           ecclesiastical
           Meeting
           or
           Judicatory
           hath
           ,
           by
           a
           dvine
           scriptural
           Right
           ,
           a
           priviledge
           to
           choose
           their
           own
           Moderator
           ?
           Where
           is
           there
           any
           Precept
           for
           this
           ?
           or
           any
           example
           of
           such
           election
           in
           Scripture
           ?
           If
           all
           Meetings
           of
           ecclesiastical
           Judicatories
           have
           this
           priviledge
           ,
           then
           also
           their
           Sessions
           (
           where
           they
           take
           upon
           them
           to
           be
           constant
           Moderators
           )
           have
           
           this
           also
           ,
           which
           ,
           belike
           ,
           will
           not
           please
           them
           well
           ,
           that
           any
           of
           the
           Meeting
           but
           themselves
           should
           be
           chosen
           there
           to
           preside
           ;
           or
           ,
           can
           they
           say
           ,
           that
           every
           ecclesiastical
           Meeting
           or
           Judicatory
           ,
           hath
           this
           priviledge
           by
           a
           divine
           natural
           right
           ?
           If
           so
           ,
           no
           civill
           Society
           or
           Judicatory
           should
           want
           it
           ;
           but
           all
           claim
           power
           to
           choose
           their
           own
           Presidents
           ,
           which
           were
           evil
           doctrine
           under
           a
           Monarchy
           ,
           where
           power
           is
           in
           the
           Prince
           to
           elect
           and
           name
           Presidents
           for
           Council
           ,
           Session
           ,
           
             &c.
             
          
           Or
           ,
           are
           they
           able
           to
           demonstrate
           ,
           that
           it
           is
           not
           lawful
           for
           the
           Christian
           Magistrate
           ,
           upon
           whom
           the
           external
           ordering
           of
           all
           the
           Judicatories
           in
           his
           His
           Dominions
           depends
           ,
           to
           nominate
           out
           of
           a
           Meeting
           of
           Ministers
           ,
           conveen'd
           by
           him
           ,
           one
           grave
           and
           godly
           Minister
           of
           the
           number
           ,
           to
           order
           the
           actions
           of
           the
           Meeting
           ,
           and
           by
           his
           Authority
           to
           controll
           the
           unruly
           ?
           Can
           it
           be
           made
           evident
           ,
           that
           the
           ancient
           Christian
           Councils
           ,
           general
           or
           provincial
           ,
           (
           though
           they
           had
           ecclesiastick
           Presidents
           )
           did
           alwayes
           formerly
           choose
           their
           own
           President
           ?
           
             Presides
             ecclesiastici
             in
             vetustis
             Conciliis
             ,
             nonnunquam
             nominati
             ab
             Imperatore
             ,
          
           saith
           
             Zepperus
             ,
          
           Eccles
           .
           Pol.
           p.
           742
           ,
        
         
           As
           to
           the
           second
           ,
           The
           great
           exception
           is
           at
           the
           power
           of
           the
           Presidents
           of
           the
           Synods
           ,
           they
           being
           Bishops
           ,
           claim
           in
           undue
           power
           as
           if
           Authority
           solely
           resided
           in
           them
           ,
           at
           least
           they
           claim
           a
           negative
           voice
           .
        
         
           
             Ans
             .
          
           1.
           
           Were
           it
           so
           ,
           and
           were
           this
           a
           fault
           ;
           yet
           ,
           it
           were
           not
           their
           fault
           who
           concur
           :
           the
           personal
           fault
           of
           another
           cannot
           be
           any
           good
           ground
           for
           Brethrens
           withdrawing
           from
           their
           necessary
           duty
           ,
           especially
           it
           being
           considered
           what
           might
           be
           allowed
           them
           ,
           for
           easing
           the
           scruple
           of
           their
           Conscience
           ,
           as
           was
           above
           said
           .
           If
           I
           be
           only
           admitted
           to
           consult
           in
           regulating
           the
           affairs
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           in
           a
           Meeting
           where
           I
           think
           I
           should
           have
           equal
           authority
           with
           any
           that
           sits
           there
           ,
           Can
           it
           be
           sin
           in
           me
           to
           go
           so
           far
           in
           my
           duty
           ,
           as
           I
           am
           permitted
           to
           do
           ,
           to
           testifie
           against
           sin
           ,
           to
           give
           my
           best
           counsel
           for
           suppressing
           thereof
           ,
           and
           for
           advancement
           of
           holiness
           ?
           If
           I
           be
           abridged
           and
           restrain'd
           as
           to
           that
           authority
           ,
           which
           I
           think
           is
           due
           to
           me
           ,
           it
           is
           the
           sin
           (
           if
           there
           be
           any
           )
           of
           these
           who
           do
           restrain
           me
           and
           not
           mine
           ;
           shall
           I
           do
           no
           part
           of
           my
           duty
           ,
           because
           I
           cannot
           do
           all
           that
           I
           think
           I
           ought
           to
           do
           ,
           being
           ,
           as
           to
           some
           part
           of
           it
           ,
           restrain'd
           by
           another
           ?
           
           But
           Secondly
           ,
           Is
           it
           not
           granted
           by
           most
           judicious
           Divines
           ,
           that
           Presbyters
           (
           having
           a
           power
           in
           several
           cases
           to
           suspend
           the
           exercise
           of
           their
           own
           just
           authority
           ,
           when
           the
           suspension
           of
           it
           tenderh
           to
           a
           publick
           good
           )
           may
           for
           the
           peace
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           resolve
           to
           give
           to
           one
           person
           of
           their
           number
           a
           negative
           voice
           in
           Government
           ,
           so
           as
           to
           do
           nothing
           without
           him
           ?
           
             Baxt.
          
           Church
           gover
           .
           
             pag.
          
           18.
           
           And
           excellent
           Mr.
           
             Vines
          
           (
           when
           at
           the
           Isle
           of
           
             Wight
             ,
          
           the
           King
           could
           not
           be
           brought
           off
           that
           ,
           that
           in
           Meetings
           of
           Presbyters
           there
           should
           be
           one
           ,
           under
           the
           name
           of
           Bishop
           ,
           with
           a
           negative
           voice
           )
           did
           counsel
           both
           
             Presbyterians
          
           and
           
             Independents
          
           to
           accept
           of
           the
           concession
           ,
           as
           they
           would
           not
           have
           all
           the
           blood
           ,
           miseries
           and
           confusions
           that
           after
           might
           ensue
           ,
           laid
           at
           their
           door
           .
           See
           his
           considerations
           on
           the
           Kings
           Concessions
           .
           Whatever
           may
           be
           said
           of
           that
           
             negative
             voice
             ;
          
           the
           law
           of
           the
           land
           putting
           Bishops
           into
           a
           stated
           presidency
           ,
           and
           yet
           Presbyters
           being
           admitted
           to
           rule
           with
           Bishops
           ,
           judicious
           and
           sober
           men
           would
           not
           lay
           so
           great
           weight
           on
           it
           ,
           as
           to
           refuse
           their
           concurrence
           in
           common
           and
           uncontroverted
           duties
           upon
           that
           account
           .
           But
           yet
           ,
           one
           thing
           would
           be
           remembred
           ,
           that
           Brethren
           are
           at
           a
           very
           clear
           disadvantage
           in
           withdrawing
           from
           presbyterial
           Meetings
           ,
           where
           they
           know
           the
           Moderator
           doth
           not
           ,
           nor
           can
           claim
           more
           power
           then
           any
           of
           themselves
           .
           All
           the
           ground
           of
           their
           not
           concurring
           with
           these
           Meetings
           ,
           must
           be
           ,
           that
           they
           do
           not
           choose
           the
           Moderator
           in
           their
           particular
           Presbyteries
           :
           But
           he
           is
           nominate
           by
           the
           Bishop
           〈◊〉
           the
           Synod
           ;
           and
           yet
           ,
           in
           all
           reason
           ,
           the
           authority
           and
           consent
           of
           Bishop
           and
           Synod
           ,
           should
           conclude
           any
           particular
           Presbytery
           .
           Do
           not
           Brethren
           remember
           ,
           that
           in
           time
           of
           the
           Commission
           of
           the
           Kirks
           ruling
           ,
           there
           were
           restraints
           laid
           upon
           Presbyteries
           in
           matters
           far
           higher
           and
           weightier
           concernment
           then
           that
           ,
           and
           little
           dinn
           about
           the
           same
           ?
        
         
           But
           thirdly
           ,
           if
           the
           Brethren
           refuse
           to
           concur
           with
           the
           Synods
           for
           want
           of
           unpreaching
           Elders
           there
           ,
           whose
           Office
           they
           account
           of
           divine
           institution
           ,
           they
           would
           remember
           ,
           that
           great
           Divines
           of
           the
           presbyterian
           way
           ,
           
             Blondel
             ,
             Vines
             ,
             Baxter
             ,
          
           and
           many
           others
           look
           upon
           these
           as
           an
           humane
           device
           (
           and
           their
           reasons
           moving
           them
           ,
           are
           weighty
           .
           )
           But
           let
           them
           be
           as
           they
           are
           imagin'd
           by
           the
           Brethren
           ;
           yet
           ,
           can
           the
           removal
           of
           these
           ,
           without
           
           out
           their
           fault
           ,
           render
           it
           unlawful
           for
           them
           to
           concur
           in
           a
           Synod
           of
           Ministers
           where
           these
           are
           not
           ?
           Can
           the
           absence
           ,
           or
           removal
           of
           these
           (
           supposed
           )
           Church-officers
           ,
           render
           a
           Synod
           of
           Ministers
           ,
           with
           their
           President
           ,
           unlawful
           and
           not
           to
           be
           joyned
           with
           ?
           because
           other
           men
           are
           debarred
           from
           their
           duty
           (
           they
           are
           supposed
           to
           have
           right
           to
           )
           shall
           we
           run
           from
           our
           duty
           ,
           especially
           this
           being
           done
           without
           our
           fault
           ?
        
         
           A
           fourth
           thing
           the
           Brethren
           would
           consider
           anent
           their
           refusal
           to
           concur
           in
           Synods
           and
           Presbyteries
           ,
           before
           it
           was
           hinted
           at
           ,
           and
           it
           is
           this
           .
           They
           have
           ,
           for
           many
           years
           ,
           concurred
           in
           doing
           common
           duties
           in
           Presbyteries
           and
           Synods
           ,
           with
           these
           ,
           whom
           they
           looked
           upon
           as
           fixing
           a
           sinful
           schisme
           (
           as
           the
           other
           ,
           they
           charged
           them
           with
           apostasic
           from
           former
           principles
           )
           yet
           ,
           with
           these
           they
           concurred
           in
           common
           duties
           ,
           so
           far
           as
           they
           could
           get
           their
           concurrence
           ,
           and
           complained
           of
           their
           separating
           way
           when
           they
           refused
           .
           And
           were
           they
           not
           bound
           against
           schism
           and
           the
           makers
           of
           it
           ,
           by
           the
           Covenant
           and
           Word
           of
           God
           too
           ,
           as
           against
           any
           thing
           else
           that
           is
           now
           made
           the
           pretence
           of
           separation
           from
           the
           Judicatories
           ?
        
         
           Fifthly
           ,
           Brethren
           would
           consider
           ,
           if
           in
           this
           their
           present
           practice
           ,
           they
           do
           not
           fall
           short
           of
           the
           moderation
           and
           wisdom
           of
           their
           worthy
           Ancestors
           ,
           with
           whom
           they
           pretend
           to
           be
           of
           of
           the
           same
           judgment
           ,
           who
           choosed
           rather
           to
           concur
           with
           such
           Meetings
           as
           these
           (
           though
           not
           satisfied
           with
           their
           constitution
           )
           in
           governing
           the
           Church
           ,
           and
           doing
           unquestionable
           duties
           ,
           then
           altogether
           to
           desert
           them
           ,
           or
           make
           a
           schime
           and
           ruin
           the
           peace
           of
           the
           Church
           .
           Some
           say
           to
           this
           ,
           they
           were
           but
           men
           ,
           and
           erred
           in
           so
           doing
           ;
           but
           they
           are
           not
           angels
           that
           say
           so
           ,
           nor
           without
           danger
           of
           erring
           ;
           they
           were
           men
           of
           conscience
           and
           learning
           ,
           and
           more
           unlike
           to
           have
           erred
           in
           this
           their
           way
           ,
           then
           these
           who
           say
           they
           erred
           and
           prove
           it
           not
           .
           Some
           alledge
           a
           disparity
           between
           the
           case
           of
           Ministers
           then
           and
           now
           ,
           upon
           the
           account
           of
           clearer
           engagements
           against
           Episcopacy
           by
           Ministers
           now
           ,
           then
           by
           them
           who
           lived
           in
           these
           times
           ,
           and
           upon
           the
           account
           of
           the
           standing
           of
           Synods
           at
           the
           time
           when
           Bishops
           were
           brought
           in
           upon
           them
           ,
           in
           our
           Ancestors
           dayes
           ;
           whereas
           now
           they
           were
           not
           standing
           ,
           when
           Bishops
           are
           brought
           in
           but
           raised
           ,
           and
           sit
           now
           as
           holding
           and
           depending
           upon
           Episcopacy
           .
           
           It
           shall
           not
           be
           denyed
           there
           is
           some
           disparity
           and
           difference
           between
           the
           case
           of
           Ministers
           now
           and
           then
           ,
           
             simile
             non
             est
             idem
             ;
          
           but
           any
           difference
           that
           is
           observed
           ,
           is
           impertinent
           and
           not
           material
           to
           this
           purpose
           ,
           to
           make
           the
           concurrence
           in
           these
           Synods
           now
           ,
           to
           be
           unlawfull
           ,
           which
           was
           to
           our
           Ancestors
           lawfull
           ▪
           For
           ,
           as
           to
           the
           former
           ground
           of
           disparity
           ,
           it
           is
           certain
           ,
           Ministers
           then
           accounted
           themselves
           as
           really
           bound
           against
           the
           allowance
           of
           episcopal
           Government
           ,
           both
           by
           the
           Covenant
           and
           by
           the
           Word
           of
           God
           ,
           as
           any
           do
           judge
           themselves
           engaged
           against
           it
           by
           late
           Bonds
           :
           whether
           they
           did
           mistake
           in
           this
           or
           nor
           ,
           we
           say
           nothing
           ;
           but
           ,
           that
           they
           did
           so
           judge
           ,
           it
           is
           out
           of
           question
           ;
           and
           yet
           ,
           they
           thought
           their
           practice
           ,
           in
           concurring
           in
           all
           lawfull
           matters
           in
           Synods
           and
           Presbyteries
           ,
           consistent
           enough
           with
           their
           judgment
           ,
           touching
           Episcopacy
           and
           their
           Bonds
           against
           it
           .
           And
           as
           to
           the
           latter
           of
           these
           differences
           ,
           it
           can
           be
           nothing
           material
           ,
           as
           the
           rendring
           concurrence
           with
           Synods
           and
           Presbyteries
           now
           ,
           unlawfull
           ,
           which
           then
           might
           be
           lawfull
           :
           For
           ,
           the
           Meetings
           now
           and
           then
           are
           of
           the
           same
           constitution
           ,
           nothing
           altered
           .
           Nor
           is
           there
           any
           thing
           in
           these
           Meetings
           to
           affright
           from
           concurrence
           in
           them
           now
           ,
           more
           then
           at
           that
           time
           ;
           nor
           any
           more
           holding
           of
           ,
           or
           dependency
           on
           Bishops
           now
           ,
           when
           the
           King's
           Majesty
           hath
           taken
           off
           the
           restraint
           which
           for
           a
           time
           He
           put
           on
           ,
           then
           if
           He
           had
           not
           at
           all
           restrained
           them
           ,
           neither
           any
           more
           then
           was
           of
           these
           Synods
           and
           Presbyteries
           ,
           which
           of
           old
           did
           sit
           when
           Bishops
           were
           brought
           in
           upon
           them
           .
           Neither
           is
           it
           likely
           ,
           that
           Ministers
           ,
           who
           now
           refuse
           concurrence
           ,
           would
           have
           given
           it
           ,
           had
           their
           Judicatories
           not
           been
           restrained
           from
           meeting
           .
           This
           seems
           a
           very
           bare
           pretext
           .
        
         
           Sixthly
           ,
           Brethren
           would
           consider
           well
           ,
           if
           in
           refusing
           to
           concur
           with
           their
           Brethren
           in
           undoubted
           duties
           (
           where
           they
           may
           salve
           their
           consciences
           by
           humble
           ,
           modest
           expressing
           what
           they
           judge
           amiss
           )
           they
           do
           not
           run
           themselves
           either
           upon
           the
           rock
           of
           ecclesiastical
           Independency
           ,
           in
           their
           several
           Congregations
           ,
           in
           administration
           of
           Discipline
           ,
           (
           if
           they
           mind
           to
           have
           any
           Discipline
           at
           all
           )
           or
           ,
           to
           combine
           in
           clandestine
           Presbyteries
           of
           their
           own
           ,
           which
           they
           may
           consider
           how
           either
           it
           shall
           be
           taken
           by
           the
           christian
           Magistrate
           ,
           or
           how
           it
           shall
           rellish
           of
           that
           spirit
           of
           unity
           and
           love
           that
           should
           be
           amongst
           Christ's
           Ministers
           ;
           and
           
           whereaway
           in
           end
           this
           principle
           of
           division
           from
           their
           Brethren
           ,
           in
           unquestioned
           duties
           ,
           may
           lead
           them
           ;
           whether
           to
           divide
           also
           from
           their
           Brethren
           in
           the
           worship
           of
           God
           ,
           and
           to
           teach
           people
           so
           to
           do
           ,
           (
           somewhat
           of
           this
           is
           already
           seen
           )
           and
           to
           endeavour
           the
           fixing
           of
           a
           perpetual
           schisme
           ,
           the
           seeds
           whereof
           are
           sown
           with
           too
           much
           animosity
           .
        
         
           4.
           
           Now
           cometh
           to
           be
           considered
           ,
           the
           case
           of
           such
           Brethren
           of
           the
           Ministry
           as
           choose
           rather
           to
           quit
           their
           Ministry
           then
           once
           come
           in
           termes
           with
           these
           ,
           upon
           whom
           the
           Law
           hath
           settled
           a
           power
           ,
           to
           order
           them
           in
           the
           exercise
           of
           the
           same
           .
           It
           would
           be
           most
           seriously
           thought
           of
           ,
           whether
           it
           be
           right
           ,
           that
           any
           Ministers
           of
           Christ
           should
           set
           their
           Ministry
           ,
           the
           service
           of
           God
           ,
           the
           benefit
           which
           the
           Lord's
           people
           might
           have
           by
           their
           good
           gifts
           ,
           (
           to
           say
           nothing
           of
           the
           interest
           of
           their
           families
           )
           at
           so
           low
           a
           rate
           ,
           as
           not
           to
           have
           used
           all
           lawfull
           means
           (
           trying
           at
           least
           upon
           what
           termes
           they
           might
           enjoy
           their
           Ministry
           )
           before
           they
           had
           fallen
           upon
           that
           extremity
           to
           desert
           it
           .
           If
           any
           man
           will
           say
           ,
           it
           is
           no
           lawfull
           mean
           to
           speak
           with
           a
           Bishop
           in
           that
           matter
           ,
           though
           it
           might
           tend
           to
           his
           continuance
           in
           the
           Ministry
           (
           and
           perhaps
           might
           be
           ,
           in
           some
           measure
           ,
           disappointed
           in
           his
           fears
           )
           he
           had
           need
           to
           examine
           well
           ,
           whether
           conceit
           or
           conscience
           ruleth
           most
           there
           ;
           and
           to
           think
           of
           it
           ,
           how
           he
           can
           justify
           the
           deserting
           of
           his
           Ministry
           ,
           without
           the
           utmost
           essay
           to
           hold
           it
           .
           It
           must
           be
           confessed
           ,
           that
           it
           is
           a
           new
           and
           rare
           Case
           ,
           that
           men
           will
           rather
           embrace
           suffering
           then
           once
           speak
           one
           word
           to
           persons
           intrusted
           with
           power
           ,
           by
           the
           Law
           of
           the
           Land
           ,
           (
           whatever
           they
           be
           )
           to
           try
           at
           them
           ,
           upon
           what
           termes
           they
           might
           be
           permitted
           to
           preach
           the
           Gospel
           .
           The
           comfort
           (
           it
           is
           to
           be
           feared
           )
           of
           suffering
           ,
           upon
           such
           an
           account
           ,
           will
           not
           run
           very
           clear
           .
           But
           ,
           it
           will
           be
           said
           ,
           the
           thing
           that
           is
           stuck
           at
           ,
           is
           
             the
             canonical
             Oath
             ,
          
           enjoyned
           by
           Law
           ,
           and
           which
           the
           Bishops
           will
           require
           :
           this
           ,
           some
           say
           ,
           they
           cannot
           take
           ,
           conceiving
           it
           contradictory
           to
           the
           Covenant
           and
           to
           the
           Word
           of
           God.
           But
           ,
           1.
           
           Such
           as
           have
           not
           so
           much
           as
           come
           in
           termes
           with
           the
           Bishops
           ,
           and
           of
           whom
           that
           Oath
           ,
           or
           Promise
           ,
           hath
           not
           been
           particularly
           required
           ,
           seem
           to
           leap
           too
           soon
           to
           suffering
           ,
           before
           it
           come
           to
           them
           :
           and
           before
           they
           had
           tryed
           ,
           if
           possibly
           there
           might
           have
           been
           relevant
           grounds
           for
           dispensing
           with
           the
           Law
           towards
           them
           .
           
           Had
           they
           been
           personally
           put
           to
           take
           that
           Oath
           ;
           and
           if
           so
           ,
           there
           could
           be
           no
           dispensing
           with
           them
           ,
           nor
           they
           able
           to
           digest
           that
           Oath
           ,
           then
           they
           had
           more
           clearness
           in
           their
           undergoing
           suffering
           .
           2.
           
           As
           to
           contradiction
           to
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           if
           
             Timorcus
          
           (
           pag.
           37.
           )
           may
           be
           believed
           (
           and
           he
           seems
           tender
           in
           the
           matter
           of
           others
           )
           there
           is
           no
           contradiction
           between
           the
           canonical
           Oath
           and
           the
           Covenant
           ;
           he
           maintains
           ,
           that
           the
           Ministers
           ,
           who
           of
           old
           took
           the
           canonical
           Oath
           ,
           did
           not
           swear
           the
           contradictory
           thereto
           when
           they
           took
           the
           Covenant
           :
           whence
           it
           will
           follow
           necessarily
           ,
           that
           they
           who
           have
           taken
           the
           Covenant
           do
           not
           contradict
           that
           Oath
           ,
           if
           they
           should
           take
           the
           Oath
           of
           canonical
           Obedience
           :
           and
           indeed
           it
           will
           be
           hard
           to
           find
           out
           a
           contradiction
           ,
           either
           in
           termes
           ,
           or
           by
           necessary
           consequence
           .
           But
           ,
           if
           the
           obligation
           of
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           as
           to
           that
           second
           article
           ,
           shall
           be
           found
           to
           cease
           ,
           (
           whereof
           afterward
           )
           the
           lawfulness
           of
           the
           other
           Oath
           will
           be
           clearer
           .
           3.
           
           It
           would
           be
           considered
           ,
           that
           the
           Reverened
           Persons
           ,
           intrusted
           by
           Law
           to
           call
           for
           that
           Promise
           from
           Ministers
           ,
           do
           not
           search
           into
           mens
           apprehensions
           concerning
           the
           grounds
           of
           their
           power
           ;
           all
           they
           seek
           ,
           is
           obedience
           to
           them
           in
           things
           lawfull
           and
           honest
           ,
           as
           being
           presently
           in
           power
           ,
           being
           ,
           by
           Law
           ,
           ordinary
           Overseers
           of
           the
           Ministry
           in
           their
           duties
           ,
           and
           chief
           Ordainers
           of
           them
           who
           enter
           into
           the
           Ministry
           .
           But
           ,
           it
           is
           said
           ,
           where
           obedience
           is
           promised
           ,
           there
           is
           an
           acknowledgment
           of
           the
           lawfulness
           of
           their
           Power
           ,
           Office
           and
           Authority
           ;
           because
           ,
           obedience
           formally
           cannot
           be
           but
           to
           a
           lawfull
           Authority
           :
           therefore
           ,
           he
           that
           in
           his
           conscience
           thinketh
           a
           Bishops
           Office
           unlawfull
           ,
           cannot
           so
           much
           as
           promise
           obedience
           to
           him
           in
           things
           lawfull
           and
           honest
           ,
           lest
           ,
           by
           his
           taking
           such
           an
           Oath
           ,
           he
           make
           himself
           guilty
           of
           establishing
           that
           which
           he
           accounts
           unlawfull
           .
           But
           ,
           1.
           it
           is
           not
           obedience
           under
           a
           reduplication
           ,
           and
           as
           formally
           obedience
           ,
           they
           call
           for
           ;
           if
           it
           be
           obedience
           materially
           ,
           Ministers
           doing
           their
           duties
           in
           things
           really
           lawfull
           ,
           they
           are
           satisfied
           .
           2.
           
           Suppose
           it
           were
           so
           ,
           that
           obedience
           ,
           as
           formally
           obedience
           ,
           were
           required
           ;
           yet
           ,
           it
           were
           hard
           to
           say
           ,
           it
           could
           not
           be
           promised
           ,
           or
           that
           it
           could
           not
           be
           acknowledged
           ,
           that
           they
           have
           any
           lawfull
           Authority
           :
           for
           ,
           waving
           the
           consideration
           of
           any
           ecclesiastical
           Office
           ,
           wherein
           they
           may
           pretend
           to
           be
           superiour
           to
           other
           Ministers
           ;
           and
           giving
           (
           but
           not
           granting
           )
           
           that
           as
           Church-ministers
           ,
           their
           Office
           and
           superiority
           were
           unlawful
           ;
           yet
           ,
           looking
           upon
           them
           as
           the
           Kings
           Majesties
           Commissioners
           in
           Causes
           ecclesiastical
           for
           regulating
           the
           external
           order
           of
           the
           Church
           in
           their
           several
           bounds
           ,
           and
           impowred
           by
           the
           law
           of
           the
           land
           so
           to
           do
           (
           they
           being
           also
           Presbyters
           ,
           and
           having
           power
           with
           others
           in
           Ordination
           and
           Jurisdiction
           ecclesiastical
           )
           it
           will
           be
           hard
           to
           say
           ,
           that
           their
           power
           is
           not
           lawfull
           ,
           and
           that
           obedience
           is
           not
           due
           to
           them
           .
           The
           strictest
           
             Presbyterians
             ,
          
           will
           not
           find
           ground
           to
           disown
           their
           Office
           in
           that
           consideration
           .
        
         
           There
           are
           three
           things
           mainly
           ,
           which
           bear
           off
           Brethren
           of
           both
           these
           sorts
           and
           ranks
           ,
           from
           submitting
           to
           ,
           and
           concurring
           in
           their
           duties
           under
           the
           present
           Government
           ,
           1.
           
           Their
           fears
           of
           future
           evils
           .
           2.
           
           Their
           present
           thoughts
           of
           the
           unlawfulness
           of
           the
           Office
           of
           a
           Bishop
           over
           Presbyters
           in
           the
           Church
           .
           3.
           
           Their
           former
           Engagements
           by
           the
           bond
           of
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           which
           they
           conceive
           still
           binds
           them
           .
           As
           to
           the
           first
           ,
           their
           fears
           ;
           there
           can
           be
           no
           sufficient
           ground
           in
           these
           to
           bear
           them
           off
           from
           that
           ,
           which
           ,
           for
           the
           present
           ,
           is
           found
           to
           be
           their
           duty
           :
           If
           evils
           feared
           ,
           should
           come
           ,
           and
           Brethren
           ,
           in
           conscience
           toward
           God
           ,
           not
           able
           to
           comply
           with
           them
           ,
           then
           suffering
           might
           be
           the
           more
           comfortable
           ;
           but
           the
           gracious
           providence
           of
           God
           ,
           watching
           over
           his
           Church
           ,
           the
           goodness
           and
           wisdom
           of
           our
           Soveraign
           ,
           and
           of
           Rulers
           under
           him
           (
           considering
           the
           temper
           of
           this
           Nation
           )
           may
           make
           all
           these
           fears
           vain
           ,
           and
           disappoint
           them
           ;
           and
           it
           is
           not
           for
           us
           to
           be
           too
           thoughtful
           ,
           or
           to
           torment
           our selves
           with
           fears
           ,
           before
           the
           time
           .
           In
           the
           mean
           time
           ,
           it
           would
           be
           well
           considered
           by
           Brethren
           ,
           that
           bear
           off
           from
           concurrence
           ,
           if
           they
           do
           well
           in
           withdrawing
           their
           counsels
           from
           their
           Brethren
           ,
           and
           in
           doing
           that
           which
           tendeth
           to
           the
           loss
           of
           their
           enterest
           in
           ,
           and
           respect
           with
           persons
           in
           present
           Authority
           ;
           in
           regard
           whereof
           ,
           they
           might
           be
           exceedingly
           instrumental
           to
           prevent
           any
           thing
           that
           is
           feared
           .
           2.
           
           As
           to
           their
           thoughts
           of
           the
           unlawfulness
           of
           the
           Office
           of
           a
           Bishop
           ,
           something
           hath
           been
           said
           of
           the
           lawfulness
           of
           their
           concurrence
           in
           unquestion'd
           duties
           (
           even
           upon
           that
           supposition
           )
           something
           also
           hath
           been
           said
           of
           the
           acknowledgment
           of
           the
           lawfulness
           of
           their
           Office
           ,
           looking
           upon
           them
           as
           Presbyters
           ,
           commissionated
           by
           the
           King
           ,
           for
           external
           ordering
           of
           Church-affairs
           in
           their
           severall
           
           bounds
           ;
           and
           of
           the
           lawfulness
           of
           obedience
           to
           them
           ,
           as
           in
           that
           capacity
           .
           It
           is
           not
           the
           purpose
           of
           this
           Paper
           ,
           to
           dispute
           much
           for
           their
           Church-capacity
           or
           Rule
           over
           Presbyters
           ,
           or
           anent
           the
           Office
           of
           Bishops
           ,
           as
           an
           order
           of
           Church-ministers
           .
           Only
           as
           to
           this
           ,
           three
           things
           would
           be
           seriously
           pondred
           by
           Brethren
           .
           1.
           
           Where
           they
           are
           able
           to
           find
           in
           all
           Christs
           Testament
           ,
           any
           precept
           for
           meer
           Presbyters
           ,
           preaching
           and
           unpreaching
           ,
           in
           a
           full
           equality
           of
           power
           ,
           to
           rule
           the
           Church
           of
           Christ
           ;
           to
           give
           Ordination
           to
           Ministers
           ,
           to
           judge
           in
           all
           controversies
           of
           Religion
           ministerially
           ,
           and
           do
           all
           acts
           of
           Government
           in
           the
           Church
           ,
           or
           where
           they
           can
           find
           any
           example
           of
           such
           a
           Presbytery
           ,
           doing
           these
           acts
           without
           some
           superiour
           Officer
           acting
           with
           them
           ,
           or
           directing
           them
           in
           their
           actings
           ,
           or
           where
           there
           is
           any
           inhibition
           (
           either
           expresse
           ,
           or
           by
           necessary
           consequence
           )
           that
           no
           Gospel-minister
           should
           in
           any
           case
           have
           superiority
           in
           power
           over
           others
           in
           Church-affairs
           .
           2.
           
           Let
           it
           be
           considered
           ,
           if
           (
           descending
           from
           the
           Scripture
           times
           )
           it
           can
           be
           found
           in
           any
           Writer
           ,
           who
           lived
           in
           the
           first
           two
           or
           three
           ages
           after
           Christ
           ,
           or
           in
           any
           History
           or
           Record
           relating
           to
           these
           times
           (
           not
           to
           speak
           of
           after-ages
           )
           it
           can
           be
           found
           ,
           that
           there
           was
           any
           such
           Church-officer
           as
           an
           unpreaching
           Elder
           ,
           joyned
           in
           full
           equality
           of
           power
           with
           Preaching-elders
           in
           acts
           of
           Ordination
           of
           Ministers
           (
           from
           which
           ,
           if
           they
           be
           necessary
           parts
           and
           members
           of
           the
           Presbytery
           ,
           they
           cannot
           be
           excluded
           )
           and
           in
           all
           other
           acts
           of
           Jurisdiction
           ;
           or
           ,
           if
           there
           be
           any
           mention
           of
           the
           names
           ,
           or
           power
           of
           any
           such
           persons
           .
           Or
           ,
           if
           it
           can
           be
           from
           these
           Writers
           found
           ,
           that
           there
           was
           ever
           any
           Ordination
           of
           Ministers
           ,
           or
           exercise
           of
           Jurisdiction
           ecclesiastical
           by
           Ministers
           ,
           
             i.
             e.
          
           by
           meer
           Preaching-presbyters
           ,
           without
           some
           one
           ,
           stated
           President
           over
           them
           ,
           under
           the
           name
           of
           Bishop
           ,
           who
           was
           to
           go
           before
           them
           in
           these
           actions
           ;
           and
           without
           whom
           ,
           nothing
           was
           to
           be
           done
           in
           these
           .
           Shall
           not
           the
           practice
           of
           that
           primitive
           Church
           ,
           which
           followed
           the
           Apostles
           ,
           as
           it
           were
           ,
           at
           the
           heels
           ,
           be
           most
           able
           to
           shew
           us
           which
           way
           they
           went
           ,
           and
           what
           was
           their
           practice
           ?
           It
           is
           too
           horrid
           a
           thing
           to
           imagine
           ,
           and
           that
           which
           a
           modest
           Christian
           can
           hardly
           down
           with
           ,
           that
           immediately
           ,
           after
           the
           Apostles
           times
           ,
           the
           whole
           Church
           of
           Ch●●●t
           ,
           should
           agree
           to
           so
           substantial
           an
           alteration
           of
           the
           
           Government
           of
           the
           Church
           (
           suppos'd
           to
           be
           )
           instituted
           by
           Christ
           and
           his
           Apostles
           ,
           as
           to
           exclude
           one
           s●●t
           of
           Officers
           of
           his
           appointment
           ,
           and
           to
           take
           in
           another
           not
           appointed
           by
           him
           :
           And
           that
           it
           should
           be
           done
           so
           early
           ,
           
             Statim
             post
             tempora
             Apostolorum
             ,
             aut
             eorum
             etiam
             tempore
             ,
          
           saith
           
             Molinaeus
             ,
          
           Epist
           .
           3.
           
             ad
             Episcop
             .
             Winton
             .
          
           Bishops
           were
           set
           up
           in
           the
           time
           ,
           when
           some
           of
           them
           (
           especially
           
             John
          
           )
           were
           living
           ,
           
             viventibus
             ,
             videntibus
             ,
             &
             non
             contradicentibus
             ;
          
           as
           is
           manifest
           by
           History
           in
           the
           successors
           of
           
             Mark
          
           at
           
             Alexandria
          
           and
           others
           .
           Can
           it
           be
           imagin'd
           ▪
           that
           such
           a
           thing
           as
           the
           Office
           of
           a
           Bishop
           ,
           should
           have
           been
           set
           up
           so
           early
           in
           the
           times
           of
           the
           Apostles
           ,
           and
           they
           not
           contradicting
           it
           ,
           had
           it
           been
           contrary
           to
           Christs
           mind
           ?
           How
           unlikely
           is
           it
           ,
           that
           in
           those
           times
           ,
           when
           the
           piety
           and
           zeal
           of
           Christians
           was
           so
           great
           ,
           and
           knowledge
           too
           ,
           there
           should
           have
           been
           no
           opposition
           to
           the
           Office
           of
           Bishops
           ,
           had
           it
           been
           judged
           a
           wronging
           of
           Christs
           Ordinance
           ?
           How
           unlikely
           is
           it
           ,
           that
           in
           times
           of
           such
           fiery
           persecution
           ,
           Christs
           Ministers
           should
           be
           carryed
           with
           ambition
           ,
           to
           seek
           the
           superiority
           over
           others
           in
           an
           Office
           against
           his
           mind
           ?
           Or
           ,
           that
           people
           would
           have
           yielded
           to
           the
           ambitious
           courses
           of
           Pastors
           ?
           How
           can
           it
           be
           thought
           ,
           that
           the
           whole
           Church
           in
           these
           times
           (
           without
           any
           known
           exception
           )
           should
           have
           taken
           up
           that
           way
           of
           Government
           by
           Bishops
           ,
           without
           any
           co-action
           to
           it
           by
           civil
           Power
           ;
           without
           any
           advice
           or
           direction
           from
           General
           Assemblies
           and
           Councils
           ,
           which
           then
           were
           not
           in
           being
           ;
           If
           this
           way
           had
           not
           been
           universally
           judged
           lawfull
           ;
           yea
           ,
           it
           may
           be
           suppos'd
           descending
           from
           a
           higher
           warrant
           then
           voluntary
           agreements
           of
           men
           ?
           We
           do
           never
           hear
           of
           any
           opposition
           to
           the
           Office
           and
           dignity
           of
           a
           Bishop
           over
           Presbyters
           ,
           till
           it
           was
           made
           by
           one
           
             Aerius
          
           in
           the
           fourth
           age
           ,
           (
           whom
           
             Epiphanius
          
           calleth
           a
           frantick
           man
           )
           he
           being
           enraged
           ,
           that
           
             Eustathius
             ,
          
           whom
           he
           undervalued
           in
           comparison
           of
           himself
           ,
           was
           preferred
           to
           him
           ,
           and
           got
           the
           Bishoprick
           ,
           which
           he
           ambitiously
           aimed
           at
           ,
           began
           to
           talk
           against
           the
           dignity
           and
           order
           of
           Bishops
           ,
           and
           is
           therefore
           counted
           by
           
             Epiphanius
          
           and
           
             Augustine
          
           (
           no
           children
           in
           knowledge
           )
           an
           heretick
           ,
           (
           in
           whatever
           sense
           they
           mean
           )
           and
           also
           he
           is
           justly
           censured
           and
           condemned
           by
           
             Blondel
             ,
             Gers
             .
             Bucer
             ,
             Molinaeus
          
           to
           
             Andrews
             ,
          
           as
           a
           disturber
           of
           a
           lawful
           order
           in
           the
           
           Church
           ,
           albeit
           they
           cannot
           come
           up
           to
           think
           ,
           that
           Episcopacy
           is
           a
           divine
           Institution
           or
           apostolicall
           .
        
         
           Now
           ,
           let
           Brethren
           in
           modesty
           consider
           ,
           how
           unlike
           it
           is
           ,
           that
           the
           Office
           of
           a
           Bishop
           should
           be
           contrary
           to
           the
           institution
           of
           Christ
           in
           his
           Word
           ,
           that
           began
           so
           early
           ,
           even
           in
           the
           Apostles
           times
           without
           their
           contradiction
           ,
           that
           was
           so
           universally
           submitted
           to
           by
           the
           primitive
           Christians
           in
           their
           most
           firy
           tryals
           ,
           that
           hath
           continued
           in
           the
           christian
           Churches
           ,
           (
           not
           only
           these
           infected
           with
           the
           Roman
           apostasie
           ,
           but
           the
           eastern
           Church
           that
           disclaimeth
           the
           Popes
           supremacy
           )
           and
           that
           for
           1500.
           years
           after
           Christ
           ,
           without
           any
           contradiction
           ,
           save
           of
           one
           man
           ,
           who
           never
           had
           a
           marrow
           ;
           no
           not
           
             Jerome
          
           (
           whatever
           be
           said
           concerning
           him
           by
           some
           )
           that
           is
           still
           owned
           by
           most
           of
           the
           reformed
           Churches
           ,
           who
           have
           rejected
           the
           Pope
           ,
           not
           only
           by
           these
           of
           the
           Lutheran
           way
           ,
           under
           the
           name
           of
           Superintendents
           (
           
             quid
             est
             Episcopus
             nisi
             Superintendens
             ?
          
           saith
           
             Jerom
             ,
             epist
             ,
             ad
             Euagrum
          
           )
           but
           also
           by
           some
           of
           the
           Calvinean
           way
           ,
           as
           may
           be
           seen
           by
           
             Zepperus
             ,
          
           Eccles
           .
           Pol.
           And
           formally
           ,
           that
           is
           even
           owned
           as
           lawfull
           (
           being
           well-moderated
           )
           by
           the
           stoutest
           Disputers
           against
           the
           divine
           right
           of
           it
           .
           Albeit
           men
           ,
           in
           their
           passionat
           strains
           to
           popular
           auditories
           ,
           sometimes
           cry
           out
           upon
           the
           Office
           of
           a
           Bishop
           as
           an
           anti-christian
           and
           popish
           domination
           ;
           yet
           ,
           in
           the
           protestant
           Episcopacy
           that
           is
           owned
           ,
           there
           is
           no
           more
           of
           the
           Pope
           then
           there
           is
           of
           a
           Mass-priest
           in
           a
           Minister
           ;
           or
           of
           a
           Conclave
           of
           Cardinal-presbyters
           in
           a
           Commission
           of
           the
           Church
           or
           a
           Presbytery
           .
           The
           Episcopacy
           that
           is
           now
           ,
           is
           the
           very
           primitive
           Episcopacy
           ,
           which
           
             Timorcus
          
           descriving
           (
           
             Ep.
          
           10.
           
           
             Sect.
          
           25.
           )
           affirmeth
           to
           be
           ,
           that
           nothing
           in
           Ordination
           or
           Jurisdiction
           be
           done
           by
           Brethren
           under
           the
           Bishop
           ,
           without
           him
           ,
           and
           he
           alone
           doing
           nothing
           without
           them
           in
           these
           ,
           and
           avowes
           the
           same
           not
           to
           be
           contrary
           to
           the
           Covenant
           .
           The
           Episcopacy
           that
           now
           is
           ▪
           is
           that
           same
           Office
           for
           substance
           ,
           which
           
             Ignatius
          
           had
           at
           
             Antioch
             ,
             Polycarp
          
           at
           
             Smyrna
             ,
             ●orn●lius
          
           in
           
             Rome
             ,
             Iraeneus
          
           at
           
             Lyons
          
           in
           
             France
             ,
             Cyprian
          
           in
           
             Carthage
             ,
          
           and
           many
           others
           had
           in
           other
           places
           before
           the
           
             Niven
             Council
             ;
          
           and
           which
           
             Chrysostome
             ,
             Augustine
          
           and
           many
           others
           had
           after
           :
           and
           it
           should
           be
           our
           desire
           to
           God
           ,
           that
           our
           Bishops
           (
           as
           they
           hold
           the
           same
           Office
           and
           Place
           ,
           for
           substance
           ,
           these
           did
           )
           so
           they
           may
           imitate
           
           their
           vertues
           and
           graces
           ;
           and
           be
           notable
           Instruments
           for
           advancing
           God's
           glory
           in
           their
           stations
           .
           But
           ,
           3.
           it
           would
           be
           considered
           ,
           that
           the
           holding
           of
           Episcopacy
           ,
           as
           a
           Government
           unlawfull
           and
           contrary
           to
           the
           Word
           of
           God
           ,
           will
           cast
           too
           great
           an
           imputation
           upon
           this
           Reformed
           Church
           of
           
             Scotland
             :
          
           For
           ,
           (
           laying
           aside
           the
           times
           of
           war
           and
           confusion
           since
           the
           year
           ,
           1638.
           wherein
           ,
           in
           the
           midst
           of
           the
           noise
           of
           Armes
           and
           Armies
           ,
           there
           hath
           been
           small
           opportunity
           for
           a
           serious
           free
           disquisition
           anent
           these
           matters
           )
           it
           will
           be
           found
           ,
           that
           before
           that
           year
           ,
           Episcopacy
           had
           been
           for
           a
           far
           longer
           time
           owned
           by
           this
           Reformed
           Church
           then
           Presbytery
           had
           been
           :
           For
           ,
           untill
           the
           year
           ,
           1580.
           
           Episcopacy
           was
           not
           abolished
           in
           
             Scotland
             ;
          
           the
           Office
           of
           Bishops
           was
           really
           used
           in
           
             Scotland
          
           till
           the
           year
           ,
           1580.
           in
           which
           the
           General
           Assembly
           at
           
             Dundee
          
           declared
           it
           unlawfull
           :
           and
           yet
           ,
           they
           could
           not
           get
           their
           Presbyteries
           set
           up
           by
           the
           Authority
           of
           the
           Land
           ,
           till
           twelve
           years
           after
           in
           the
           year
           ,
           1592.
           
           But
           ,
           evident
           it
           is
           ,
           that
           at
           the
           time
           of
           making
           that
           Act
           at
           
             Dundee
             ,
          
           Bishops
           were
           in
           the
           Land
           (
           for
           so
           the
           Act
           it self
           ,
           in
           the
           body
           of
           it
           ,
           imports
           )
           
             Forasmuch
          
           (
           say
           they
           )
           
             as
             the
             Office
             of
             Bishop
             is
             now
             used
             in
             this
             Realm
             ,
          
           &c.
           
           And
           is
           clear
           also
           from
           their
           Order
           they
           give
           to
           process
           the
           several
           Bishops
           ,
           if
           they
           lay
           not
           down
           their
           Office.
           Now
           ,
           from
           the
           time
           of
           general
           Reformation
           ,
           from
           Popery
           to
           the
           time
           of
           that
           Act
           of
           
             Dundee
             ,
          
           there
           were
           full
           twenty
           years
           ;
           (
           the
           Reformation
           being
           in
           the
           year
           ,
           1560.
           )
           during
           all
           which
           time
           ,
           the
           Church
           of
           
             Scotland
          
           was
           governed
           by
           some
           ,
           
             singulares
             personae
             ,
          
           particular
           persons
           in
           several
           circuits
           in
           the
           Land
           ;
           some
           under
           the
           name
           of
           Superintendents
           ,
           Commissioners
           or
           Visitors
           of
           Countries
           ;
           some
           under
           the
           name
           of
           Bishops
           ;
           where
           popish
           Bishops
           embraced
           the
           Reformation
           ,
           they
           had
           their
           power
           continued
           ,
           and
           Commission
           given
           to
           them
           for
           ordaining
           Ministers
           and
           using
           Jurisdiction
           :
           and
           when
           the
           civil
           Magistrate
           presented
           any
           Orthodox
           to
           vacant
           Bishopricks
           ,
           they
           were
           accepted
           of
           by
           the
           Assembly
           ,
           
             Edinburgh
             ,
             Aug.
          
           6.
           1573.
           where
           the
           Regent
           ,
           promising
           to
           the
           Assembly
           that
           qualified
           persons
           shall
           be
           presented
           to
           vacant
           Bishopricks
           ,
           the
           Assembly
           concludes
           ,
           that
           the
           jurisdiction
           of
           Bishops
           in
           their
           ecclesiastical
           Function
           ,
           shall
           not
           exceed
           the
           jurisdiction
           of
           Superintendents
           .
           And
           the
           Superintendent
           of
           
             Lothian
             ,
          
           is
           called
           
           by
           
             John
             Knox
             ,
          
           at
           his
           installing
           ,
           
             anno
             ,
          
           1560.
           the
           
             Pastor
          
           of
           the
           Churches
           of
           
             Lothian
             ;
          
           and
           these
           ,
           who
           represent
           that
           Countrey
           ,
           promise
           to
           give
           obedience
           to
           him
           as
           becomes
           the
           sheep
           to
           their
           Pastor
           .
           It
           is
           manifest
           then
           ,
           that
           for
           twenty
           years
           after
           the
           Reformation
           ,
           Bishops
           ,
           whether
           under
           that
           name
           ,
           or
           other
           names
           ,
           continued
           in
           
             Scotland
             :
          
           and
           it
           is
           remarkable
           ,
           that
           our
           Reformers
           were
           wiser
           men
           then
           to
           put
           a
           
             Presbytery
          
           in
           their
           Creed
           :
           For
           ,
           in
           the
           Confession
           registrated
           in
           Parliament
           ,
           
             anno
             ,
          
           1567.
           (
           which
           before
           had
           been
           presented
           )
           though
           they
           had
           zeal
           enough
           against
           all
           things
           that
           favoured
           of
           popery
           ;
           yet
           ,
           in
           their
           Confession
           ,
           there
           is
           nothing
           against
           Bishops
           ,
           nor
           for
           a
           Presbytery
           .
           And
           ,
           Act
           24.
           the
           former
           civil
           priviledges
           of
           the
           spiritual
           State
           of
           the
           Realm
           are
           ratified
           ;
           accordingly
           ,
           Bishops
           did
           sit
           in
           that
           Parliament
           :
           also
           ,
           in
           the
           same
           Confession
           ,
           they
           say
           ,
           not
           one
           Policy
           or
           Order
           can
           be
           for
           all
           Churches
           and
           all
           times
           .
           But
           ,
           after
           the
           year
           ,
           1580.
           wherein
           the
           Office
           of
           Bishops
           was
           abrogated
           by
           the
           Assembly
           ,
           albeit
           some
           provincial
           Synods
           were
           set
           up
           in
           the
           place
           of
           the
           outed
           Bishops
           and
           Superintendents
           in
           these
           Provinces
           ;
           yet
           ,
           was
           there
           no
           Presbytery
           before
           the
           year
           ,
           1586.
           nor
           any
           of
           these
           Judicatories
           legally
           established
           before
           ,
           1592.
           and
           within
           eighteen
           years
           after
           that
           ,
           or
           twenty
           ,
           Bishops
           are
           set
           up
           again
           by
           the
           Act
           of
           Assembly
           ,
           1610.
           and
           ratified
           in
           Parliament
           ,
           1612.
           and
           continued
           so
           the
           space
           of
           twenty
           eight
           years
           ,
           till
           the
           Assembly
           at
           
             Glasgow
             ,
          
           1638.
           
           So
           it
           may
           be
           easily
           seen
           ,
           the
           Office
           of
           a
           Bishop
           is
           no
           great
           stranger
           to
           this
           Church
           ,
           since
           the
           Reformation
           of
           Religion
           ;
           but
           hath
           been
           longer
           owned
           then
           Presbytery
           in
           times
           of
           peace
           :
           and
           ,
           modesty
           would
           require
           ,
           we
           should
           not
           be
           ready
           to
           condemn
           this
           Reformed
           Church
           ,
           as
           having
           in
           those
           times
           owned
           a
           Government
           unlawfull
           and
           against
           the
           Word
           of
           God
           ,
           especially
           when
           the
           different
           fruits
           of
           Government
           ,
           by
           
             Presbytery
          
           and
           
             Episcopacy
             ,
          
           have
           been
           ,
           to
           our
           cost
           ,
           sadly
           experienced
           .
        
         
           But
           now
           ,
           we
           come
           to
           the
           third
           difficulty
           anent
           the
           Oath
           of
           the
           Covenant
           :
           This
           is
           popularly
           pleaded
           by
           such
           as
           do
           not
           penetrate
           into
           the
           controversie
           anent
           the
           Office
           of
           a
           Bishop
           ,
           in
           point
           of
           lawfulness
           or
           unlawfulness
           .
           Indeed
           ,
           the
           Bond
           of
           a
           lawfull
           Covenant
           is
           so
           sacred
           a
           tye
           ,
           that
           ,
           without
           contempt
           of
           
           the
           holy
           majesty
           of
           God
           ,
           it
           cannot
           be
           violated
           ,
           nor
           without
           great
           sin
           ;
           no
           creature
           can
           absolve
           us
           from
           it
           ,
           nor
           dispense
           with
           it
           ;
           nor
           are
           we
           to
           break
           it
           for
           any
           temporal
           advantage
           ,
           terror
           or
           trouble
           .
           Yet
           ,
           (
           supposing
           the
           Covenant
           to
           be
           lawfull
           ,
           which
           is
           not
           proven
           )
           it
           is
           sure
           ,
           1.
           
           That
           a
           lawfull
           Oath
           may
           cease
           to
           bind
           us
           ,
           so
           that
           though
           we
           do
           not
           that
           which
           was
           under
           Oath
           promised
           to
           be
           done
           ;
           yet
           ,
           there
           is
           no
           perjury
           :
           
             Semper
             perjurus
             est
             ,
             qui
             non
             intendit
             quod
             promittit
             ;
             non
             semper
             perjurus
             est
             ,
             qui
             non
             perficit
             q●od
             promisit
             sub
             Juramento
             ,
          
           say
           the
           Casuists
           .
           2.
           
           It
           is
           certain
           that
           a
           lawfull
           ,
           although
           in
           the
           interpretation
           of
           it
           ,
           it
           be
           
             stricti
             juris
             ,
          
           and
           is
           to
           be
           understood
           according
           to
           the
           intention
           of
           the
           givers
           of
           it
           ,
           and
           as
           the
           plain
           words
           bear
           ;
           yet
           ,
           it
           bindeth
           not
           in
           the
           sense
           which
           any
           ignorant
           mind
           or
           over-scrupulous
           conscience
           may
           put
           upon
           it
           ,
           or
           that
           some
           persons
           ,
           upon
           partial
           designes
           ,
           may
           put
           upon
           it
           ,
           
             Videndum
             est
          
           (
           say
           Casuists
           )
           
             ne
             stricta
             interpretatio
             abeat
             in
             nimis
             strictam
             &
             rigidam
             .
          
           3.
           
           It
           is
           certain
           ,
           an
           unlawfull
           Oath
           did
           never
           ,
           nor
           doth
           bind
           any
           conscience
           to
           do
           according
           to
           it
           ,
           though
           it
           bindeth
           to
           repentance
           for
           making
           of
           it
           ,
           and
           adhering
           to
           it
           .
        
         
           In
           considering
           and
           applying
           these
           things
           :
           as
           to
           the
           first
           ,
           It
           would
           be
           remembred
           ,
           that
           an
           Oath
           ,
           howsoever
           in
           it self
           lawfull
           ;
           yet
           the
           case
           may
           be
           such
           ,
           that
           by
           something
           following
           after
           it
           ,
           the
           Oath
           may
           cease
           to
           bind
           us
           to
           the
           performing
           of
           what
           was
           sworn
           ;
           yea
           ,
           the
           case
           may
           be
           ,
           that
           an
           Oath
           ,
           lawfully
           made
           ,
           yet
           cannot
           be
           lawfully
           kept
           ;
           it
           were
           sin
           to
           keep
           it
           in
           some
           cases
           :
           then
           ,
           and
           in
           that
           case
           ,
           it
           is
           not
           we
           that
           loose
           our selves
           ,
           but
           God
           looseth
           us
           ,
           when
           an
           Oath
           ,
           lawfull
           at
           the
           making
           ,
           cannot
           be
           kept
           without
           sin
           against
           him
           .
           Amongst
           other
           cases
           ,
           wherein
           the
           ceasing
           of
           an
           obligation
           of
           a
           lawfull
           Oath
           may
           be
           seen
           ,
           these
           three
           Cases
           are
           worthy
           to
           be
           considered
           ;
           and
           seriously
           is
           it
           to
           be
           pondred
           whether
           they
           be
           applicable
           to
           the
           present
           Question
           anent
           a
           discharge
           from
           the
           bond
           of
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           as
           to
           the
           second
           Article
           of
           it
           ,
           which
           is
           now
           under
           question
           .
           1.
           
           If
           the
           matter
           of
           an
           Oath
           be
           such
           ,
           as
           a
           Superiour
           hath
           it
           in
           his
           power
           to
           determine
           of
           it
           ,
           the
           Oath
           of
           the
           inferiour
           or
           subject
           person
           ceaseth
           to
           oblige
           him
           ,
           and
           is
           loosed
           when
           the
           Superiour
           consents
           not
           to
           what
           he
           hath
           sworn
           :
           this
           is
           both
           agreeable
           to
           reason
           ;
           because
           no
           deed
           of
           a
           person
           inferiour
           or
           
           subject
           to
           others
           ,
           should
           prejudge
           the
           right
           of
           the
           Superiour
           ▪
           nor
           take
           from
           him
           any
           power
           allowed
           to
           him
           by
           God
           in
           any
           thing
           :
           And
           also
           ,
           all
           sound
           Divines
           do
           acknowledge
           this
           upon
           the
           common
           equity
           of
           that
           law
           ,
           
             Numb
             .
          
           30.
           4.
           
           If
           it
           be
           said
           ,
           that
           the
           matter
           of
           the
           second
           Article
           of
           the
           Cov●nant
           ,
           being
           not
           of
           indifferent
           nature
           ,
           but
           determined
           by
           the
           Word
           of
           God
           ,
           and
           so
           not
           under
           the
           power
           of
           a
           Superiour
           on
           earth
           to
           determine
           in
           it
           ;
           it
           would
           be
           remembred
           ,
           that
           in
           all
           this
           part
           of
           the
           discourse
           ,
           where
           the
           ceasing
           of
           the
           obligation
           of
           the
           Covenant
           is
           spoken
           of
           (
           as
           to
           the
           second
           Article
           )
           they
           are
           dealt
           with
           ,
           who
           plead
           the
           obligation
           of
           the
           Covenant
           only
           ,
           and
           upon
           that
           account
           do
           scruple
           .
           As
           for
           the
           consideration
           of
           the
           lawfulness
           or
           unlawfulness
           of
           Episcopacy
           in
           it self
           ,
           a
           little
           of
           it
           was
           spoken
           to
           before
           ;
           and
           the
           tryall
           of
           that
           ,
           is
           matter
           for
           longer
           disquisisition
           :
           and
           men
           would
           not
           be
           too
           peremptory
           in
           condemning
           Episcopacy
           ,
           if
           they
           seriously
           consider
           ,
           that
           the
           ablest
           Pens
           that
           ever
           engaged
           in
           this
           Controversie
           ,
           have
           found
           it
           a
           task
           too
           hard
           for
           them
           to
           demonstrate
           Episcopacy
           to
           be
           in
           it self
           unlawfull
           :
           and
           if
           we
           ask
           the
           judgments
           of
           the
           most
           eminent
           reformed
           Divines
           ,
           we
           shall
           find
           very
           few
           or
           none
           learned
           ,
           sober
           and
           faithfull
           in
           the
           point
           ,
           who
           do
           judge
           it
           to
           be
           forbidden
           by
           God.
           But
           in
           this
           point
           ,
           when
           these
           who
           alledge
           the
           bond
           of
           the
           Covenant
           only
           for
           their
           scruple
           ,
           there
           is
           a
           necessity
           to
           abstract
           from
           that
           question
           ,
           whether
           Presbytery
           be
           necessary
           by
           divine
           law
           ,
           and
           Episcopacy
           in
           it self
           unlawfull
           ?
           In
           this
           part
           of
           the
           discourse
           (
           supposing
           the
           lawfulness
           or
           indifferency
           of
           it
           )
           we
           only
           enquire
           ,
           whether
           meerly
           by
           vertue
           of
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           we
           are
           bound
           to
           stand
           against
           it
           ?
           If
           by
           Gods
           Word
           it
           be
           found
           to
           be
           unlawfull
           (
           which
           cannot
           be
           proved
           )
           then
           whether
           there
           had
           been
           a
           Covenant
           made
           against
           it
           ,
           or
           not
           ,
           it
           cannot
           be
           allowed
           ?
           If
           it
           be
           said
           again
           ,
           that
           the
           consent
           of
           our
           Superiour
           hath
           been
           obtained
           to
           that
           ,
           to
           which
           we
           have
           determin'd
           our selves
           by
           our
           Oath
           in
           the
           second
           Article
           ;
           and
           therefore
           our
           Oath
           ,
           before
           God
           ,
           is
           confirmed
           ,
           and
           he
           hath
           not
           power
           to
           revoke
           his
           consent
           ,
           according
           to
           that
           law
           ,
           
             Numb
             .
          
           30.
           14.
           
           It
           would
           be
           be
           considered
           ,
           whether
           it
           was
           the
           Lords
           mind
           in
           that
           ●aw
           ,
           that
           if
           children
           or
           wives
           ,
           having
           vowed
           ,
           should
           by
           some
           means
           drive
           their
           parents
           or
           husbands
           out
           of
           the
           house
           ,
           deprived
           them
           
           of
           all
           their
           worldly
           comforts
           ;
           and
           then
           ,
           when
           they
           had
           put
           them
           thus
           undurifully
           under
           sad
           tentations
           ,
           bargain
           with
           them
           either
           to
           ratifie
           their
           vows
           ,
           or
           never
           to
           enjoy
           these
           comforts
           they
           had
           deprived
           them
           of
           ;
           whether
           it
           was
           the
           Lords
           mind
           ,
           that
           consent
           ,
           so
           obtain'd
           ,
           should
           be
           an
           irrevocable
           confirmation
           of
           their
           vows
           ,
           who
           had
           carryed
           themselves
           so
           undutifully
           ?
           There
           is
           no
           evidence
           for
           that
           .
           And
           the
           application
           is
           easie
           ,
           since
           it
           is
           known
           that
           the
           Covenant
           was
           contrived
           and
           carryed
           on
           ,
           as
           if
           the
           design
           had
           been
           laid
           to
           extirpate
           Episcopacy
           whether
           the
           King
           would
           consent
           or
           not
           ,
           or
           whatever
           course
           should
           be
           taken
           to
           force
           his
           consent
           ,
           
             vi
             &
             armis
             ,
          
           or
           by
           suspending
           Him
           from
           the
           exercise
           of
           His
           royall
           Power
           ;
           an
           unparallel'd
           way
           of
           usage
           from
           subjects
           to
           their
           SOVERAIGN
           .
           Again
           it
           would
           be
           considered
           ,
           whether
           this
           be
           ,
           
             De
             jure
             naturali
             ,
          
           that
           a
           consent
           of
           a
           Superiour
           once
           given
           to
           the
           vow
           of
           an
           inferiour
           ,
           he
           hath
           no
           power
           to
           revoke
           his
           consent
           upon
           reasonable
           causes
           ,
           and
           to
           make
           void
           the
           vow
           ,
           albeit
           ,
           if
           he
           do
           it
           rashly
           and
           unreasonably
           ,
           he
           sinneth
           .
           Great
           Schollers
           are
           of
           the
           mind
           ,
           he
           may
           revoke
           his
           consent
           :
           
             Lessius
             ,
          
           Tractat.
           
             de
             Voto
             ,
             dubio
          
           13.
           
           It
           is
           thought
           by
           him
           and
           others
           ,
           that
           the
           precept
           
             eà●enus
          
           is
           judicial
           ,
           as
           it
           maketh
           an
           irrevocable
           confirmation
           of
           the
           vow
           once
           consented
           to
           .
           If
           it
           be
           further
           said
           ,
           if
           the
           Superiour
           ,
           under
           Oath
           ,
           give
           his
           consent
           to
           the
           inferiours
           Oath
           ;
           or
           ,
           if
           He
           himself
           swear
           the
           same
           thing
           ,
           then
           there
           is
           no
           power
           left
           of
           revoking
           his
           consent
           ,
           or
           doing
           or
           putting
           his
           inferiours
           to
           do
           contra●y
           to
           the
           Oath
           :
           This
           is
           granted
           ,
           unlesse
           upon
           some
           other
           ground
           there
           be
           a
           clear
           loosing
           of
           the
           Superiours
           Oath
           ,
           and
           a
           ceasing
           of
           the
           obligation
           of
           it
           .
           Leaving
           these
           things
           to
           be
           applyed
           ,
           let
           us
           look
           upon
           the
           second
           Case
           ,
           wherein
           the
           obligation
           and
           binding-power
           of
           an
           Oath
           ceaseth
           ,
           and
           the
           Oath
           is
           loos'd
           ;
           it
           is
           this
           ,
           When
           the
           matter
           concerning
           which
           the
           Oath
           is
           ,
           continueth
           not
           in
           the
           same
           state
           it
           was
           in
           at
           the
           making
           of
           the
           Oath
           ,
           when
           something
           in
           providence
           before
           the
           accomplishment
           of
           the
           Oath
           occurreth
           ,
           that
           maketh
           the
           performance
           of
           the
           Oath
           ,
           either
           sinfull
           ,
           or
           importing
           some
           turpitude
           ,
           and
           something
           against
           moral
           honesty
           ;
           or
           when
           the
           case
           comes
           to
           be
           that
           ,
           that
           the
           plain
           end
           and
           expectation
           of
           the
           Oath
           ,
           upon
           which
           it
           was
           founded
           ,
           appeareth
           frustrate
           :
           according
           to
           the
           language
           
           of
           Divines
           ,
           
             Res
             non
             permanet
             in
             eôdem
             statu
             ,
             ideò
             cessat
             Juramenti
             obligatio
             :
          
           For
           example
           ,
           if
           a
           man
           swear
           ,
           that
           at
           such
           a
           certain
           time
           ,
           he
           shall
           deliver
           to
           such
           a
           man
           his
           sword
           ,
           if
           in
           the
           mean
           time
           that
           man
           turn
           mad
           ,
           and
           ,
           in
           probability
           ,
           might
           kill
           himself
           or
           others
           with
           the
           sword
           ,
           had
           he
           it
           in
           his
           hand
           ,
           there
           lyeth
           no
           obligation
           upon
           the
           swearer
           to
           deliver
           it
           to
           him
           ;
           Nay
           ,
           it
           were
           a
           sin
           ,
           and
           against
           charity
           ,
           to
           perform
           what
           he
           had
           promised
           .
           Again
           ,
           if
           a
           man
           swear
           to
           marry
           such
           a
           woman
           at
           such
           a
           time
           ,
           if
           before
           that
           time
           he
           is
           made
           certain
           she
           is
           with
           child
           to
           his
           own
           brother
           ,
           it
           were
           a
           grievous
           sin
           of
           incest
           to
           to
           marry
           her
           (
           under
           pretence
           of
           keeping
           his
           promise
           ;
           )
           Or
           ,
           if
           she
           should
           ,
           before
           the
           marriage
           day
           ,
           be
           found
           with
           child
           to
           another
           man
           (
           not
           so
           related
           to
           him
           )
           yet
           ,
           to
           marry
           her
           ,
           as
           it
           could
           not
           but
           have
           something
           against
           moral
           common
           honesty
           in
           it
           ;
           so
           the
           plain
           end
           and
           expectation
           of
           his
           Oath
           ,
           on
           which
           it
           was
           founded
           ,
           being
           frustrate
           by
           the
           womans
           whoredome
           ,
           (
           
             viz.
          
           the
           having
           of
           a
           loyal
           honest
           and
           comfortable
           yoke-fellow
           )
           albeit
           he
           had
           made
           twenty
           Oaths
           to
           her
           ,
           they
           bind
           him
           not
           ;
           God
           hath
           loos'd
           the
           man
           ,
           
             Res
             non
             permanet
             in
             eodem
             statu
             .
          
           Now
           ,
           as
           to
           the
           present
           Case
           of
           the
           Covenanters
           ,
           let
           it
           be
           considered
           ,
           whether
           the
           matter
           abideth
           in
           that
           same
           state
           ,
           
             i.
             e.
          
           whether
           there
           do
           not
           something
           now
           occur
           ,
           that
           putteth
           us
           in
           that
           condition
           ,
           that
           without
           sin
           we
           cannot
           perform
           what
           we
           did
           promise
           ,
           in
           that
           second
           Article
           of
           the
           Covenant
           .
           It
           will
           be
           said
           ,
           What
           is
           the
           sin
           ?
           For
           answer
           ,
           It
           must
           be
           still
           suppos'd
           (
           as
           before
           we
           admonished
           )
           that
           in
           this
           part
           of
           the
           discourse
           concerning
           these
           who
           plead
           the
           bond
           of
           the
           Covenant
           meerly
           ,
           that
           the
           matter
           of
           the
           second
           Article
           of
           the
           Covenant
           (
           about
           which
           the
           debate
           is
           )
           is
           in
           it self
           indifferent
           ;
           and
           that
           Episcopacy
           in
           it self
           ,
           or
           by
           any
           law
           of
           God
           ,
           is
           not
           unlawfull
           ,
           or
           prohibited
           .
           If
           it
           were
           this
           way
           unlawfull
           there
           needed
           little
           question
           be
           made
           about
           the
           bond
           of
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           (
           for
           ,
           what
           is
           unlawfull
           ,
           must
           never
           be
           allowed
           ,
           be
           it
           sworn
           against
           or
           not
           )
           but
           ,
           supposing
           the
           indifferency
           and
           lawfulness
           of
           Episcopacy
           in
           it self
           ,
           I
           say
           the
           Covenant
           cannot
           now
           oblige
           against
           it
           ,
           there
           being
           so
           notable
           an
           alteration
           of
           the
           case
           and
           state
           of
           matters
           ,
           that
           whoever
           now
           do
           think
           themselves
           bound
           to
           stand
           to
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           as
           to
           that
           second
           Article
           (
           for
           there
           are
           other
           matters
           in
           
           that
           Covenant
           ,
           from
           which
           we
           can
           never
           be
           disobliged
           or
           loosed
           ,
           they
           being
           necessary
           by
           divine
           and
           moral
           Law
           )
           do
           think
           themselves
           bound
           to
           a
           perpetual
           disobedience
           to
           the
           Magistrate
           ,
           in
           a
           matter
           wherein
           he
           hath
           power
           to
           command
           them
           ;
           and
           this
           is
           a
           perpetual
           sin
           .
           
             Perkins
             ,
          
           of
           Oaths
           ,
           saith
           well
           ,
           
             No
             Oath
             can
             bind
             against
             the
             wholsom
             Laws
             of
             the
             Common-wealth
             :
             because
             every
             soul
             is
             subject
             to
             superior
             powers
             ,
          
           Rom.
           13.
           
           Neither
           is
           it
           material
           whether
           the
           Laws
           be
           made
           before
           or
           after
           the
           Oath
           ;
           both
           wayes
           the
           matter
           of
           the
           Oath
           becomes
           impossible
           ,
           
             de
             jure
             ,
          
           as
           Casuists
           speak
           :
           And
           now
           we
           are
           to
           think
           ,
           the
           matter
           remaineth
           not
           in
           the
           same
           state
           ,
           when
           the
           doing
           of
           what
           we
           did
           swear
           ,
           imports
           sin
           .
        
         
           I
           know
           
             Timor●us
          
           (
           pag.
           19.
           )
           ple●deth
           ,
           that
           even
           upon
           supposition
           ,
           that
           it
           is
           in
           the
           power
           of
           the
           Magistrate
           to
           set
           up
           the
           episcopal
           form
           of
           Government
           ,
           that
           yet
           we
           cannot
           own
           it
           ,
           but
           must
           suffer
           under
           it
           :
           because
           (
           faith
           he
           )
           upon
           that
           supposition
           ,
           that
           the
           matter
           of
           the
           Oath
           ,
           was
           
             res
             indifferens
             &
             libera
          
           in
           it self
           ;
           yet
           ,
           it
           is
           no
           more
           free
           to
           us
           ,
           
             Juramentum
          
           (
           saith
           he
           )
           
             tell
             it
             libertatem
             :
          
           But
           ,
           by
           his
           favour
           ,
           albeit
           in
           indifferent
           things
           of
           private
           concernment
           ,
           wherein
           private
           persons
           bind
           themselves
           ,
           and
           wherewith
           the
           Magistrate
           medleth
           not
           ,
           an
           Oath
           may
           take
           away
           our
           liberty
           ;
           yet
           ,
           a
           subjects
           Oath
           cannot
           take
           away
           the
           power
           of
           the
           Magistrate
           ,
           in
           commanding
           things
           which
           he
           seeth
           for
           publick
           good
           ,
           and
           the
           matters
           not
           being
           in
           themselves
           unlawfull
           :
           Neither
           can
           it
           take
           away
           or
           hinder
           the
           liberty
           ,
           or
           rather
           duty
           of
           subjects
           ,
           in
           obeying
           what
           is
           lawfully
           commanded
           ;
           otherwise
           ,
           subjects
           ,
           by
           their
           Oaths
           ,
           might
           find
           a
           way
           to
           plead
           themselves
           free
           from
           obedience
           to
           Magistrates
           in
           all
           things
           indifferent
           which
           they
           should
           command
           them
           ;
           which
           is
           absurd
           .
           But
           ,
           3.
           
           It
           would
           be
           remembred
           ,
           that
           when
           the
           keeping
           of
           an
           Oath
           is
           certainly
           a
           hindrance
           of
           some
           greater
           good
           ,
           (
           especially
           if
           other
           circumstances
           concur
           ,
           that
           render
           the
           Oath
           non-obligeing
           )
           the
           obligation
           of
           it
           ,
           in
           some
           cases
           ,
           may
           cease
           .
           This
           anent
           the
           loosing
           of
           Oaths
           ,
           because
           of
           the
           obstacle
           put
           to
           some
           greater
           good
           ,
           which
           might
           be
           attained
           by
           not
           doing
           what
           is
           sworn
           ,
           is
           indeed
           a
           very
           ticklish
           and
           tender
           question
           ,
           and
           all
           had
           need
           to
           look
           to
           it
           ,
           lest
           ,
           under
           pretence
           that
           the
           keeping
           of
           an
           Oath
           is
           an
           obstacle
           to
           a
           greater
           good
           attainable
           ,
           by
           not
           keeping
           the
           Oath
           
           there
           be
           a
           wide
           gap
           opened
           to
           all
           perjury
           ;
           and
           the
           popish
           Casuists
           are
           herein
           too
           lax
           for
           laying
           that
           ground
           ,
           that
           it
           is
           
             de
             jure
             naturali
             ,
          
           that
           every
           one
           should
           do
           that
           which
           is
           best
           ;
           they
           conclude
           ,
           that
           where
           the
           performance
           of
           what
           is
           sworn
           is
           like
           to
           hinder
           a
           greater
           good
           that
           might
           be
           attained
           by
           not
           keeping
           the
           Oath
           ,
           that
           in
           that
           case
           an
           Oath
           bindeth
           not
           at
           all
           .
           Protestant
           Casuists
           ,
           as
           Bishop
           
             Sanderson
             ,
          
           do
           deny
           this
           principle
           without
           limitation
           thus
           expressed
           ;
           yet
           do
           grant
           ,
           that
           it
           is
           true
           when
           there
           concurreth
           some
           other
           thing
           (
           as
           usually
           there
           doth
           )
           which
           may
           render
           the
           Oath
           void
           ,
           or
           the
           keeping
           of
           it
           unlawfull
           ,
           or
           looseth
           from
           it
           ,
           the
           impeditiveness
           of
           greater
           good
           there
           hath
           weight
           .
           But
           ,
           we
           may
           say
           ,
           albeit
           other
           things
           did
           not
           concur
           to
           the
           nulling
           or
           voiding
           of
           an
           Oath
           ;
           yet
           ,
           if
           the
           standing
           to
           it
           be
           found
           impeditive
           of
           a
           greater
           good
           ,
           to
           which
           we
           are
           bound
           by
           a
           prior
           obligation
           ,
           then
           the
           Oath
           ,
           being
           an
           obstacle
           of
           such
           a
           greater
           good
           ,
           ceaseth
           to
           bind
           the
           swearer
           .
           If
           a
           man
           should
           swear
           never
           to
           go
           near
           such
           a
           river
           or
           water
           ,
           having
           once
           been
           in
           hazard
           there
           ;
           yet
           ,
           where
           he
           seeth
           at
           some
           distance
           from
           it
           his
           brother
           like
           to
           perish
           in
           the
           water
           ,
           and
           it
           is
           probable
           to
           him
           ,
           that
           he
           could
           be
           able
           to
           save
           his
           life
           ,
           the
           prior
           and
           greater
           bond
           of
           char●ty
           ,
           and
           of
           God's
           Law
           commanding
           ,
           that
           bindeth
           him
           to
           go
           help
           his
           brother
           ,
           and
           looseth
           him
           from
           his
           Oath
           .
           And
           as
           to
           our
           case
           ,
           besides
           what
           hath
           been
           said
           for
           the
           clearing
           ,
           upon
           other
           grounds
           ,
           of
           the
           non-obligation
           of
           the
           Covenant
           in
           that
           second
           Article
           (
           the
           matter
           thereof
           still
           supposed
           as
           indifferent
           ,
           and
           Episcopacy
           not
           forbidden
           by
           any
           divine
           Law
           )
           may
           we
           not
           clearly
           see
           ,
           that
           there
           is
           (
           by
           adhering
           to
           that
           Oath
           as
           still
           binding
           )
           an
           obstacle
           put
           to
           the
           attainment
           of
           a
           greater
           good
           and
           of
           greater
           necessity
           ,
           and
           to
           the
           seeking
           after
           that
           greater
           good
           which
           we
           are
           pre-obliged
           ,
           by
           former
           Bonds
           ,
           to
           labour
           after
           ?
           Is
           not
           that
           great
           duty
           of
           preaching
           the
           Gospel
           of
           peace
           ,
           lying
           upon
           Ministers
           ,
           (
           
             wo
             to
             us
             if
             we
             preach
             not
          
           )
           and
           lying
           upon
           many
           Ministers
           antecedently
           to
           the
           ●aking
           of
           this
           Covenant
           ;
           and
           upon
           adhering
           to
           that
           Covenant
           in
           the
           second
           Article
           ,
           proveth
           a
           hindrance
           to
           that
           greater
           duty
           whereto
           we
           are
           pre-obliged
           ;
           shall
           it
           still
           be
           thlought
           to
           bind
           so
           ,
           that
           rather
           then
           we
           will
           acknowledge
           God's
           loosing
           us
           by
           a
           former
           obligation
           to
           a
           greater
           duty
           ,
           we
           will
           ,
           by
           adhering
           to
           it
           ,
           put
           our selves
           
           in
           incapacity
           (
           according
           to
           Law
           )
           to
           serve
           any
           longer
           in
           the
           Ministry
           ?
           Do
           there
           not
           also
           ly
           upon
           us
           all
           pre-obligations
           to
           obey
           the
           Magistrate
           in
           things
           not
           against
           God's
           Law
           ,
           (
           such
           as
           now
           Episcopacy
           is
           supposed
           to
           be
           )
           to
           procure
           the
           publick
           peace
           and
           good
           of
           Church
           and
           State
           ,
           and
           prevent
           horrid
           confusions
           ,
           which
           (
           as
           matters
           go
           )
           cannot
           be
           avoided
           by
           sticking
           at
           that
           Article
           in
           the
           Covenant
           ?
           Shall
           not
           the
           peace
           of
           conscience
           ,
           that
           shall
           arise
           from
           tendring
           these
           great
           interests
           ,
           be
           as
           much
           ,
           and
           more
           then
           any
           peace
           of
           conscience
           pretended
           to
           be
           in
           keeping
           the
           Oath
           ,
           which
           (
           though
           we
           should
           not
           be
           ready
           to
           judge
           any
           )
           may
           perhaps
           ,
           upon
           examination
           ,
           be
           found
           rather
           a
           piece
           of
           satisfaction
           to
           the
           will
           ,
           then
           peace
           of
           the
           conscience
           ,
           God
           having
           loosed
           and
           set
           free
           conscience
           from
           that
           Bond
           ,
           
             in
             hoc
             rerum
             statu
             ?
          
        
         
           But
           ,
           to
           the
           second
           thing
           which
           we
           observed
           anent
           Oaths
           ,
           or
           Covenants
           ,
           it
           would
           be
           remembred
           ,
           that
           a
           Covenant
           or
           Oath
           ,
           though
           lawfull
           and
           binding
           ,
           even
           in
           the
           strict
           interpretation
           of
           it
           ;
           yet
           ,
           doth
           not
           bind
           in
           the
           rigid
           interpretation
           ,
           which
           some
           ,
           either
           through
           weakness
           ,
           or
           scruples
           or
           design
           ,
           may
           put
           upon
           it
           .
           Sometimes
           souls
           may
           make
           snares
           of
           Oaths
           to
           themselves
           by
           overstretching
           them
           ,
           and
           so
           do
           run
           themselves
           into
           the
           perplexities
           they
           needed
           not
           .
           Concerning
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           different
           interpretations
           and
           senses
           have
           been
           given
           of
           it
           ,
           according
           to
           the
           several
           interests
           of
           persons
           of
           contrary
           judgments
           ,
           combined
           in
           it
           .
           But
           ,
           as
           to
           the
           second
           Article
           now
           in
           question
           ,
           it
           may
           be
           doubted
           ,
           if
           it
           be
           broken
           by
           submission
           to
           ,
           or
           owning
           the
           present
           Episcopacy
           established
           by
           Law
           in
           
             Scotland
             ;
          
           or
           ,
           whether
           it
           be
           not
           an
           over-rigid
           straining
           of
           that
           Covenant
           ,
           to
           bend
           it
           against
           the
           present
           Episcopacy
           established
           in
           
             Scotland
             .
          
           For
           clearing
           of
           which
           ,
           it
           would
           be
           considered
           ,
           first
           ,
           that
           at
           the
           time
           of
           the
           taking
           of
           that
           
             solemn
             League
             and
             Covenant
             ,
          
           there
           were
           no
           such
           Church-offices
           in
           
             Scotland
             ,
          
           as
           are
           mentioned
           in
           that
           Article
           ;
           there
           needed
           not
           ,
           as
           to
           
             Scotland
             ,
          
           a
           swearing
           to
           extirpat
           Offices
           that
           were
           not
           in
           it
           at
           that
           time
           ;
           and
           some
           Offices
           there
           mentioned
           ,
           never
           were
           in
           it
           .
           2.
           
           It
           would
           be
           remembred
           ,
           that
           an
           Oath
           is
           to
           be
           interpreted
           according
           to
           the
           sense
           of
           the
           givers
           of
           it
           .
           
             Timorcus
          
           (
           
             pag.
          
           16.
           )
           giveth
           us
           assurance
           ,
           that
           the
           Parliament
           of
           
             England
             ,
          
           intended
           nothing
           less
           in
           imposing
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           then
           the
           
           extirpation
           of
           all
           kinds
           of
           Prelacy
           and
           Bishops
           in
           the
           Church
           ;
           and
           that
           it
           was
           resolved
           in
           Parliament
           ,
           with
           consent
           of
           the
           Brethren
           of
           
             Scotland
             ,
          
           that
           it
           was
           only
           intended
           against
           Episcopacy
           as
           then
           established
           in
           
             England
             :
          
           and
           (
           
             Pr●f
             .
             p.
          
           23.
           )
           we
           do
           not
           (
           saith
           he
           )
           think
           the
           Covenant
           to
           be
           against
           the
           primitive
           Episcopacy
           ,
           which
           there
           he
           descrives
           to
           be
           a
           presidency
           of
           one
           Minister
           over
           others
           ,
           so
           that
           without
           him
           nothing
           is
           to
           be
           done
           in
           matters
           of
           Ordination
           and
           Jurisdiction
           :
           and
           when
           he
           explaineth
           the
           second
           Article
           of
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           he
           saith
           ,
           it
           is
           only
           tyrannical
           Bishops
           that
           are
           covenanted
           against
           :
           which
           
             Baxter
          
           also
           calls
           the
           sinfull
           
             species
          
           of
           Prelacy
           ,
           in
           his
           Preface
           to
           the
           Disputations
           of
           Church-government
           ;
           which
           he
           sayes
           was
           abjured
           only
           ,
           and
           not
           Episcopacy
           .
           And
           in
           that
           same
           dispute
           (
           
             pag.
          
           4.
           )
           he
           declareth
           ,
           that
           most
           of
           the
           godly
           Ministers
           ,
           since
           the
           Reformation
           ,
           did
           judge
           Episcopacy
           ,
           some
           of
           them
           ,
           lawfull
           ,
           and
           some
           of
           them
           most
           fit
           ;
           and
           addeth
           ,
           that
           almost
           all
           of
           these
           that
           are
           of
           the
           late
           
             Ass●
          
           at
           
             Westminster
             ,
          
           and
           most
           throughout
           the
           Land
           ,
           did
           conform
           to
           Episcopal
           Government
           ,
           as
           not
           contrary
           to
           the
           Word
           of
           God
           ;
           and
           that
           he
           believs
           ,
           that
           many
           of
           them
           are
           yet
           so
           far
           reconciliable
           to
           it
           ,
           (
           moderated
           )
           that
           if
           it
           were
           only
           established
           ,
           they
           would
           submit
           to
           it
           as
           they
           did
           :
           for
           ,
           he
           heareth
           (
           as
           he
           saith
           )
           but
           of
           few
           of
           them
           who
           have
           made
           recantation
           of
           their
           former
           conformity
           ;
           and
           contrarily
           ,
           hath
           known
           divers
           of
           them
           professing
           a
           reconciliableness
           ,
           as
           aforesaid
           ,
           as
           Mr.
           
             Gataker
          
           doth
           ,
           in
           one
           of
           his
           Books
           ,
           profess
           his
           judgment
           .
           Thus
           Mr
           ▪
           
             Baxter
             ,
          
           by
           whom
           we
           may
           see
           their
           error
           or
           folly
           ,
           who
           think
           there
           can
           be
           no
           godly
           Ministers
           owning
           Episcopacy
           ;
           and
           also
           how
           reconciliable
           godly
           Divines
           in
           the
           
             Ass
             .
          
           were
           to
           a
           regulated
           Episcopacy
           ;
           So
           that
           it
           seemeth
           ,
           the
           great
           grievance
           aim'd
           at
           in
           the
           Covenant
           to
           be
           redressed
           ,
           was
           ,
           the
           Bishops
           claim
           of
           a
           sole
           Ordination
           and
           Jurisdiction
           ;
           and
           the
           multitudes
           of
           Courts
           of
           lay
           Chancellors
           ,
           
             &c.
          
           set
           over
           Ministers
           in
           matters
           of
           Government
           ,
           and
           not
           the
           Office
           of
           Bishops
           ,
           concurring
           with
           Synods
           of
           Ministers
           and
           their
           presiding
           and
           being
           Superiors
           in
           Church-meetings
           .
           If
           it
           be
           said
           ,
           that
           every
           one
           of
           the
           particular
           Offices
           ,
           mentioned
           under
           the
           name
           of
           Prelacy
           in
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           are
           abjured
           ;
           and
           therefore
           Bishops
           are
           abjured
           :
           Mr.
           
             Vines
             ,
          
           in
           his
           Considerations
           upon
           the
           Kings
           Concessions
           at
           the
           
             Isle
          
           of
           
             Wight
             ,
          
           
           will
           (
           for
           loosing
           this
           )
           tell
           us
           of
           a
           sense
           of
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           which
           he
           inclines
           to
           ,
           
             viz.
          
           that
           ,
           as
           to
           that
           Article
           ,
           the
           Covenant
           is
           not
           to
           be
           understood
           
             in
             sensu
             divisô
             ,
          
           but
           
             compositô
             ,
          
           (
           which
           sureth
           to
           Mr.
           
             Baxters
          
           complex
           frame
           )
           And
           therefore
           asserts
           ,
           that
           continuing
           of
           Bishops
           with
           a
           negative
           voice
           in
           Ordination
           and
           ministerial
           Meetings
           ,
           might
           be
           permitted
           without
           breach
           of
           Covenant
           .
           And
           if
           it
           be
           so
           ,
           as
           this
           learned
           man
           and
           others
           mention'd
           ,
           concede
           ,
           What
           reason
           is
           there
           to
           bend
           the
           Covenant
           against
           the
           present
           Episcopacy
           of
           
             Scotland
             ,
          
           which
           is
           establish'd
           to
           govern
           the
           Church
           (
           not
           excluding
           ,
           )
           but
           with
           consent
           of
           Presbyters
           ,
           with
           as
           great
           moderation
           as
           any
           was
           in
           the
           primitive
           Episcopacy
           .
           But
           it
           will
           be
           said
           ,
           then
           we
           stand
           bound
           against
           the
           English
           Prelacy
           ,
           as
           it
           is
           explained
           in
           the
           Covenant
           .
           
             Ans
             .
          
           It
           will
           be
           time
           to
           dispute
           that
           ,
           when
           we
           are
           called
           to
           live
           under
           that
           frame
           of
           Prelacy
           :
           In
           the
           mean
           time
           let
           it
           be
           granted
           ,
           that
           the
           Church
           establishment
           amongst
           us
           ,
           is
           not
           that
           which
           the
           Covenant
           describeth
           to
           be
           renounced
           :
           neither
           are
           we
           rashly
           to
           judge
           the
           way
           of
           other
           Churches
           ,
           which
           we
           are
           not
           called
           to
           own
           ;
           they
           are
           to
           give
           an
           account
           of
           their
           own
           way
           to
           God
           and
           the
           King
           ,
           and
           will
           allow
           us
           a
           discharge
           from
           meddling
           in
           their
           affairs
           ;
           and
           they
           are
           not
           like
           in
           hast
           ,
           to
           give
           us
           any
           place
           or
           calling
           in
           modelling
           their
           Church-government
           ,
           to
           which
           all
           protestant
           Churches
           ought
           to
           pay
           reverence
           .
        
         
           But
           again
           ,
           it
           will
           be
           said
           ,
           was
           not
           the
           form
           of
           Episcopacy
           that
           was
           in
           
             Scotland
          
           before
           (
           from
           which
           the
           present
           is
           nothing
           different
           )
           abjured
           in
           the
           National
           Covenant
           ,
           before
           we
           had
           any
           dealing
           with
           
             England
          
           anent
           change
           of
           their
           Church-government
           .
           
             Ans
             .
          
           If
           we
           will
           believe
           the
           Ministers
           who
           reason'd
           with
           the
           Doctors
           of
           
             Aberdeen
          
           (
           and
           they
           were
           the
           prime
           promoters
           of
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           and
           carried
           with
           them
           the
           sense
           of
           the
           body
           of
           the
           Covenanters
           )
           they
           who
           subscribed
           that
           Covenant
           ,
           might
           ,
           with
           great
           liberty
           ,
           voice
           in
           an
           Assembly
           ,
           concerning
           Episcopacy
           without
           prejudice
           ,
           notwithstanding
           their
           Oath
           :
           And
           upon
           this
           ground
           ,
           would
           perswade
           the
           Doctors
           to
           subscribe
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           because
           in
           so
           doing
           they
           should
           not
           be
           taken
           as
           abjuring
           Episcopacy
           (
           as
           the
           Doctors
           thought
           )
           But
           ,
           notwithstanding
           their
           Oath
           and
           subscription
           ,
           had
           their
           liberty
           remaining
           entire
           to
           voice
           for
           Episcopacy
           in
           an
           Assembly
           :
           See
           their
           
           answer
           to
           the
           Doctors
           their
           fourth
           and
           tenth
           demands
           .
           And
           the
           truth
           is
           ,
           that
           as
           in
           the
           explication
           added
           ,
           
             anno
             .
          
           1638.
           
           Episcopacy
           is
           not
           mentioned
           as
           abjured
           ;
           so
           neither
           was
           it
           abjured
           by
           the
           National
           Covenant
           as
           it
           was
           enjoyn'd
           to
           be
           subscribed
           ,
           
             anno
             .
          
           1580.
           
           It
           is
           alledged
           ,
           that
           under
           the
           name
           of
           the
           Popes
           wicked
           Hierarchy
           ,
           the
           Office
           of
           Episcopacy
           was
           abjured
           ;
           But
           they
           who
           say
           so
           ,
           would
           consider
           ,
           that
           the
           abjuring
           of
           the
           Popes
           wicked
           Hierarchy
           ,
           imports
           not
           an
           abjuration
           of
           the
           Office
           of
           a
           Bishop
           ,
           more
           then
           the
           Office
           of
           a
           Presbyter
           or
           a
           Deacon
           ,
           which
           are
           parts
           of
           that
           Hierarchy
           (
           so
           called
           by
           the
           Council
           of
           
             Trent
             ,
          
           Canon
           .
           Sess
           .
           7.
           )
           as
           well
           as
           the
           Office
           of
           a
           Bishop
           .
           If
           the
           Covenant
           do
           not
           under
           that
           expression
           abjure
           these
           Offices
           ,
           neither
           doth
           it
           abjure
           the
           Office
           of
           a
           Bishop
           ,
           seing
           these
           are
           parts
           of
           that
           which
           the
           Papists
           call
           Hierarchy
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           this
           .
           The
           intent
           of
           that
           Covenant
           ,
           was
           not
           to
           abjure
           the
           Office
           of
           Bishops
           ,
           more
           then
           of
           Presbyters
           or
           Deacons
           ,
           but
           to
           abjure
           the
           Hierarchy
           ,
           so
           far
           as
           it
           was
           the
           Popes
           ,
           (
           his
           wicked
           Hierarchy
           )
           as
           it
           also
           abjureth
           his
           five
           bastard
           sacraments
           ,
           so
           far
           as
           he
           maketh
           them
           Sacraments
           ,
           (
           for
           sure
           ,
           Orders
           or
           Ordination
           of
           Ministers
           and
           Marriage
           ,
           which
           he
           maketh
           two
           Sacraments
           ,
           are
           not
           abjured
           in
           the
           Covenant
           as
           to
           the
           matter
           of
           them
           ,
           but
           only
           as
           to
           the
           relation
           of
           being
           Sacraments
           ,
           which
           the
           Pope
           puts
           on
           them
           )
           even
           so
           the
           Popes
           Hierarchy
           is
           abjured
           ,
           counted
           and
           called
           wicked
           ,
           not
           as
           to
           the
           matter
           of
           these
           Offices
           comprehended
           under
           the
           ecclesiastical
           word
           
             Hierarchy
             ,
          
           (
           for
           then
           the
           Office
           of
           Presbyters
           and
           Deacons
           ,
           should
           be
           also
           counted
           wicked
           and
           abjured
           )
           but
           as
           to
           the
           dependance
           of
           all
           these
           Offices
           on
           him
           ,
           as
           the
           fountain
           and
           head
           of
           the
           Church
           under
           Christ
           ,
           and
           the
           corruption
           adhereing
           to
           these
           Offices
           ,
           and
           flowing
           from
           him
           ,
           so
           far
           as
           they
           are
           his
           ,
           depending
           on
           him
           ,
           corrupted
           by
           him
           ,
           there
           is
           wickedness
           in
           them
           or
           joyn'd
           to
           them
           ,
           and
           so
           they
           are
           abjured
           (
           as
           in
           another
           word
           of
           that
           Covenant
           ,
           his
           blasphemous
           Priest-hood
           is
           abjured
           ,
           yet
           in
           that
           the
           Office
           of
           Presbyter
           is
           not
           abjured
           .
           )
           But
           ,
           mean
           time
           ,
           the
           Offices
           themselves
           ,
           which
           are
           said
           to
           make
           up
           that
           Hierarchy
           ,
           are
           not
           abjured
           ,
           nor
           are
           to
           be
           rejected
           ,
           but
           purged
           from
           what
           is
           his
           ,
           or
           any
           dependance
           on
           him
           ,
           or
           corruption
           flowing
           from
           him
           .
           And
           so
           the
           Office
           of
           a
           Bishop
           ,
           amongst
           Protestants
           
           (
           Bishops
           now
           being
           loosed
           from
           that
           dependance
           from
           the
           Sea
           of
           
             Rome
          
           and
           the
           Pope
           ,
           who
           as
           head
           of
           the
           Church
           claimed
           a
           plenitude
           of
           power
           over
           the
           whole
           Church
           ,
           and
           made
           all
           Christian
           Bishops
           and
           Ministers
           but
           as
           his
           slaves
           and
           vassals
           ,
           portioning
           out
           to
           them
           such
           measure
           of
           jurisdiction
           as
           he
           thought
           fit
           ;
           as
           their
           stiles
           in
           this
           Countrey
           imported
           of
           old
           ;
           
             Ego
          
           N.
           
             Dei
             apostolicae
             sedis
             gratiâ
             Episcopus
          
           )
           I
           say
           the
           Office
           of
           the
           protestant
           Bishop
           is
           no
           more
           a
           part
           now
           of
           the
           Popes
           wicked
           Hierarchy
           ,
           then
           is
           the
           Office
           of
           a
           Minister
           or
           Deacon
           .
        
         
           But
           further
           it
           may
           appear
           ,
           that
           under
           the
           name
           of
           the
           Popes
           wicked
           Hierarchy
           ,
           the
           Office
           of
           Bishops
           was
           not
           abjured
           in
           the
           National
           Covenant
           .
           1.
           
           The
           enjoyner
           of
           that
           Covenant
           to
           be
           taken
           by
           the
           subjects
           ,
           was
           King
           
             James
             ,
          
           of
           blessed
           memory
           ;
           He
           ,
           having
           himself
           with
           His
           family
           subscribed
           that
           Oath
           and
           Covenant
           ,
           gave
           charge
           to
           all
           Commissioners
           and
           Ministers
           within
           the
           Realm
           to
           crave
           the
           same
           Confession
           from
           their
           parishoners
           ,
           and
           proceed
           against
           the
           refusers
           ,
           as
           the
           words
           of
           the
           charge
           bear
           ,
           
             March
             ,
          
           2.
           1580.
           
           This
           was
           the
           first
           injunction
           for
           taking
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           which
           was
           mainly
           intended
           for
           securing
           the
           Religion
           ,
           and
           the
           King
           who
           favoured
           it
           and
           professed
           it
           ,
           from
           Papists
           ,
           who
           were
           sound
           practising
           with
           forraigners
           against
           him
           and
           it
           ,
           and
           for
           clearing
           the
           King
           and
           his
           Court
           from
           aspersions
           .
           But
           that
           the
           King
           by
           that
           Covenant
           intended
           the
           abjuration
           of
           the
           Office
           of
           protestant
           Episcopacy
           ,
           it
           is
           most
           improbable
           ,
           and
           by
           many
           things
           the
           contrary
           appeareth
           .
           1.
           
           The
           instrument
           in
           penning
           that
           Covenant
           at
           the
           Kings
           command
           ,
           was
           Mr.
           
             John
             Craig
             ,
          
           His
           Minister
           ,
           a
           very
           learned
           man
           ,
           who
           but
           nine
           years
           before
           ,
           (
           
             Jan
             ,
          
           12.
           
             anno
             .
          
           1571.
           )
           had
           given
           his
           consent
           in
           the
           Assembly
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           which
           then
           did
           meet
           at
           
             Leith
             ,
          
           that
           Commissioners
           might
           be
           appointed
           to
           joyn
           with
           these
           whom
           the
           Council
           should
           appoint
           for
           settling
           the
           policy
           of
           the
           Church
           :
           of
           these
           Commissioners
           he
           himself
           was
           one
           ,
           and
           with
           him
           
             Dun
          
           the
           Superintendent
           of
           
             Angus
             ,
             Winrame
          
           Superintendent
           of
           
             Fyfe
          
           and
           others
           :
           the
           resolution
           they
           came
           to
           ,
           was
           that
           there
           should
           be
           of
           the
           most
           qualified
           of
           the
           Ministry
           some
           chosen
           by
           the
           Chapters
           of
           the
           cathedral
           Churches
           ,
           to
           whom
           vacant
           Arch-bishopricks
           and
           Bishopricks
           
           might
           be
           dispon'd
           ,
           and
           they
           to
           have
           power
           of
           Ordination
           ,
           and
           to
           exerce
           spiritual
           Jurisdiction
           in
           their
           several
           Diocesses
           ;
           and
           at
           the
           Ordination
           of
           Ministers
           to
           exact
           an
           Oath
           of
           them
           for
           acknowledging
           His
           Majesties
           Authority
           ,
           and
           for
           obedience
           to
           their
           Ordinary
           in
           all
           things
           lawfull
           .
           And
           accordingly
           some
           were
           provided
           to
           Bishopricks
           at
           that
           time
           ;
           neither
           did
           the
           Church
           in
           the
           following
           Assembly
           at
           St.
           
             Andrews
             ,
             (
             March
             ,
          
           1571.
           )
           take
           exception
           at
           these
           Articles
           of
           agreement
           .
           It
           is
           true
           at
           
             Perth
             (
             August
             ,
          
           1572.
           )
           they
           received
           the
           same
           ,
           but
           with
           a
           protestation
           ,
           it
           was
           only
           for
           an
           
             interim
             ,
          
           &c.
           
           But
           this
           we
           may
           say
           ,
           that
           the
           learned
           Penner
           of
           the
           National
           Covenant
           ,
           allowed
           of
           Bishops
           a
           few
           years
           before
           this
           Covenant
           :
           Nor
           is
           there
           any
           evidence
           that
           he
           changed
           his
           mind
           ,
           or
           that
           he
           did
           in
           that
           draught
           of
           the
           Confession
           ,
           mean
           protestant
           Bishops
           (
           which
           then
           he
           approved
           )
           by
           the
           Popes
           wicked
           Hierarchy
           which
           is
           abjured
           .
           2.
           
           As
           for
           the
           King
           himself
           ,
           that
           He
           minded
           no
           abjuration
           of
           the
           Office
           of
           a
           protestant
           Bishop
           by
           that
           Covenant
           ,
           may
           be
           evident
           by
           this
           ,
           that
           when
           He
           and
           His
           family
           took
           that
           Covenant
           ,
           and
           when
           he
           enjoyn'd
           it
           to
           the
           subjects
           ,
           there
           was
           no
           such
           thing
           known
           in
           this
           Church
           as
           a
           Government
           by
           Presbyteries
           (
           the
           whole
           Government
           consisting
           in
           Ordination
           and
           Jurisdiction
           ,
           exerced
           in
           the
           several
           parts
           of
           the
           land
           ,
           being
           in
           the
           hands
           of
           some
           under
           the
           name
           of
           Bishops
           ,
           some
           under
           the
           name
           of
           Superintendents
           ,
           or
           under
           the
           name
           of
           Commissioners
           of
           Countreys
           ,
           who
           exercis'd
           the
           same
           in
           their
           several
           precincts
           )
           other
           Government
           there
           was
           not
           ,
           but
           by
           some
           single
           persons
           ,
           having
           power
           in
           their
           several
           bounds
           .
           It
           is
           true
           ,
           the
           Assembly
           quarrel'd
           what
           they
           did
           amiss
           ,
           but
           yet
           they
           were
           then
           really
           Bishops
           :
           And
           it
           is
           not
           like
           the
           King
           did
           swear
           himself
           ,
           or
           put
           others
           to
           swear
           against
           the
           Church-government
           that
           was
           then
           in
           the
           Countrey
           ,
           and
           was
           not
           rejected
           by
           the
           Church
           ,
           till
           
             July
             ,
          
           12
           ,
           1580.
           
           Yea
           ,
           it
           is
           evident
           ,
           that
           the
           King
           and
           His
           Council
           ,
           minded
           not
           to
           swear
           down
           protestant
           Episcopacy
           by
           that
           Covenant
           :
           For
           ,
           suppose
           the
           General
           Assembly
           in
           that
           same
           year
           ,
           1580
           ,
           
             July
          
           12.
           did
           passe
           an
           Act
           against
           Episcopacy
           (
           the
           like
           whereof
           had
           not
           been
           done
           in
           this
           Church
           before
           )
           yet
           ,
           the
           very
           year
           following
           ,
           1581.
           though
           the
           King
           and
           Council
           had
           presented
           the
           Confession
           to
           the
           Assembly
           ,
           to
           be
           
           subscribed
           by
           them
           and
           the
           people
           in
           several
           Parishes
           at
           their
           order
           ,
           or
           by
           their
           perswasion
           ;
           yet
           ,
           that
           very
           same
           year
           ,
           an
           Act
           of
           Council
           is
           made
           ,
           confirming
           expresly
           that
           agreement
           ,
           1571.
           at
           
             Leith
          
           concerning
           Archbishops
           and
           Bishops
           :
           And
           this
           was
           done
           six
           months
           after
           the
           sending
           the
           Confession
           to
           the
           Assembly
           and
           the
           Councils
           Act
           for
           subscribing
           ;
           this
           being
           in
           
             October
             ,
          
           that
           in
           
             March
             ,
          
           1581.
           
           Now
           is
           it
           any
           way
           probable
           ,
           that
           the
           King
           and
           Council
           (
           had
           they
           intended
           to
           abjure
           Episcopacy
           in
           the
           Confession
           )
           should
           within
           six
           moneths
           make
           an
           Act
           for
           confirming
           a
           former
           agreement
           for
           establishing
           Episcopacy
           ?
           And
           this
           Act
           of
           Council
           was
           no
           secret
           :
           For
           ,
           the
           King
           openly
           avowed
           it
           in
           the
           business
           concerning
           
             Montgomery
             ,
          
           Bishop
           of
           
             Glasgow
             ,
          
           whom
           the
           King
           would
           not
           suffer
           to
           be
           processed
           upon
           the
           account
           of
           his
           accepting
           a
           Bishoprick
           ;
           because
           ,
           as
           he
           said
           ,
           he
           had
           so
           lately
           ratified
           the
           agreement
           at
           
             Leith
             ,
          
           1571.
           
           Neither
           did
           the
           Assembly
           or
           any
           Ministers
           speak
           of
           that
           deed
           of
           the
           Kings
           and
           Councils
           ,
           as
           contrary
           to
           the
           Covenant
           (
           albeit
           in
           these
           dayes
           they
           had
           a
           way
           of
           using
           liberty
           enough
           ,
           and
           more
           then
           was
           sitting
           .
           )
           And
           it
           being
           plain
           ,
           that
           the
           Covenant
           (
           in
           the
           intention
           of
           King
           and
           Council
           who
           injoyned
           it
           first
           ,
           and
           transmitted
           it
           to
           the
           Assembly
           and
           subjects
           )
           doth
           not
           abjure
           Episcopacy
           ;
           Why
           should
           the
           subjects
           take
           themselves
           bound
           as
           swearing
           down
           Episcopacy
           by
           that
           Oath
           ,
           seing
           every
           Oath
           is
           to
           be
           taken
           in
           the
           declared
           sense
           of
           the
           Imposers
           ,
           which
           is
           consistent
           with
           the
           words
           of
           it
           ?
           But
           it
           will
           be
           yet
           said
           ,
           that
           the
           General
           Assembly
           at
           
             Glasgow
             ,
          
           1638.
           have
           declared
           ,
           that
           in
           that
           National
           Covenant
           ,
           Episcopacy
           was
           abjured
           in
           the
           year
           ,
           1580
           ,
           and
           they
           enjoyned
           ,
           that
           all
           should
           subscribe
           according
           to
           the
           determination
           of
           that
           Assembly
           ;
           and
           many
           have
           done
           so
           .
           
             Ans
             .
          
           1.
           
           It
           seemeth
           very
           strange
           ,
           that
           any
           Assembly
           ,
           or
           Company
           of
           men
           ,
           should
           take
           upon
           them
           to
           declare
           what
           was
           the
           sense
           of
           the
           Church
           in
           taking
           a
           Covenant
           ,
           or
           Oath
           ,
           when
           few
           or
           none
           of
           the
           men
           were
           living
           ,
           who
           took
           that
           Covenant
           ;
           or
           ,
           if
           living
           ,
           few
           or
           none
           of
           them
           were
           members
           of
           that
           Assembly
           at
           
             Glasgow
             ,
          
           1638.
           
           As
           
             juramentum
             est
             vinculum
             personale
             ,
          
           (
           so
           say
           the
           Casuists
           )
           So
           no
           man
           ,
           or
           company
           of
           men
           can
           take
           upon
           them
           to
           define
           what
           was
           the
           sense
           of
           dead
           men
           in
           taking
           an
           Oath
           or
           Covenant
           while
           they
           were
           alive
           ,
           unlesse
           they
           
           can
           produce
           some
           authentick
           expresse
           evidence
           ,
           that
           such
           was
           their
           meaning
           in
           taking
           the
           Oath
           and
           Covenant
           in
           their
           life-time
           .
           Now
           ,
           all
           that
           the
           Assembly
           of
           
             Glasgow
          
           hath
           produced
           in
           their
           large
           Act
           ,
           (
           
             Sess
             .
          
           16.
           )
           declaring
           Episcopacy
           to
           be
           abjured
           ,
           
             anno
             ,
          
           1580.
           amounts
           to
           nothing
           more
           ,
           but
           this
           ,
           that
           before
           
             Jul.
          
           1580.
           (
           at
           which
           time
           ,
           some
           moneths
           after
           the
           Covenant
           was
           enjoyn'd
           by
           the
           King
           to
           be
           taken
           by
           the
           subjects
           )
           the
           Church
           was
           ,
           and
           had
           been
           some
           years
           labouring
           against
           Bishops
           (
           who
           notwithstanding
           continued
           ,
           till
           after
           the
           Act
           at
           
             Dundee
             ,
          
           1580.
           )
           And
           that
           after
           the
           year
           ,
           1580.
           there
           was
           much
           opposition
           to
           that
           Office
           by
           the
           Assemblies
           :
           But
           all
           their
           citations
           of
           Acts
           ,
           come
           not
           to
           this
           point
           ,
           to
           prove
           that
           Episcopacy
           was
           abjured
           by
           the
           Covenant
           or
           any
           words
           in
           it
           ;
           nor
           do
           these
           ancient
           Assemblies
           after
           ,
           1580.
           ever
           assert
           any
           such
           thing
           (
           men
           being
           then
           living
           who
           knew
           the
           sense
           of
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           that
           it
           was
           against
           Covenant
           to
           admit
           of
           Episcopacy
           ;
           but
           they
           go
           upon
           other
           grounds
           in
           oppugning
           that
           Office.
           How
           strange
           is
           it
           that
           Assemblies
           of
           Ministers
           ,
           who
           had
           taken
           that
           Covenant
           ,
           are
           never
           heard
           to
           plead
           against
           Episcopacy
           (
           though
           they
           loved
           it
           not
           )
           upon
           that
           ground
           ?
           And
           that
           fifty
           eight
           years
           after
           ,
           when
           most
           ,
           or
           all
           of
           these
           first
           takers
           of
           it
           ,
           are
           worn
           out
           ,
           a
           generation
           riseth
           ,
           that
           will
           plead
           ,
           that
           their
           Ancestors
           took
           that
           Covenant
           in
           that
           sense
           (
           abjuring
           Episcopacy
           )
           whereas
           there
           is
           in
           no
           Act
           of
           these
           ancient
           Assemblies
           (
           after
           the
           Covenant
           was
           taken
           ,
           or
           at
           the
           taking
           of
           it
           )
           any
           assertion
           ,
           that
           it
           was
           their
           mind
           in
           taking
           that
           Covenant
           ,
           to
           abjure
           Episcopacy
           ?
           And
           that
           Episcopacy
           was
           not
           (
           in
           the
           intention
           of
           the
           takers
           of
           the
           National
           Covenant
           of
           old
           )
           abjured
           by
           the
           Covenant
           ;
           no
           ,
           nor
           unlawfull
           in
           it self
           ,
           even
           in
           the
           judgment
           of
           the
           Assembly
           of
           the
           Church
           of
           
             Scotland
             ,
          
           may
           appear
           ,
           in
           that
           within
           six
           years
           after
           that
           year
           ,
           1580.
           a
           General
           Assembly
           at
           
             Edinburgh
          
           do
           declare
           ,
           that
           the
           name
           of
           
             Bishop
          
           hath
           a
           special
           charge
           and
           function
           thereto
           annexed
           by
           the
           Word
           of
           God
           ;
           and
           that
           it
           is
           lawful
           for
           the
           General
           Assembly
           ,
           to
           admit
           a
           Bishop
           to
           a
           Benefice
           preferred
           by
           the
           Kings
           Majesty
           ,
           with
           power
           to
           admit
           ,
           visit
           and
           deprive
           Ministers
           ,
           and
           to
           be
           Moderators
           of
           Presbyteries
           where
           they
           are
           resident
           and
           subject
           only
           to
           the
           sentence
           of
           the
           General
           Assemblies
           .
           It
           seems
           within
           six
           years
           ,
           the
           General
           
           Assembly
           at
           
             Edinburgh
          
           retracted
           the
           Act
           of
           
             Dundee
             ,
          
           1581.
           
           But
           ,
           3.
           
           Strange
           it
           was
           that
           the
           Company
           met
           at
           
             Glasgow
          
           (
           an
           Assembly
           against
           which
           as
           much
           is
           said
           ,
           and
           upon
           good
           grounds
           ,
           as
           against
           any
           other
           in
           our
           Church
           )
           had
           power
           to
           bind
           others
           to
           their
           determination
           of
           the
           sense
           of
           the
           Covenant
           .
           Certain
           it
           is
           ,
           no
           Assembly
           nor
           Company
           of
           men
           ,
           can
           put
           an
           obligation
           upon
           persons
           who
           have
           taken
           an
           Oath
           personally
           to
           accept
           of
           their
           sense
           of
           the
           Oath
           which
           they
           put
           upon
           it
           .
           It
           is
           true
           ,
           the
           Assembly
           of
           
             Glasgow
          
           could
           declare
           their
           own
           sense
           of
           the
           Oath
           taken
           by
           themselves
           ,
           but
           could
           not
           impose
           their
           sense
           upon
           the
           takers
           of
           the
           Oath
           before
           ,
           that
           sense
           not
           having
           been
           given
           to
           the
           takers
           of
           the
           Oath
           by
           the
           imposers
           of
           the
           same
           ;
           and
           the
           takers
           of
           the
           Oath
           not
           having
           impowered
           the
           Commissioners
           at
           
             Glasgow
          
           to
           declare
           their
           sense
           of
           that
           Oath
           they
           had
           taken
           .
           So
           then
           ,
           whatever
           was
           done
           at
           
             Glasgow
          
           after
           the
           Covenant
           was
           taken
           by
           the
           body
           of
           the
           Land
           ,
           could
           not
           oblige
           all
           the
           takers
           of
           it
           to
           own
           their
           declaration
           of
           the
           sense
           of
           the
           Covenant
           (
           which
           was
           not
           at
           first
           imposing
           the
           Oath
           ,
           declared
           to
           them
           )
           And
           the
           body
           of
           the
           people
           of
           this
           land
           ,
           have
           not
           indeed
           abjured
           Episcopacy
           by
           that
           National
           Covenant
           they
           entered
           in
           ;
           neither
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           nor
           added
           interpretation
           importeth
           any
           such
           thing
           :
           Nor
           hath
           the
           body
           of
           the
           people
           of
           the
           land
           ,
           by
           any
           after
           deeds
           ,
           owned
           that
           Assemblies
           sensing
           of
           the
           Covenant
           ;
           Nor
           was
           there
           any
           Act
           in
           that
           Assembly
           ,
           that
           all
           should
           own
           their
           determination
           of
           the
           sense
           thereof
           .
           It
           is
           true
           ,
           there
           is
           an
           Act
           (
           
             Sess
             .
          
           26.
           )
           that
           these
           who
           had
           not
           already
           subscribed
           ,
           should
           subscribe
           with
           an
           allowance
           of
           the
           Assemblies
           determination
           concerning
           the
           sense
           of
           the
           Covenant
           :
           But
           few
           did
           so
           .
           If
           any
           did
           so
           ,
           they
           are
           to
           consider
           ,
           whether
           they
           have
           not
           been
           too
           rashly
           carryed
           on
           in
           the
           current
           of
           that
           time
           without
           a
           just
           examination
           of
           matters
           ,
        
         
           But
           finally
           ,
           Now
           (
           that
           we
           are
           got
           out
           of
           the
           noise
           of
           Armes
           and
           Confusions
           of
           the
           by-past
           times
           )
           it
           concerneth
           the
           Ministers
           of
           Christ
           ,
           to
           ponder
           if
           there
           was
           any
           thing
           unlawfull
           in
           that
           Covenant
           (
           we
           speak
           now
           of
           the
           solemn
           League
           and
           Covenant
           ,
           which
           seemeth
           most
           expresse
           against
           Prelacy
           ,
           and
           which
           almost
           swallowed
           up
           the
           memory
           of
           the
           other
           .
           )
           
           That
           there
           are
           great
           duties
           engaged
           to
           in
           the
           same
           ,
           relating
           to
           true
           Religion
           and
           an
           holy
           life
           ,
           from
           which
           no
           power
           on
           earth
           can
           loose
           ,
           and
           to
           which
           we
           are
           indispensably
           tyed
           ,
           is
           not
           to
           be
           doubted
           .
           Neither
           is
           it
           to
           be
           doubted
           ,
           that
           many
           godly
           Ministers
           and
           people
           ,
           were
           ingaged
           in
           that
           Covenant
           ,
           who
           designed
           no
           evil
           ,
           nor
           minded
           any
           injury
           to
           the
           Soveraign
           ;
           Yet
           ,
           several
           things
           ,
           as
           to
           that
           Covenant
           ,
           are
           worthy
           to
           be
           seriously
           examined
           ,
           that
           we
           may
           see
           how
           they
           can
           be
           justified
           before
           God
           ;
           Or
           ,
           if
           they
           are
           to
           be
           confessed
           as
           faults
           ,
           especially
           if
           any
           evil
           or
           unlawfull
           thing
           be
           found
           in
           the
           substance
           or
           mater
           of
           the
           Covenant
           ;
           it
           would
           be
           remembred
           ,
           
             Malum
             est
             ex
             singulis
             defectibus
             .
          
        
         
           1.
           
           The
           warrantableness
           of
           entring
           into
           that
           publick
           Oath
           or
           Bond
           ,
           without
           the
           supreme
           Authority
           of
           the
           land
           ,
           and
           against
           the
           mind
           of
           the
           Soveraign
           .
           Can
           there
           be
           any
           example
           shewed
           amongst
           the
           people
           of
           God
           of
           old
           ,
           either
           Jews
           or
           Christians
           ,
           of
           carrying
           on
           a
           publick
           Oath
           or
           League
           and
           Bond
           without
           their
           Soveraign
           Powers
           ,
           that
           were
           over
           them
           ,
           going
           before
           them
           ;
           or
           ,
           they
           not
           consenting
           or
           contradicting
           ?
           Is
           it
           not
           so
           special
           a
           Royalty
           of
           the
           King
           ,
           to
           have
           power
           of
           imposing
           a
           publick
           Oath
           on
           all
           his
           subjects
           ,
           especially
           when
           the
           Oath
           hath
           a
           direct
           aim
           for
           raising
           and
           taking
           Armes
           ,
           for
           invasion
           of
           any
           in
           forreign
           Nations
           (
           such
           was
           the
           aim
           of
           the
           solemn
           League
           as
           to
           us
           in
           
             Scotland
          
           )
           that
           if
           this
           can
           be
           done
           without
           the
           King
           ,
           What
           is
           there
           that
           may
           not
           be
           done
           without
           him
           ?
           Who
           can
           have
           a
           lawfull
           power
           to
           swear
           all
           the
           Kings
           subjects
           to
           such
           a
           purpose
           ,
           without
           his
           consent
           ?
           Much
           lesse
           can
           any
           have
           power
           to
           swear
           them
           to
           a
           War
           against
           the
           Soveraign
           ,
           while
           he
           is
           no
           way
           injuring
           them
           ,
           but
           heaping
           favours
           upon
           them
           ;
           the
           War
           ,
           in
           that
           respect
           ,
           not
           being
           defensive
           on
           their
           part
           ,
           no●
           admitting
           of
           apologie
           upon
           that
           ground
           (
           supposing
           that
           to
           be
           a
           good
           ground
           .
           )
           Is
           it
           not
           certain
           ,
           that
           several
           just
           laws
           of
           this
           land
           ,
           clearly
           inhibit
           all
           Leagues
           of
           subjects
           under
           whatsoever
           colour
           or
           pretence
           ,
           without
           the
           Kings
           consent
           had
           and
           obtain'd
           thereto
           ?
           
             Jam.
          
           6.
           
           Parl.
           10.
           
           Act.
           1●
           .
           
             Mary
             ,
          
           Parl.
           9.
           
           Act
           75.
           
           It
           is
           well
           known
           ,
           that
           when
           the
           Nationall
           Covenant
           was
           carryed
           on
           ,
           that
           the
           people
           might
           be
           moved
           to
           concur
           in
           it
           and
           to
           take
           it
           ,
           it
           was
           
           pretended
           ,
           that
           it
           was
           not
           without
           Authority
           ;
           and
           that
           the
           warrand
           it
           had
           from
           King
           
             James
          
           his
           Authority
           ,
           still
           continued
           (
           albeit
           neither
           He
           nor
           His
           Successor
           gave
           any
           authoriy
           to
           the
           additional
           explication
           and
           application
           )
           and
           ,
           at
           that
           time
           ,
           it
           was
           ingenuosly
           professed
           by
           the
           Promoters
           of
           that
           Covenant
           ,
           (
           as
           may
           also
           be
           cleared
           by
           Writings
           they
           have
           left
           to
           the
           world
           )
           that
           had
           it
           been
           a
           new
           Covenant
           or
           League
           ,
           they
           would
           not
           ,
           they
           could
           not
           have
           entered
           in
           it
           without
           the
           King's
           Authority
           warranding
           them
           ;
           But
           ,
           when
           the
           solemn
           League
           and
           Covenant
           (
           which
           had
           no
           shaddow
           of
           the
           King's
           Authority
           )
           cometh
           upon
           the
           stage
           ,
           this
           Doctrine
           was
           forgotten
           utterly
           ;
           for
           ,
           it
           was
           carried
           on
           in
           
             England
          
           by
           a
           Meeting
           of
           Parliament
           ,
           excluding
           one
           of
           the
           Estates
           ,
           and
           the
           King
           proclaiming
           against
           it
           in
           
             Scotland
          
           by
           a
           Committee
           of
           Estates
           ,
           which
           ,
           if
           they
           had
           power
           to
           engage
           the
           Land
           in
           a
           Forreign
           war
           ,
           intended
           in
           that
           Covenant
           ,
           may
           be
           doubted
           .
           Now
           ,
           although
           this
           could
           not
           nullifie
           the
           obligation
           of
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           were
           the
           matter
           of
           it
           undoubtedly
           lawfull
           and
           otherwise
           still
           obliging
           ;
           yet
           ,
           it
           were
           well
           if
           unlawfulness
           ,
           in
           regard
           of
           this
           defect
           and
           want
           of
           a
           lawfull
           Authority
           warranding
           it
           ,
           were
           acknowledged
           ;
           this
           were
           some
           piece
           of
           self-denyal
           :
           Casuists
           say
           ,
           that
           
             res
             jurata
          
           may
           be
           
             licita
             ,
          
           when
           
             Juramentum
             est
             illicitum
             .
          
           Let
           the
           matter
           of
           the
           Oath
           be
           lawfull
           ,
           and
           suppose
           it
           also
           to
           oblige
           ;
           yet
           ,
           they
           who
           appear
           so
           afraid
           of
           sin
           in
           breaking
           that
           Oath
           ,
           would
           ,
           for
           proof
           of
           their
           sincerity
           ,
           give
           as
           publick
           testimony
           against
           the
           sinfull
           way
           of
           entring
           into
           that
           Bond
           ,
           as
           they
           do
           against
           that
           sin
           (
           as
           they
           suppose
           )
           in
           breaking
           it
           ;
           if
           they
           say
           
             factum
             valet
             ,
          
           let
           them
           consider
           if
           they
           have
           no
           better
           reason
           to
           say
           
             fieri
             non
             debuit
             .
          
        
         
           2.
           
           It
           is
           most
           seriously
           to
           be
           considered
           ,
           if
           there
           be
           not
           in
           the
           intrinsical
           frame
           of
           the
           Covenant
           that
           with
           which
           God
           was
           not
           well-pleased
           .
           Such
           a
           solemn
           Oath
           and
           Covenant
           ,
           being
           a
           most
           solemn
           profession
           before
           God
           of
           what
           men
           did
           own
           in
           Religion
           ,
           and
           professedly
           intended
           for
           the
           greatest
           mutual
           assurance
           of
           men
           entring
           in
           it
           ,
           (
           one
           to
           another
           )
           should
           have
           been
           fram'd
           in
           most
           strict
           ,
           plain
           and
           specifical
           termes
           .
           But
           ,
           this
           
             solemn
             League
             ,
          
           &c.
           
             was
             purposely
             fram'd
             in
             general
             and
             homonymous
             termes
             ,
          
           such
           as
           (
           by
           the
           expressions
           )
           leaveth
           room
           for
           all
           the
           Sectaries
           in
           the
           Isle
           (
           if
           they
           will
           but
           profess
           to
           own
           
           the
           Word
           of
           God
           )
           to
           lurk
           under
           the
           lap
           of
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           to
           own
           each
           one
           their
           own
           way
           ,
           and
           yet
           plead
           their
           keeping
           of
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           such
           is
           the
           generality
           of
           the
           termes
           of
           it
           ;
           that
           several
           sorts
           of
           Sectaries
           may
           fight
           in
           their
           several
           factions
           one
           against
           another
           ,
           all
           pretending
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           there
           being
           no
           distinct
           specifical
           termes
           in
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           whereupon
           some
           could
           implead
           others
           as
           guilty
           of
           breach
           ;
           and
           did
           not
           the
           Sectarian
           
             Armie
             ,
          
           when
           they
           invaded
           
             Scotland
             ,
          
           pretend
           the
           Covenant
           and
           keeping
           of
           it
           ,
           and
           thereupon
           there
           were
           high
           appeals
           made
           to
           heaven
           ?
           Will
           not
           all
           ,
           or
           most
           of
           them
           ,
           own
           the
           letter
           of
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           which
           only
           seems
           clear
           against
           Popery
           and
           Prelacy
           ,
           and
           for
           a
           violent
           extirpation
           of
           this
           ?
           Then
           there
           was
           no
           security
           in
           that
           Covenant
           for
           preserving
           Presbytery
           in
           
             Scotland
             ;
          
           the
           Presbytery
           not
           being
           once
           named
           ,
           only
           the
           matter
           is
           wrapped
           up
           in
           a
           general
           ,
           We
           shall
           preserve
           the
           
             Reformed
             Religion
          
           in
           the
           Church
           of
           
             Scotland
          
           in
           Doctrine
           ,
           Worship
           ,
           Discipline
           and
           Government
           against
           our
           common
           enemies
           ;
           
             reformed
             Religion
             ,
          
           and
           
             against
             common
             enemies
             :
          
           No
           
             Independent
          
           or
           
             Separatist
             ,
          
           but
           might
           say
           ,
           he
           would
           preserve
           the
           Reformed
           Religion
           ,
           
             &c.
          
           in
           
             Scotland
             ,
          
           albeit
           he
           thought
           not
           Presbytery
           to
           be
           any
           part
           of
           Reformed
           Religion
           or
           Government
           ,
           and
           although
           he
           minded
           to
           do
           against
           it
           himself
           ;
           only
           ,
           if
           he
           would
           preserve
           it
           ,
           it
           should
           be
           to
           hold
           off
           what
           he
           apprehended
           worser
           ,
           he
           would
           preserve
           it
           against
           
             the
             common
             enemies
             .
          
           Neither
           is
           there
           security
           in
           that
           Covenant
           for
           reforming
           
             England
             ,
          
           according
           to
           the
           pattern
           as
           was
           desired
           by
           us
           .
           Was
           there
           not
           more
           
             policy
          
           then
           
             piety
          
           in
           this
           ,
           to
           endeavour
           the
           soldering
           and
           holding
           fast
           of
           so
           many
           several
           parties
           united
           against
           Episcopacy
           ?
           yet
           ,
           sorting
           amongst
           themselves
           ,
           like
           the
           iron
           and
           clay
           toe●
           of
           
           Nebuchadnezar's
           image
           ,
           and
           ready
           to
           break
           one
           upon
           another
           (
           all
           under
           pretence
           of
           the
           Covenant
           )
           as
           it
           clearly
           came
           to
           passe
           and
           is
           still
           like
           to
           be
           ,
           such
           is
           the
           vanity
           of
           humane
           policies
           ,
           unsound
           wayes
           of
           uniting
           ,
           tending
           to
           the
           begetting
           ,
           in
           end
           ,
           of
           greater
           distractions
           .
           And
           the
           Covenant
           being
           of
           purpose
           framed
           in
           general
           terms
           ,
           for
           the
           most
           part
           ,
           that
           several
           parties
           might
           be
           fast
           united
           against
           Prelacy
           owned
           by
           the
           King
           ;
           if
           it
           should
           be
           still
           owned
           ,
           would
           prove
           no
           better
           then
           a
           perpetual
           seminary
           of
           diverse
           Parties
           ,
           all
           pleading
           their
           keeping
           of
           their
           Covenant
           ,
           and
           yet
           no
           
           party
           agreeing
           one
           with
           another
           in
           the
           specifical
           sense
           thereof
           and
           some
           of
           the
           wayes
           of
           these
           several
           parties
           ,
           might
           be
           found
           much
           worse
           (
           in
           the
           judgment
           of
           right
           discerners
           )
           then
           Prelacy
           is
           ,
           or
           may
           be
           thought
           to
           be
           by
           some
           .
           It
           would
           be
           seriously
           pondred
           ,
           whether
           this
           way
           of
           a
           studied
           indistinctness
           ,
           generality
           and
           homonymie
           in
           the
           terms
           of
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           for
           strengthning
           a
           party
           against
           some
           one
           thing
           ,
           was
           acceptable
           to
           God
           ?
           And
           whether
           the
           blood
           of
           our
           Countrey-men
           ,
           should
           have
           been
           cast
           away
           in
           such
           uncertain
           terms
           ?
           It
           will
           be
           said
           ,
           The
           Covenant
           is
           clear
           enough
           against
           Episcopacy
           ,
           let
           us
           keep
           it
           in
           the
           clear
           and
           true
           sense
           of
           it
           ,
           whatever
           doubtfulness
           be
           otherwayes
           .
           But
           to
           say
           nothing
           of
           this
           that
           we
           have
           shewed
           above
           ,
           how
           unclear
           it
           is
           against
           the
           Episcopacy
           established
           now
           in
           
             Scotland
          
           (
           however
           clear
           it
           be
           as
           intended
           against
           the
           English
           frame
           )
           were
           it
           not
           better
           to
           lay
           aside
           (
           when
           now
           it
           is
           disclaimed
           by
           King
           and
           Parliament
           and
           all
           persons
           of
           trust
           in
           the
           Land
           )
           an
           humane
           form
           ,
           which
           ,
           in
           respect
           of
           the
           Composure
           of
           it
           ,
           is
           apt
           to
           be
           ,
           hath
           been
           ,
           and
           is
           like
           to
           be
           a
           seminary
           of
           varieties
           of
           parties
           (
           all
           pleading
           it
           )
           and
           worse
           evils
           then
           Prelacy
           is
           imagin'd
           to
           be
           ,
           then
           still
           to
           own
           it
           ,
           when
           as
           authentick
           exponers
           of
           the
           sense
           of
           it
           ,
           who
           might
           reprove
           false
           pretenders
           to
           the
           keeping
           of
           it
           ,
           cannot
           be
           had
           ;
           neither
           while
           they
           were
           in
           being
           ,
           could
           agree
           amongst
           themselves
           anent
           the
           sense
           of
           it
           ;
           as
           may
           be
           seen
           in
           the
           Parliament
           of
           
             Englands
          
           ba●ling
           the
           Scotish
           Commissioners
           Declaration
           ,
           
             anno
             .
          
           1647.
           and
           other
           Papers
           .
           God
           hath
           given
           the
           children
           of
           men
           work
           enough
           to
           be
           exercised
           in
           his
           holy
           Word
           ,
           which
           certainly
           ,
           in
           his
           intendment
           ,
           hath
           but
           one
           true
           sense
           (
           howbeit
           mans
           blindness
           often
           perceiveth
           it
           not
           )
           It
           is
           a
           needless
           labour
           to
           be
           taken
           up
           with
           humane
           forms
           (
           purposely
           contrived
           in
           general
           terms
           for
           taking
           in
           parties
           of
           known
           contrary
           sense
           and
           judgment
           )
           which
           will
           (
           if
           own'd
           )
           prove
           apples
           of
           contention
           in
           the
           present
           and
           succeeding
           Generations
           .
        
         
           But
           ,
           3.
           
           Let
           sober
           and
           godly
           men
           consider
           ,
           if
           it
           was
           dutifully
           done
           ,
           to
           swear
           the
           preservation
           of
           the
           Kings
           person
           and
           Authority
           conditionally
           and
           with
           a
           limitation
           ,
           
             In
             the
             preservation
             and
             defence
             of
             the
             true
             Religion
             .
          
           Mr.
           
           
             Crofton
          
           indeed
           denyeth
           ,
           that
           in
           that
           third
           Article
           of
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           there
           is
           any
           limitation
           of
           our
           loyalty
           in
           defending
           the
           King
           ,
           or
           that
           this
           is
           the
           sense
           ,
           that
           we
           are
           only
           bound
           to
           defend
           Him
           while
           He
           defends
           Religion
           ;
           he
           asserts
           ,
           that
           clause
           to
           be
           only
           a
           predication
           of
           their
           present
           capacity
           who
           engage
           to
           defend
           the
           King's
           Person
           ,
           to
           this
           sense
           ,
           
             we
             being
             in
             defence
             of
             Religion
             ,
          
           &c.
           
             shall
             defend
             the
             King's
             Person
             .
          
           But
           ,
           (
           to
           say
           nothing
           how
           strain'd-like
           this
           looketh
           ,
           the
           words
           ,
           in
           the
           sense
           of
           judicious
           men
           ,
           looking
           as
           a
           clear
           limitation
           of
           our
           duty
           to
           Him
           ;
           as
           if
           otherwise
           we
           owed
           Him
           no
           duty
           of
           that
           sort
           )
           Belike
           ,
           the
           General
           
             Ass
             .
          
           of
           the
           Church
           of
           
             Scotland
          
           should
           understand
           the
           sense
           of
           the
           Covenant
           somewhat
           better
           then
           Mr.
           
             Crofton
             ,
          
           (
           to
           say
           nothing
           of
           their
           stating
           their
           opposition
           to
           Authority
           of
           Parliament
           in
           the
           matter
           of
           the
           
             Engagment
             ,
          
           1648.
           upon
           this
           as
           the
           main
           hinge
           ,
           ●
           .
           our
           conditional
           duty
           to
           the
           King
           )
           .
           They
           in
           their
           Declaration
           ,
           1649.
           declare
           ,
           that
           the
           King
           was
           not
           to
           be
           admitted
           to
           the
           exercise
           of
           His
           royal
           Power
           ,
           before
           satisfaction
           ,
           as
           to
           the
           matter
           of
           Religion
           (
           they
           meant
           mainly
           that
           particular
           mode
           of
           Church-government
           by
           Presbytery
           ;
           for
           ,
           that
           was
           it
           that
           went
           under
           the
           name
           of
           Religion
           ,
           the
           substance
           of
           the
           protestant
           Religion
           being
           never
           under
           question
           between
           the
           King
           and
           them
           )
           they
           plead
           for
           a
           ground
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           where
           their
           duty
           ,
           in
           defending
           the
           King's
           Person
           and
           Authority
           ,
           is
           said
           to
           be
           subordinate
           to
           Religion
           ;
           and
           therefore
           it
           is
           concluded
           ,
           that
           without
           manifest
           breach
           of
           Covenant
           ,
           they
           cannot
           admit
           Him
           to
           reign
           ,
           till
           in
           that
           they
           be
           satisfied
           :
           It
           is
           clear
           ,
           they
           look'd
           on
           it
           as
           a
           limitation
           of
           their
           duty
           ,
           and
           that
           His
           owning
           of
           Presbytery
           ,
           
             &c.
          
           was
           
             conditio
             sinè
             quà
             non
             ,
          
           of
           His
           reigning
           amongst
           them
           ,
           and
           of
           their
           paying
           duty
           to
           Him
           ;
           and
           so
           indeed
           the
           transactions
           in
           the
           Treaties
           at
           
             Breda
          
           and
           the
           
             Hague
             ,
          
           and
           what
           followed
           thereupon
           ,
           expounded
           their
           mind
           .
           Now
           ,
           was
           this
           right
           ,
           that
           (
           where
           our
           Alleagiance
           binds
           us
           to
           duty
           in
           a
           greater
           latitude
           )
           this
           should
           be
           held
           out
           to
           people
           as
           the
           only
           standard
           of
           their
           loyalty
           ,
           and
           duty
           to
           the
           King
           ?
           Was
           it
           sound
           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
           giv●
           occasion
           to
           wicked
           men
           (
           as
           the
           Sectaries
           take
           it
           in
           their
           Declaration
           before
           the
           late
           King's
           death
           )
           to
           think
           they
           were
           no
           further
           obliged
           to
           Him
           then
           ▪
           He
           should
           defend
           that
           which
           ,
           they
           accounted
           Religion
           ▪
           yea
           ,
           that
           they
           were
           obliged
           by
           Covenant
           to
           destroy
           Hi●
           Person
           ,
           they
           finding
           (
           as
           they
           say
           ,
           in
           that
           Declaration
           )
           that
           His
           Safety
           and
           Religions
           are
           inconsistent
           ▪
           And
           ,
           was
           it
           the
           duty
           of
           th●se
           who
           were
           Commissioners
           from
           this
           at
           
             London
          
           then
           ,
           to
           profess
           in
           their
           Paper
           ,
           
             they
             were
             not
             in●●●s●●d
             to
             〈…〉
             in
             their
             guilt
             ,
          
           when
           they
           knew
           th●
           〈◊〉
           would
           take
           their
           meaning
           to
           ●e
           of
           the
           King
           ▪
           Doth
           difference
           in
           Religion
           ,
           or
           in
           these
           inferior
           and
           lower
           points
           ,
           about
           Church-government
           ,
           loose
           a
           people
           from
           their
           duty
           in
           defending
           His
           Person
           ,
           and
           obeying
           His
           Authority
           ?
           How
           may
           forreign
           Princes
           (
           who
           have
           Protestants
           in
           their
           Dominions
           )
           take
           it
           ,
           if
           that
           might
           pass
           for
           an
           approved
           opinion
           amongst
           their
           protestant
           Subjects
           ,
           that
           their
           loyalty
           is
           to
           be
           limited
           to
           His
           beeing
           of
           their
           Religion
           ;
           and
           if
           He
           be
           not
           ,
           they
           may
           either
           cease
           to
           defend
           ,
           Him
           or
           inv●d●
           Him
           ?
           It
           may
           be
           remembred
           ,
           that
           those
           who
           owned
           the
           western
           Remonstrance
           ,
           did
           justifie
           their
           seditious
           Engagments
           and
           renting
           proceedings
           (
           which
           few
           of
           them
           have
           dis●laim'd
           to
           this
           day
           )
           upon
           then
           sensing
           the
           obligation
           of
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           as
           is
           said
           ,
           and
           that
           in
           conformity
           to
           the
           constant
           tenor
           of
           the
           published
           Declarations
           and
           Testimonies
           of
           Church
           judicatories
           ,
           since
           the
           taking
           of
           the
           Covenant
           ▪
           and
           if
           s●
           ,
           sure
           it
           concerneth
           the
           Ministers
           of
           this
           Church
           ,
           to
           vindicate
           the
           Doctrine
           it
           hereof
           ,
           in
           the
           point
           of
           
             that
             respect
             and
             obedience
             ,
             to
             the
             Civil
             ,
             Magistrate
          
           (
           which
           the
           Confessions
           of
           all
           Protestant
           Churches
           do
           own
           )
           which
           hath
           been
           stain'd
           ,
           by
           these
           corrupt
           principles
           and
           positions
           ,
           and
           the
           undutifull
           practices
           ,
           slowing
           from
           the
           same
           in
           these
           years
           past
           .
        
         
           But
           to
           say
           no
           more
           it
           would
           be
           in
           the
           fear
           of
           God
           considered
           ,
           if
           in
           the
           solemn
           Covenant
           ,
           the
           engagers
           therein
           have
           bound
           themselves
           ,
           to
           〈◊〉
           act
           unlawfull
           ,
           that
           may
           render
           the
           Covenant
           in
           some
           part
           of
           the
           matter
           of
           it
           sinfull
           ;
           the
           act
           which
           in
           the
           second
           Article
           (
           now
           under
           question
           ▪
           )
           they
           have
           
           engaged
           themselves
           in
           ,
           is
           the
           voting
           out
           of
           Prelacy
           ,
           or
           the
           Offices
           ▪
           
             &c.
             
          
           There
           was
           no
           such
           Offices
           in
           
             Scotland
          
           at
           that
           time
           ,
           so
           they
           needed
           not
           to
           swear
           extirpation
           of
           what
           was
           not
           there
           ,
           In
           
             England
          
           their
           Church-government
           being
           warranted
           by
           the
           Laws
           of
           the
           King
           and
           Land
           ,
           it
           may
           be
           question'd
           if
           the
           swearing
           the
           extirpation
           ,
           or
           endeavouring
           to
           extirpate
           the
           same
           ,
           without
           and
           against
           the
           consent
           of
           the
           Soveraign
           Law
           giver
           of
           the
           land
           ,
           was
           a
           lawfull
           Act.
           The
           question
           is
           not
           now
           ,
           whether
           Episcopacy
           be
           lawfull
           or
           not
           ,
           But
           supposing
           Episcopacy
           to
           be
           unlawfull
           in
           it self
           ,
           albeit
           in
           that
           case
           the
           Law-givers
           were
           indeed
           bound
           to
           remove
           it
           ,
           and
           to
           annull
           Laws
           favouring
           it
           ;
           Yet
           ,
           it
           were
           unlawfull
           to
           people
           to
           bandy
           for
           forcing
           or
           frighting
           the
           Law
           givers
           to
           an
           alteration
           of
           these
           Laws
           ,
           and
           to
           tye
           themselves
           to
           a
           mutual
           defence
           ,
           with
           lives
           and
           fortunes
           for
           overturning
           what
           the
           Law
           alloweth
           (
           agree
           the
           Soveraign
           or
           not
           )
           which
           is
           the
           clear
           meaning
           of
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           
             Artic.
          
           2
           ,
           3
           ,
           5.
           
           If
           once
           that
           Principle
           prevail
           ,
           that
           subjects
           may
           (
           when
           they
           apprehend
           Laws
           unlawfull
           )
           use
           forcible
           endeavours
           to
           obtain
           alteration
           thereof
           ,
           What
           security
           can
           there
           be
           for
           the
           best
           Printes
           in
           maintaining
           the
           best
           Laws
           ?
           or
           what
           peace
           for
           people
           ?
           When
           an
           evil
           spirit
           rusheth
           upon
           people
           ,
           or
           some
           
             Sheba
          
           bloweth
           the
           trumper
           ,
           they
           will
           be
           ready
           to
           think
           it
           is
           their
           place
           and
           calling
           ,
           being
           souldiers
           and
           men
           at
           armes
           (
           however
           called
           thereto
           )
           to
           offer
           violence
           to
           Magistrates
           and
           Laws
           ,
           even
           the
           best
           :
           It
           is
           in
           vain
           ,
           some
           defenders
           of
           the
           Covenant
           say
           ,
           forcible
           endeavours
           are
           not
           meant
           ;
           Compare
           second
           Article
           and
           third
           ,
           that
           make
           mention
           of
           lives
           and
           estates
           ,
           and
           relates
           to
           the
           former
           and
           the
           fifth
           Article
           .
           It
           is
           clearly
           enough
           seen
           ,
           violent
           endeavours
           are
           meant
           ,
           where
           lesse
           will
           not
           do
           .
           And
           when
           the
           cause
           of
           the
           Covenant
           was
           managed
           in
           the
           field
           ,
           were
           not
           people
           upon
           account
           of
           that
           Article
           ,
           hunted
           out
           either
           to
           kill
           or
           die
           ,
           and
           terrified
           with
           the
           charge
           of
           Covenant-breaking
           if
           they
           went
           not
           ?
           Did
           not
           people
           conceive
           themselves
           ,
           (
           or
           were
           taught
           so
           )
           that
           it
           was
           their
           place
           and
           calling
           to
           take
           armes
           without
           and
           against
           the
           consent
           of
           the
           
           Soveraign
           Law-giver
           ?
           And
           in
           that
           calling
           ,
           they
           were
           to
           endeavour
           forcibly
           ,
           consent
           the
           King
           or
           not
           ,
           to
           carry
           that
           abolition
           of
           Prelacy
           .
           Let
           it
           be
           considered
           ,
           whether
           engageing
           to
           such
           endeavours
           were
           lawfull
           ,
           
             quoad
             nos
             ;
          
           or
           whether
           it
           can
           be
           a
           lawfull
           bond
           ;
           that
           tyes
           to
           such
           violent
           endeavours
           against
           the
           supreme
           Magistrate
           and
           Laws
           (
           be
           what
           they
           will
           be
           )
           And
           let
           it
           be
           seriously
           pondred
           ,
           that
           if
           they
           who
           hold
           themselves
           obliged
           in
           no
           way
           to
           yield
           unto
           ,
           acknowledge
           ,
           obey
           nor
           act
           under
           the
           Government
           ,
           which
           the
           King
           and
           Law
           have
           set
           over
           them
           ,
           and
           by
           thus
           withdrawing
           their
           subjection
           ,
           encourage
           and
           lead
           others
           to
           do
           the
           like
           after
           their
           example
           ,
           thereby
           designing
           to
           weaken
           the
           Government
           (
           which
           in
           the
           fairest
           construction
           ,
           cannot
           be
           judged
           to
           
             live
             peaceably
          
           )
           If
           ,
           I
           say
           ,
           these
           will
           speak
           and
           act
           consequentially
           to
           former
           principles
           and
           practices
           ,
           not
           yet
           by
           them
           disclaimed
           ,
           they
           must
           also
           hold
           themselves
           by
           the
           same
           Covenant
           oblig'd
           to
           resist
           and
           fight
           against
           the
           Laws
           fencing
           Episcopacy
           ,
           if
           occasion
           were
           offered
           ;
           and
           not
           only
           to
           vent
           their
           animosities
           and
           discontents
           in
           their
           prayers
           and
           discourses
           in
           private
           ,
           but
           also
           to
           take
           all
           occasions
           to
           revile
           and
           curse
           that
           Government
           and
           their
           Superiours
           ,
           commissionated
           by
           the
           King
           ,
           in
           Prayers
           ,
           Sermons
           and
           discourses
           in
           publick
           ;
           and
           ,
           in
           effect
           ,
           to
           do
           what
           in
           them
           lyeth
           ,
           to
           bring
           it
           and
           them
           under
           ,
           the
           scandal
           and
           
             odium
          
           of
           the
           people
           ,
           and
           make
           them
           the
           Butt
           of
           their
           malice
           and
           revenge
           ;
           let
           wise
           men
           judge
           how
           far
           this
           is
           from
           the
           tenor
           of
           our
           lawfull
           Oaths
           of
           Allegiance
           ,
           Supremacy
           ,
           yea
           and
           Christianity
           ,
           and
           what
           an
           inlet
           this
           will
           give
           to
           disturb
           the
           peace
           and
           rekindle
           that
           fire
           which
           had
           almost
           consumed
           us
           to
           ashes
           .
           To
           close
           ,
           1.
           
           If
           Episcopacy
           be
           of
           Apostolick
           Institution
           (
           as
           many
           learned
           godly
           men
           judge
           ,
           and
           it
           is
           hard
           to
           say
           many
           swearers
           of
           the
           Covenant
           had
           ground
           of
           clear
           perswasion
           to
           the
           contrary
           )
           it
           would
           not
           be
           so
           banded
           against
           without
           grievous
           sin
           and
           scandal
           .
           2.
           
           If
           Episcopacy
           be
           of
           indifferent
           nature
           ,
           and
           only
           by
           humane
           constitution
           ,
           it
           would
           be
           considered
           ,
           what
           Protestants
           write
           against
           Papists
           ,
           
             That
             vows
             of
             perpetual
             abstinence
             in
             all
             cases
             from
             things
             in
             their
             nature
             indifferent
             ,
             are
             
             utterly
             unlawfull
             ;
          
           and
           let
           it
           be
           thought
           ,
           whether
           it
           be
           lawfull
           for
           any
           subjects
           to
           bind
           up
           themselves
           by
           Oath
           ,
           never
           to
           be
           subject
           to
           the
           Magistrates
           laws
           in
           things
           God
           hath
           put
           under
           the
           determination
           of
           his
           power
           .
           3.
           
           Let
           Episcopacy
           be
           unlawfull
           ,
           (
           which
           is
           not
           proven
           by
           any
           )
           yet
           it
           shall
           be
           unlawfull
           for-subjects
           to
           attempt
           the
           abrogation
           of
           the
           Laws
           favouring
           it
           ,
           by
           any
           force
           to
           be
           us'd
           on
           the
           Lawgiver
           ,
           which
           is
           indeed
           the
           intent
           of
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           and
           the
           proceedings
           thereupon
           were
           answerable
           .
        
         
           The
           Lord
           give
           us
           humble
           and
           peaceable
           spirits
           ,
           to
           see
           at
           last
           ,
           and
           lay
           to
           heart
           the
           sin
           and
           folly
           of
           those
           Bonds
           and
           Combinations
           against
           the
           Kings
           Ecclesiastical
           Government
           ,
           and
           his
           will
           expressed
           in
           the
           Laws
           of
           the
           land
           ,
           which
           are
           inconsistent
           with
           that
           duty
           and
           loyalty
           ,
           which
           Church-men
           ,
           above
           other
           subjects
           ,
           should
           pay
           to
           that
           
             Supremacy
             in
             all
             causes
             and
             over
             all
             persons
             ,
          
           declared
           by
           the
           law
           to
           be
           an
           inherent
           right
           to
           the
           Crown
           :
           It
           is
           high
           time
           for
           us
           in
           this
           day
           of
           our
           tranquillity
           and
           calm
           which
           God
           hath
           wrought
           ,
           to
           consider
           what
           belongs
           to
           our
           peace
           ,
           and
           to
           discern
           the
           way
           of
           our
           duty
           ,
           from
           which
           we
           have
           been
           too
           long
           transported
           by
           the
           tempestuous
           Agitations
           and
           diverse
           winds
           of
           Doctrines
           ,
           Engagements
           and
           professions
           in
           the
           years
           past
           :
           Reason
           and
           Scripture
           ,
           Divine
           and
           Natural
           law
           ,
           seem
           to
           point
           out
           as
           with
           a
           Sun-beam
           ,
           the
           way
           we
           should
           hold
           ,
           namely
           ,
           that
           
             for
             publick
             security
             ,
             order
             and
             peace
             ,
          
           Ministers
           and
           people
           do
           acquiesce
           in
           the
           present
           establishment
           ,
           and
           obey
           every
           Ordinance
           of
           man
           ,
           whether
           the
           King
           as
           Supream
           ,
           or
           those
           who
           are
           commissionated
           by
           Him
           ,
           and
           that
           not
           only
           for
           wrath
           but
           conscience
           sake
           .
           Let
           it
           be
           far
           from
           Ministers
           of
           the
           Gospel
           of
           peace
           ,
           to
           head
           and
           lead
           the
           people
           into
           divisions
           and
           offences
           ,
           and
           by
           their
           carriage
           and
           way
           ,
           to
           dispose
           them
           into
           disaffection
           and
           discontent
           with
           the
           King
           and
           his
           Laws
           ,
           as
           if
           in
           the
           account
           of
           some
           ,
           (
           whether
           of
           corrupt
           and
           weak
           minds
           )
           he
           were
           a
           Tyrant
           not
           a
           Father
           to
           the
           Church
           ,
           who
           maketh
           such
           Laws
           ,
           which
           His
           conscientious
           subjects
           cannot
           obey
           for
           fear
           of
           sin
           against
           God
           ;
           if
           this
           way
           of
           disobedience
           be
           persisted
           in
           ,
           it
           is
           easie
           to
           see
           what
           evils
           will
           follow
           ,
           (
           since
           it
           must
           be
           expected
           ,
           that
           the
           
           King
           and
           Parliament
           ,
           will
           in
           honour
           and
           justice
           ,
           maintain
           the
           laws
           )
           And
           how
           the
           whole
           Nation
           may
           be
           exposed
           to
           the
           reproach
           of
           a
           troublesome
           ,
           disquiet
           ,
           factious
           people
           ,
           delighting
           still
           in
           sedition
           and
           turbulency
           ;
           It
           becomes
           us
           rather
           to
           cut
           off
           occasions
           of
           stumbling
           in
           the
           way
           of
           Gods
           people
           ,
           and
           to
           be
           patterns
           of
           love
           to
           ,
           and
           zeal
           for
           the
           Honour
           and
           tranquillity
           of
           our
           King
           and
           Countrey
           ,
           of
           this
           Church
           and
           State
           ,
           and
           to
           shew
           so
           much
           tenderness
           for
           the
           interest
           of
           Religion
           ,
           Order
           and
           Unity
           ,
           as
           to
           put
           forth
           our selves
           to
           the
           utmost
           in
           our
           stations
           ,
           to
           promote
           all
           these
           ,
           which
           will
           prove
           the
           most
           effectual
           way
           of
           crushing
           that
           spirit
           of
           Athelsm
           and
           profaneness
           ,
           so
           much
           complained
           of
           by
           those
           who
           flee
           from
           the
           only
           remedy
           thereof
           ;
           Ministers
           are
           not
           to
           imploy
           themselves
           so
           much
           in
           considering
           how
           to
           maintain
           and
           uphold
           the
           interest
           of
           a
           party
           or
           cause
           they
           have
           espoused
           ,
           as
           how
           far
           they
           may
           go
           ,
           what
           they
           may
           without
           sin
           do
           in
           the
           practice
           of
           what
           the
           law
           injoyneth
           .
           The
           God
           of
           peace
           and
           truth
           direct
           and
           stablish
           us
           in
           the
           way
           of
           peace
           and
           truth
           ,
           
             Amen
             .
          
        
         
           FINIS
        
      
    
     
       
         
           ERRATA
           .
        
         
           Pag.
           15.
           
           Line
           6.
           for
           
             others
          
           read
           
             Oaths
             .
          
           Pag.
           18.
           
           Line
           2.
           for
           
             sect
          
           read
           
             sort
             .