ANIMADVERSIONS ON THE Scotch Covenant. WHEREIN All may receive satisfaction as to the Illegality of it, and be easily persuaded to the Renunciation thereof.  
By J. L.  Ezek. 16.61. 
Then thou shalt remember thy ways, and be ashamed, when thou shalt receive thy sisters, thine elder and thy younger: and I will give them unto thee for daughters, but not according to thy Covenant.  
LONDON: Printed for Nath. Brook, at the Angel in 〈◊〉, 1662.   

Animadversions, etc.  
AS soon as I viewed this Sermon and the passages annexed to it though I have no itch to the Press, (which I wish were more narrowly looked to) yet Facit indignatio versum, I could not forbear putting pen to paper, that I might Vindicate my Sovereign and the Church of England. And though I could wish rather any should have done it then myself, yet better it is that it should be done by one that is Minimus sacerdotum then not at all. Indeed I was once in the mind to let it pass with a private Deleatur to the whole, conceiving that scarce any would be found willing to feed on such sour Grapes, the greatest part of those who have any Ecclesiastical Function amongst us being weary of hearing a Charge, and therefore call for a Retreat to be Sounded, desiring a composure of Church Differences; yet because there are some bad Stomaches that delight in green Fruit and Trash; and others Weak, who require some greater satisfaction to the particulars herein contained than they can give themselves; I hoped that it might have some good success, if not to the former yet to these latter. And if any thing seem sharp let the Reader blame him Qui laesit prior. It will be superfluous to Exercise any Charity in raising a doubt of the Author of this paper, since the Title page bears his name, or of his willingness to have it made public since we are there told that it was Printed according to the Authors own Copy, to prevent any counterfeit; against which surely that care could not make a sufficient provision since it will be evident that the whole (at best) is no other. But we may well Quaere and easily be resolved of the Reasons of issuing it out at this time of his Sacred Majesties coming to England, that they were no other, then either to engage him to the same here, and so give an Alloy to the Affections of those that had embarked themselves in his and his Father's Cause, or else upon a refusal to be a Foundation of Clamour against him by their handful of Associates in England: If these suffice not, why may we not think that it was proposed as a pattern to some rigid and refractory Spirits to hold him to the same hard meat here which they had so liberally fed him with in Scotland. It is plain that as Malice was the Mother, so Mischief is the intended Daughter.  
Others of a contrary Judgement to them have been willing to Lute up their Mouths and Acquiesce in the Royal determination with the advice of his great Council, but these Men will never cease to cast in Firebrands amongst us to put all in Flames; what can we not be a Church unless we be a Kirk? or is all the World obliged to Dance after the Scotch Bagg-pipe? is either England so Low, or themselves in so High and Potent Condition, that they should impose upon us? or is our Peace and Settlement the only object of their Envy? or if they must needs be attemping a Disunion amongst us in such a juncture of Affairs wherein all sober minded men labour to make up our many Breaches had they no other expedient but this paper to do it? as if they were resolved, that his Sacred Majesty should never be free from Afflictions whether with them or us; or had they no better Sermon for a Coronation, or to plead their interest then this pitiful crude piece? Believe it, if the Author were chosen for so great a work by ability, not faction, we may well pity them with whom the work of Preaching Runs so Low, and let me add, so full of dregs.  
It is not agreeable to the more modest and civil Genius of our Nation to be so bold in the Pulpit with private men how mean soever, as to name them, much less with a KING; we have learned Parcere personis dicere de vitiis; it is sufficient that we give the Thesis, let the Auditor's Conscience make the application; or where we think that necessary we cannot but account it absurd to direct it to any particular Person, a course more fit to blast then instruct him, nor shall any man ever find this rude way advantageous for the attaining that end, which is or should be designed by Preachers, the Benefit of the Auditors; for who is there so publicly reproved whose corruption will not hatch a dislike of the froward and imprudent instructor; and where this dislike takes place his Doctrine is like to find but a mean Reception. We know well the Charge of the Apostle, Those that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear, 1 Tim. 5.20. But who doth not know that this is not to be understood of all offences but those that are primae magnitudinis, and those sins without Controversy, and publicly known, and that after a Fruitless Trial of all fair and gentle means, and private admonitions; and when ever used, or if ever to God's Vice gerent, in silken words. But for every Minister (since he will be called so) so soon as he hears of any Affairs of State which dislikes his Fancy, or corresponds not with his Interest, immediately to fly in the Face of Majesty, and by a satirical bawling and barbarous Discourse to render it mean in the eyes of the Subjects, which are of themselves too apt to entertain such thoughts and discover the bad fruits of them, is neither agreeable to the Ingenuity of a Scholar, the Prudence of a Christian, or the Gravity of a Divine. I could muster up here a Troop of practices of this nature, but that I have no intent to provoke my Reader to laughter by repeating those things which were never fit to be spoken once, much less in a Pulpit: and yet (which is the mischief of it) for this only they are thought godly and faithful; And our Author tells us as much, pag. 10. For, They spared not (saith he) to tell the King his fault to his Face. Yet this may seem to be a small matter in respect of another usage they have, which is not only to rebuke (I had almost said rail against) then Coram, but in their Country Pulpits, before a few walking Clods to censure all the actions of the Court, and rip up all the imagined faults of the absent King, who can never be informed by such discourses, so that any intelligent person must needs conclude, that their proper tendency is to stir up seditious spirits to resist the lawful Magistrate, for maintenance of their new Model. And though you will think this enough and too much, yet they rest not here; for they are so accustomed to revile the living, both present and absent, that they spare not the very Dead, as you may see in this Author, page 4. There are many sins upon our King and his Family; a little after, I desire the King be truly humbled for his own sins, etc. the sins of his Father's House, which have been great! Page 19 He accuses King James of making a foul defection; and in a few lines after, says, that He laid the Foundation whereupon his Son our late King did build much mischief to Religion all the days of his life. Os impudens! was there none that had loyalty enough to stop that black mouth? or is it so customary with you, that it is to be esteemed a Scotch Elegancy? In good earnest that blessed Saint shall hear a Martyr when the Name of such railing Rabshakaes' shall either be forgotten or remembered with abhorrency.  
Again, Page 22. Sir, There is too much iniquity upon the Throne by your Predecessors, who framed mischief by a Law. And Page 24: I may say freely that the chief cause of the Judgement upon the King's House hath been the Grandfather's breach of Covenant with God, & the Father's following steps in opposing the work of God, & his Kirk within these Kingdoms. What will you disturb the Grave, and arraign & sentence the Ashes of the Kings? how can we expect any Piety where there is a want of that Charity which covereth the multitude of Offences? nay, where there is that radicated malice that makes offences where there are none, and that is not satisfied with a verbal aspersing the Dead, but by the Press endeavours the transmitting these Calumnies to Posterity: Aut hoc non est Evangelium, aut hi non sunt Christiani, 'tis the Apostles rule, Titus 3. v: 2. To speak evil of no man; you have not the Authority of the Writers of the Canon of Scripture in censuring the Lives of your KING'S though you take it:  
Page 2 In the Circumstances of Coronation prefixed to the Sermon, you may take notice, that assoon as ever the Lord Chancellor had signified their desire of his being Crowned, with the same breath he desires the Maintenance of Religion conform to the Nationall Covenant, League and Covenant; So it seems Religion must conform to that, not that to Religion: this is that which they make the top of the Crown, its Cross; and than if this be done, what will they do? he tells you, that They will bestow Land, Life, and what else is in their power for the maintenance of Religion, and the safety of his Majesty's person. I like well that God should be set above the King, and so doth his Majesty too; But what the aim of these Men is in prefixing of Religion to the safety of his Majesty's sacred Person, we know by sad experience; and find here in their words, Religion conform to the Nationall Covenant: would you understand what Religion is in their sense? the sum total, is the National Covenant, the League and Covenant; which being their own device and an unwarrantable composure how little reason there is, that either that should be the comprehensive of Religion, or Religion under that Notion stand before his Majesty, let all sober and discreet Men judge.  
Page 3 In the Sermon, to let alone his Conjectures about Joash, when he comes to make the Parallel betwixt him and the King, he tells you, Pa. 3. That the wicked Men have risen up, and usurped the Kingdom; And who were these wicked men? were they not all or most of them Covenanters? did they not all swarm out of the Hive of Presbytery? and what did your own Country men do in the days of his great Grandmother? and by what Principles were they acted, and who set them a work? and what were the Pretences? we are well pleased you should condemn these amongst us as much as you will, but desire that you would pass the same Censure upon all that lie under the same Gild, what ever covering they throw over it. For we agree fully with you, That who ever rises up and Usurps the Kingdom, deserves the Title of wicked; and as you say in the words following, we say also, that They put to Death the last King most unnatually: but who brought him low and made the way for his Murder? who did unnaturally murder him in his Repute and good Name, and so prepared him for their Cruelty? If you be not able to answer these Questions, every Child can with us; for the vail is taken off, and you must never think these many Ages to deceive so much as the Plebeians with the NAME of RELIGION in your sense before mentioned.  
Page 4 You say, Page 4. That there are many sins upon the King and his Family; the unhandsomeness of this expression is took notice of before; and now must add that which is proper as it lies here; what so young and yet so many sins? what are they personal? can they see so many, and all the world besides admire they can find so few? What were they sins in Government? why he never yet came to it here when these words were spoken; and how long had he governed with you, or how much did he govern? though you put away most of his Friends from him, yet we are not ignorant, He that will charge others so Magisterially should look a little into himself, and those that side with him; and shall we find him or their Assembly spotless? So much hath been printed, so much is known of your ways and proceed, that you had need to bewail your own Trible ere you charge his Majesty so rudely and violently: and if we may trace you in your own way of censuring, I think we may say; The Event hath showed that the Lord hath had a Controversy with you; as well as you say he hath with the Royal Family.  
Page 5 Page 5: He is not content to strike at the present King and his dead Ancestors, but he must discover their wont dissafection to Kings in General; for there he gives them this lash, Kings use to be so taken up with their Crowns that they despise their People. They are always engrafting in the stock of the people a bad opinion of Kings, which with the heat of their Sermons, they can at pleasure make sprout out into a Rebellion; and therefore I shall only tell him to this Passage, that He and his Faction are so taken up with their novel Discipline, that they despise Crowns, and speak evil of Dignities, and encourage the People to do the like as thinking it very safe to speak the Pulpit language.  
That which follows in the same Page is to me very strange, when he so confidently affirms, I know nothing that is good in Government but a King may learn it out of the Book of God. It is a great sign you know not much. The end which the Scripture proposeth as to us, is to discover the way and means of attaining salvation, in this Non deficit, so omits not any thing of that which is needful to acquire this End. But on the other side, Non redundant in superfluis; for although there be scattered up and down some general precepts concerning Magistrates and all Relations, yet it being not the end of Scripture to write Politics, we may boldly say, that all that is good in Government cannot be learned out of the Book of God: much might be said to this; but because I mean to make short work with him, I shall choke him with an Authority drawn from a Patriarch of his own King-lessening Doctrine, Buchanan in his Book De jure Regni when he comes to answer the Objection, 
De jure Regni apud Scotos Pag. 47.  That however Idolatrous the Kings of Israel were, yet the Prophets never exhorted the people to take up Arms and to set things right by such crooked means, Possum (saith he) apud multas Nationes plurimas saluberrimasque recensere Leges quorum in Sacris literis nullum est exemplum; The Government is by Laws; Laws there are, and good ones too it may be; besides what are there something it seems by him not only for Government, but for governing him that hath the Government, that yet there is no Scripture for? And he did very ingeniously to confess they had no Scripture for it; for all their practices in that are besides the Text, Kings must govern by Scripture, but they think they may govern them without.  
He is pleased a little after to commend the Testimonies of God for the best Counsellors; we deny it not: but why are they so? Because they will tell the Kings freely both their Sin and their Duty; Why, who should if they should not; God speaks by them; but sure I am he likes them the better for their freedom with Kings: but let me tell you, since the Scriptures are so free, you might be a little modester than you are; and let something else then railing be the Character of a good Preacher amongst you.  
Page 6 Much troubled he is, Page 6. with anointing of Kings; and after he hath granted that one of he Cases in which the Jews used it, viz, in the Case of Interruption by Usurpation, which he confesseth was their Case in the present Coronation; yet than he flies to this, that it was Typical and taken from the Jews without warrant. They make what they please typical; but though they were anointed, and Christ were yet thence to infer it was a type, is no sound consequence. The Jews used Baptism before Christ; Christ makes use of it also; will they say this is a typical action? if so, why do they not cast that off? the sick were anointed with Oil, James 5.14. was that typical? as for his other, that it was taken from the Jews without warrant, I must look upon it as affirmed Gratis. For in these things where we have not directions in the New Testament, why may we not have respect to the Old, especially when the action doth not deny Christ come, so will not lay any Jewish bondage upon us: Now to make it more odious, he tells us how that this anointing was Most in use with the Bishops of Rome, who to keep Kings and Emperor's subject to themselves did swear them to the Pope when they were anointed; (and yet the Jewish Priests did never swear Kings to themselves,) as for England although the Pope was cast off, yet the subjection of Kings to Bishops was still retained; for they anointed the King and swore him to the maintenance of their Prelatical Dignity. Very good; Turpe est Doctori cùm culpa redarguit ipsum, What art thou O man, that condemnest another, and yet dost the same things. Sure you were asleep when you delivered this, I am sure you forgot yourself much; look into Page 2: in the Chancellor's Speech, and see what he moves to the King so soon as he had delivered the desires of the people for his Coronation; That he would maintain Religion, conform to the National Covenant, League and Covenant; so in Pa. 10. after the Sermon was done, they put him to renew the Covenant, they had urged him to take it before: this was but a renewing; for notwithstanding their Articles at Breda, they knew well how they had used him in this particular, both before he landed and after, contrary to their first agreement; for no Coronation nor nothing to be done for him without this; and who is this to Engage him too, but their Presbytery, that is, themselves; and yet they complain of the Pope and the English Bishops that they swear Kings to themselves. Accordingly they fashion the people, Page 21: to bear Truth and Faith to him, and live and die with him; with this limitation, In your service according to the Nationall Covenant and Solemn League and Covenant: So Page 23. the Lords one by one did promise Truth and Faith to him against all manner of Polkes whatsoever in your service, according to the Nationall Covenant and Solemn League and Covenant. So, no Covenant, no Obedience, no King. Yet they do not as the Pope or the Bishops of England; good men! they are guilty of no such practices; indeed they are not, but of worse they are. Where was your reason when you say that in England although the Pope was cast off, yet the Subjection of Kings to Bishops was still retained? wherein or how is the King of England subject to the Bishops, speak it out Man! do they meet without his Order but with the danger of a praemunire? have any of them opposed him or railed against him in their Sermons? or have they undertaken at their Assemblies to order the King, to order the Army, to direct them when they shall Fight, when not; whom they shall employ, whom cast out, how they shall keep their King locked up as a Prisoner; when he shall appear, and when 'tis fit to take him from the Army; lest by being seen, he prove too popular, and give a Check to the Kirk? All which things and many more we know who have done, that pretend to nothing but the sword of the spirit; Do the Bishops at any time use so much as a bold Expression to him? do they not acknowledge though not their calling yet the exercise of it in this or that Precinct to him? do they in their Synods offer to oblige the people by their determinations, till the things agreed upon have received the Stamp of Royal Authority, and so made currant? can you say that at any time they have held their Resolution firm in any thing without the King's Confirmation? do they not acknowledge him and pray for him as supreme in all causes as well Ecclesiastical as Civil? do you give him so much, or do you so pray for him? Lastly, have the Bishops in England since the Reformation, ever used any violent means to bring the King to their bow? who have you known, and let them bear the charge of subjecting Kings to their model.  
But you go on to tell us how Subjection of Kings to Bishops is still retained in England; now let the Auditor look for some rare reasons, for which he may prepare either his laughter or pity, or both, For the anointed, the King; ergo, he is subject to them: Hear as good an Argument; the Marquis of Argyle the grand Patron of the Covenant, set the Crown upon the King's Head, Page 21. will you say therefore the King was subject to him? I will not say what he and you would have made him, but a better Providenc hath delivered him out of those storms and a little time will discover the hidden things of that mischievous League. The latter part is as good and to the same tune; And swear him to the maintenance of their Prelatical Dignity: you are much out; for they present nothing, but what his Ancestors ever voluntarily engaged themselves too by Oath, and do not force an Oath upon him of their own devising. The Oath is not of their imposing, but of his own free taking, and thereby he engageth himself to nothing, but what is by Law established: not urged by violence, and threats and arms. And what if he doth engage by Oath to preserve the Rights of the Church, is the matter so heinous? Yes, Bishops are Limbs of Antichrist. You say much but you prove little; will you make the Apostles Limbs of Antichrist? Name & Alexandria à Marco Evangelista usque ad Heraclam & Dionysium Episcopos, Presbyteri semper unum ex se electum, in excelsiori gradu collocatum Episcopum nominabant Hieronymus ad Evagrium, Epist. 85: was Mark Bishop of Alexandria a Limb of Antichrist? or Peter at Antioch or Rome, or James at Jerusalem, or Polycarp at Smyrna? what have all Ecclesiastical Writers agreed together to lie in a matter of Fact, delivering to us the succession of Bishops in the most principal Sees? I will not say much to this, the Cause hath been handled by many Learned Pens which either you have not read, or if, which prejudice St Hierom to whom you attribute more than all the Fathers, because you think he doth least to Bishops; yet if he might determine the Controversy in his Epistle to Evagrius, he would give it against you. Et ut sciamus traditiones Apostolicus sumptus de Veteri Testamento; quod Aaron, & filii ejus: atque Levitae in Templo suerunt, hoc sibi Episcopi & Presbyteri, & Diacani vindicent in Ecclesia, Epist: 85. I will add no more but look beyond Calvin, yet anointing, and Bishops must Be put together to the door, never to come in again: Yes, they may and never ask a Scotch Minister leave; you must not always think to reign as Kings, and censure as you please, coupling Popery and Prelacy together without any distinction, on purpose to make all that be of that judgement in the same condemnation with the Papists, and so fit for your Sequestration and Violence. But though he cast out the Ceremony of anointing, yet he undertakes to tell us presently after, how they are anointed of the Lord, Because by the Ordinance of the Lord their Authority is sacred and inviolable. Take heed you break not the Ordinance of the Lord; for we shall have occasion afterwards to see how sacred and inviolable you make it in your opinion and practice. Then you commend unto us in the same Page, The spiritual Unction which you say is common to Believers; and than That few Kings are so anointed. There are but few Kings; therefore there cannot be many so anointed when the whole number is so small: but let me tell you there are many Rebels, and not one of them is so anointed.  
Anon after you come to reckon up the Enemies to the Authority of Kings, and we could enlarge your Catalogue with another name to the third sort, who you say are such Who rise against Kings in open Rebellion as Absolom and Sheba, who said, what have we to do with David the Son of Jesse? To your Tents O Israel; For at the first beginning of Rebellion amongst us by Tumults, a Treatise bearing this very Title wast cast into his Majesty's Coach, and by whom they were excited to this, is evident; so they are Rebels, open Rebels and Enemies to the Authority of Kings by their own Description.  
Page 7 Page 7. You say the Photinians allow Kings in Profession, but they are against the Exercise of their Power in the administration of Justice. I have heard of a Northern People that crowned their King and so allowed Kings in Profession, but would suffer him to do nothing; so they denied the Exercise of his Power in the Administration of Justice. Are not these Photinians in Mr. Robert Douglas judgement? A few lines following he makes a profession, That they are far from cutting off a lap of that just power and greatness which God hath allowed to the King, and we have bound ourselves by Covenant not to diminish. You mean, I suppose, not to diminish, id est, more than the Covenant doth:  
Now in the next place, when he comes to the principal Verb the Covenant, that Covenant which was between God and the King, he refers you to the sum of it, 2 Kings 23: 3. which contains nothing we can except against; But what is this to their Covenant he after mentions and the particulars of it; In Josiahs you meet with none of this muster of Popery, Prelacy, Superstition, Heresy, Schism and Profaneness, nothing of Incendiaries, Malignants or the like, or engaging to alter other Nations and reform them; These Men if they meet with but the word Covenant, they think it is a Blank which they may fill up with what they please, and then christian it with the title of a Scripture Covenant. I shall refer him for this to Oxford Reasons, which when my Scotch. Minister can solidly answer, we will take it into further consideration, and till then lay it by.  
Now then let him boast what he will, how much Scotland hath preference before other Nations, for their making a Covenant, if they get but as much more by it as they have already gotten, a blue Bonnet will buy all.  
Page 8 The 8. Page is such a bundle of Calumnies that I am willing quickly to skip over this Dunghill; for the scent is very offensive to any good Subject or modest temper: Nothing here but of Dissembling Kings, the sins of his Father's House; the House of our King hath been much defiled with Idolatry: Complaints of a profane Court in England: If this be to preach, there is none of our Tub-men, that will not do it as well; for they can make any thing idolatrous or profane, as well as he; I, even Learning too; and I doubt, if they had their minds, it would be Idolatry for some men to eat their meat.  
Page 9 But in the close of this Page and in the 9 he comes to the Covenant between the King and the People; in which he saith, Is a Contract between Him and them, containing conditions mutually to be observed. This he saith, but doth not prove, nor ever can, that there was any such Contract between Joash and the people: he may state it how he pleases; but if he put more into it, then that he should govern them, and they be obedient, I conceive it is his own Fancy; for nothing is expressed, and we never find their Kings under any Conditions, but what they owed to God. As for those other two which you mention; In regard of Laws, and in regard of Government, you only say it; For first those Laws that are received, may be altered, and it may be good that they be altered when they prove inconvenient; and who can alter them but the King? Others may Legem rogare, but he only doth Legem far; and if he do make a Law contrary to what was in use at such a time of his Oath, will you say he is a Breaker of his Oath by enacting the contrary that is more advantageous? how is he then limited by them, any longer than he shall find them beneficial to the People? And in a word, for all you blurt out against Arbitrary Power and Government, it is impossible to place the Supreme Power, either in one, or few, or many, but it must be Arbitrary; therefore all Arbitrary Government is not Tyrannical, though you jumble them together, and make them all one in the Latter end of the 9 Page. Is it not Arbitrary with that Supreme Power, whether this shall continue a Law or not? but if you mean by Arbitrary, an Arbitrary administration of justice in the Execution of the Law already made, therein I suppose no King will assume to himself an Arbitrary Power; for not to act by that Rule which was at first the act of his own will, is to contradict himself; yet withal you cannot deny, but that the King may dispense with the Execution of the Law by Pardon, and so moderate the rigour of it.  
What you say of Limitation in regard of Government, is little to the purpose; for though the KING govern not alone, yet all else besides are (to use the Apostles phrase) sent by him, and their power they have from him, as the Fountain of all power.  
What the Author of Defensio Regia hath written, I suppose he is able to make good against a greater Giant than yourself; and therefore I shall not meddle with what you asperse him, till you have answered his Arguments which will be long enough.  
In the close of this Page, you tell us, That Kings are deceived who think the People are ordained for the King, and not the King for the People. And I affirm that those Ministers are deceived that think they are not ordained mutually for each other; the King to govern the people, and the people to be governed by their King.  
Pag. 10 Now in the 10. Page, after you have been as bold as blind Bayard with the King, and with Kings you wipe your lips, and come out with a pretence of Modesty, that You desire not to speak much of this subject; and afterward you break out into more than yet you have said: You tell us also that Men have been very tender in meddling with the Power of Kings; I am sure, you, nor the rest of your Brethren, are not of those Men that have been so tender; for you undertake in the same Paragraph to advise, how Subjects (you name them in this general term) should keep within the bounds of this Covenant in regulating that Power that is the Kingly Power. Where is the sacredness and inviolableness of their Authority which you talked of in the 6. Page? for now here you give liberty to the Estates to control, to oppose Him and to resist Him by Arms; and this you make a Duty: for you say not only that they may do it, but that they ought to do it, when the King overthrows Religion, Laws and Liberty; But yet you know this was done constantly by the Kings of Israel, and sometimes by the Kings of Judah: yet to speak your own language a little after, I think you cannot show that the Prophet ever taught such Doctrine, or the Apostles, though under Heathen Emperors, that the Estates might oppose with Arms, nor any Churches, but those that Scotize, and the Jesuits; how they agree I will give you a Taste; for others have given you a full Meal.  
Bellarmine in his 5: lib: De Romano Pontifice, c. 7: saith, that the Christians obeyed Nero, Dioclesian, Julian the Apostate, and Valens the Arrian, Quia de●●ant vires temporales Christianis; So the Author of the Book De just● abdicatione Regis Henrici 3. saith upon the same occasion, Non est eadem ratio instituendae Ecclesiae atque institutae, add quod id tum non licuit dum impiorum mu titudo superior esset. And to obey with him in another place is Laudabile tantùm cum resistere nequeas. And he that shall read Buchanan, De jure Regni apud Scotos, Pag. 50.55. shall find the same Doctrine. For though they look several ways, yet like Sampson's Foxes they are tied together by the tails; he hath there the same sense. Paul saith, he wrote of obedience in the infancy of the Church when there were but few Christians and not many of them rich, or of ability, or ripe for such a purpose. And a little after, as if a Man should write to such Christians, as are under the Turk, poor and feeble, would he not write as Paul did? see the Apostle (as he takes upon him to instruct him) respected, says he, the Men he wrote too, and his words are not to be extended to a whole Commonwealth or City. Prodigious Divinity! which the Church was never acquainted with till the Jesuits and these Men broached it. Tertullian who lived in the latter end of the second Century, teacheth us another Lesson, in his Apologeticus, Num plures Mauri aut Marco munici, ipsique Parthi, cui Bello non idonei qui tam libentèr trucidamur: were it weakness only that kept the Christians in subjection, which is most untrue, Christians would be the worst Subjects and most dangerous to be suffered in any Nation, as those who would obey no longer then till they were strong enough to resist; but when they ceased to be weak, would cease to be subject also: no pretence of Religion should make us irreligious. If you give this Power to the Estates, you advance their power above the Kings; and then how is he sacred and inviolable in his Authority, when another Authority under him may resist him by Arms? and those who though they are higher than others, yet are Subjects having all their Honours and Places, which sets them above the Common people, from Him: But all this will not justify the proceeding of the Kingdom, as you say it will against the late King; for you have only said so much, having given nothing of reason to satisfy the Conscience in a matter of so great import. But I must pray you not to call them the Proceed of the Kingdom; For it was but the proceed of a Faction in that Kingdom, a Multitude being driven in to them merely out of Fear to secure themselves from their Violences, and how much you and your Brethren here have sinned in violating men's Consciences by your imposing upon them the Covenant; you have reason to know in part already, and will one day know more when you shall come before an impartial Judge: That the late King (as you call him; but the blessed MARTYR you might,) did in a hostile way set himself to over throw Religion, Parliaments, Laws and Liberties, is most false; For all the world knows he died for their Preservation.  
You go on to show us next, that For every Breach of Covenant, Subjects should not lay aside a King, That is, to speak plain, depose him, Except the Breaches be such as overthrow the Fundamentals of the Covenant with the People: Why, what then? you do not say in terms they may depose him in that case: but you imply it; For you say, Except the Breaches be such: So if they be such, or you judge them such, it seems they may; Yet afterwards you think you make amends by charging private persons, To be very circumspect about that which they do in relation to the Authority of Kings. It seems they may do something, only they must be circumspect in it. Yet Page 24. so inconstant is he to himself, that he honestly saith, the Conspiracy of Subjects against their Kings, is a wicked Course: And he thinks he acquits them very highly, that those Godly Pastors (as he calls them) in King James his time, did not intermeddle in showing their judgement that the King should be suspended from the exercise of his Royal Power, though they suffered persecution for their Honesty and Freedom: That is, for their bold and unreasonable Discourses before the King. But what the judgement was both of them and of their Master before them, J. Knox is to be seen in his Writings and theirs; I will not spend time in transcribing many passages out of Knox, his Treatises are to be had, and in them it is to be seen that he is for more than Deposing; but for that plain; in his History, Page 37●. Princes (saith he) for just Causes may be Deposed: but what those just Causes are, he keeps close in his own breast; for an angry Assembly, they conceive, may determine that: Knox to England and Scotland, Fol. 78. If Princes be Tyrants against God and his Truth, their Subjects are free from their Oaths of Obedience; which if, than they as well as the Estates may suspend, and what not.  
Buchanan de jure Regni, pag. 61. Populus Rege est praestantior, & melior Populo, jus est ut imperium cui velit deferat. And Viretus complains much in his third Dialogue of white Devils, Fol. 252. That so much Power is put into the civil Magistrates hands; whereupon he calls them Temporal Popes. Why doth he complain of these Men amongst us for the practice of Regicide, when they and their Masters have given them the Principle? These are ways to set all the world in combustion; for when ever any discontented Party shall say the King is a Tyrant to God and his Truth, than they may fall upon him and Depose him; and we know there was never much time between the Deposition of Kings and their being Murdered.  
Pag. 11 In the top of the 11. Page, you are to be minded that you recite a Text against Resisting the lawful Power, and in the 10. you are expressly, For resisting by Arms.  
You complain, that the Sectaries cover their Destroying of Kings with Christ's Interest. And we complain, some Sectaries cover their keeping under and resisting of Kings with Christ's Interest.  
The Author of the Ecclesiastical Discipline, 
J. C.  and generally all of them, divide the Church into two Moieties, viz those that are to govern as Pastors, Doctors and Elders: and those which are to obey, as Magistrates of all sorts and the people: And Beza against Erastus, speaks plainly, and tells us, that Princes have no more to do with matters of the Church, than Ministers have with the Affairs of the Commonwealth. Briefly, Submittere Sceptra Christo, is with the Roman Catholic, Ponitifici; with these Men, as the Learned Bishop in his Tortura Torti, Page 34: observes, Presbyterio; which Beza is bold to call, Tribunal Christi; and this Author, Page 24. The Kingdom of Christ more than once.  
Pag. 12: Prayers you say, Are to be made for Kings that are not in Covenant. I, and active Obedience to All in all lawful things is to be performed; where that cannot be, passive must be yielded:  
You say you do not count these Enemies who profess Repentance and declare themselves for the Cause and Covenant. Are the Cause and Covenant two distinct things? you should have said for the Cause of the Covenant, though indeed there be no cause for the Covenant. It is strange you should commend to Christians Repentance for doing their Duty.  
Pag. 14 For the Malignants, he tells them, Little Good is to be expected from them; well, and how much good have the Covenanters done? Every one can tell you they have beggared three Kingdoms, and are not yet quiet, but would quite destroy them, though they find their Discipline and Government of this Nation as incurrent as Parallels.  
Pag. 15 Prayers (saith he) are not much in request at Court. He cannot forbear a fling at King or Court; for aught I know there are the best Prayers, where are the best Subjects? For never tell us of Obedience to God whom you have not seen, if you be deficient in the Expression of it to Men whom you have seen.  
He says, They deceive Kings, that make them believe Presbyterial Government cannot suit with Monarchy. King James who knew these Men Intus & in cute, was wont to say, No BISHOP no KING; and we have seen the sad Truth of the Apothegme in our days, so soon as they had gotten out One, they sought to destroy the Other.  
Pag. 16 You confound things so strangely, that it is hard where to take you; but yet it is plain, that you would have Kings to have Nothing to do in the Government of the Kirk, in this, true Romanists, yet for a shift you can decline them to. For your Brethren at the Conference at Hampton Court, complained of the Bishops, that they were not Friends to the King's Supremacy; yet I believe none Greater, none have maintained it more stoutly. Indeed we do not allow to King's Sacerdotalia Officia, but the ordering the establishing of all things that concern Religion must proceed from Him. He is mixta Persona cum Sacerdote; and so we see that Moses gives the Ceremonies, not Aaron; David order the courses of the Priests, Levites, and Singers, by those Councils were called Edicts made about Religion and the Affairs of the Church.  
You tell the King, he is obliged to maintain Presbyterial Government; but however he should maintain that, I doubt he would sadly find that that will never maintain him.  
He cannot leave his Boldness in undertaking to tell the particular causes of God's Judgements, which he is often at. Some endeavour to make you reproach that for which God hath punished your Predecessors. Judicia Dei abyssus magna, you are very confident in such Speeches, and show little of a Divine.  
But no marvel; for he pretends to prophesy; For he is so enamoured with this Government, that he saith, Who ever meddles to overturn it, it shall be as heavy to him as the burdensome stone to the Enemies of the Kirk. Is it not so to them who submit to it a heavy dull burden? and we have not yet seen his Prophecy fulfilled; for we have found that this Covenant hath ruined as many of its Servants as Enemies.  
Pag. 17 You show there plainly how jealous you are of Kings, and how loath they should govern for fear their Government should prove prejudicial to the Cause, that is, Presbytery. For though you say before, How well Kingly Government and that agree; you scarce dare venture them together; It was with much Debate that you yielded to it notwithstanding you sent for him. You are free in your advice to the King in your story of Modus, but never practise it yourselves; for such Hotspurs the world affords not; who know no moderation, and think they have no zeal unless it put the Nation into Flames.  
Pag. 18 All the charge you lay upon King James amounts to nothing; for you never left him till you had gotten him to Covenant when he was young; and what he said then of England or Geneva, is as of little consequence as the rest: But what if he never said it, but you for him? or what if the Church of England do retain some Ceremonies, must they needs be Popish eo nomine because Ceremonies? Away with these trivial complaints, the Church of England neither retains so many, as may hinder her Sons from attending to the substantial part of Religion, nor any so unproper, as that they cannot procure the End for which they were commanded.  
As for Geneva, if they have any Holy days, they may perhaps answer you in the Apostles phrase, Judge no man in respect of a Holy day. But these hot Northern Heads, judge, and condemn all the world but themselves. And all the world besides, thinks them scarce worth seeing or condemning. What King James did when he came to riper years and more experience, doth give a Testimony that he was under Force in his younger time; And the Foundation he laid and upon which his Son built, was not To mischief Religion, but to bring the Church to its ancient splendour, and to keep underneath malapert and disorderly Sectaries; as Mas Robert; who when he had done his Sermon, and the Action of Coronation is over, and that he hath given the King his Benediction, being conscious to themselves by what means they had extorted this from him, he falls to his threaten, Page 23. Pag. 23 And to scare both King and Nobles from declining the Covenant; As if nothing else were able to hold the Crown but that: we have heard of righteousness that it will establish a Throne, but never that a forced Covenant would work such strange Feats. But he tells us then afterward, that If they keep the Covenant it may be expected that God will keep you out of their hands, viz: Cromwell and his Party. We know not that any thing was broken of it; for all was in their hands till Worcester Fight, yet they fell into their Hands, and the Covenant did not save them.  
Pag. 24 You say freely indeed that the chief Cause of the Judgements upon the King's House hath been the Grandfather's breach of Covenant with God, and the Father's following steps in opposing the work of God and his Kirk within these Kingdoms. Do you know it was Judgements to him who was so unnaturally murdered? to the Nation I am sure it was a Judgement, but to him a Mercy to be taken away in such a Cause, and by such Hands as no bad Man could suffer from, and from such a people, the Tide of whose affections if it had not turned, they had neither been worth living amongst, nor ruling. And with the like rare confidence you charge him in Christ's Name, to Keep this Covenant in all points, and if he break it and come against this Cause, I assure you the controversy is not ended between God and your Family, but will be carried on to the further weakening if not the overthrow of it. How dare you charge a King in Christ's Name to keep that which was made in your own name, and for your own interest? upon what ground can you assure him that the Controversy is not ended with his Family, but that it shall continue still to the weakening or overthrow of it? Yes now I have found the Reason; For if he do not, you and your Party, I do believe, will do your utmost for effecting what you threatened. You do as the Rebels did here in England before the War, predict great Troubles, which themselves were resolved to raise. For though it becomes us to conceive that all Afflictions are just, and so suppose some Default in us, yet for any Man to say either of himself or others, that such a Lash is for such a Fault, is more than we have Warrant for, and a presumptuous intruding into the secrets of God's justice, which such a Boldness may bring at last upon us. You know who said, That neither this Man hath sinned or his Parents, that he was born blind; yet perhaps had you been there, you would have given a REASON why he had been born blind.  
You promise much, that if he Befriend the Kingdom of Christ, that is, the Covenant; It may be God from this day shall begin to do you good. Now you are not so confident as before; but if you break the Covenant, than he is not upon his may bee's but is very positons.  
But ye that Support, and he that is supported will fall together. You give us that which is very rare, in your Writings (most of them being an Ipse dixit) a reason why you urge this, because it is a rare thing (you say) to see a King and great Men for Christ. This being for Christ, is a canting Phrase, which every Sect takes up at pleasure. For whoever is for the Interest of that side is for Christ; 
Sect.  and then Ipsum esse illic est pro mereri, as Tertullian, with you not to do the Duties of a Christian, but to be for the Covenant; that is, to be for Christ; and all you are for Christ, and no Body else: Pure Donatists, ubicunque ipsi ibi Ecclesia, The Church is where ever they are, and no where else to be found.  
At last for a close of all, you tell the King, That he is the only Covenanted King with God and his People in the world; which is all one, as if you had said, that he was the only unhappy Prince in the world to fall into such hands that should crucify him with a Covenant: and you promise very peremptorily, That if he observe what is contained therein, it shall prove a happy time for Him and his House. Wherein hath it so proved from you?— where is your Promise Master Robert? what ever happiness he hath, he owes it not to you or the Covenant (as all the world knows) but God. For as for his Restauration, It was the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes; For it is he that turned the Hearts of the People, even of the greatest part of his Enemies, Solo Deo Laus & Gloria.  
How the King was likely to be taken much with that, which took so much from him, I appeal to the world? and how much the Covenant took from him, appears in that it was made without him, and obtruded upon him: To take off the Blot which this Paeper intends to cast upon his Sacred Majesty, let the Christian Reader that is Liber à partibus, consider a little his Majesty's Case, by that Rule, Quod tibi fieri non vis; and that others judge not. It was in Scotland, where he was at more Liberty, and had not yet obliged himself to the contrary in that Nation, when he was young and in the condition of an Exile, having been deprived of his Father of ever blessed Memory, by bloody Traitors, in a most barbarous and unheard of manner, which no History can parallel, despoiled of three Kingdoms, of all comfort and support, his Friends here were all worried by the Rebels, those abroad scarce able to sustain themselves in being: And those foreign Friends he had, entertaining a conceit that he was wanting to himself in that he did not more readily embrace the Scotch Offers, which he must do, or undergo the harsh Censure of neglecting his Affairs, and so lose that little remainder of solace he had left. This forces him to hearken to them to make an Agreement with them; but when they once had him, than nothing but such harsh Conditions must be put upon him as will make that Party in the Nation odious to all posterity; what should he do? there was no way to get out of their hands, he is kept up rather like a prisoner than a King. If he yield to them there was hopes that he should, if not govern them; (for let him that can do that) yet have his person free from danger. If he oppose, how could he be confident, that they which lay so great a weight upon the Covenant, would not in their Rage entertain some Bargain with the Enemy? and so they might enjoy their beloved Helena, and some of our English Money besides, (both which the English Mahomet was likely enough to yield to,) deliver him up to be sacrificed by those Tyrants, who never spared Money to shed Blood, nor Blood to get Mony.  
And this they could have done with fair pretences and some formal Articles (they know the way) that he should not have his person violated, which that grand Hypocrite would have broken at his pleasure. And now see if there were ever any strait like His. Put thyself in the same Case, as it is but weakly expressed here, and then tell me if thou should not think thyself under so great a Tentation as might render thy yielding; if not, no frailty, yet the more excusable, and fit to be relieved by prayers, then trampled on by a superbous Censure: How many inconveniences is the poor Prisoner forced to yield to? how unreasonable Agreements to sign, that his Condition may not be worse? And what person that pretends to man doth not account all these Acts, during his Restraint, and whilst the Force is upon him, a mere Nullity? How often have we known the honest Traveller, when he falls into the hands of cruel Thiefs, to engage to say or do that for his preservation, which otherwise he would never be guilty of? I wonder much how any Man that hath the Soul of a Christian, or the Duty and Affection of a Subject, can forbear melting into tears, when his sad Condition represents itself to his thoughts, and in his ours. For how can we be said all this while to have lived without the Breath of our Nostrils? That great God who sits above the water-floods and remains a King for ever; as he hath Restored, so bless Him with the choicest of his Blessings; preserve Him to us, and us dutiful to Him, And there will be nothing wanting to complete our Happiness, but our repeated Praises and Thanksgiving for so signal a Blessing.  
FINIS.