Baxter - BX5207 B3 A2 1696

414 The LIFE of the LIB. I. 3. Nor can it eafily be proved unlawful for the King and Parliament, either to make a feparation of thefe Powers, or to take both from them , and fo fet up the Primitive fort of Bithops , either with or without any Civil Authority : Abbots had once alto a place inParliament, and yet they are now taken down, it is fup- polednot unlawfully. The Kinghimfelf doth lawfully make Members of both Houfes, by making Earls and Barons,and by giving Corporations power to choofe Burgeffes, who before had none. And asthe new making of thefe, fo the exclu- dingof fome Members, may be without any change in the Form of Civil Ga vernment r Certainly many Fathersand Canons are againstthe Civil Government ofthe Clergy. § 37z. z. The fecond obje&ion is [That the Authority of the Impofers was null as to that Ad]. Anfw. That is a diltin& Controverfie, which here I that' pats ny : Bun grant- ing it to be fo, no more will follow but that the People were not bound by any Command of theirs to take it : But a Vow that istaken in my Clofet, without any Man's impofition or knowledge, may beobligatory ; or one that a Robber forcech me to by the High-way : The nullity of the Obligation to take it, is all that fol- loweth thenullity of theirAuthority ; which will not infer the nullity of the Obli- gation to keep it : for it maketh it but equal to a Vow which is made of a private Will without any Command of Authority at all. § 373. I. The thirdReafon (which molt nearly toucheth the Controverfie) is, That the Mattervowed (to extirpate Prelacy) war unlawful, both as against the Laws of God and of the Land. Anfw. If this be proved, no doubt but the Obligation is void, and of no effe&. But, a. It is before proved to be far from being against the Law of God to alter this Prglacy by warrantable means : Andalfo, that it is not against the Lawof the Land, for Subje&s modestly to petition, or Parliament Men tofpeak , or theKing and Parliament to change ; which are the A&ions which belong to their Places and Callings. And if it hadbeen exprefly part of the matter of that Vow [to do this by unlawful mean,] the queftion is, Whether thiscan difoblige the Swearer from the lawful part adjoyning, which is [to do it in their Places and Callings] ? Whatever o- ther matter is, this matter is not yet proved to be unlawful. § ;74. Objeet. But Epifcopacy is Jure Divino, and the Covenant mentioneth the ex- tirpation If Prelacy, which is of the fame Species with the other Epifcopacy : And there- fore it is to be undergo.' as to the extirpation of all Epifcopacy, and fo not obligatory. Anfw. a. It is before proved that our Prelacy is not of Divine Right,but again!! ir. 2. And that it differerh evenfpéccifically from the Primitive Epifcopacy. 3. But that's nothingto, the Covenant: For whether it differffecie, velgrado, vel accidenti- bus, it is proved that the Covenanttalkethnot of the extirpation of any ocher E- pifcopacy but it alone. 4. But if it did, it followeth not that the Obligation a gainH the unlawful Prelacy is null, becaufe the conjun& Vow again!! all Epifcopa- cy is null : If a Man Vow at once to do two things, of which one is lawful, and theother unlawful, he maybe bound to the lawful part, when he is not bound to the unlawful. But it's plainly proved, that it was our Prelacy mittens, as fuch, defcri- bedexprefly, (yea, the inclufon of Epifcopacy openly difclaimed) which was the thing covenanted againft. '§ 373. Obje&. The finisproximus is parr of the matter of the Vow : for the fevers' At's are vowedonly as means to thatend: And therefore the obligation to the end ceafmg, the obligation to the meansas fucb sloth ceafe : Now the cud was the maintaining a War again,/! the King, and the illegal takingdownof Prelacy : And every Claufe in the Covenant receiving itsfencefrom thisunlawful End, is itfe f unlawful Anfw. Though I hear none use this Realòn, yet it being the ttrongelt that I could devife, and all that canTeemof any weight being comprized in it, I will not paf it by; ( though it be for Sub[once the fame with that fire ant-Veer- ed). And, r. It is plain that the finis proximo, of altering Prelacy, can be neither of thefe mentioned: Neither the War, nor the illegality of the Change: Thefinis proximsa mull be the ceffation of Prelacy : The next End was a ( real or fuppofed ) eafe to the Nation by it; and a (real or fuppofed) Reformation of the Church by it : And is far are the two aforefaid things from being the neareui Ends, that they would heno Ends. For, r. The nature of the thing Iheweth it : It may much fitlier befaid that the War was forthe taking down of Prelacy; (as is common- lyPaid by the Prelatißs) than that the taking down of Prelacy wasfor the War: And the War was long before Prelacywas taken down: And it is contrary to feacetto ,

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=