PART II. ReverendMr. Richard Baxter. 4i7 3. Who can prove that it is anyViolationOf that Oath, or wrong to [ the li- berties of the Church] which the King fweareth to preferve,to changethePrelacy in', to the Primitive Epifcopacy? by taking down Lay-Chancellors, and reftoring Pa- ftoral Power, &c. any more than it was to take down Abbots, and to raft out the Pope, and to fubjeét the Clergy to the Magiffrate, who before were much exempt All thefe feem to be much more againft the Libertiesof that which was called the Church when thisOath was formed, than the !hewing Mercy to Prelates and the whole Land, by reducing them to a lawful rank,can be. 4. Do any Cafuifts in the World teach filch Doctrine, That a former Oath is null, becaufe Tome Conveniencies required the taking of a later ? ç. If this hold true, then God's Law, which is former and higher than all, having firft made it (as many Non-Subfcribers think ) a fin to cherifh the Diocefan Frame at all, and confequently to fwear to do it, thequeftion is, Whether the Obligati- on tofwear the upholding of them, or the Obligation not to fwear it, were the greater ? § 382. 'to. Mr. Frellwood's further Reafon is, That [it is injuflice to calf outfo ma- ny Men from their pouT1dDignities and Eflates ; and therefore no Vow can oblige any to it]. 11njw. r. If indeed it were fo, then the Vow extending butto our Places aidCal- hags, cannot bind us to it : But is it anyInjultice to make a -Law againil Prelacy in Specie, and to let their Places and Mantas she with them? TheGovernment may be foaltered without putting out any Man, ifnone be putin tofugceed them when they die. 2. And what ifthe King continue them as Church-Magiftrates ( only to do what his own Officers may do, to keep the Churches Peaceas Juftices) and con- tinue their Baronies and their Lands andPlaces in Parliament, and only reform the pretended Spiritual Power of theKeys : would not this have been a taking down of Prelacy without the wrong of any ? 3. Or what if he had taken down all their Power, and given them a Writ of Eafe, and therewith leftthem, durante vita, their Effaces and Honours? Would this have been any injury to them? 4. IfPrelacy be as frnful as the Non-Subfcribers foregoing Arguments would prove, can it be injuftice to fave a Man fromSin and Hell? and to fave all the Churches from fach Calamity, for fome flelhly abatements that follow to a few Perlons? ç. Was it injuftice to put down the Abbots ? Or cannot King and Parliament do good by Laws to the Church or Commonwealth, whenever a tingle Perfon or a few do fuller by it? 6. Efpecially where the Maintenance is Publick, and given for the Work, and the Work is for the Publick Good ? Doth any Prince temple the removingof an intolerable Pilot or Captain from a Ship ? Or an intolerable Minifter from the Church ? Or an intolerable Officer from the Court, though it be to his loll ? For my part, I never accufed them for cutting out fo many HundredMinifters from their Livings or Benefices, upon fuppofition that it be no wrong to Chril and Mens Souls to caft us out of the Church ; but fhould rather juftifie it. § 383. tr. The lull and not the weakeft Reafon againft the Obligation of the Covenant is, That [ if it were lawful before for fubjeth topetition, and Parliament Men todesk andvote ageinfl Prelacy,yet now it u not ; becaufe by ibisAEl theParliament bath made it unlawful. "?nfw. a. The Parliament loth only declaretheir fenfe of a thing pall [ that no Man it bound] and not mall by.a Law that no Man_ball beneefartb be bound. - z. If it had been otherwife, all Proteffants confefs that neitherPope , nor any Earthly Power candifpenfe with Oaths and Vows. 3. They do not fo much as prohibit all Men to endeavour an Alterationof Go- vernment in the Church, but only forbid them to fay, That they are bound to it by the Covenant. 4. They have allowed Subjeets to petition for the change of Laws, tó theydo it but ten at a time. 5. TheParliament is not byany Man to be accufed of fuch a Subverfionof Li- berties and ofParliaments Priviledges, andof the Conftitution of the Kingdom, as to forbid Subjets petitioning, and all Parliament Men fpeaking, and to difable the King and Parliament fromchanging a Law when they fee caufe: If they Iltónkf do any of this, the Charges now brought againft the Long Parliament, would leach and allow us to fuppofe all to be null, kJ h tr . g¢
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=