Baxter - BX5207 B3 A2 1696

388 The LIEE of the,`-- B. I. r. Thofe that are high Prelatifs fay, r. For Epifcopacy, it is of Divine Initiuui- .on, and perpetual Ufage in the Church, and neceffary to Order among the Cler- gy and People, and ofexperienced Benefit to this Land,and molt congruousto Civil Monarchy ; and thereforenot to be altered by any ; no not by the King and Par- liament, if they fhould fwear it : Therefore the Oath called the Et ratera Oath was formed before the War,- to Swear all Men to be true to this Prelacy, and not to Change it. 2. Thofe that are called Conforming Presbyterians, and Latitudinarians, both fay that our Prelacy is lawful, though not neceffary ; and that Mr. Edward Stil lingfleet's Irenicon hathwell proved, That no Form of Church Government is of Divine Inftitution. And therefore when the Magiftrate commandeth any, he is to be obeyed. But force they grew up to Preferment, they grow to be hot forthe Prelacy. § 287. Andtherefore as to the Covenant, they all fay, r. That the ,End of it was Evil, viz. To Change the Government of the Church, without Law, which was fetled byLaw. z. That the Efficient Caufe was Evil or Null, viz. That the Impofers had no Authority to do it. 3. That the Matter was Evil, viz. to extir- pate, and changethe Government of the Church by Rebellion and Combination a- gainft the King. 4. That theSwearers All in taking it was finful, for the forefaid Reafons. ç. That the King's Prohibition and difowning it did nullifie all theSub- ¡efts Obligations, ifany were upon them, by virtue of Numb. 3o. 6. That the People being all Subje&s, cannot endeavour the Change of Church Government without the King. 7. That King Eberle, took not that fame Covenant, but ano- ther. 8. That he was forced to it. 9. That he was virtually pre-engaged to the contrary Matter, in that he was Heir of the Crown, and bound to take the Coro- nation Oath. r O. That to cult fo many Men as the Bithops out of all their Ho- iours and Poffel&ons, is Injuftice, which nonecan be obliged to do. r r. That if it werelawful before to endeavouranAlteration of the Governmentof the Church, yet now it is not, when King and Parliament have made a Law againtt ir. Thefe are Mr. Fu/wood's and Mr. Stileman's Pleas, and the Sumof all that I have heard as to that Point. § 288. But further, as to the Interpretation of the Words of the Declaration hereabouts, the Latitudinarians, and Conforming Presbyterians, and tome of the Prelatiltsfay as followeth : r. That the Declaration includeth not the King , when it faith, [There brim obligation enme or anyother perfon ]: which they prove, becaufe that Laws are made only for Subje&s, and therefore are to be interpreted asfpeak- ing only of Subjeóts. 2. Becaufe the King is meant in theCounterpart,or Oble&, viz. the Government of theState, which is not tobe altered. z. They fay that it is onlyRebellions , or other unlawful Endeavours , that are meant by the words [ to Endeavour]. 3. They fay that by [any Alteration] is meant only [ any Effential Alteration j and not [ any Integral or Accidental Alteration j of the Government. 4. And the leadingIndependents have taught them alto tofay, that this Covenant was effentially aLeague, between two Nations upon a certain occafion,whichthere- fore (ifever it did bind) is now like an Almanack outof date, Et ceffat obligatie ceffantibm perferni, materiâ.& fine. ç. They principally argue that all Mens words are to be taken charitative, in the moli honest and favourable fence that theywill bear: mach more the King's and Parliament's : Therefore Charity permicteth us not to judge them fo inhuman, irrational, irreligious, and cruel , as to command Men to be perjured, and to change the constituted Government, by prohibiting King, Parliament, or People, to do any thing which belonged to them in their places. Thelè are theReafons for the lawfulnefs of declaring against the Obligation of the Covenant. 289. 3. In the fame Declaration it is profeffed, That [ it is not lawful, on any pretence whatfoever, to takeupArms againfl the King, or anyComn:P seated by bin] &c. Concerning this, they are alfb divided among themfelves. One Party fay, That this is true univerfallyin the proper fenceof thewords. The ocherfay, That it is to be undedfood of fuels as are legally Commi(faoned by him only ; and that if he fhould Commiflion two orthreeMen, or more, to kill the Parliament, orburnthe City, or to difpoffefs Menoftheir Freeholds , it were lawful forcibly to refill. Or if the Sheriffbe to raife the Palle Comitatur in obedienceto a Decree of a Court of justice, to put aMan intopoffeflion of his Houk, hemay do it forcibly, though the Defendant be Commifíioned by theKing tokeep it. Becaufethey fay that the Law is to be taken fano fenfe,and not as may lay the Law-givers under fo heavy an Accufa- tìon, as the literal unlimited fence would do. 4290.

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=