Chapter XXV: Part III: The Present testimony stated and vindicated in its principal heads (14)

2. Let it be considered, that though (as the pleaders for these transactions do impertinently) alledge the same words in other cases might be subscribed in a more abstract sense, as being capable of a good construction; yet complexly considered in the form and frame of all the oaths and bonds we have been troubled with, they cannot be subscribed in any sense; and if in any, that must be the imposer's sense, which in them all is always pernicious. 1. They cannot be taken in any sense though never so good, if we consider the absolute illegality of their arbitrary imposition. It will be confessed that oaths should be very tenderly imposed upon consciences, not only lest the name of God be prostitute to profanation, in matters light and trivial, or dubious and uncertain; but lest a tyrannical jurisdiction be exercised over the souls of men, which are not subject to any power that mortals can claim: so it cannot be denied, but that the constitution of our government requires, and reason as well as religion says it is necessary, that no ruler hath right to enjoin an oath which is not first enacted into a law; and it was always accounted a good plea for refusing oaths, when there was no law for them; and some have been charged with treason, for exacting oaths without a statute ordaining them: which might be brought in as a charge against all the imposers of our oaths, the most part of which have been enacted and extorted without any colour of law; some of them being never ordained by any act of parliament, and others of them before they could obtain such a mischief framed into an act for them, and all of them neither ever legally administred nor righteously enacted, by such who had power to make acts; for as for the packed parliaments that made them, no conscientious man could ever own such a company of perjured traitors, to be their parliamentary representatives. Yet abstracting from that, I say, the oaths that have been imposed without and against law could never be taken in any sense, without consenting to their treasonable breach of law, for which they have forfeited their lives to justice, whenever there shall be a judicatory to revise their administrations: and these that have been imposed by a pretended law, could never be taken without justifying of that law that ordained them, which hath been nothing but a mischief framed into a law by a throne of iniquity. 2. They cannot be taken in a good sense, with a safe conscience, considering either what is plain in them, or what is more ambiguous. What is plain and capable but of one sense, that is always either restraining to a clear sin, to renounce some part of the covenanted reformation, in profession or practice; or constraining from a clear duty, that we should not do that which we may or ought to do. There is nothing in all of them plain but what obliges to one of these two. Again, what is ambiguous in them, as it ought to be refused for its ambiguity; so, when it is explained according to the imposer's mind and meaning, the sense will be found always pernicious, though the words may be plausible. As when they require an obligation to allegiance, or loyalty, or peaceableness, or orderliness, and other smooth words, signifying excellent things in an abstract notion, these will be found to carry quite another sense, if we enquire into the imposer's meaning, in which only oaths and bonds must be taken. The only way to find out their meaning, is to consider either their acts or actings, or their designs and intentions, as they are discoverable by any man of prudence or consideration. If we consult their acts or actings practically, and not only legally explaining them for a commentary, then by allegiance, we can understand nothing else but an owning of their absolute tyranny: by loyalty, nothing but an absolute and implicit obedience of their absolute commands, without reserve (as the late proclamation for the toleration expounds it) by peaceableness, nothing but a stupid subjection to them, letting them do what they please without resistance or controul; and by orderliness nothing but a disorderly compliance and conformity with them, in going along with the corruptions and defections of the time; for their acts and actings expound them so. If we consider their designs and intentions, according to which they are all uniformly calculate and equally levelled; he is blind who hath not seen they have been driving all this time at these designs (to which all these oaths and bonds have been adapted and successfully subservient, and by which they have been promoted to the present pass) to overturn gradually all the degrees of our covenanted reformation, to establish tyranny, and advance it unto greater degrees of absoluteness, and to introduce popery and slavery: so that by allegiance and loyalty can be meant nothing else but an obligation to own and obey, and never to oppose the design of advancing tyranny; and by peaceableness and orderliness, nothing else can be intended, than an obligation never to oppose either the present settlement, or future establishment of popery and arbitrary power, upon the ruins of the reformation, and our civil and religious rights and liberties. Whence, they that can take these oaths and bonds in any other sense, and plead for the inoffensiveness of the terms, in a more abstract notion, and sense alledged more legal, without regard to that of the imposers, practically explained by their administrations, and so looking more to the briberies of their blinded reason and worldly interest, than to the dictates of conscience, please themselves with such notions and quibbling evasions, do but mock God, deceive the world, elude the enemies, and delude themselves. And all these debatings for accommodations and expositions in another sense, are but foul fairdings of conscience-beguiling compoundings in, and pitiful priggings for, a base compliance. But it is usual for a guilty son of Adam to sew fig-leaves.

4. Let it be considered, that all these oaths and bonds that the land hath been debauched with these 27 years, are all condemned by, and contradictory to anterior binding orders, the acts of the general assemblies requiring no oaths in the common cause to be taken, without the church's consent, as was cleared in the historical part, upon the fifth period, page 97. And that especially they are condemned as being contradictory to, and violatory of prior oaths, of continuing indispensible obligation; being designed, pressed, and imposed, on purpose to delete the same out of the minds and memories of the present generation; I mean the national and solemn league and covenants, and other former nationally binding public engagements. Which, because they are not only broken and burnt, but declared criminal to be owned, and because the owning of their obligation is ordinarily inserted in the indictments of our martyrs, I must touch upon them more particularly. It was cleared above, Head I. arg. 11. from the form, the object, and from the ends of the covenant, which are all moral, and of indispensible obligation, that it is of perpetual and unalterably binding force, obliging the present and all future generations, as well as that which did first come under the bond of it. And to confirm this, I shall add more particularly these many considertions. 1. The national engagements are national promises, plighting and pledging the nation's public faith, for the preservation and propagation of religion and liberty, to succeeding posterity; which if succeeding generations may reverse, then the faith of men, and the faith of nations, can be of no force above a century of years; nay nor after the decease of them that personally made the promise: and so every new ruler, every new parliament, yea every person coming up to succeed the father in any capacity, might be free not to stand to it, which were very absurd. Certainly that promise of the jewish nobles and rulers, not to exact usury of their brethren, but to restore, and not require it of them, did not only oblige themselves but would bring their posterity under the curse, if they should exact the same debt there remitted, Neh. v. 12, 13. And does not a national promise of preserving the reformation, bind as much to the curse of the breach of it? 2. They are national vows, avowing and avouching, and devoting themselves and their posterity to be the Lord's people, and to keep his statutes, and promote his interests, which do bind the posterity. Jacob's vow at Bethel, that the Lord should be his God, Gen. xxviii. 21. did oblige all that his posterity, virtually comprehended in him; he found him in Bethel, and there he spake with us, saith the prophet many hundred years after, Hos. xii. 4. The Israelites vow to destroy the Canaanites, did oblige all their posterity, Numb. xxi. 2. Not only by virtue of the Lord's command, but by virtue of their vow; as we are obliged to preserve the reformation, not only by virtue of the Lord's command, but by virtue of our covenants. Vows are bonds to the soul, which must stand, Numb. xx. 2, 4. And whereas it is said, that as a woman's father or husband might disannul her vow, and so the magistrate might abrogate the covenant: besides the impertinency of this comparison, as might be easy to demonstrate, it may be, by giving and not granting that he might do so; yet if the father and husband shall hold their peace, then all her vows shall stand, and her bonds wherewith she bound her soul shall stand, ver. iv. 7. but so it was, that the supreme magistrate did give his consent to the national covenant, and the successor did swear the solemn league and covenant, and received the crown on the terms thereof, to preserve and promote religion and liberty; and therefore his vows must stand, they cannot be made void afterwards; for, it is a snare to devour that which is holy, and after vows to make enquiry, Prov. xx. 25. So we find the Rechabites were obliged to observe the vow of their forefathers Jonadab, Jer. xxxv. 6. 14. And if the father's vow obliges the children, shall not the nation's vow oblige the posterity? 3. They are national oaths which do oblige posterity: Esau's oath to Jacob, resigning his birth-right, did oblige his posterity never to recover it, Gen. xxv. 33. Joseph took an oath of the children of Israel to carry up his bones into Canaan, Gen. 1. xxv. which the posterity, going forth of Egypt in after ages, found themselves straitly sworn to observe, Exod. xii. 19. and accordingly buried them in Shechem, Josh. xxiv. 32. The spies swore to preserve Rahab alive and her house, Josh. ii. 12, &c. which was without the consent of the magistrate, and yet Joshua found himself obliged to observe it, Josh. vi. 22. Moses swore unto Caleb to ensure him an inheritance, Josh. xiv. 9. and upon this ground he demands it as his right, ver. 12. which he could not do, if successors might reverse their predecessors lawful oaths.

The Lord will in a special manner, resent and revenge the posterities breach of the oath of their father's covenant, Ezek. xvi. 59. "Thus saith the Lord God, I will even deal with thee, as thou hast done, which hast despised the oath, in breaking the covenant," which was the covenant of their fathers. 4. They are national covenants, wherein king, parliament, and people do covenant with each other, for the performance of the respective duties of their several stations, either as to the work of reformation, or as to the preservation of each others mutual rights and privileges: so that they are national covenants made by men with men; and these we find do oblige the posterity. Israel's covenant with the Gibeonites did oblige the posterity, Josh. ix. 15, 19. and for the breach of it many ages after, the posterity was plagued, 2 Sam. xxi. 1. Zedekiah was bound by his predecessor's covenant, though it was such as made the kingdom base, yet in keeping it, it was only to stand. "Shall he break the covenant, and be delivered? Thus saith the Lord, as I live, surely mine oath that he hath despised and my covenant that he hath broken, even it will I recompense upon his own head," Ezek. xvii. 12, 14, 15, 19. The apostle says even of human covenants, "Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth or addeth thereunto," Gal. iii. 15. that is, cannot do so lawfully much less can one man disannul a nation's covenant. 5. They are national attestations of God as a witness, for the perpetuity, as well as fidelity of these sacred engagements. All such covenants, wherein the holy name of God is invocated as witness, are owned of God as his (hence the covenant betwixt David and Jonathan, is called the covenant of the Lord, 1 Sam. xx. 8.) and Zedekiah's fault was the breach of the Lord's covenant, Ezek. xvii. forecited. So likewise that covenant mentioned Jer. xxxiv. 8, 9, 10. wherein the princes and people did swear to let their Hebrew servants go free, is called God's covenant, verse 18. and upon this account sorer judgments are threatened, verse 19, 20. "And I will give the men that have transgressed my covenant, which have not performed the words of the covenant which they had made before me----into the hands of their enemies." Certainly this did oblige the posterity, at least not to recal these servants, and, it was always morally obliging. So our national covenant, sworn with hands lifted up to the most high God, being materially also binding, cannot be abrogated by the posterity except the Lord renounce his interest in them; as long as the witness liveth then, who claims them as his, they cannot be made void; especially considering. 6. They are national covenants made with God, as the other party contracting, in the matters of God, which none can dispense with, or grant remissions in; and therefore they must perpetually bind, until he loose them. And if even the posterity break them, the Lord will make them that hate them to reign over them, and he will bring a sword upon them to avenge the quarrel of his covenant, Levit. xxvi. 15, 17, 25. Such were all the national covenants of the Lord's people, renewed by Joshua, Asa, Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, Josiah, Ezra, Nehemiah, for the breaches of which the Lord plagued the posterity. It was for breach of their fathers covenant with God, that the ten tribes were carried away captive, 2 Kings xvii. 15, &c. We have already experienced the threatned judgments for covenant breaking, and may look for more. 7. They are for their matter national covenants, about things moral objectively, obliging to join ourselves to the Lord in a perpetual covenant that shall not be forgotten, Jer. l. 5. I might easily demonstrate all the articles of the covenant to be morally binding, but they are demonstrated sufficiently above, Head 1. Arg. 11. therefore they are perpetually binding. 8. They are for their ends national covenants, inviolably obliging. Which cannot be made void, though they should be broken, because the ends of them are always to be pursued, as is proved above, Head 1. therefore they are perpetual. 9. They are for their formality national covenants, most solemnly sworn, and subscribed by all ranks, with uplifted hands, with bended knees, with solemn invocating the name of God, with solemn preaching, prayer and praise, rendering themselves and the posterity obnoxious to the curse, if they should break it. Now the solemnities of the oath do aggravate the heinousness of the breach of it, as is clear from Jer. xxxiv. 19. Ezek. xvii. 18. quoted above: the reason is, because of their greater deliberation in the action, and because of the greater scandal accompanying the violation thereof. Hence as they are national oaths and covenants so solemnized, they are national adjurations, under the pain of a national curse, not to break them nationally, which do make the posterity obnoxious to it; as Joshua adjured Israel, saying, "Cursed be the man that raiseth up, and buildeth this city Jericho," Josh. vi. 26. which was fulfilled many generations after, in the days of Ahab, upon Hiel the Bethelite, 1 Kings xvi. last verse. So the curse of introducing abjured prelacy and popery, if it be let in, will be impendent on the nation. All national covenants have a curse annexed, in case of a breach, whenever it shall be: so in Nehemiah's covenant, 'They clave to their brethren, and entered into a curse, and into an oath, to walk in God's law, which was given by Moses the servant of God, and to observe and to do all the commandments of the Lord our Lord, and his judgments and statutes;' particularly not to enter into affinity with their malignant enemies, Neh. x. 29, 30. which certainly did oblige the posterity, because the thing was moral; so in our covenants we are bound to the same things, and nothing but these: and therefore the posterity is liable to the curse of perjury, for the breach thereof. 10. They are for their legality national laws, being solemnly ratified by the parliament and by the king, and made the foundation of their compact with him at his inauguration, whereby they became the fundamental laws of the government, and among the very laws and rules of governing, which, though they be rescinded by a wicked law, yet make the rescinders chargeable not only of perjury, in breaking a covenant, but of treason and tyranny, in breaking and altering the constitution of the government, and render them liable to the curse thereof: for they cannot rescind that, nor escape its vengeance: whereof we have a speaking pledge already, in that the rescinder of these covenants was so terribly rescinded, and cut off by the hands of unnatural violence; God thereby fulfilling that threatned judgment of covenant breakers, that he hath broken his covenant shall be brought to destruction, and bloody and deceitful men shall not live out half their days; Psal. lv. 20. last verse. So Charles II. got not leave to live out half the days that he projected to himself. 11. They are national engagements of an hereditary nature, like that of Israel, Deut. xxix. 14, 15. which did oblige not only the present, but the absent, 'not only them that stood there that day before the Lord their God, but them that were not there that day.' Grotius de jur. bel. lib. 2. cap. 6. gives these marks of hereditary covenants, (1.) When the subject is of a permanent nature, and as long as the same body remains: therefore as long as Scotland is Scotland, whose people in their personal capacity, whose parliaments in their parliamentary capacity, whose king in his princely capacity, did all solemnly and sacredly engage in the covenant, it must be real and perpetually obliging. (2.) When there is such a clause in the covenant, as that it should be perpetual, there are many clauses in the solemn league to this purpose. In Art. 1. are these words, 'That we, and our posterity after us, may, as brethren, live in faith and love, and the Lord may delight to dwell in the midst of us.' In the 5th Art. 'We shall each one of us, according to our place and interest, endeavour that the kingdoms may remain conjoined in a firm peace and union to all posterity.' (3.) When it is such as is made for the good of the kingdom, the covenant expresses its end, for the perpetual good of the kingdom, 'having before our eyes the glory of God, the advancement of the kingdom of----Christ, the honour and happiness of the king and his posterity, and the true public liberty, safety, and peace of the kingdoms; wherein every one's private condition is included.' And again it is added, 'for preservation of ourselves and our religion from utter ruin and destruction.' All this is a public national good. (4.) The matter is moral, about materially binding duties, and therefore it must be hereditary, and of perpetual obligation. 12. Lastly, They are national obligations, taking on public duties, by way of virtual representation of the posterity. And they that think it irrational, that the father should represent and involve the family, must resolve us how the religious and civil covenants of Israel and Judah, made in Moses', Joshua's, David's, Asa's, Joash's, Hezekiah's, Josiah's and Nehemiah's days, did comprehend and bind as well the absent as the present, and their posterity, yet unborn; as also, how the laws and contracts continually passed by some do take in others, not personally consenting; yea, how comes it to pass, that every succeeding generation is bound to the laws, and must be obedient to the kings, that they did not make themselves, no reason can be given, but because they are virtually represented by, and included in their fathers. Now, if these arguments prove our national covenants to be perpetually binding, and cannot be dispensed with, then must these posterior oaths that are made in a diametrical opposition to the covenants, and are condemned by the covenants, be false and unlawful oaths; but the first is proved: therefore these oaths so opposite to, and condemned by the covenants, are false and unlawful. That they are opposite to the covenant, will appear in the induction of all of them. And that, whatever they be imposed by this party, they are condemned by the covenants, wherein we are obliged to make no such transactions with them, will appear if we consider these and the like expressions, 'That we shall neither directly, nor indirectly, suffer ourselves to be divided by whatsoever suggestion, allurement, or terror, from this blessed conjunction, nor shall cast in any let or impediment that may stop or hinder any such resolution, as shall be found to conduce for so good ends.' Which are the words of the national covenant, clearly condemning oaths and bonds given to malignants, which are divisive of them that adhere to, and unitive with them that oppose the covenant, and impeditive of resolutions to prosecute the ends thereof. So, in the solemn league and covenant, Art. 4. 'We are obliged to oppose all such as make any faction or parties amongst the people contrary to this league and covenant; but by these oaths and bonds, such factions are made,' &c. And by Art. 6. 'We are obliged to assist and defend all those that enter into this covenant (contradicted by all the latter oaths and bonds) and not to suffer ourselves directly, or indirectly, by whatsoever combination,----to be divided----from this blessed union,----whether to make defection to the contrary part, or to give ourselves to a detestable indifferency,' &c. Which we do, when we divide ourselves from these that refuse these oaths, and make defection unto the party that impose them. And in the solemn acknowledgment of sins, and engagement to duties, 'We are sworn, sect. 6. to be so far from conniving at, complying with, or countenancing of malignancy, injustice, &c. that we shall not only avoid and discountenance these things, &c. but take an effectual course to punish and suppress these evils.' All which we counteract and contradict, when we take any of these oaths or bonds.

In the second place, by a particular induction of the several kinds of these oaths and bonds, the iniquity of each of them will appear; and the complex iniquity of the smoothest of them, the oath of abjuration compared with every one of them, will be manifest. And consequently the honesty and innocency of sufferers for refusing them will be discovered.

1. The first in order, which was a copy to all the rest, was the declaration, ordained to be subscribed by all in public charge, office, or trust, within the kingdom: 'Wherein they do affirm and declare, they judge it unlawful to subjects, upon pretence of reformation, or any other pretence whatsoever, to enter into leagues and covenants, or take up arms against the king,----and that all these gatherings,----petitions, protestations----that were used----for carrying on of the late troubles, were unlawful and seditious; and particularly that these oaths,----the national covenant,----and the solemn league and covenant, were and are in themselves unlawful oaths.' Here is a confederacy required against the Lord, at which the heavens might stand astonished; an unparalelled breach of the third command. Which could no more be taken in truth and righteousness, than an oath renouncing the bible; but it hath this advantage of the rest; that it is somewhat plain, and the iniquity legible on its front. 1. That it is a renouncing of solemn and sacred covenants, perpetually binding to moral and indispensible duties, the wickedness whereof is evident from what is said above. 2. It makes perjury of the deepest dye, the absolute necessary qualification of all in public office, who cannot be presumed capable of administrating justice, when they have avowed themselves perjured and perfidious, and not to be admitted among heathens, let be Christians, nor trusted in a matter of ten shillings money, according to the laws of Scotland. 3. It renounces the whole work of reformation, and the way of carrying it on, as a pretence and trouble unlawful and seditious, which if it be a trouble, then the peace they have taken in renouncing it, must be such a peace as is the plague of God upon the heart, filling it with senselesness and stupidity in his last judgment, because of the palpable breach of covenant; or such a peace, as is very confident with the curse and vengeance of God, pursuing the quarrel of a broken covenant. 4. It condemns the taking up arms against the king, which shall be proven to be duty. Head 5. Besides, that hereby the most innocent means of seeking the redress of grievances, that religion, risings, law, and practice of all nations allows, is condemned. Yet, in effect, for as monstrous as this oath is, the complex of its iniquity is touched in the oath of abjuration; in which many of these methods of combinations, risings and declarations of war against the king, and protestations against his tyranny, which were used in the late troubles for carrying on the reformation, are abjured; in that a declaration is renounced, in so far as it declares war against the king, and asserts it lawful to kill them that serve him: which yet, in many cases in the covenanted reformation here renounced, were acknowledged and practised as lawful, besides that it hath many other breaches of covenant in it, as will be shewed.

II. The next net they contrived to catch consciences, was the oath of allegiance and supremacy: 'Wherein they that took it for testification of their faithful obedience to their most gracious and redoubted sovereign, Charles king of Great Britain,----do affirm, testify, and declare,----That they acknowledge their said sovereign, only supreme governor of this kingdom, over all persons and in all causes; and that no foreign prince----hath any jurisdiction, power, or superiority over the same; and therefore do utterly renounce all foreign power,----and shall, at their utmost power, defend, assist, and maintain his majesty's jurisdiction foresaid,----and never decline his power----.' The iniquity of this oath is very vast and various, 1. It is a covenant of allegiance with a king, turned tyrant and enemy to religion, subverter of the reformation, and overturner of our laws and liberties: and therefore demonstrate to be sinful both from the first general argument against oaths, and from head 2d. 2. It cannot be taken in truth, righteousness, or judgment: because the words are general and very comprehensive, and ambiguous, capable of diverse senses; when he is affirmed to be supreme over all persons, and in all causes, and to be assisted, and maintained, in that jurisdiction. Who can be sure in swearing such an oath, but that he may thereby wrong others, wrong parliaments in their privileges, wrong the church in her liberties, and which is worse, wrong the Lord Jesus Christ, who is supreme alone in some causes? Can an oath be taken in truth and righteousness, to assist him in all encroachments, upon causes that are not subordinate to him? And in invading all those privileges of subjects, which are natural, civil, moral, and religious? For if he be supreme in all causes, then all these depend upon him, and be subordinate to him. And can it be taken in judgment, and with a clear mind, when it may be debated and doubted (as it may by some) whether the obligation of it is to be considered, as circumstantiate and specificate to the present object of it, supposing him a tyrant? Or in a more abstract notion, as it might be rendered in the sense of its first authors as it was taken in king James the VI's days, and as they plead for taking the English oath of allegiance, as it was excepted by the Puritans in queen Elizabeth's days? Whether it obliges to a king in idea, and in a more general consideration, as one who is said never to die? Or with reference to such an one as we have, a mortal man, and an immortal enemy to all those precious interests, for preservation of which he only received his kingship? Whether it must be taken in that of the imposers, practically explained by their administrations? Or in any other sense, alledged more legal? These would be clear, before it can be taken with the due qualifications of an oath. 3. As for the civil part of it, or ecclesiastical, no other examination needeth to be enquired after, than what they give forth on their acts on record: the act of supremacy (to be seen in the historical representation of the sixth and last period,) senses the ecclesiastical part of it: and the act for acknowledgment of his Majesty's prerogative does sufficiently sense, explain and expound the civil part; declaring, 'That it is inherent in the crown, and an undoubted part of his royal prerogative,----to have the sole choice and appointment of all officers of state,----the power of calling, holding, and dissolving parliaments and all conventions and meetings of estates,----the power of armies, making of peace and war, treaties and leagues with foreign princes or states, or at home by the subjects among themselves:----and that it is high treason in the subjects,----upon whatsoever ground to rise----in arms,----or make any treaties or leagues----among themselves: without his majesty's authority first interponed thereto; that it is unlawful to the subjects, of whatsoever quality or function to convocate----themselves, for holding of councils to treat, consult, or determine in any matters civil or ecclesiastic, (except in the ordinary judgments) or make leagues or bonds upon whatsoever colour or pretence, without his majesty's special consent,----that the league and covenant, and all treaties following thereupon, and acts or deeds that do or may relate thereunto, are not obligatory,----and that none----should presume, upon any pretext of any authority whatsoever, to require the renewing or swearing of the said league and covenant,' &c. Whereby it appears, that all this screwing up the prerogative to such a pitch is by the oath of allegiance to defend all this jurisdiction justified: and so, these palpable encroachments on the privileges of the Scots parliaments, that, by the fundamental constitutions of the government always had a share in making laws, and peace and war: these robberies of our natural privileges of defending ourselves by arms, in case of the king's tyranny and oppression, and of convocating for consultations about the best means thereof; and these invasions upon our ecclesiastical privileges, in keeping general assemblies for the affairs of religion for an affair newly happening, always strenuously contended for as a part of the testimony; yea, all these rescindings, repealings, and condemnings of the way and manner, methods and measures, of promoting the covenanted reformation, are by this oath explained, and by this act acknowledged to be parts of that supremacy and jurisdiction to be defended and maintained: as likewise, by many wicked acts since promulgated, which promote the supremacy to a vast degree of absoluteness, which all do interpret what that supremacy is which is sworn to be maintained, to wit, pure tyranny established by law. See the many grievous consequences of this laid out at large, in Apol. Relat. Sect. 10. 4. Here is absolute allegiance sworn to an absolute power, paramount to all law, engaging to faithful obedience to their sovereign, as supreme over all persons, and in all causes----and to defend, assist, and maintain his said jurisdiction, and never to decline his power: there is no restriction here on obedience, nor limitation on the power, nor definition of the causes, nor circumscription of the cases, in which that assistance, &c. is to be given, whether they be lawful or not. Now, absolute allegiance to an absolute power cannot be sworn by any man of conscience, nor owned by any man of reason, as is proven, Head 2. Arg. 6. It cannot be lawful in any sense, to swear such an oath to any mortal, nay, not to a David nor Hezekiah: because to swear unrestricted and unlimited allegiance to any man, were a manifest mancipating of mankind, not only to an ass-like subjection, but to a servile obligation to maintain and uphold the persons and government of mutual men, be what they will, turn to what they will; it is known the best of men may degenerate: and by this no remedy is left to redress ourselves, but our heads, hearts, and hands all tied up under an engagement to defend, assist, and maintain whosoever doth hold the government, manage it as he pleases. This reason will also conclude against the English oath of allegiance, though it be a great deal more smoothly worded, and seems only to require a rejection of the Pope, and legal subjection to the king; yet, that comprehensive clause makes it border upon absoluteness, I will bear faith and true allegiance to his majesty's heirs and successors, and him and them will defend to the uttermost of my power, against all conspiracies and attempts whatsoever. There are no conditions here at all, limiting the allegiance, or qualifying the object; but an arbitrary imposition of true allegiance and defence, in all cases, against all attempts, (even that of repressing their tyranny not excepted), not only of their persons, but of their dignities, if this be not an illimited allegiance to an absolute power, I know not what is. 5. Here is an acknowledgment of the ecclesiastical supremacy resident in the king: which is the most blasphemous usurpation on the prerogatives of Christ, and privileges of his church that ever the greatest monster among men durst arrogate: yea, the Roman beast never claimed more; and, in effect, it is nothing else but one of his name of blasphemy twisted out of the Pope's hands by king Henry the VIII. and handed down to queen Elizabeth, and wafted over to James the VI. for that was the original and conveyance of it. The iniquity whereof is discovered above, Head 1. Arg. 3. But further, may be aggravated in these particulars, (1.) It is only a change of the Pope, but not of the popedom; and nothing else but a shaking off the ecclesiastical pope, and submitting to a civil pope, by whom Christ's hardship is as much wronged as by the other: and hereby a door is opened for bringing in popery (as indeed by this stratagem it is brought now to our very doors) for by the act of supremacy he hath power to settle all things concerning doctrine, worship, discipline or government, by his clerks the bishops, having all the architectonic power of disposing, ordering, and ordaining these, as he in his royal wisdom thinks fit. (2.) By this church and state are confounded (whereof the distinction is demonstrate above) making the magistrate a proper and competent judge in church matters, not to be declined; whereby also he hath power to erect new courts, mongrel judicatories; half civil, half ecclesiastic, which have no warrant in the word. (3.) By this, many palpable and intolerable encroachments made upon the liberties and privileges of the church of Christ are yielded unto; as that there must be no church-judicatories or assemblies, without the magistrate's consent, but that the power of convocating and indicting assemblies do belong only to him, and the power of delegating and constituting the members thereof, that he may dissolve them when he pleases; that his presence, or his commissioners, is necessary unto each national assembly; that ministers have no proper decisive suffrage in synods, but only of advice; that the church judicatories be prelimited, and nothing must be treated there, which may be interpreted grating upon the prerogative, nor any thing whatsoever, but what he shall allow and approve, without which it can have no force nor validity; yea, by this a door should be opened unto the utter destruction and overthrow of all church-judicatories, seeing he is made the fountain of all church power. (4.) By this, the magistrate is made a church-member as he is a magistrate, and so all magistrates as such are church-members, even heathens. And yet, (5.) By this he is exempted from subjection to the ministry, because they are made accountable to him in their administrations, and in the discharge of their function are under him as supreme. Yea, (6.) By this the magistrate is made a church officer, having the disposal of the church's government. And not only so, but (7.) By this he is made a church officer of the highest degree, being supreme in all causes, to whom ministers in the discharge of their ministry are subordinate. And so, (8.) By this the church of the New Testament is made imperfect, so long as she wanted a Christian magistrate, wanting hereby a chief officer; yea, and the apostles did amiss in robbing the magistrate of his power. (9.) By this the magistrate might exercise all acts of jurisdiction, immediately by himself; seeing he can do it as supreme by his commissioners in ecclesiastic affairs. (10.) Finally, by this oath the king is made the head of the church, being supreme over all persons, and in all causes, unto whom all appeals and references must ultimately be reduced, even from church judicatories. Those things are only here touched they are more apodictically confirmed above, and may be seen made out at large in Apol. Relat. Sect. 12. But I proceed. 6. It is contrary unto the solemn League and Covenant; into whose place, after it was broken, burnt, buried, and rescinded, since they have remitted the subjects allegiance by annulling the bond of it, they substitute and surrogate this in its place: and therefore none can comply with the surrogation of the second, except he consent to the abrogation of the first oath. All the allegiance we can own according to the covenants, stands perpetually and expresly thus qualified, viz. in defence of religion and liberty, according to our first and second covenants, and in its own nature must be indispensibly thus restricted: therefore to renew the same, or take an oath of allegiance simply, purposely omitting the former restriction, when the powers are in manifest rebellion against the Lord, is, in effect, a disowning of that limitation, and of the sovereign prerogative of the great God, which is thereby reserved and as much as to say, 'Whatever authority command us to do, we shall not only stupidly endure it, but actively concur with, and assist in all this tyranny.' See Naph. first edition, Pag. 177, 178. Vindicated at length by Jus Populi. chap. 11. By all this the iniquity of the Scots oath of allegiance and supremacy may appear, and also that of the English oath of allegiance, even abstract from the supremacy, is in some measure discovered; though it is not my purpose particularly to speak to that: yet this I will say, That they that plead for its precision from the supremacy annexed seem not to consider the full import of its terms; for under the dignities, superiorities and authorities, there engaged to be upheld, the ecclesiastical supremacy must be included; for that is declared to be one of the dignities of the crown there, as well as here; and hither it was brought from thence. And therefore those Scots men that took that oath there, and pled, that though the oath of allegiance in Scotland be a sin, yet it is duty to take the oath in England, seem to me to be in a great deceit: for the object is the same, the subject is the same, the duty expected, required, and engaged into, is the same, and every thing equal in both. Yet all this iniquity, here couched, is some way comprehended in, and implied by the oath of abjuration: for the civil part is imported in abjuring a declaration, for its declaring war against the king, where it is clear, he is owned as king, and all part with them that declare war against him being renounced, it is evident the abjurers must take part with him in that war, and so assist and defend him; for being subjects, they must not be neutral, therefore if they be not against him, they must be for him, and so under the bond of allegiance to him: the ecclesiastical supremacy is inferred from that expression of it, where some are said to serve him in church, as well as in state, which implies an ecclesiastical subordination to him as supreme over the church.

III. The tenor of some other bonds was more smooth and subtile, as that of the bond of peace; several times renewed and imposed, and under several forms; but always after one strain; engaging to live peaceably, whereby many were caught and cheated with the seeming fairness of these general terms; but others discerning their fallaciousness, refused and suffered for it. This in the general is capable of a good sense: for no Christian will refuse to live peaceably, but will endeavour, if it be possible, as much as lieth in them, to live peaceably with all men, Rom. xii. 18. that is, so far to follow peace with all men, as may consist with the pursuit of holiness, Heb. xii. 14. But if we more narrowly consider such bonds, we shall find them bonds of iniquity. For, 1. They are covenants of peace, or confederacies with God's enemies, whom we should count our enemies, and hate them because they hate him, Psal. cxxxix 21. It is more suitable to answer, as Jehu did to Joram, 2 Kings ix. 22.----What peace, so long as the whoredoms of thy mother Jezebel, and her witchcrafts are so many? than to engage to be at peace with those, who are carrying on Babylon's interest, the mother of harlots and witchcrafts. 2. This cannot be taken in truth, judgment, and righteousness, because of the fallacy and ambiguity of the terms: for there are diverse sorts of peace and peaceableness; some kind is duty, some never. It must then be rightly qualified, for we can profess and pursue no peace of confederacy with the enemies of God, not consistent with the fear of the Lord, otherwise we cannot expect to have the Lord for a sanctuary, but for a stone of stumbling, Isa. viii. 8, 12,----14.----No peace obstructing the gospel or testimony, or abstracting from the duty of the day: no peace tending to sinful security, Jer. viii. 11. No peace leading to slavish stupidity; no peace prompting to preposterous prudence, in palliating sin, or daubing defections with untempered morter; no peace inconsistent with truth; they must go together, Zech. i. 19. No peace that may not be followed with holiness, Heb. xii. 14. But it must be so qualified, that it be in the Lord, in truth, in duty, contributing for the good of the church, Psal. cxxii. 8, 9. and the fruit of that wisdom, which is first pure, and then peaceable, James iii. 17. Now, all that know the imposers of these bonds, will acknowledge that is not the peace they are seeking. 3. If we further enquire into their meaning of living peaceably, and seek a determinate sense of it from their acts and actings, it is plain they mean such a peaceable living, as gives obedience to their wicked laws, and is a compliance to their established courses: and it must be such a peaceable living, as is opposite to their sense of sedition, rebellion, schism, &c. Which they interpret every seasonable duty to be: and it must be such a peaceable living, as they were presumed not to have been observant of before; and whatever it be, must be opposite to that with which they were charged as turbulent, and so contrary to all the duties of our covenanted profession, as going to meetings, withdrawing from the curates, &c. Which they interpret not to be peaceable living. 4. This is contrary to our covenants, which oblige us to a constant contending with, and opposition to them. Yet all this is engaged into in the oath of abjuration, which abjures all war against the king, and all doing injury to them that serve him, and consequently to peace, and living peaceably with them.

IV. Of affinity to this were many other bonds of regularity, frequently renewed and generally imposed, and that with unparalleled illegality and rigour; sometimes by hosts of savage Highlanders; sometimes by circuit courts, and by heritors upon their tenants, and with such unheard of involvments, that the master or heritor was obliged for himself, his wife, children, servants, tenants, and all under him, to live orderly; which in some was more bluntly expressed, in others more flatly explained, that they should keep the public ordinances, that is, hear the curates, and not go to any seditious conventicles, (so they called the persecuted meetings of the Lord's people for the worship of God) and in others yet more impudently exacted, that they should not harbour, entertain, or correspond with any that went to these meetings, but discover and assist to the apprehending of them. There were several forms of them from time to time, some longer, some shorter; but all of them, first and last, were to the same sense and scope. And the most favourably worded had much wickedness in them: for, 1. They are covenants of order, and coming under the same rule with themselves, which is nothing but their lusts and mischiefs framed into law, not according to the rule of the word of God, but the iniquitous laws of men. 2. They could not be taken in truth, judgment, and righteousness: for either they were ambiguous, or their plain sense obliged to manifest iniquities, to conform with all their enacted corruptions. 3. They are clear breaches of covenant, which obliges to another kind of orderliness, and to follow other rulers, and take none from them in the matters of God. 4. They are impossible, and absurd; obliging masters to bind for all under them, that could neither lie in their power, nor in their duty, to restrain their liberty in these lawful things, and to constrain and compel their consciences to sin. 5. They are unnatural and cruel, obliging the takers to partake with them in their persecution of the godly. 6. They were engagements to hear curates, which is proved to be sin, head 1. throughout. 7. They were engagements to withdraw from the meetings of the Lord's people, proved to be duty, head 4. Yet the oath of abjuration is some way equivalent to this, in that it obliges the abjurers to renounce disorderliness in their sense, and to do no harm to the time-serving orderly clergy or laity, serving and prosecuting their wicked orders.

V. Some other bonds of that nature, and oaths frequently put to suffering people when taken prisoners, did require peaceableness and orderliness, in this stile, that they should either tacitly or expresly condemn some risings in arms, as at Pentland, Bothwel, &c. to be rebellion against the king, and a sin against God, and engage never to rise in arms against the king, or any commissionate by him, upon any pretence whatsoever. The iniquity whereof is manifest: For, 1. This is a covenant equivalent to a league offensive and defensive with them, obliging never to offend or oppose them, nor to defend nor rescue our brethren against and from their murdering violence. 2. This could not be taken in truth, judgment, and righteousness: for who can tell how far that may extend, upon any pretence whatsoever? This may oblige us to make a stupid surrender of our lives, when the king turns so tyrannical, as to send his cut-throats to demand them, or authorizes his bloody papists to massacre us, them we must not resist upon any pretence. 3. It is contrary to our covenants, that allow resistance in some cases, and oblige to assist and defend all that enter under the bond thereof. 4. This infers an owning of the present authority, as the irresistible ordinance of God, and an obligation of living peaceably in subjection under it; disproved above. To which I shall add a part of that forecited letter of Mr. Rutherford's, the 63d in number of the third part of his printed letters, which are a clear vindication of the principles and practice of our conscientious sufferers on this point: 'There is a promise and real purpose, (saith he) to live peaceably, under the king's authority; but (1.) You do not so answer candidly and ingeniously the mind of the rulers, who to your knowledge, mean a far other thing by authority than you do: for you mean his just authority, his authority in the Lord----in the maintainance of true religion, as in the covenant, and confession of faith----is expressed from the word of God; they mean his supreme authority, and absolute prerogative about laws, as their acts clear, and as their practice is; for they refused to such as were unwilling to subscribe their bond to add, authority in the Lord, or just and lawful authority, or authority as it is expressed in the covenant; but this draught of a petition yields the sense and meaning to them which they crave. (2.) That authority for which they contend, is exclusive of the sworn covenant; so that except ye had said, Ye shall be subject to the king's authority in the Lord, or according to the sworn covenant, you say nothing to the point in hand, and that sure is not your meaning. (3.) Whoever promises so much of peaceable living under his majesty's authority, leaving out the exposition of the fifth command,--may, upon the very same ground subscribe the bond refused by the godly, and so you pass from the covenant, and make all these bypast actings of this kirk and state these years bypast to be horrid rebellion, and how deep this guilt draws, consider.' 5. This would infer, though the king should send and kill us, we must not resist, nor defend our own lives: yet, being an oath against the sixth command, which enjoineth natural self-preservation, it should be intrinsically sinful; and 'tis all one to swear to non-preservation of self, as to swear to self-murder. 6. I hope to make it appear in the fifth head, that this is against the practice of nations, the law of nature, and the word of God. Yet all this complex iniquity is clearly comprehended in the oath of abjuration, in terms abjuring all war against the king.