A DISCOURSE CONCERNING The Engagement: OR, The Northern Subscribers Plea opposed to their dissenting Neighbours importune Animosities against Engaging to be true and faithful, etc. Tending to beget a calm Compliance in all the Conscientious Lovers of Truth and Peace. Laid together by N. W. a friend to the COMMONWEALTH. Deceit is in the heart of them that imagine evil; but to the Counsellors of Peace, is joy, Prov. 12.20. Where envying and strife is, there is confusion, and every evil work, Jam. 3.16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Nazian: Orat. 12. London, Printed for Francis Titan, dwelling at the Three Daggers in Fleetstreet, near the Temple. 1650. A DISCOURSE CONCERNING The Engagement: OR, The Northern Subscribers Plea, etc. WHen the glorious God, Job 34.21. whose eyes are upon the hearts and ways of the sons of men, (looking through their purposes) strikes off the Chariot wheels of their beloved interests, as incompatible with his grand design in the World: When he discomfits their hopes, and casts a damp upon their expectations, 'tis usual for them to sit down in morosity and peevishness of spirit, 1 Kings 19.4. Ionas 4.8. and think they do well to be angry, even unto death. This unhappy temper hath rob us of the agency and usefulness of many hopeful instruments, in these days of great temptation, when a man hath been more precious than fine Gold, yea, a man then the golden wedg of Ophir. Isaiah 13.12. But as this frame of spirit and demeanour, is always very importune, and misbecoming those who are called out to the service of Providence, so especially in times of sad discomposure, such as ours at present are. Now the ribs of Jacob hang loosely, and dash one against another, and England's children are even straggling as Hinds that find no pasture. Now our breach is great, like the Sea, and gapes still, widening for our enemies; those that get behind the hedge, Ezek. 22.30. are not where God looks for them. He that is so fond of his gourd, that though destruction upon destruction be cried, and the whole Land spoiled, Lam 4 3: yet will by no means let it go; is cruel, like the Ostrienes in the Wilderness, and worse than the Sea-Monsters, which draw out the breast, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Chrysost. Isai. 59.16. and 51.18. Micah 7.4. and give suck to their young ones. Christians, as they are the greatest lovers of God, so they are full of bowels, beyond all other men, and tender of their mutual welfare. Truly, the Lord may very well wonder, seeing so few intercessors, so few that come with balm in their hands, and ligatures for our wounds, yea, that so many of the best (in account) amongst us, are rather as briars, and of the most upright, sharper than a thorn hedge, raking in our wounds like enemies, and without pity widening our breaches, although the rent be even at the cawl of the heart. Rom. 2.1. That we may not therefore become inexcusable, doing the same things, or render ourselves altogether unserviceable in our age and places, though we can do little for the help of the Lord, till it shall seem good unto him to lay us aside, (although our interests be not suited more than many other men's, who fling away in discontent, nor our spirits satisfied, but in waiting the good pleasure of the Lord,) we judge it our duty, to stand up with those few heads and stays of our Tribes, kept together by God's providence in this straight of time for our support, and to engage with them for the strengthening of their hands, till the Lord hath accomplished his great work, Isaiah 51.16. Psal. 94.13, 15. planting the Heavens, and laying the foundations of the Earth amongst us; till he give us rest from the days of adversity, and still the enemy, and the avenger; till judgement return unto righteousness, and all the upright in heart follow it; till he throughly plead our cause, and roll away our reproach; till he ordain peace in our borders, making our walls salvation, Isaiah 60.18. and our gates praise. And that in so doing, we may acquit ourselves from the imputations, both of time-serving, and blinde-obedience, (nothing being good, but what is rationally good) we shall, 1. Lay down, and clear those conscientious grounds which have led us on to this duty, and, 2. Make answer, ex abundanti, to those serious scruples which we perceive to stick upon many men, as obstructors of their ready conjunction with us in this business. As to the first of these, it hath continually fallen upon our thoughts, whether any men (living under such dispensations of providence) may disoblige themselves from acknowledging, at least in some sort, those powers in being over them (whether lawful or pretended) and not draw upon their heads the guilt of all that dismal confusion which would (like the breaking out of water) unavoidably follow the total * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Chrys. dissolution of Government amongst them? especially in a Nation wherein the contest about Prerogative has been the sharpest Plea that ever it was acquainted with, and in which the fiery spirit of absolute domination hath found more Abettors than could be imagined amongst a people that hated not the name and thing of liberty and property. And though some men happily, whose judgements and activity have been against us in this grand quarrel, may conceive themselves exempt from any such charge, yet whether we who have fought against tyranny should not be accessary to Anarchy and deeply concerned in its woeful consequents, should we disown that Authority over us (though not so full and formal as we might wish it were) we have ever been held in great doubt? we never coveted to have the enemy's thanks for doing his work; yea, we have been very fearful lest the Laws should cry out against us as lawless, and every ruined family should charge its undoing upon our scores. If men be Wolves one to another under the straightest restrictions of Magistracy, what will they be when left to their own laws? the best lot we ourselves can look for in such a cause, is but the Giant's courtesy, to be devoured last; nay considering that spirit in most people lusting to revenge, we may look to be devoured first. As to those pretensions which other men make to power and rule over us, we found them but shadows, or at best but dilute and washie supports to a sinking Commonwealth; we can expect no operation of that which is not in being, let the title or right to power be never so highly pretended; neither were we ever throughly persuaded that Government was any man's * See the Tenure of Kings, etc. I. M. Princeps è Senatu oritu●, Senatus è vobis. Oho. in Tac. ad praetorianos● freehold, or that many men might not serve providence in the administration of right to a Nation, and the promoving its welfare as well as any one, were his blood of never so high a colour, or his Grandeur never so pompous and Majestic. Hence we fell to a debate, whether we had not already, yea, whether most men had not interpretatiuè owned the Powers in Being? viz. by submitting their cases to trial in that course of law which fetcheth its formality and original from them, and is dispensed by their substitutes and inferior Officers? and those of us who are Lawyers, whether by pleading at the Bar and owning their Judges as proprietors of the Bench, we did not own those who Commissioned them? yea, whether all of us in paying them tribute, have not set our seal to their Authority, and its lawfulness? if we have gone this mile with them, how should we refuse to go the other mile too, even to give them honour and fear, as well as tribute? Rom. 13.7. Render therefore to all their deuce, tribute to whom tribute, custom to whom custom, fear to whom fear, and honour to whom honour be longeth; if nothing had belonged to them, we should have given them-nothing; real acknowledgements always, in the sense of wise men, overweighing verbal disowning. Lastly, those of us who are Ministers found ourselves surprised, by our own prayers for them, as men possessed of power, to give them homage; by our making request to God that they might use their talents well, we found this included, that they had their talents from God; we have owned them in their declarations, days of thanksgiving and humiliation, and we think it but straining at a gnat, if we should refuse to set our hands to engage with them, who have had our tongues, yea sure, and our * Peccant qui d ssidium cordis & linguae faciunt, etc. Pic. Mirand Ep. hearts likewise at their commands and disposal as to such duties. Hence, reflecting upon our ways, we fell to a more deliberate and strict scrutiny, whether all this were well done and justifiable, yea or no? being solemnly put upon it at the instance of our own consciences (that we might be both void of offence towards God, and towards men) and by the confident and illboding presumptions of many knowing and considerable persons against the present Authority, Act. 24.19. decrying its lawfulness, and in their discourses taking it as for granted, that no conscientious man could own the Parliament as now constituted, or its power. We thought sure their reasons are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, very ponderous, which disoblige them from that visible Authority over us; but all that we could gather from them fell very much below our expectations, and being weighed in the balance, proved far too light for what might be laid against it. Our consciences suggesting ready, and (as we thought) full answers to their most material and weighty alledgments, and finding ourselves able to set reason against reason; yea, had it becomed us, confidence against confidence (meeting with persuasions to a compliance and closure with the Parliament, stronger than any persuasions to disunion) we thought it not best to take up with vox populi, being an insufficient warrant for any man's refusal, to co-engage or fall in with the Authority, but diligently to search whether we ought to go forward or backward; and the more we enquired into the mind of God concerning us, the more we found this duty, for which we plead, cleared up to our consciences. Now the principal Arguments offering themselves to us for this purpose, and prevailing above us, were these. 1. The Being of these present powers over us from God, which we found Argum. 1 thus made out unto us. 1. All constitutions have their making and marring, their standing and falling from God: frames of Government indeed are resolved by him into the people's * will, Deut. 17.14. as the next and immediate cause of their specification or formality, and what kind of Government they will for their own good, the Lord sets his Seal upon it, as owning and approving it; this is clear in that translation of Government from the Judges in Israel, and the setting up of Kingly Power in the person of Saul, 1 Sam. 8.9, 10, 12. Chapters; But that here is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the hand of God in the Wills of men, in these cases, appears from his appropriating such changes to himself, both as to persons, and things, Ezek, 21.27. Zachar. 11.10, 14. Hos. 13.11. jer. 18.4. Act. 13.10, 21, 22. The Policies of Nations are some of Gods Works upon the wheels, which he orders and frames as seemeth good to himself; man is the instrument and subject in all changes, but the being, or not being of them must be resolved into God's Will, as the Supreme and Primordial cause. He doth according to his Will in the Army of Heaven, and among the Inhabitants of the Earth, and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What dost thou? Dan. 4.35. But here men put in with a full cry, We desired not, Object. or willed this change of Government, this new Frame or Model superinduced over us, nor yet can we content ourselves with it. To this we Answer, some men desired it, others did not; Answ. in this case the prevailing, not the worsted, or overborne party may lay claim to the signature of Divine approbation, or at least to the concurrence of God's * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Clem. Alex. Admonit. ad Gentes. absolute Will, without which no purposes, and by which all purposes are brought to pass and established, Psa. 33.11, 12. This is seen in Rehoboams rejection, 1 Kings 12.15.24. The Text tells us, that the cause and the thing was from God. Again, when the people were divided about the choice of a King, 1 Kings 16.21, 22. the prevailing party were owned in their choice, God never manifesting any dislike of it, nor ever reproving Omry or his Successors for usurpation. And if this hold good in the choice of a Governor, why may it not in the choice of a Government? and then surely that is of God, which by his Providence is superinduced over us, though its superinduction be never so much stomached by the surly wills of many, of most men. 2. That place of Scripture, Rom. 13.1. (amongst many others) is very full and pregnant to prove the Being of our present Powers from God, Not only Magistracy in common is his Ordinance, as King and Sovereign of the whole Earth, but the specifical Powers that * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be, likewise are by the Ordination of God, as the first and chief cause of all Being's. The word here rendered, Ordained, we conceive to be of great force for the legitimating our powers, it being often used to signify events and appointments flowing from the eternal efficacious Decree of God, as Act. 13.48.22.10, etc. in which God cannot be a Spectator only, or a permitter, but must needs lay to his hand as a powerful Worker, yea, in an eminent and signal manner too (this we shall evidence he hath done in our Case by and by) for if the permission of God (which extends itself to evil, sin, or privative defects, be not without his a Circa quodcunque est Dei permissio circa idem etiam est actualis volitio. Th. de Bradward. volition, then surely those futuritions, or positive events determined by him, and welpleasing to him, come not to pass without his special efficiency; this Doctrine some of us have taken in from the Schools, and in whatever Series of events God manifests this his special concurrence or appearing, that cause he owns; hence it may be said of our change, the thing is of God, and those Powers in being over us ordained of him, yea, by his special appointment, special procurement, and we hope out of special grace and favour. Object. But the Word, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, say some, signify lawful powers, a power of right, contradistinguished to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a power of might. Answ. To this we Answer, What men mean by a power of Right, or how far they will extend it, we do not very well know; we conceive our present Powers may fall within that compass; but as for the word, it signifies any power; the devil hath no lawful power to give, and yet this word is used for that power over the Kingdoms of the world which he offered unto Christ, Luke 4.6. what shall we think of pilate's power to crucify the Lord of Life? Joh. 19.10. Here the word is used again: was that a lawful power? Secondly, we cannot easily understand how any powers should take the denomination of lawful or unlawful, from their Form, Constitution, or Mould; for then only some one frame of Government would be lawful (as it is in Gospel Discipline) and all other unlawful; but rather from the efflux of people's wills, into the Being of such Powers over them, or from their agency in commanding things lawful or unlawful under God. Those that command unlawful things, in such exorbitances (swerving from the Rule of their Office) they retain no stamp of * Malus princeps, non est princeps, quemadmodum spiritus impurus qui invasit corpus hominis, non est animus. Eras. Authority or Power on them at all: For upon this account, we are disobliged from conscientious obedience in such cases, because there men act as disrobed of Magistracy, God never giving any man Commission to do evil. He is the Minister of God to thee for good, saith the Apostle, Rom. 13.4. 1 Pet. 2.14. Object. Kingly power is by this Plea proved a lawful power, and a power ordained of God; why then was the King resisted, rejected, and that Government laid aside? Answ. To this we say, 1. That Kingly power with its just limits and boundaries, was a lawful power amongst us, and ordained of God, and is so where ever it is lawfully exercised. King's are lawful powers, but not exclusively: The Kings of England were so, the States of Holland are so, so are the Emperors, Princes, and Cantons of Germany, the Senate and Capi of Venice, the great Dukes of Muscovy, the Vaivods of Transilvania, and the Parliaments of England. 2. Why that Government is laid aside, the Parliament hath given most men very good satisfaction, both for the equity and necessity of it, in their Declaration of March 17. 1648. published in several Languages, unto which we refer the Objectors. 3. The King was rejected upon the matter of his Charge; See the King's Case. resisted because of his illegal commands and usurpations upon Liberties, and * If a Villain work on Sunday by his Lords command, he shall be free. Sir H. spilman, Council. Consciences: Neither was the King (though a lawful power) the sole power amongst us, no, nor the Sovereign power neither, if Mr. Prynne be not mistaken (who entitles several Volumes of his, The Sovereign Power of Parliaments and Kingdoms,) and that learned Scotchman in his Lex, Rex, (opposed to all Prerogative and Royal Advocates) overthrowing and exauctorating the Pleas of Maxwel, Barclay, Grotius, Spalatensis, the Doctors of Aberdeen, Dr. Fern, E. Simmons, etc. tending to assert the Royal Prerogative of Christian Kings. We conceive all powers, as to their form, are lawful, yet all changeable. The Royal Sceptre was lawful, though not everlasting; the laying it aside, speaks not its absolute illegality, but its temporal inexpediency. And we wish that Parliaments in their present Constitution, may not be so long lived, as the Norman Sceptre, if they be less expedient; we judge them both lawful powers, but neither irresistible, nor unchangeable. 4. The Lord by his Providence hath largely commented upon those Texts, which confirm the lawfulness of our powers in Being, yea, their very constitution as from him. Grotius of the truth of Christian Religion, l. 1. sect. 11. Where it pleaseth God to change the form of Government; those men whom he useth as instruments for the effecting of that matter, as being determined for him: Suppose they be like to Cyrus, Alexander, or Caesar the Dictator, to them all things, even those which are above the reach of man's prudence, do succeed more beyond their desires and wishes, than the diversity of humane casualties ordinarily doth permit, etc. They are the words of H. Grotius, a man not very Orthodox touching Magistracy neither, and remarkable under this head, by all those who have taken notice of the gracious conduct of Providence towards, and the Lords presence with those who have been instruments in his hands, for effecting this change of Government amongst us: And truly, he that considers the works done in our days, pondering them well, and yet confesseth not Digitum Dei, hîc & hîc, the Arm of the Almighty made bare for us, we cannot but think he is more deeply baptised into the spirit of Atheism, than the Egyptian sorcerers which withstood Moses, were, Exod. 8.19. If the falling of a Sparrow to the ground, though worth but half a farthing, hath something of providence in it, much more, those wonderful appearings of God antecedent, concomitant, and subsequent to our change of Government. Psal. 97.5. Have not the hills melted like wax at the presence of the Lord, at the presence of the Lord of the whole Earth. See the Lord General's Letter from Ireland. Decemb. 1649. Isai. 26.11. God will surely curse that man and his house, who saith it was an arm of flesh that did what was done in England, as making way for this change, or what hath been done in Ireland since. Those who will not see when the Lords hand is lifted up, they shall see, and be ashamed, etc. The Almighty's smoothing that roughness, and becalming those tumultuous ragings of people's spirits, by the greatness of his arm, Exod. 15 16. making them as still as a stone, just upon this change. His breaking their powerful conspiracies, and dissipating those numerous bodies (spirited with influence from the Royal Head) before this change, and his preventing those hideous confusions, and garments rolling in blood, which by the Catholic out cry of the vulgar, and the ominous presages of some graver heads, threatened to attend this change. All these jointly pondered (together with his uninterrupted goodness towards us ever since) make up an evidence of God's signal owning that power in Being over us, which is the product of these wonders. If Providence can speak any thing of his mind, or ever did in any age of the world: Psalm 19.2. If the Lords workings be not dumb shows; if there be any language in them, it is that of Shemaiah, to all that would lift up themselves against our present Authority, 1 Kings 12.24. Return every man to his house, for this thing is from the Lord; not from him only as an overseer of things doing, and an orderer of things done for his glory, but as an efficatious worker in producing this very change, according as he useth to show himself in all those events, and those only which are of special complacency to him. Isaiah 23.9. The Lord of hosts hath purposed to slain the pride of all glory, and to bring into contempt all the honourable of the Earth: Surely, this word is come to the birth (we believe, and therefore we speak.) The anointed of the Lord will certainly make Monarchy and Monarches, Psalm 2.9, etc. the present pride and glory of many Nations, as infamous as ever they have been famous. If Kings be not wise; if they serve him not with fear; if they set themselves against the Lord, Apoc. 21.24. and comply not with his interest in the world; if they bring not their glory and honour to the New Jerusalem; he will pour shameful spewing upon their glory, yea, though they bear themselves up in their port and pride, Isaiah 60.15. as Behemoth in the waters of Jordan; he will dash their Sceptres in pieces like a potter's vessel, and make them bow to the soles of their feet, whom he hath promised to make an eternal Excellency, even the Saints of the most high God, Dan. 7.28. Heb. 12.28. who shall receive a Kingdom which cannot be shaken. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this. Having thus cleared our first Argument, as the main foundation upon which we build our obedience, being of most powerful and direct influence upon our consciences. From this holding Plea, we pass to a second Argument. The mutual relation of Protection and Allegiance (every benefit requiring Argum. 2 some duty) presseth us to a cheerful owning the Parliament, and to a re-alliance with them, as our actual Protectors in subscribing to be true and faithful, etc. This Argument is hinted in the Act for Subscription, Act. Jan. 2. 1649. and not without special reason, considering how ready men are to forget themselves, and to trip up the heels of such as support them. We need not labour in specifying or aggravating the benefits of Protection, they being of so obvious a sense to all, who prize Religion, Life, Liberty, or Property: And we understand not what duties answer the nature, and claim of such benefits. If a thankful owning of those persons and powers, through whose hands they are dispensed to us, and a cheerful submission to them be denied. If we give not that which God requires, will our offering be accepted? and wherewith shall we make an atonement for our ingratitude? Here again many interpose, as not willing to be thought undutiful; we Object. 1 can cheerfully submit to the Authority, say they, And that out of Conscience in things lawful, but to acknowledge and approve of them as lawful powers, we cannot. Answ. There may be wisdom (which we see not) or rather policy in this; but to our sense, the objectors seem rather nice then wise. We never knew how to divide the hair, or distinguish betwixt a conscientious subjection to any powers over us, and an owning them, as full and lawful powers ordained of God. Conscientious submission consignifies a conscientious owning the powers, and presumes or implies their lawfulness; otherwise Conscience would not interpose so far: All the tribute of duty which Conscience exacts, being paid as to God, will be ill performed, if we pay them in to a wrong hand. The case indeed is changed, when a man submits upon another account than Conscience, as from Policy, Fear, etc. But Conscientious obedience hath no such flaw in it, as a mental reservation of so strange and implicatory a purport as this, I obey out of Conscience, and yet I judge the powers so unlawful, as that their commands have no influence upon my Conscience at all. Object. 2 Others say, Their selfseeking and oppression make us we cannot own them so hearty, as otherwise we might. Answ. 1. Many cry out against selfseeking, who love themselves and their interests, as impatiently as any Member of the Council of State whatsoever, can do his; and thousands amongsts us make a noise about oppression, who pay them not a groat a quarter; yea, our quondam Publicans exclaim heavily, Burdens! Burdens! Dic mihi si fueris tu lo, qualis eris? Deut. 32.6. But, Do ye thus requite the Lord, O foolish people and unwise? 2. Those men rather sought themselves, who sought the King's favour, and tacked about to his interest, who would plead his cause rather than not kiss his hand; as that man who blushed not to aver, That the King's Concessions were the largest, the safest, and the beneficiallest, that ever were granted by any King to his Subjects since the Creation. Did they seek themselves, who to the apparent jeopardy of them and their posterities, durst take such a Lion by the beard as they did? Neither have they yet divided his inheritance by line amongst them, nor voted an everlasting Parliament (as many ad invidiam, suggest) to make their houses great, or themselves Princes over us. But to proceed. We shall mention but one Argument more, viz. Argum. 3 We know not how to approve our hearts before God, if we should put ourselves out of a capacity of serving his Providence, while he offers us opportunity thereunto, as we should do by refusing this Engagement. Now every man almost cries out, Isai. 3.6, 7. Let me not meddle, make me not a ruler to this people, let not this breach be under my hand. We think it most seasonable standing up in the gap (as our callings may require) and offering our services to the God of our lives and comforts. This we have spoken to already, in the beginning of our Plea: And truly, we are much pressed in our spirits, and cannot but wait upon the Lord, going forwards while he leads us. When Israel sat still, they were ever hankering after Egypt, therefore said the Lord sometime unto Moses, Speak to the people that they go forward. And that which many call Back-sliding, we doubt not to take for Progression. If God leads a people beyond their non-ultra, or the limits of their own prefixed thoughts, or expectations, they usually grudge him their company. Israel would go willingly out of Egypt, the place of their bondage; but when they met with any staggering difficulties, or amuzing providences in their journeys, they fell to chiding with God, and would needs be returning to their old taskmasters service again. It is a true saying, Multi ad perfectionem pervenirent, nisi jam se pervenisse credorent. Fab. Many men might have attained perfection; but for their too early dreams, that they were already perfect. Those (and they not a few) who made it their ultimate end, To establish the King's Throne in Righteousness, proclaiming and declaring this, together with their loyalty, to the world, as their prime scope, when they were convinced that the Lord would not have it so, sit down as sullen as the Prophet, when God would not verify his Declaration concerning Nineveh: Jon. 4. But because we cannot do this thing, shall we therefore do nothing? We fear this Plea will not be accepted before God: That which we conceive good, is not done; therefore we have laid ourselves aside, and refused to do any thing for his service, in order to the Public Good. We never heard of any such persuasion coming from the Lord that called you. Gal. 5.8. To this we hear men say, They lay not themselves aside, but the Parliament doth it, by urging upon them an Engagement (as the condition of their service, and activity for the Public Good) which they cannot salva conscientiâ, submit to, and that chief upon this ground, because it presumes their consent to the change of Government, and an approbation of those things which have been done in order to it. But, under favour, we conceive this consequence is not of necessary Connexion with the Antecedent, and therefore we may be so bold with it, as to deny it. 1. We presume that the Parliament and Army might do some things in order to this change, which themselves hold only justifiable upon the Plea of necessity, and not absolutely to be approved: Some of the Parliaments Declarations, and of the Armies Papers witness this. 3. Can those who submitted to the Norman yoke, be interpreted to approve all that the Conqueror did in order to the vassalizing them, and bringing them to his own terms? Hist. liber. Lusitaniae. li 3. c. 4. Can we think that the Dukes of Bragance who swore Allegiance to the Spaniard (usurping Lordship over him against all the people's consent) did by that act approve what the King of Spain did in order to his subversion? Surely no. Thus we think (mutatis mutandis) that our subscribing to the present Authority, concludes neither our approbation of what hath been done in order to the change of Government, no nor the change itself: it ties our hands indeed from subverting the establishment in esse, and to be subject; and powers (in our thoughts) irregularly and disorderly changed may be lawfully and conscientiously subscribed unto and owned as powers ordained of God. Master Dury in his consid. of the present engag. It is the persuasion of a good Christian, and one of no mean name, That it doth not belong to us to judge definitively of the Rights which the supreme powers over us in the world pretend to have unto their places. And it is our persuasion, that neither Gods commands touching subjection, nor the Parliaments Acts for subscription, puts the submitting conscience either upon the approbation or non-approbation of the equity or iniquity of this change of Government wrought amongst, but only upon the conscientious acknowledging the powers over us in their present constitution, as the only visible Authority by the Ordinance of God. But 3. Supposing the consequence good, that subscription drew with it a consent to the change of Government, and an approbation of what was done in order to it, we conceive that both of these, without any injury offered to conscience, may be approved; The Parliaments forementioned declaration renders the former approvable to us, March 17, 1648. and as to the main things done in order to this change, we shall speak our thoughts in particular. They appear to be these, 1. The Parliaments declaring the Original of all lawful power to be in the people: in which (as we understand it) little else is declared then this, that forms of Government are humane ordinances, or creatures (according to that of the Apostle, 1 Pet. 2.13.) to exclude the claim to a sacred and unalterable prerogative in any persons or powers whatsoever; This we find no great reason to boggle at. Secondly their laying aside the House of Lords, which in effect they had done seven years before, viz. in declaring to their Lordships, that if they refused to join with them in settling the Militia, the Commons would proceed to do it without them; that was then judged a safe and wholesome Resolve: and why might it not take place now after all the experiences had of delays and Negatives (in matters of highest moment) from the Lords, yea of their direct thwarting the common sense of the Kingdom in Parliament? For it is unreasonable to conceive, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sect. 39 that it should be a matter of sin, or unlawful for a Kingdom to make provision for itself and its own good, unless such or such a small party amongst them, who prefer their own undue personal interests before the public interests and welfare of the Nation, should consent and join with them therein. This put the Parliament upon a necessity of abolishng the House of Lords, as may appear in their declaration March 17. 1648. And this we conceive need stick as little upon us. 3. Their bringing the King to a trial, sentencing him, and taking him away from the midst of us: If the King was a Delinquent and an implacable one, fiat justitia, ruat calum. That the people have no right to judge him, though he was so, as it is our dissenting neighbour's Plea, so it was the Plea of that prerogative Secretary Lethington against Knox (a man Orthodox and conscientious) God (saith Knox) is the universal judge as well unto the King as to the people, History of the reformation of Scotland. lib 4. so that what his word commands to be punished in the one, is not to be absolved in the other. We agree in that (said Lethington) but the people may not execute God's judgements, but must leave it unto himself, who will either punish it by death, by war, by imprisonment, or by some other kind of his plagues. I know (saith Knox) the last part of the reason to be true; but for the first, that the people, yea or a part of the people, may not execute God's judgements against their King, being an offendor, I am assured ye have no other warrant, except your own imaginations, and the opinion of such as more fear to offend their Princes then God. This we know, that God is no accepter of persons, and that blood, upon whomsoever it lies, cryeth so loud in the ears of the Almighty, that he has strictly commanded men to take no satisfaction for the life of any murderer. Now, Numb. 35 30, 31, 33. what if we had no Law, rule, or precedent to go by for the punishing of Princes, in any civil Record, shall not justice therefore be done? must the law of God be enfeebled and fall to the ground for want of an humane ordinance to back and enforce it? Judge, we pray you, may this be? but we are fearful of swelling our paper beyond the bulk of a brief Plea; this also, we conceive, may be approved by men honest and conscientious. But the great matter is yet behind, the grand question or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not what a people may do of this nature, being free from all bonds & obligations, but what they may do who lie under Covenants and Engagements to maintain such and such a Government, or such and such governors in their power and Sovereignty? Here, say our dissenting neighbours, the water sticks, as to our present case; and in particular they cry out amain of the contrariety and utter inconsistency of the Covenant and Oath of Allegiance with this present Engagement; this leads us therefore to the second thing propounded in the beginning of our Plea, viz. that we should make answer to, and remove those serious objections which waylay many conscientious men, so that the cannot come up to the subscription. We shall take leave here to lay down two or three preparatory Rules touching the obligatory power of Covenants in general, which may befriend us in this our following essay, viz. 1. Rule, All Covenants binding unto sin are ipso facto, void, because the matter of a Covenant (being an essential part of it) is res licita, and for want of that due matter any Covenant falls to pieces; as that vow which ties any man to a condition that is impossible signifies nothing, upon this this account, Mark 6.23. Acts 23 14. 1 Sam. 25 22. because a man cannot keep it de facto; so that vow or Covenant by which one is put upon any thing unlawful, signifies as little, because a man cannot perform it de jure. The sin is in making such Covenants, not in breaking them, a man overtaken with any such Oaths, needs no absolution, they fall asunder of themselves. 2. Rule, That Covenant may be lawfully entered into, which (the state of things and persons being changed) may not be kept without sin. Put the case I have engaged myself to this woman never to marry any other but her; after a while this woman falls distracted, mischiefs all she can come nigh, is fit for no place but Bedlam, where now she lies bound in chains, and so is like to do while her dying day; but I must either marry or burn: am I now (notwithstanding my engagement to her) free for another woman, or no? We conceive conscience would give in its verdict, Yes. 3. Rule, When any men by a promissory Oath engage themselves to some duty or performance for the benefit and advantage of another; if he (in whose behalf the promise is made) shall take away that foundation upon which the promise was built, the Covenantiers are become free, 1 King. 1.52. & 2.23, 24 37, 38, 42, 43. there the case is cleared. Suppose any people by covenant pay unto their Prince, as their public shield or Protector, such and such Annual Subsidies. This Prince, regardless of his duty, is to the people as a wall broken down, he prostitutes their safety to brutish destroyers, their liberties to encroachments, their trade and goods to Piracies and Harrasing: They become sensible of the defalcation of their properties, and the debauchment of the public interest, and deny him the encovenanted tribute; the Prince sues them upon an action of debt, and (though prerogative be the foreman of the Jury) the people are acquitted and justified. What are Kings but vassals to the State? who if they turn tyrants, Lex, Rex. p. 404. in Answer to an Objection of Amisaeus. fall from their Rights, Is Master rutherford's question in his dispute for the just prerogative of King and people. These Rules we find very useful for the descrupling, and disobliging our consciences of those ties in the objection, and being of very easy and obvious application, we shall pass to more particular Salvoes. 1. To the Covenant, and to that clause in it for preserving the King's person, we answer, it is conditional; and that article for bringing all Delinquents to condign punishment, is positive and absolute: for if this limitation, in the preservation of Religion, etc. be not a condition, then either these two articles mentioned contradict one another (and so the Covenant ties us to impossibilities) or else the King was no Delinquent. If the former, than the Covenant, as to both those articles is null. If the latter, why did the Assembly of the Church of Scotland, in a declaration sent to the King, charge him with being guilty of shedding the blood of many thousands of his best subjects? Yea, why did their Commissioners (concurring with the Houses of Parliament, See the Parl. Declarat. of March. 4. 1647. in their answer of the thirteenth of January to the King's letter of December 1645.) amongst other things, make it their first and chief reason why they could not consent to the Kings coming to London; and to a Personal Treaty desired by Him, until satisfaction and security were given to both his Kingdoms, because so much blood of his good subjects had been shed in this war by his commands, and his Commissions. Here we see the Parliament and Scotch Commissioners charging the King with deep Delinquency, how comes it to be expiated in 1048? Or shall we think it was a groundless charge? Is it fit to strike Princes for equity? Nay, sure we should prejudg their wisdom and integrity too much, in saying so; they tell us how he became guilty, viz. The blood being shed by his commands and Commissions, he shed it; for the Author is more guilty than the * Semper is dicitur facere cui praeministratur. Tertul. * Opera magis pertinent ad imperantem, quam ad exequ●ntem. Actor. The Prophet Nathan tells David that he shed the blood of Vriah, 2 Sam. 12.9. though Vriah was slain by the sword of the children of Ammon, and not by David's Commission neither, but by his indirect procurement; but the King's Commissions to kill, etc. at the bar of justice abundantly testified his palpable guilt and Delinquency Therefore we conceive (to avoid a manifest contradiction in our solemn Covenant) that clause must needs be acknowledged conditional, which concerned the King's person, (for as touching his power, the dispute is not so hot, though by the Covenant the one be as sacred as the other.) The * The reasons of the present Judgement, etc. p. 27. Oxford Convocation saw this condition clearly enough from the Parliaments Declarations in answer to the Scottish Papers, and therefore were deter d, as they say, from taking the Covenant; Nay, the a Royal Pourtraicture. King himself (if men may believe it) upon the Covenant tells us, that the clause in the Covenant referring to his person was of a Dangerous limitation; how could that be, if the Covenant, according to the letter of it might not be kept, and yet the King's person endangered? And surely if by any Covenant we had unwarily tied ourselves to privilege his person, so as thereby to overthrow the use or end of b See Junius Brut. p. 84. Magistracy amongst us, that Covenant could not be binding, because sinful; God will have no man lift up above his c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Naz. Orat. 27. Ordinance, but this is done by setting up an unaccountable Magistrate, Covenanting to privilege his person absolutely, or without limitation, which must needs give him liberty to play d Quilibet impune facere, hoc scilicet regium est. Sallust. Rex, and to make what God ordains for people's good, to become a snare to them, and their chief endamagement; no such discommode in the world, as a man that may do what his list, and his life notwithstanding must be accounted the choicest treason that can be; well then, if the King's preservation was conditional, we must leave it to the determination of those who are chosen to Judge and conclude what is consistent with our liberties, and what not, whether the things mainly Covenanted for, or the condition could have been obtained and preserved with the preservation of this King's person, yea, or no; if not, the case is e Enuntiatio hypothetica, si conditio sit impossibilis, aequivalet negativae. Fr. Burghers. loq. clear; and truly we cannot but think as the Parliament and Kirk of Scotland thought, viz. That the King's Concessions were unsatisfactory, yea, destructive to Religion, and the Nations safety, and that he should be ever kept on treating (being thereby set in balance with the whole Nation, and) with the advantage of creating everlasting war and trouble, to the ruin of all honest people, especially being a man guilty of most enormous crimes, and of an implacable spirit, we thought our Covenant never bound us to. 2. Whereas divers amongst us will needs bring Monarchy within the compass of the Covenant, and conceive themselves bound thereby to maintain Kingly Government (sure 'tis a Gourd they are very fond of) we cannot see how they can possibly hedge this in, there being no mention made of Kingly Government, or the King's posterity at all in it; his just Rights, and power there spoken of and Covenanted for, were his personal Rights and Power, as may appear by the last Clause of that Article; We have no thoughts of diminishing his Majesty's just power and greatness: all which was to stand or fall with performance, or non-performance of that grand condition in the Preservation of, etc. touching this condition the Scots speak very well (though in the extent of the Covenant we conceive them mistaken) in their Declaration of August last, containing the grounds why they could not admit the late King's Son to the exercise of Royal Power over them. The duty of defending and preserving the King's Majesty's Person and Authority (say they) is joined with, and subordinate unto the duty of preserving and defending the true Religion and Liberties of the Kingdoms, and therefore his Majesty standing in opposition to the just and necessary public desires concerning Religion and Liberties, it were a manifest breach of Covenant, and a preferring of the King's Interest to the Interest of Jesus Christ, to bring him to the exercise of his Royal Power, which he walking in a contrary way, and being compassed about with Malignant Counsels, cannot but employ to the prejudice and ruin of both. Object. But the Declaration of the Houses of April, 1646. and other Declarations abundantly clear the extent of the Covenant to Kingly Government, and bear witness to their meaning in it. Answ. 1. We conceive not ourselves bound by the Covenant to maintain any thing besides the letter of it, and the most obvious sense; 'tis wholly beside the purpose and unreasonable to fasten any postnate or occasional Declarations upon men's consciences in this case, since what the Parliament did without, or beside the Covenant, neither reacheth us, nor comes within our compass to scan or pass verdict on, the Covenant pointing or referring us to no such considerations. 2. The same unalterable tenor of politic administrations cannot suit the various exigency of a Nations Affairs; what the Parliament therefore declared at one time, Declaration of March 17. 1648. p. 21. Ames: de Consc. l. 5. c. 25. Ibidem. they might see necessary cause for altering at another, and did, as appears by that Declaration, where Answer is made to this present Objection; the Intention or Obligation of a Law or a Promise, ought not to be extended beyond the reason or foundation of it, so that the Reason or ground ceasing, the Obligation must needs cease too, as it doth likewise upon this account, viz. if the state of things and persons be so changed, as that in the judgement of wise men, those who promised or declared aught, cannot be thought to have willed the including such or such an event in the promise: Now this event in the Parliaments Case was the King's implacability and inexorableness, after seven addresses made unto him, and the strong inclinations of the House of Lords to his beloved Interest, neither of which events the Parliament can be judged to have included in their former Declarations, viz. that they should resolve thereby, and declare to maintain the Government in that manner, let the King or Lords do what they pleased, or carry themselves as they listed. 3. And lastly, as to those breaches of Parliament Privileges, (which we Covenanted to preserve) by forcing the House, excluding the members, &c we have this to say. 1. This Engagement concludes not our approbation, nor wraps us up in the guilt of any miscarriages infringing the Covenant, if any such were committed, neither doth our Covenant bind us to any things impossible, whatsoever irregularity have been charged upon the Army (of this kind) in our places and callings we could neither prevent nor can remedy. See that Declaration, Feb. 17. 1648. Page 12, 13. 2. We hear of no Covenantiers in Scotland, who scruple their submitting to that power in Being over them, nor their owning it, though those who now govern affairs there, were brought in by a greater force than ever our Parliament groaned under; another Parliament being there called, while the former was by adjournment continued. And the imprisoning some of our Parliament Members, is alleged by the Army to be (amongst other things) for Confederacies and Correspondencies with that party in Scotland, which our Brethren there found themselves necessitated to trample under foot; yet no man saith unto them, why do you so? This makes us think that Parliament-priviledges may be sometimes looked at, as Formalities, rather than sacred and indispensable Rights, viz. When the greater number of Parliament men set themselves in a way of utter ruining, rather than of building up and establishing a Nation on the sure Foundations of Peace and Righteousness. Thus we leave what hath been said to the Consciences of those men who set the Covenant as a partition wall betwixt themselves and the Engagement: We come now to the oath of Allegiance, and shall draw out our sense touching that, as briefly as may be. 1. The ground of that Oath we conceive to be our actual protection, and not merely the King's obligation to protect us (as some would have it) for miserable is that people like to be, See the Oxford Reasons, etc. Rom. 13.4. whose welfare is no otherwise provided for then thus; Kings having got a knack to disoblige themselves of their duty towards their subjects when they list. Men do not swear Allegiance to Magistrates, as dropping from heaven over them (like poor Earthlings, created merely to bear up their trains) but as Ministers ordained and chosen for their service and good. We ever thought, that the Stipulations betwixt a Prince and people were * Junius Brutus, p. 97, etc. Ames. Med. de Jurament. & de Consc. l. 4. c. 2●. mutual, and always held it a safe rule, That if he who promiseth mutually, will not perform what he promiseth, our Obligation is not binding. But how well the late King performed his part, we shall have reason to remember. Again, the formal Cause of a promissory Oath ceasing, the Obligation itself ceaseth; but the formal Cause (as we said) of Allegiance, a Protection: This needs no proof, the Arguments against it being nonsuited over and over in the Court of Reason and Truth; therefore, we conceive ourselves loosed from Allegiance according to that Oath, its correlate and foundation being taken away. Thus the Portugals plead in our case. The Kings of Castille, say they, Histor. Liberat. Lucit. l. 2. Though admitted the Kings of Portugal, yet may be rejected. 1. Because they have not kept those Covenants which they were sworn to, at their entrance on the Crown, cap. 3. 2. By reason of their maladministration of Government, to the destruction of the Commonwealth, without hope of remedy, cap. 4. 3. By reason of their tyranny, cap. 5. 4. By the Law of nature, which enables a people to defend themselves against all such as seek their ruin and extinction, cap. 7. 5. Neither did they conceive their Oath of Allegiance hindered this. Praeclaro facinori non obstitit juramentum praes●itum regi Castellano, l. 3. c. 4. Did we not cut our own throats? and were we not accessary to our own undoing, if by the servile abasing ourselves to a tyrant's will, we should give him the advantage of ruining us? This were a palpable yielding up that which most Kings reach out their hands for, Even that we are made for them, and not they for us, and for our good. 2. When we swear homage and obedience to our Lord and Superior, who afterwards ceaseth to be our Lord and Superior, the * Quum aufertur ratio formalis juramenti juramentum cessat ratione even●us, qui casus est eorum qui jurarunt se obedituros Domino aut Principi alicui, qui postea cessat esse talis. Am●● de Consc. l 4. c. 22. Obligation ceaseth. This Rule Henderson makes use of in his first Paper to the King at Newcastle, and will be irrefragable by all the Reason in the world. Can this Oath therefore bind us, now our Superior is not? (However taken away, by might or right, cavent actor.) Well, but we hear many say, The King cannot die; it is to be supposed, they mean it of a death in Law, not a natural death; and then, being our Law is called the Soul of Reason, it would be known, what Reason can be given of that maxim? Surely, a King dethroned, is dead in Law; and this may persuade plain men to question the universal, and holding verity of it. If he may die as King, we doubt not but his person may die; but a King laid aside, or dead, dies as King, otherwise there could be no such thing as an Interregnum, of which we read frequently in all Chronicles. Again we ever thought, that a King's Coronation was his actual investiture with Power, or his Constitution as King; and sure it will be accepted, and excuse us; if when we hear of any such King amongst us, we grudge him not our Allegiance; if we swear Homage to the King's Successors, they must either succeed him before we can perform it, or else our Oath ties us to his Children, or Heirs while he lives, as well and fully, as when he is dead. If any of the late King's Children do de facto succeed him, as King, or Heir, his Power, we shall be their Liege people; but for a Succession de jure, as we are made no judges of any such thing, so we know not what it means: We swear Allegiance not to Kingly power, as we conceive, but to our Royal Protectors, and he that is not actually our Liege Lord, we cannot be termed his Liege Subjects; for Relations stand and fall together. We know little of the mysteries in Law, for the greatest part of us; neither do we conceive it necessary (for the approving our hearts unto God) that we apply ourselves to the search of them. If there be any thing hid in the Laws which prejudiceth our Rights and Just Liberty, as this Maxim, That the King cannot die (according as it useth to be urged) seems to do; we shall thank the Parliament for calling us to subscribe, if our subscription may work its abolition. But if men, when they say, The King cannot die, mean this, viz. That that Legislative, or Executive Power, Fundamental to a Nations Being, cannot die; we are ready to kiss their lips, and grant it true. Thus that power which the Spaniard had by Law in the Netherlands, still lives in the States of those United Provinces, though he be rejected; and thus the King's power lives in our present Parliament, else we were all but dead men. Having thus cleared our grounds for subscription, and shown its consistency with those sacred ties which fall not asunder of themselves. We shall conclude with a request to our dissenting neighbours, that they would not confidently, or magisterially slight what is capable of their serious consideration in this our plea, Men that study an impartial search of truth and conscientious satisfaction in the crowd of different persuasions, must not be resolved to maintain any * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Non est pudor ad meliora transire. Ambros. Hypothesis of their own, however their understandings have been educated. He that gratifies his affection at so high a rate, as to make it umpire in any contest, cheapens the Jewel of truth so faintly, as if he intended not to buy it, and basely prostitutes the sovereignty of his Judgement. We cannot weigh things by affection and reason too, divers weights are an abomination to the Lord, Prov. 20.23. and a false balance is not good; a few grains of affection will overpoize many drams of reason, and we are all apt to overween our habituated persuasions, and to set them up as the first, second, and third argument against contrariety in Judgement to us, however bottomed, we are apt to think them, yea, and call them impregnable, and invincible; as Montanus, overvaluing his two poor parishes in Asia, Euseb. Eccles. hist. li. 5. Pepusa and Tymium, called them Jerusalem. Hence commonly ariseth that confidence, which makes men dictator's rather than disputers, and is no competent testimony of truth, being but like a wager, which according to the proverb, Is a fools argument. Two Franciscan Friars would needs be burnt at a stake, to prove Savanarola an Heretic; Phil. de Comm. li. 8. and a Jacobine Friar offers himself to the flames, to prove he was no Heretic: yet these premises were not demonstrative; or of power to espouse the judgement of any impartial seeker to the conclusion they inferred. Savanarola might hold the truth notwithstanding that argument the Franciscans brought against him; and an error notwithstanding the Jacobines confidence, videtur quod sic, and videtur quod non sic, had better becomed them both. Truly this is the temper of many dissenters amongst us, as to the engagement, they will seem rather to offer themselves to an outlary, banishment, imprisonment, and what not (out of prepossession and prejudice) then show any face of reason at all to prove the unlawfulness of subscribing to the present Authority. Others that have their conscientious reasons are as of propounding them, as if those who differ from them were not men to be argued with, as denying some common principle, that carries its evidence in itself. It is not here * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athan. undertaken, but essayed, to persuade their consciences; and briefly to lay down some of those grounds on which our engagement with the Parliament out of conscience is built, that it may not be presumed or concluded (as commonly it useth to be) that there is little conscience in any, saving in those who put themselves on the suffering side. We shall not apologise much in the behalf of this our Plea, only thus, we live far from the scene of action and information, and have little acquaintance with great men's spirits and tempers (being of the smaller people) we know not how this controversy is dignosced and scanned, or what ●hapes it puts on amongst those larger heads, and men of greatned expe●iences, by reason of their higher callings, relations, and employments, who happily (as 'tis said of Berengarius) may know all things knowable: we have searched only to find out duties, and must be excused (as ignorant of their several Pleas) if we touch not upon all mens gravamina, or ●hose scruples which make them contrary in persuasion and action to us. Yea, if sometimes we strike unwittingly besides the nail, if we be less exact or full in our Salvoes then the nature of such a business may require. Yea, if happily we mistake in any thing of moment, we speak but our own sense, which at so great a distance, from Authentic informers, may be easily deceived. Sed non pigebit nos s●oubi haesitamus, quaerere; nec pudebit nos sicubi erramus n●● corrigare. August. De Trinit. Li. 1. cap. 1. FINIS.