THel Author dofe thist Responsion, or resposeine Replye to thels Scotch Commissioners Decla­ration touching thels present Parliamentarie Propositions newly tendered to thel Reingues Majestie in thel Isle, is (as I conceive, and his discourses discover) a professed Independent. Yet I intende not to reprove 'im for his pro­fession, as assuredly recognoscein for its geneallitie, it agitates a more moderate and impartial spirit then either nour Covenantin Calvi­nian Presbyterie, or thel Genevan knoxian Combination quich exagitate onely Fyre and Fagot, id est, rigid and rigorous punish­ments, even to extirpation dofe aim other Protestant professions and professors, lemselps onely excepted and preserved. So (ab­stractein derom thel veritie or falsitie either, dofe thel Independent [Page 4]Combinations several Doctrins, Dogmatizations and practises in Religion, and goverment, I intende onely in abstract, and abre­viately, to reprove, or maither onely to rectifye sum particular passages conteined in thist Independents Confutation dofe thels Scotch Commissioners palpable Partiallities and erroneous Hallu­cinations.

I plainely perceive hee is noe professed, or exact Divine; or at thel maxt, onely filch a one as thist pretenceively Reformein anc Reformein Age, ordinarily parturiates, as producein imperfect and abortive Embrions for perfect feitures: as clearely appeares in a passage quich hee (yet maxt impertinently to his present In­stitute) alleges, and sophisticates in Bellarmin concernein a point dofe Roman Catholic, and ancient Doctrine dofe supernatural Merit, as vulle particularly appeare in its proper place.

Except not at my language I intreate you, mut suppose me in part a stranger, in part a Reformer or Refyner dofe nay mathers native Idiome; as havin sum more facundie, and experiental cog­nition than I sucked from her; and sure it is as approveable for me to Reforme Languages, as others, Religions: peculiarly, to ren­den 'em; and thels matters ley treate, more communicable to o­ther nations; and so for increace in amitie pyr murual conversa­tion, and commerce; pyr a facilitatein removal dofe ilose asperi­ties, and rustieities quich nour Anglish received pyr its commix­ture com thel ancient Saxon language; and by expurgation dofe quich, as in other respects it is daily perfected: so vulle it pye thist improvement, consecute greater affinitie and vicinitie to the Latin, Italian, Spanish, and French Languages; and consequenter more intelligibilitie in relation to thels principall foraine nations. I now passe to particulars.

Theyr patience (saith thel Replyermeanein thels knoxian Scots) was seen &c. Thist passage he verie justly reproves in thels Scots: for in reallitie, I conceive ley chiefly exercysed leyr patience, partly in exspertein nour present paiment dofe leyr mercenary monies now pass'd: partly in expectein more; More fooles nour Presbyterian party, quich vould purchase leyr con­currence in Rebellion at so costlie a rate; peculiarly cognoscein thels Knoxian Scots sare as sildome not perfidious to other Nati­ons, as not loyal to leyr soune. Alm quon in thist case dofe op­position [Page 5]to leyr Native Sovereigne, I vulle not offer to tax 'em, in quich peradventure, sum vulle irrationally judge it bad fien mins dishonorable for 'em to prove perfidious than punctual in thel performance of leyr Ingagements, especially dofe leyr treasonous Covenant, since as, Displicet Dea stulta promissio: So conse­qvently, more piously neglected, or dissolved than observed.

Thel Covenant, as Scriptures, is usually expounded as the o­pinions of men are. Verie vruely, if you had restringed it to thiests nour novelous Reformation, or Rereformation tymes; in quich as sacred Scriptures, so ley turne Juraments, and Cove­nants into a nose dofe ceare or wax; quich, and leyr promiscu­ous lecture dofe thel Bible in so manie severall vulgar languages, and Editions, occasiones silch a Babilonian confusion, dofe hereti­cal Errors, and Differences, Sects and Factions as have formerly, and even at thist verie present, daily pullulate; ey and have so or­dinarie influence, even into affaiers dofe State; as it justly moved a certaine ingenious and judicious Protestant verie appositely to vercifie in thist insuein manner.

Accordingly thels Presbyterians, and thels Knoxian Scots de­clare leyr Covenant in one sense, thels Independents in an other, ey manie quoe fere Presbyterian Covenanters, have now turned leyr coates playein at faxt and floose avith leyr so solemne, and sanctified vow; complainein dofe it as forged in Scotland, and tou remissely, if not perfidiously, prosecuted pyr thels Scotch Commanders, as you suggeste; and quich nour then Presbyterian Commissioners fere faine to tringue for falut dofe a benter; you subintende, for defeet dofe an other mine favorable to leyr graci­ous Sovereinge and his loyal subjects; nor an other more accept­able either to thel Presbyterian, or Independant Combinations, so you plainly conclude, it fas forced upon leyr consciences to thel ruine dofe am both, Ministres and Laies: so as thel tyrannie dofe thels Presbyterian Imposers, I confesse, you verie iustly taxe for severall other reasons you alledge for thel iniquitie dofe thel pre­mentioned Covenant, and consequently for your just disavowe­ance [Page 6]dofe it, and contrynance dofe a new one more rationall, and sincere, as you verie rightly subjoine, it was absurdly hypochri­tical to sweare the preservation dofe the Kings person, quen at same tyme a warre is ingaged against 'im, &c.

You vruely adde, the Scots approve onely silch Propositions as vulle profite Scotland, and Seots in Angland; so to inriche lem selps, and depauperate us. I professe accordingly, I sam not able to apprehend (ulle reason, quy nee Anglish should have de­syred more Correspondencie, Contractation, or Confederation com thels Scots, than for ordinarie Commerce. For thist is onely to reap thels sweet fruits dofe nour fertil Contrie, as you verie considerately supertadde: yet pam I not approve your refusal dofe an amiable Treatie, sie it at London, or at sum other place, it matters not much; thist siein thel generally approved meanes for peaceable Accomodations in alm Debates and Controversies, e­specially in thist nature, in thel judgement dofe tractable people. Anc surely ilose sare not guided pyr a peaceable spirit (nor con­forme to him quoe is Deus pacis) quoe avoyde and debarre alm peaceable meanes, and indifferencie for avoydance dofe a new and renewed sanguinarie Combustion in Religionarie and temporal affaires; quich is nour moderate Soveaeignes principal care, and solicitude. So as your apprehensions dofe His Majesties presence at London, or any oeher place, dofe a new guar pyr it occasion­able, sare mearly vaine timorizations, frivolous jealousies, and onely cavillous tergiversations as I conceive, peculiarly now, quen thel Citie, and Contrie tou is in thel Armies power, and custodie, and in a sort, inslaved to it, quich in sum degree fas Herrie seventh's case, not nour present Sovereignes. Nor yet is it so insisted pyr thels Scotish Commissioners, as if one­ly London fere thel absolutely necessarie place for a peaceable Trea­tie: Ey I really conceive, as thel Reingues absence derom his Parli­amentarie Assembly, for causes pyr him judged just and rational, fas noe just cause for a civil Combustion of quarre: So neither contrarily his personal presence is mearely sufficient for a Peace, if a pious and tractable affection to it (quich yet in His Majesty pyr his manie, and yet more instantious Adresses to thels Parliamenters then ileyrs eo him, is maxt eminently visible) and mearly perem­ptorie Demandes) meet not avith it.

Now if (as you allege I know not quou veritably) thels Scots were for deposein him and his, ley maxt justly merite thel odius brand dofe Traitors; peculiarly supposed his Majestie is leyr more native Sovereigne than he is for Angland, as joyntly in respect hee so confidently inserted himselp into leyr Protection; quou ever I confesse you deserve sum Commendation in not denyein thels Kings dofe Angland had formerly, settein asyde the callein, dissol­vin, and peremptorie negative voyce in Parliaments, nothing but would stand well with a Kingly, or Monarchial Goverment. At thel minst, if you had set a part your exception dofe His Maje­sties Negative, your discourse had not seen so totally irrational as thels contents dofe thels quoue new Propositions quish demande much more, or thist and more at thel minst implicitly. Yet sure you proceede inconsequently in affirmein, or supposein exclusion dofe a peremptorie negative voyce in Parliaments, vulle stand or consist com Monarchical Government, since Monarchie is so ab­solute a Regal Power, as it essentially excludes tote necessarie de­pendencie surpon Parliamentarie Assemblies, as clearely appeares in thels Spanish and French Monarchies for examplarie Instance) save onely pyr vay dofe Advise or Councel, not pyr constreint, as thel verie Etymologie dofe thel name Monarcha id est, solus guber­nans or rulein alone or solely, manifestly soundes, and declares. So as if you deny your Sovereigne Power for a negative Vote or absolute refusal in not assentein to, or for his confirmein Laws, proposed to 'im either even pyr Parliaments, or any other humane Counsel or Assembly, you preposterously deprive 'im dofe his Re­gal Supremacie or Supreme Goverment in temporalls, and place it in his Subjects even repugnant to ilat primarie Act pyr quich ley primitively elected 'im for leyr Supreme Governer accordein to thels anciently established Laws, none denyein 'im a absolute Dissent, in Parliaments, or out dofe Parliaments, nor yet prohibitein 'im either to assemble, or dissolve Parliaments quen ever hee judg­eth necessarie, or convenient for thel public profit or peace dofe his Subjects in generall; or for preservation dofe his soune, or leyr Honor anc Reputation.

Anc a fortiori, or pyr a more forceable Argument, militates thist discourse acounter your exclusion dofe thel Reingues negative Re­solution in assemblein, and dissolvein Parliaments, as much more [Page 8]consistent com Manarchial Goverment, and mins prejudicial to thels Subjects, than is his Royall Dissent for constitution dofe anie new Lawes or Statutes; quich veritie now ton clearely elueeth pyr thels present lamentable effects, quou requisite it fas joyntly for thels Subjects and his sounes preservation, nour present Sove­reigne had not only had absolute Power to dissolve Parliaments in general, mut even had actually used it in dissolvein thist present Parliamental Assembly, even at its verie entrance, and priest tumul­tuations, or tumultuous oppositions to its Supreme Governet: quench it almso corollarily issueth quat great reason His Majestie had not to confirme nor admit, leyr 4. newly divised Bills, since ley so sorely circumcyse his Royal Authoritie, and Power to pro­tect himself, and his Subjects as ley scarce leashe 'im the very name dofe a Monarch, even repugnantly to leyr soune once solemn Vow & Covenant expresly obligein 'em not to diminishe his just Power and greatnesse; in case he voulde agree to leyr Advises and Coun­sels, yet subtilly subintendein for a destructive limitation dofe his supreme Prerogative, and Monarchical Power conform to quich leyr extravagant Proposals, in regard he has (yet maxt rationally) refused to descende, ley have maxt irrationally and inhumanely restrained his Royal Person in a manner, as a cloasse prisoner, force­ably excludein (quich i [...] prejudicial to 'imselp, and his Loyal Sub­jects) alm sorts dofe Adresses, or Applications to 'im in order to peace; even for 'inselps, and others; so totally debarrein him and his Subjects tote humane meanes for a peaceable Accomodation for relief dofe leyr present and future oppressions, pyr leyr provo­cation to new combustions and quarres; even contrary to leyr soune precedent pretences, so as it is astonisheably strange ley have faces to persuade thel people, ley desyre, and labour for peace, and yet directly, and positively pyr their sonne peremptorie Resoluti­ons, professedly, publicly and declaredly renounce alm means pos­sible for attainment to it. Ey yet more amaseable it is ley vulle offer to contrive a new fashioned Government, yet assuredly cog­nocein, they have no posibillity to establish either it, or any duta­ble peace conform to Lawe, and reight senze leyr Soveraigns con­sent, and public Approvement.

Thels Scots have reason to conceive Treaties vulle produce mutual confidence, contrarily, you have none for thist your Para­doxical [Page 9]passage, namely, those quoe differ are best asunder. For if ever asunder, ley'l meete in a peaceable Accomodation noe soon­er than mountaines, or sulnedayes.

Thels cousenin Scots have now just as much reason to plead for thel Reings peaceable returne to London, and for establishment dofe a durable Amnistie and Reconciliation, as ley basely, and dis­naturally refused at Newcastel to admitte 'im into Scotland his soune native Contrie and Reingdome: quich leyr maxt discour­teous, and disloyal action, I sam piously persuaded ley now cor­dially repente, and plainely perceive leyr groasse error even in mat­ter dofe State. Anc it fas not His Majesties presence (nor absence neither) mut thel perverse Presbyterian Faction, and leyr tumul­tuous Adherents, leyr treasonous aversnesse fram leyr Soveraigne, quich then caused an obstacle to a peaceable Agreement; nor yet ilose quoe persuaded His Majestie (as you mis-imagine) to sub­tract his personal presence: but ileyr malignitie quoe forced him fram London, quich has produced thist nour intestine, and sangui­narie Combustion; peculiarly ilose quoe levyed militarie forces; senz, anc even directly repugnant to leyr Soveraigns Consent; anc to thels anciently established Lawes, as have in had a Campal Armie prefore, or as soone as His Majestie had a personal garde more than ordinarie if my memorie sayles me not: Yet fare thels Scots inexcuseable, not only in thist, mut even as primarie Causers & Prolonguers dofe their native Soveraigns, & our miseries ajoynt.

Your rejection dofe His Moderate Majesties pious offer for a pacifyein Treatie, your desertin your frathers or brothers in Christ thels Knoxian Scots in your mutual Covenant; and former Tracta­tions, and Contractations com or vith 'em, I greatly doubte vulle prove a much more forceable occasion for a renewed disnatural quarre, than His Majesty, or any other dofe his Royal Partie ever administred for a Comence dofe it, as thel sequele vulle cleartly demonstrate, if not maturely prevented. For as thel mutual Co­venant, and its contryveance, fas onely pretenceively intended for Peace and Concord: so nowe your violation dofe it vulle really conclude in a final renovation dofe nour precedin sanguinarie Re­volutions: Yet is it not my intention to approve your adhesion to thel Covenant as really, not approveable either in its Forme or in its matter, no more than I approve I apts temerations ingage­ment [Page 10]or Vow to sacrifyse his dourter quose action, yet vulle not excuse your extravagant inconstancie in disavowein ilat masme quich you solemnly, publiquely and generally vowed, and avowed. Ieptes vow and ingagement fas onely prvate, not public; particu­lar, not universal: yet it is only a disputable question (or scarce ilat) quether he totally performed, or changed his vow in to some other matter more acceptable to thel Divine Majestie, not sacrify­sein his silde or childe corporally, mut onely sacrifysein her spiritu­ally to a Religious Institute (as only sum Catholic Divines out dofe quich Perkins thel Puritan picked his conceit as you report it) onely conjecturally opine, quou ever it fas, yet certain it is, Ieptes action, if he really vowed his dourters corporal sacrification, it fas directly repugnant to thel Divine Commandment non occides, now as your Covenantein Vow, fas for a sanguinarie quarre to thel ruine dofe your native Contrie; so in reallitie, it obliges you not to a pious observation, mut onely to a penetential retracta­tion, savein in case dofe an erroneous conscience: neither yet is it, (if in one part false, or erroneous, as in sum part you vulle con­fesse it is) obligatorie; or yet licitously performed; even a coun­ter a common enemy as you hallucinantly suggeste, even repug­nant to founde Doctrine in Divinitie, since malum ex quocum (que) defectu; no, not even for Reformation dofe Religion. Moreso­ver, I discover sum other great difference intreene Ieptes premen­tioned Vow, and thel Presbyterian anc Knoxian Covenant. For his fas evidently peccaminous, as a plain transgression dofe a Divine Commandment, as I have now advertised, and so had an evi­dently approveable cause for its exchange into a matter more pleasein to Deeod: contrarily you have very frivousely alleged thel Parliament may change theire Covenant: since according to thel general consent dofe Orthodox Divines, thel exchange dofe a Vow as directly tendein to a special honor dofe thel Divine Majestie, necessarily requires an evidenter melius bonum an evi­dently benter, and more acceptable material object to him for its exchange than ilat quich fas formerly offered to his gratious ac­ceptance.

Finally, leyr discharitable and dischristian Covenant, is so much more intolerable in regard it forceth, or forceably induces alm sorts dofe Protestant people even their sacred Soveraign to imbrace it, [Page 11]and not leyr soune onely sects; and to extirpate alm other even Protestant Professions, and even ilat one, and onely Catholic one quich has continued pyr a continuated succession from Christ nour Saviour, and his Apostles. So you verie judiciously subjoine no better quarrel to contende in than acounter ilose, quoe vulle de­stroy alm others not dofe leyr Religion: as thels maxt impious Presbyterians, and Knoxians Scots have mutually Covenanted.

I accasionally conceive it is much more rational, and conducent to a Christian peace, and Moderation (ilose onely Contries excep­ted quich have euer successively continued in one onely Religion) to tolerate alm Sects dofe Christian Professions, than to force Christian people to any one only Profession or Sect, quich has existed onely since Luther, or Calvins time. Yet I greatly doubte your Holland example, or President is tou large and libertine, as admit­tein or permittein a Babylonian Confusion dofe Jewes and Turks, as I sam informed.

It is a mirement to mee, to heare you pronounce: The Word dofe God must be as the Parliament conceives. As if Parliaments fere constituted Judges dofe thels sacred Scriptures, or as if Christ nour Saviour had conferd anye silch power to Parliaments; or yet anye authoritie to judge, resolve, or determine leyr Orthodox sense, quen as yet your Protestant Professors exclame acounter her authori­tie anc condemne thel Roman Catholic Ecclesie & Church, for onely judgein, or resolvein leyr veritable intellegence and meanein, indu­biously obscure places in relation to thel decision dofe controvert­ed matters in Religion; nor yet you vererunde or sare ashamed to conferre to a companye dofe laical states, a Judicative power, sover thel sacrosanct vorbe or parol dofe Deeod; quich is not one­ly palpable partialitie, mut even blasphemous presumtion, and in­just, and erroneous Usurpation.

You saye, and verie rectly: As His Majestie is Reingue or King dofe Angland, thel Parliament dofe Augland sare as apt or fit Judges in framein Lawes for his happinesse as the Parliament of Scotland. Yet sam I sure it has not appeared hitherto, either thel one or thel other really intends his precedent happines, much mins, anie increase dofe it in anie one new Law or Ordinance, mut mai­ther leyr mutual indevores onely tende to abridge & diminish his precedently injoyed happinesse, in forcein 'im to endure no­table [Page 12]dispatigement in his hereditafily possessed Monarchical Au­thoritie, greatnesse, Royal Dignitie, and Honour, as tou cleare­ly appears even to forraine Nations, and States; and to suggeste thel contrarie, is in realitie as much as if one vould offer to per­suade mins judicious or mins cautious people, it is a point of tem­poral happinesse to sie restrained, and abased. Now for thel Scots particular, as you hence consideratedly conclude, Noe neede has Angland to be inward to Scotland; so I vehemently exopte for his Moderate Maiesties, and his Reingdomes formerly continua­ted felicitie, nour Parliamentarie Convention had never, intermixed leyr Councels com thels Knoxian Scots. For, hinc ill [...] lachrymae, dofe thist Scotch Mist, have issued as fyerie Meteors, alm nour Combustions, mischiefes and miseries quich now nee suffer, and sare to suffer more, if not maturely prevented pry a pacifyein Ac­comodation, and Restitution dofe nour Soveraign and his Royal Familie to leyr estates in leyr several degrees, and conditions.

You alledge the Scots proceedings in Ireland, tou much fa­vourein the Rebelles, and at thist time in Treatie avith 'em. Yet cleare eisuffe it is, thel once Presbyterian Parliament (for in thist so clear a case, I refuse not to justifye thels Scots action in part) pyr leyr notorious neglects in leyr Supplyes and payments promi­sed, and repromised, have forced thels Scots in Ierland for leyr soune safetie to complye com thels Ireish Catholies, and thel Ro­mish Clergie, as you please to style thel Ireish Transacters. Anc conforme to thist, sure his Majesties action, in case hee had ever firmely transacted com his Ireish Subjectes for an Attonement, (as yet in reallitie hee never fid) hee had nor remained so condemnable as thels Knoxian Scots, in regard he contryved not thist Accomoda­tion for his soun peculiar interest, nor yet as a Subject, mut a Sove­reigne mearely for thel generall Interest dofe ilose his remainein Protestants, as exposed to a total ruine and destruction, if not in thist peaceable manner precautioned and diverted

You confesse, you take that libertie (in Religion I suppose you subintende) quich in your judgements is according to the mynde dof God, and dare maintain it by argument and Scripture. Yet I desire you seriously to reflecte, you have not on in thels great multitudes dofe Sects and Sectaries, quich now so generally a­bound; quich vulle confesse its disabillitie to maintaine its Dog­matizations [Page 13]pyr Scripture, and Argument, not obsistem, you vulle not denye alm or manie dofe lem for groasse errors, or plaine Heresies. You knoe thels heretical Arrians for example professed to defend leyr Heresie pyr pure Scriptures and scriptural argu­ments, even to a peremtorie rejection dofe tote Catholic Roman Tradition.

Thels Scots allege thel Reingue is adverse to the Covenant. Hence you verie interpretatively, yet verie probablely, if not in­falliblely conclude, hee dubst not sie King ofe Angland; Scotland or Ireland, unlesse hee vulle take the Covenant; you subintel­lecte sure, accordein to thel Knoxian Scots and thels Presbyteri­ans votes. Yet sure you falsely inferre hence thel non necessitie dofe a personal Treatie. For even this masme peremtorie De­maunde for his Majesties enterin thel Covenant, necessarily requi­ers a large debate previous to his entrance, since thel Covenant conteines manie several branches. In thel rest concernein thel Reingues Imprisonment, or restraint, your supposition is false quat he would indoubtedly chuse rather to end his dayes in thel Isle he is in, then to vive in anye ontward contents in London or anye other his houses, devested dofe his Government. For liber­tie is sweete, and you sare not so irrational as once to apprehende His Majestie (as neither anye other private person) had not mai­ther have his libertie even senze his Government, than neither his libertie nor his government as now his case standes.

Touchein thels Scots Allegation to haue nour Armie disbanded, iley havein a formed Armye lemselves, you verie excellently, ju­diciously, and forceablely redargue leyr palpable partialltie. Ey if iley at thist verie present tamper com France, as you superadde; it fere maxt impolitique follie in us to dissolve nour Forces at their request, or motion; contrarily, it fere more reason, and rational safetie for us to recruite, and increase 'em. Yet if you content lem in monye matters, I remain easily perswaided ley vulle not much trouble lem selps for restorement dofe thel Reings Majestie for tote leyr speciously pretended zeale toverse 'im. For if ley have vended 'im once, ley vulle venture to vende 'im once more, I greatly doubt.

Anc I occasionally advertise, I pense Roman Recusants (not obsistein leyr great impoverishments, especially dutein thel tymes [Page 14]dofe thist longue Parliamentarie Session) and for avoydance dofe new Revolutions and sanguinarie Combustions, vulle not refuse to pay thels Scots leyr 200000 livers surpon Composition for leyr libertie dofe conscience in Religion; quich is noe unreason­able, nor unseasonable request, especially in a tyme quen alm (ex­ceptein thels rigid Presbyterians) generally conspire in a mode­rate Indult for tender consciences, ley havein indured as longue & tedious a persecution, as thels Jewes in leyr Babylonian captivitie, if not yet longuer; so as thist once transacted, and inacted, thels Pursuivants Pension, and leyr future troublesome Proceedings pight or might consequently cease.

You presently subjoyne, thels Scots subintende onely thel In­dependent part dofe thel Armey quen ley allege, ley expected to have it disband at leyr recesse, and returne into Scotland. For as you verie veritably reprove 'em, if thel Army continuein had sien or been Presbyterian, ley vould never have moved, or expect­ed its dissolution.

You almso, vruely reject another objection manie tymes re­peated in thist, and other occasions, namely quat thel Armye fas or was raised contrarie to his Majesties minde, not percause nour Anglish Parliament alone, as nor thels Scotch Parliament a­alone, senze leyr Sovereignes joynt Authoritie sare proved Judges dofe thiest, as you insinuate: mut in regard his moderate Majestie never precedently complained dofe thel Independent Armye: no for contrarily, I sam confidently perswaded, if he had remain­ed constant, and favorably affected to thel Independent Part dofe thel Armye, and Parliament, and not tou favorable, anc indulgent to his Scotch Contryhomnes, or leyr nation, he had not suffered silch restreint, anc discontent, as now hee indures: quou sie it, I now perceive pyr certain Intelligence, hee is not so much curbed, nor confined, nor somuch discontented as thel vulgar report di­vulges; caused (as I conceive, and augmented, if not invented, pyr thel Presbyterian and Royal Parties, to render thel Independ­ent Combynation odious. Ey in particular, I greatly desire thels Mercurian Pamphleters vould use more discretion and modera­tion in leyr Relations and jearein corrozives; and cognosce for certain leyr transported zeale for his Majesties Restoration, mai­the impedites, or at minst, retardes it than advances it, in tou [Page 15]much exasperatein ileyr mynds in quose onely power now it is (I mean thel Independent Armie) peaceablely to restore 'im to his Royall Rights and Honour dofe quich thel Presbyterian, and Knoxian Faction have formerly deprived 'im; quoe contrarily if he had affectionously adhered to thel prementioned Armie, he had gained thel Cittie and thel Parliament ajoynt, since now ley sare amboth, at thel Armies command; peculiarly considered, His Ma­iestie once voluntarily declared, thel Armies Proposals stood more for a firme, and dureable Accomodation, than thel Parliaments Propositions precedently tenderd at Hampton Court so as I now verily conceive his onely apte meanes for a peaceable Attonement and his soune Restorement, is to reconcile his formerly gracious affections to thel Independent Partie, jointly in thel Armie, Parli­ament and Cittie, persuadein 'em to dissolve leyr Covenant com thel Presbyterian Combynation; and so accorde a part for Scot­land onely. Alias His Maiestie pyr his conjunction com thel Scots alone, vulle necessitate 'imselp to a new quarre, and so render 'imselp odious even to his precedently benaffected Anglish Subjects, and forfeite thel Intrest he had in leyr assistance; pecu­liarly to thel Independent Combynation, as accountein thel Knox­ian Scots leyr maxt mortall enemies, and opposers; quoe have ever as generally disproved His Majesties tou great propensions to thel Scoth nation (if not more) as anye other Faction or Combi­nation now, or precedently in his Dominions.

Touching thel assurance thels Scots pretonde ley had from thel Anglish Parliament, for his Majesties sodaine libertie, I easily consente to you, ley had none in reallitie, as hath now clearly appeared pyr contrarye effects. Ey thels false Scots ha­ving leyr native Sovereigne voluntarily, and in confidence com­mitted to leyr future protection in his distresse, dunctil hee had peaceably accomodated his affaires, ley remained obliged (even accordein to leyr soun public professions in leyr printed papers) pyr thel verye law dofe Nations, not to deliver 'im, especially to ilose quoe ley assuredly cognosced for so impiously affected to his Royall person as ley had precedently voted 'im prisoner to Varrick Castel, quence yet more cleerlyappears thels Scots maxt disnaturall treacherie to leyr natural Soveraigne, particularly sup­posed, as you reightly advertise, thel Parliament would not have [Page 16]refused his return into England, even in case he had passed in­to Scotland for thel present, as he greatly, and justly desired for a­yoydance dofe his Anglish Enemies violent malice so as thels Scots loyaltie quich ley so speciously pretexet, is onely just as great to leyr Prince, as to leyr profit, not one jot more; as famous for contendin dishonorein, destroyein leyr Sovereigns, as you very ve­ritably conclude thist your Passage conforme to historian relation. For really, leyr disloyaltie to his present Majestie; and his Anglish Reingdome, is tou eminently apparent in Covenantein, and pro­secutein this nour disnaturall combustion, and sanguinarie guarre quich has caused his, and his maxt loyal subjects almaxt total ru­ine, as in an other occation I have sufficiently convinced.

I professe, I conceive no just, nor judicious cause (you neither) quye thel Scots vould meddle com or with el continuance dofe nour Anglish Assembly; especially, ley havein sate so longue, and so spente thels peoples monies to so ruinous effects; nor yet ha­vein concluded leyr foolishly projected Innovations, either per­force dofe argument, or forceable Resolution pyr Scriptures; ei­ther public or private since for establishment dofe leyr Presbyte­rian Government ley use onely a poor snekin seemes for leyr as­sertion dofe it, as in leyr preamble to it ley sare faine to confesse in leyr Tractate intytled Jus Divinum, surrevence, yet is it not much material quou ley proceede in so superfluous, and disnecessa­rie a businesse, so thel charges fere saved.

Thels Scots complaine thel Presbyterian Religion anc Goverment is not setled. To quich you verie acutely responde thel settlement dofe Religion and government, must be (as the Cove­nant curnes or runs) according to the word of God: quich you finely glosse to sie or bee thel Scotch Presbyterie, since in reallitie ley deceptorily obtrude to leyr ignorant Auditories leyr soune novellously divised commentations, for thel pure vorbe dofe Deeod, and thel onely Evangelical veritie, as alm other moderne Sectaries ordinarily presume; yet is it in substance, leyr soune false doctrin deaured com thel speciously plausible niename dofe thel divine parol or vorbe; so is thels benst Reformed Churches, (in leyr usual notion) noe other than leyr soun Scotch Keale, and Genena roots as an ingenious Protestant finely styles 'em, lat is leyr soune knoxian Raphsodie; and rigid Calvinian Government, [Page 17]practise in persecution alm other Christian professions sauein one­ly leyr soun pretenceively reformed confraternitie.

Thels Scots yet more largely alledge, and reprehend a libertie granted to alm Formes dofe adoriship or worship, and opinions, in lieu dof leyr unical knoxisme, or Presbyterisme. Yet I perceive you absolutely deney thel Parliamentarie Assemblye concedes li­bertie to alm opinions or dogmatizations; quich I charitably crede to sie so; nor is thist a direct vay to blaspheme, except abu­sed & distorted. No, you subioyn verie advisedly, it is intrith Pro­testants disputable (consequenter not punishable) quich is Idola­trie, or an Idolatrous act. Yet Orthodox Divines indisputablely resolve conforme to sacred scriptures, and its verie Etymologie, Idolatrie is latrie or divine adoration dofe an Idol, or ilat quich is not really Deeod; quence ley infalliblely inferre thel honour quich Roman Catholies exhibite to Christ nour Sainours image, or to thels images dofe his beatified saints, is no reall Idolatrie, as onely conteinein a certaine honourarie respect (especially as it re­lates to thel representation dofe saints precysely) infinitely inferior to diuine culture, or adoration, and is in realitie a feigned Idolatrie onely pyr leyr peruerse Adversaries, so consequently not deservein punishment, nor prohibitable as Idolatrie is. Anc yet more cer­taine it is & infallible in practise, Roman Catholics sare totally secured from alm note dofe Idolatrie, as longue as ley onely ho­nour sacred images or pictures according to thel sense and inten­tion dofe leyr soune Catholick Roman Chirch, quich (as cleerly appears pyr its Doctrine delivered in thel Tridentine Councel for one) has ever maxt cautiously avoyded, & detested alm Idolatrie and superstition tou Drum pantur licet Nouatores nostori Pres­byteriani haeretici & Knexani quoque.

For blasphemye, it is as I conceive properly and strictly accep­ted, a contumelious parol or action exercised a counter thel Divine Majestie, yet in a more largely received sense, it imports any silch other contumelie or reproch as reflects to anye his rational creatures (especially his glorified Saints, and Angels) in quich Deeods Divine Majesty as leyr Creator notably aluces or appeares. For as honour and reverence is due to thels prementioned Angles and Saints, not onely for thel peculiar relation, ley have to Deeod omnipotent leyr Author, and Sanctifier, quoe is honored in ilem, [Page 18]and in their honor (conforme to eximious Saint Augustin fynely expressein it, in Petro quis honoratur misi ille defunctus prono­bis) mut even for ilat supernatural dignitie ley injoye in lemselps: so is silch inferior Religious honour and reverence, verie lawda­blely, and religiously exhibited to 'em pyr us quoe sare greatly in­ferior to 'em in sanctitie and glorie: and so contrarily it is damna­ble to reproche or revile 'em, and even inth or within thel com­passe dofe Blasphemie in its total latitude. Thels Elisabethians, Episcopals, and Puritans especially, have violently persecuted us Roman Catholikes thiests 80. anths or years, and more, for a mearely feigned Idolatrie, and pretended Superstition; and have cruelly butchered nour confessedly vrue anointed Preists, even di­rectly contrarie to ilat Divine Precept nolite tangere Christos me­os, for a Law founded in a faigned, anc falsely surmised Trea­son, for quich, and for his public Protestations (real or feigned) for execution dofe thels maxt injust penal Statutes inacted acoun­ter us, I greatly doubte Rex Charles quondam, and his Elizabe­than exorated Episcops now suffer leyr present oppressions as just Judgments. Yet for my part (& thel masme charitable sense I perceive generally in nour Roman Catholics) I sam cordially sorie for leyr sufferings, & really exopte, & desyre ley had sien in thel number dofe ilose dofe quich nour maxt misericordious Sa­viour Christ Jesus pronounced his Divine sentence: beati miseri­cordes quoniam ipsi misericordiam consequentur: & beati qui persecutionem patiuntur propter justitiam, &c. not for Usurpa­tion; dofe quich sort dofe more misericordius Christian people, I charitably confide, thels more moderate Independants vulle, at thel minst, admit us into silch a moderate Composition as vulle greatly ease us in nour accostomed persecutions; quich yet nee humbly requeste surpon anie conditions in nour power to per­form, for redemption dofe nour dayly vexations: for as judicium sine misericordia illi qui non facit misericordam: So superexal­tat misericordia-judicium. Thist, Itimorize, vulle fall foule to His Majestie, for his tou zealous imitation dofe his Pather & his Pathers Profession, in defence dofe Protestancie, in quich he has tou much dofe Amon, & tou modic dofe Josiah.

Conforme to thist libertie for tender Consciences (not for alme opinions as thels Scots falsly object say you) quich if anye [Page 19]other professions injoye, sure thels Roman Catholics quoe have in­dured so rigerous & longue a persecution so constantly, & unani­mously, as (onely a verie pew or few slike tainted fruits have drop'd derom thel arbe or tree dofe nour eclirch, ley have now greatest reight to injoye it in quyet possession (especially havein it at so keare rate) as is offered) & not to sie forced to conti­nue anye longer tyme subter so insupportable a yoke as you in an other respect, verie forceably redargue thels cruel Scots so much pressein for thel Presbyterian Government, quoe yet vould have condenmed for a point dofe Tyrannie to have leyr Contrie com­pelled to thel Common prayer service; or leyr French Compart­ners in Religion, namely thels Calvinian Hugonotes to have sien, forced pyr leyr Soveraigns to thel Roman Religion, as you joynt­ly superadde; to quich you yet more excellently subjoyne, ap­pealein to thel Universal Christian orbled quether there be much dofe reason for a Prince to compell his people to be dofe his Religi­on, &c. Touchein quich, you verie judiciously challenge 'em to prove it fas dithen or given 'em imediately from Christ or Deeod, mut (as you ingeniously subjoyne) if hamered out dofe thels heads of an Assembly dofe Scots & Anglish Divines, noe reason compulsion be used quen infallibilitie canot be made good. Thels Jewes, Christ, his Apostles never compelled, &c. So accordein to thist your Judicious & equitable discourse, no reason nor con­science is used in persecutein Roman Catholics peculiarly consider­ed, they professedly maintaine & demonstrate leyr Religion suc­cesively descends fram Christ Jesus, & his Apostles pyr a visible pedegree dofe Pastors & Doctors, or Deachers, quose names nee sare able to produce; quich contrarily not anye other professors sare able to performe.

Thels Scots more sover suggeste Presbyterie is limited for a tyme. Not to relate thel rest you sufficiently rejecte thist obje­ction in sayein, Perdone Angland if they take not Presbyterie surpon Scotlands nude or naked recommendation, its possible for us (as to persecution) to leap out dofe the fryein pan into the fyre; you intende out dofe persecutein Episcopacie into more rigorously persecutein Presbyterie. Then ad thels Scots: thels Ministers sare to exclude none fram thels Sacrament, savein whoe thel Parliament judges meete. In reallitie thels Scots have reason in thist exception, [...] [Page 20]quat Scripture have you for a laical or temporal Assembly to Judge dofe spirituals, or dofe spiritual matters, as is thels vrue Sacra­ments, except you subintende thel one is as spiritual as thel other, id est, neither thel one nor thel other in reallitie. Let thel Pres­byterists or Presbyterian Assemblie produceus sum Scripture quy either thels Presbyterians, or Presbyterian Parliament onely dubst have thist libertie or priviledge, to debarre or admitte to thel Sa­crament, & yet noe power for others either to admitte, or repel others from it: no sacred text appeares for thist Partiallitie.

Thels Scots presse yet more closely, Thel Parliament allows not alme Ordinances. You Responde, & Reply thel Parliament allowes alm quich sare Jure Divino. Yet you ignore not thels sacred Scriptures conferre noe filch Authority to Parliaments as is to judge quich is a Divine Ordinance quich not so. Thist fere a strainge histeron Proteron, or preposteriously to set thel equorse or horse prefore thel Cart, vulle onely a peusament, or Parliamen­tarie thinck, as you frivously insinuate, satisfie & secure tender Consciences either in thist or any other case? No sure, in thist you hallucinate verie palpably and groasly.

Touchein toleration dofe Sects, you referre thels Scots to your soune false Historie (if any silch either false or vrue, is extant in nature) or if you intende to apply it to matters dofe Faith quich sare equally as infallible as thels sacred Scriptures, or as thel Divine Spirit leyr immutable Author. Yet for matters dofe practise or manners, theists pae sumtymes admitte alteration conforme to, Tempora mutanter, et nes mutanter in illis, so in thist onely sense, Ecclesiastical Councels, even Orthodox, put in or put out (as you phrase it) very rightly & consideratly, since moral actions leyr circumstances once Changed, ilat quich fas once virtuous, & laudeable, turnes vicious, & illicite. For example, it fas once (name­ly in thels Apostles days) not peccaminous & offencive to absteine from sangue, & suffocated or strangled: yet now, & longue since, neither thel one or thel other is mins than offinnous or sin­nous & damnablely Judaical. Now if, as you presently adde, you tolerate Sects, onely for temporal respects, or for civil Peace, and if not consistent com yours, you vulle suppresse'em; now thist is not to suffer 'em accordein to sacred Scriptures prescript (as you usually expounde) nor yet for ease dofe tender Consci­ences; [Page 21]if as you intimate, for temporal Causes alone you vulle sup­presse 'em; nor differ you greatly derom or from thels verie Pres­byterians & Knoxians in thist particular, quome yet you professed­ly condemn for persecutein alm others into their own profession, & Government: you superadde you voulde have none debarred derom or from scritein or discoursein acirc or about alm Religions so ley sie or do noe hurt, for preventein quich, you promise care vull sie or be had; you subintende sure hurt to thel state, as you presently expresse. For in scritein, discoursein, or printein either, to restreine it, fere in a great measure, to restreine libertie for ten­der Consciences in Religion. Only I conjoyne com you in re­provein thels Scots presumption to printein Angland senze vlle licence, or authoritie, especially in so incendiarie a sense and style as they use, for a new combustion; yet scritein Controversies in Religion in Latin you except verie rationally, and disputations tou, & you subjoyne yet more rightly it fere or were sad, if nee pight or might not discourse sinthout or without banishment, or imprisonment.

Thels Scots complaine thel Directorie pas'd so long tyme & la­bout, is put apart, quich leyr Complaint, you in an effectual Di­lemme, verie fynely confute argumentein in thist mode or forme; either thel Assembly has fone or done its part, or not. If they have not, let them finish it, publish it, & a vay to their charges. If ley have finished it, quy sare ley yet here? Ley fere called onely to advise & present. To quich I superadde avoyde leyr Assem­bly, or Assembly dofe Asses; ey sodainely let 'em pack, & sie vone or gone. For ley consume thels Subjects monies in vaine, & prose or worse: so it is great pittie ley sare suffered to linguer & loyter any longuer, 4 shillings a day for so manie ministerial prators to spende only in bucolies or bellitimber, is no trivial expence, & di­lapidation, sover & above leyr pinguedinous Benefices, & Lecture pensions. Comodunt panem impietatic, et bibunt vinum iniqui­tatis. [Prov. 4.] I seriously doubte nee sharme never have peace & quietnesse dunctil nour new Westmonasterian Monkes (I in­tende thels Rereformein Presbyters) sare thence removed, & leyr irreligious Convent destroyed. Anc in regard the Presbyterian Co­venanters (as tis reported) obtained part dofe leyr Conquest pyr Prybes and Treacheries, I rationally suspecte ley vulle not prosper.

Thel Scots objecte Fasts ordained for extirpation dofe Heresies, and Scismes. Non satis capio. I scarce conceive your Responsion to thist in regard I conceive you put it in question, quether Here­sies & Scismes sare so percause contrarie to thel Vorbe, or Word dofe Deeod or God. For quou vulle you have Heresies cognosced, if not cogdosced as contrarie to Faith conteined onely in Deeods parol or divine Revelation, script or not script, quich is thel Rule dofe Veritie, & counter Rule to falsitie. You allege danger since everie one has libertie to judge. Yet thist reason is a mearly senze reason save onely in ilose Professions quich vulle have everie Ignaroe a learger & expounder dofe sacred Scriptures; nor your proce­dure in remittein thist to thel Civil Majestrate is one jot more or­thodox. Is it not conforme to sacred Scriptures, or divine Reve­lation or Vorbe, or to natural Reason either, for Politic States, to resolve, or yet dispute matters dofe Faith or Religion, & its contrarie Heresies, or Scismes, or frame or establishe spiritual go­vernment. Thist is no Ordinance nor Order dofe Christ nour Sa­vious: No, for so sayes great Saint Ambrose Christus non com­misit Ecclesiam suam Regibus aut Imperatoribus, sedsacerdo­tibus, & bonus Imperator intra non supra Ecclesiam est. No, for thist spiritual charge fas committed peculiarly & namely to S. Peter, & his continual successers; ey thel contrarie is a dangerously injust usurpation directly repugnant to thel sacred Text, Tu es Petrus &c. Or if thel contrarie fere even as much as coulorablely conforme to thel sacred Bible, yet quou more proper, firme, & infallible Authoritie has thel Spiritual & Ecclesiastical State for thist purpose. Ey it is maxt preposterous for civil Potentates, ei­ther to declare or determine, or yet authoritatively to advyse quat shall sie or quat not, (as you verie considerately suggeste) in matters quich sare not civil nor politic, mut mearly spiritual. For, quae medicorum est, promittunt medici; tractant fabrilia fabri. Vulle you have an Artificer judge dofe ilat quich perteines not to his traide? so you vulle verifye or render ilat vulgar Adage tou applyeable to yee: Ne sutor ultra crepidam. In hoc non laudo. If thels subjects dubst observe thels temporal Majestrates decrees in Ecclesiastical & Spiritual affaires, it totally confounds thel dooe spathes, or swordes, namely thel spiritual & temporal, & quite destroyes libertie in Religion for tender consciences, quich I ad­mire [Page 23]you have not reflexively considered.

I conceive thels Scots stand for thels authoritie dofe thel supream Majestrate even accordein to thel Covenant subintellectein pyr thel supreme Royal Ruler namely thel Riengues Majestie, Touchein quich, you affirme thel Parliament offers his retume surpon silch termes as ley conceive safe, & boond or good: quich is verie vrue, if you mentally reserve: bood for 'emselps not for his Ma­jestie.

For thels privileges dofe nour Anglish Parliament, & thel peace dofe thel Anglish Reingdome, I easily conceive, thel Scots have sien or bien as great violaters as anye other: so you verie courte­ously recognosce your obligation to Scotland in Relation to Ang­land: Yet I professe, I cognosce not for quat, except you vulle accompte it a favour in 'em to have notoriously concurred to its destructive disturbance, so as if now they would redresse us, it is not in leyr power senze an increase dofe nour miseries pyr a re­newed guarre and yet a greater combuston than ever; nor scarce so, save in case ley prevayle & so conquer us, yet more to nour cost & dishonor; dofe quich I have an ancient prediction in my custodie. Quod Deus omen avertat. Ey Angland has sien at ex­cessive charges avith 'em, & even senze ulle exspectation dofe pro­fit redoundein derom or from ilem. Angland has payed soundly for it Scotch favor, if favor you vulle name it.

Thels Scoth adjoyne, many Sectaries & leyr Adherents pyr leyr doctrins & actions offer violence to leyr Reingues person & Authoritie: I confesse I vould greatly approve thist in thel Scots if it fere sinceare & impartial, & leyr soun disnatural, & diloyal actions had not proved thel contrarie, as joyntly you & my selp have sufficiently convinced iley & thels Presbyterian Combination, & leyr concovenanters have in preached, & practized thel masme violence quich now ley speciously pretended to condemne in o­thers; indevorein to Reforme forsoth Religion, & Monarchical Authoritie even perforce dofe sanguinarie Armes: & so sare ley as pittle or little excuseable in leyr actions as in leyr Dogmatizein Principles; as having longue since agreed com thel Presbyterin Faction, His Majestie shart have no other Authoritie than accor­dein to thels Scotch or Knoxian circumcision. As for violation dofe everie Article conteined in thel Covenant, you justly re­prove [Page 24]it for a vast falsitie impinged, & injuriously offered to thels Independent Association, & concludein thel masme pyr divers Instances, as concurrein in thel punishment dofe Delinquents, and maintainein thel Doctrine dofe Scotland accounter thel common Enemie &c. Yet in thist particular sure you sare not verie conse­quent to your soune Profession, quich is noe approver dofe Pres­byterian Doctrins & Governement.

Thels masme Knoxians charge you for Causers dofe Factions, as challengers dofe thel name of Saints &c. quich you rightly re­dargue as not proved, mut onely charged, quich abundantly suffices for confutation dofe so frivolous allegations, as ley relate to Faction. Yet I com your licence, adde concernein thel challenge dofe sanctitie pyr thels Independent Professers; It is as impossible for 'em to sie really Saints except ley have one & thel masme Judgement in Religion, id est one & thel masme Faith, as it is im­possible to please Deeod sinthout or without Faith, Heb. 11.6. quich Faith is one, Ephes. 4.5. So if Protestants have not thist one Judge­ment in Faith & Religion (as now even at thist present, it more clearly appeares pyr thels greater numbers dofe multiplyed, & yet multiplyein Sects subter one Protestant name) ley sare really no Saints for alm leyr prayers, meditations, preachins, or other patts dofe exterior sanctitie; let 'em not deceive lem selps, or others, mut mark diligently ilat judicious and veritablely certain sentence pronounced pyr eximious Saint Austin, sutably to thels prerecited Scriptures Ʋbi non est vera Fides (quich accordein to thel sacred Scripture is onely one) non potest vera esse justitia. Thel reason dofe quich you have deliverd in thel renowned Tridentine Councel [ Sess. 6. Cap. 8.] fynely definein Fides est fundamentum, & ra­dix omnis justificationis, & consequently dofe tote supernatural sanctitie or saintly actions & virtues. For sanctitie is an effect dofe justification, as justification it selp is a partial effent dofe Faith. Yet I confesse ilose quoe have ilat onely one vrue Faith & its Profession, quich thel sacred Scripture require pae have thel denomination dofe Saints, in quich sense thels Apostles in leyr se­veral Epistles, usually terme ilose Saints to quome ley direct 'em, alm quou peradventure ley fere not alm really Saints in virtuous actions, & conversation, as for example, clearly appeares in thel Incestions Corinthian & others. I marvelle you reflected not quou [Page 25]manie Heresies, Heretical Errors, & Scismes, & other groasse offences sare in Judgment quen obstinacie is ad oined especially; conforme to thel Apostle Saint Pauls verie cautelous advyse: Hereticum hominem devita—cum sit proprio juditio condemna­tus, Tit. 3.

Yet I perceive thels Scots pietie for toleration in Religion streches it selp so much as not to have pious & peaceable people troubled, if in alm theints ley pa not conforme to thel Presbyteri­an government so it sie or be not destructive to leyr publick Kerk, or (Knoxian) Kerk order; quich I confesse vould not prove dis­rational, if ley lem selps vould not partially reserve thel determi­nation dofe thist libertie to leyr soune Judgments precysely not sufferin anie, not dofe leyr soune profession, to have anye part in thel discussion, & final Resolution dofe it. Alias I doubt it vould resolve into a thient dofe no thient, as leyr subsequent limitation plainly subjoines, namely silch a Toleration as is consistent com thel Covenant. For if thist rigid vow doubst sie observed, quich expressely requires one uniforme Reformation or Rereformation excludein tote Neutralitie in its prosecution, then adieu tote con­siderable toleration for anye Profession savein leyr soune Genevan Knoxisme, or Scotch Presbyterisme.

Quou you applye Bellarmins doctrine to thist your purpose, I professe my self totally disable to divine, as if he had asserted thel best and safest vay to salvation, is to sie or bie justifyed pyr thels merits dofe Jesus Christ alone: quen as thist maxt eminent Car­dinall (quome alm novel sectaries mortally envie for his sollid confutations dofe leyr heresies & heretical errors in his ample & ex­acte Decisions dofe controversies) has neither more than quine or 5 voolkes or bookes dofe Justification, (not 12 as you verie falsly suggest) nor yet has he thel passage you cyte for justification by works onely (as you fradulently dictate) mut for justification pyr faith as pyr thel foundation dofe supernaturall Justification joynt­ly pyr faith & other virtuous habits infused pyr Deeod, mamely divine faith, spairance or hope & charitie in nour prirst or primarie Justification & pyr other virtuous & meritorious actions in nour second, or secundarie Justification; in quich yet he professedly maintaines faith & thels divine merits dofe Christ nour Saviour to sie thel principal cause & foundation dofe tote nour boonde operations; or vertuous actions & merits, as necessarily supposein [Page 26]'em, & proceedein derom em, & not othervise performable pyr us then pyr divine grace & assistance: so as your application dofe Bellarmines passage to thist your discourse, is not onely totally impertinent, mut even a meare sophistication & corruption dofe his doctrine & parols; quoe has not alme theists quich you falsely relate, videlicet: the best & safest way is to be justified by the merits of Jesus Christ alone: mut theists others: propter incer­titudinem propriae justitis, ac periculum inanis gloriae, tutissi­mum est fiduciam totam in sola Dei misericordia, & benignitate reponere, cap. 7. Propos. 3. quich passage he has not (as you de­lusorily impose to your ignorant Perusers) touchin merits in ge­neral quich he professedly asserted, & cleared derom thels novelists dissound exceptions & cavils: mut onely dofe spes ar fiducia in meritis non collo canda, as in thels very tytle dofe his sempt chap­ter cleerly expresses; so as sure you had no spectacles either for your nose or your minde; quen you so falsely, and ignorantly a­bused thist maxt eminent, & orthodox Divine. I really conceived thels Independents had carried more honest mindes, yet now I perceive sum dofe lem have no more synceritie than thels Puritans or Presbyterians in traducein nour Roman Catholic Divines, & Di­vinitie. One famous Puritan (if not more) namely sir Humfry Lyne falsified thist masme place a longue tyme passed: so it appears thist leyr corruption & traducement (as manie other quich I have longue since observed in perusein leyr tractes) passeth as it fere pyr a continued tradition derom one to another, so I conclude thel maxt Doctrined Cardinal verie Catholicly maintaines merit performed pyr divine concurrence, & supernatural auxiliation, & efficatiously confutes & confoundes thel contrarie heritical error: Yet verie advisedly advyseth us not to confide in nour soune me­rits in regard everie particular Catholic is not assured he has talia merita (I use Bellarmines phrase) silch merits as are sufficient for atteinement dofe eternal soluation. Conforme to Catholic sense, thel masme Author has another Proposition in thel masme chapter. In bonis meritis quae veretalia esse compertum sit, siducia aliqua collocari potest, modo superbia caueatur, quich I super a bundly adde thel more plainely to confounde an impertinent, & cavelous ignaroe in matters dofe Divinitie: Yet ingeniously concedein thist scripter is verie ingenuous in consuting thels Scotch Commissio­ners [Page 27]absurdities & temeratious hallucinations. Touchein thist point dofe supernatural merits mellifislaus Saint Barnards advise is most safe & sound merita habere cura, habita data noveris.

Thel rest quich thels Scots objecte in leyr presumptious declara­tion is chiefely invectiues a counter toleration in Religion, except it serve for leyr soune knoxian palats; & greatly pressein for thel performance dofe leyr Covenant, in leyr soune sense onely, yet cer­tainly cognoscein it is now canceld in leyr acception & sense onely: I adde, if as you concede, you intende not to restore his Majestie to tote ilat quich formerly he had de jure, then I doubt it vull proue in you summum jus summa injuria, or prorse, to deprive 'im dofe it, particularly his negative verdict, even quether you condescende to a Treatie or not, or if his Majestie has power to excepte at thel Parliaments Propositions, or at sum matters con­teined in 'em (as you volontarily confesse) so has he much more power to rejecte lem totally, in case he judgeth none dofe thels matters conteyned in 'em conduceable to himselpe, or his Loyal subjects, mut thel plaine contrarie, for so thel concession dofe leyr total collection, vould prove much more prejudiciall then onely sum particulars. Especially supposed you joyntly confesse thel Parliament is not about to put Laws surpon 'im sithont or without his consent.

For if tote thist be really so, I have not I professe abilitie to ap­prehend or imagin quon thel Parliamenters indeauour to deprive 'im dofe his negative voyce, quich is onely his Royal dissent de­rom ilose particular Articles, or bils quich his Parliament pro­poundes to 'im for his consent; quen he maturely perceives 'em prejudical to his Royall Person, Honour, or Authoritie, as ley re­late to his Subjects Protection, profit, & prosperitie. Anc if you once concede 'im his negative in establishment dofe new Laws, surely it vulle prove noe more preiudical to Parliamentarie Autho­ritie to concede 'im tote thel rest dofe his Royal Reights or Roy­alties quich de jure he has ever hereditarily possessed. Ey if abuses in his Government sare caused pyr his Favorites (as yet you onely conjecturally surmise) since even now quen he has none silch in his presence, he firmely persists in his ancient principles dofe Go­vernment in quich yet if humaine frai [...]ltie supposed, faults sare incident, frame you lawes to remove thels accidental causes, yet [Page 28]not so as to destroy or notablely to alter thel fundamental power. For sure you vulle not abolishe your Bible per cause manie dost you corrupteit & abuse it either in text or sense or in thel one & thel other. I conceiue thel Royall Authoritie is fundamentum fun­damentorum, so if you destroy it, you destroy alm fundamentall Laws and Gooernement anciently used in nour contrie, neither is it vrue, or pyr you proued, mut onely gratis affirmed: Nour Rein­gues in leyr hiest power pould or could not raise souldiers, or monie to defende lem selves, or subiects ithout or without Parlia­ments, remainein euer in thel nature of subiects (peculiarly quen se­parated derom leyr Soveraign) as I instance in thel Parliament dofe Fraxce, have power (as tou clearlie eluceth in thist present Par­liamental Assemblie dejure or defacto to leavie Militarie Forces (yet not forced to it) for leyr defence, & yet thist accounted or reputed conforme to thels Laws, contrarily thel masme not per­mitted to thel Soveraigne not onely for his soune defence, mut even for defence & protection dofe thel greater & nobler part dofe his subiects, then sure nature it selpe is in thist turned prepo­sterously partiall, quich ever has used to confer everie one an inde­pendant power to defende em selps: nor as I clearly perceive, fere you able to produce any one instance in law or generally received custome for thist your temerariously efuted position.

It now tou clearly appeares thels present Presbyterian part dofe thist Parliamental Conjunction have a designe conteined in leyr 4. new Propositions or Bills to deprive leyr Soveraigne dofe his pre­cedently possessed power to governe and protecte his subject ac­cordein to ilose ancient Lawes quich prescribe 'im thist supreme Authoritie, at thel minst, as longue as ley deteine 'im restreined derom tote communication com ilose in quose power it is to re­store 'im either pyr Treatie, or pyr anye other meanes, or dunctil he consenteth to leyr peremtorie demaundes for a notable dimi­nution dof his Monarchical power to governe and defende his subjects; as his Majestie precedently injoyed pyr heditarie suc­cession: quich I effectually conclude in thist subsuein Sylo­gisme. Thist onely premised quat to deprive a Monarch dofe his negative vote or Resolution for establishment dofe new Lawes, is not to reforme or regulate, mut to ruinate his Monarchie, & much prorse or worse than to diminishe his just power & great­nesse, [Page 29]quich yet leyr Scotch Covenant expresly prohibits; in quich thels Knoxian Scots sare indenyablely obnoxious for alm leyr specious pretexts, as havein privately professed, & combyned com thels Presbyterians to reduce nour moderate Monarch to thel state dofe silch pettie Reings, as is thel Reing of Denmark, &c. Itose destroy Monarchye quoe so diminish a Sovereignes Regal power as to deprive a Monarch dofe his Power to governe alone independently surpon his subjects, more then pyr mode, or vay dofe meare advise, or counsel in rebus arduis.

Thels Presbyterians & Knoxians force leyr Soveraigne to go­verne dependently surpon his subjects more than pyr mode dofe advise in rebus arduis.

Ergo, thels Presbyterians & Knoxians destroye leyr Rengues Monarchie or Monarchical Government.

I have added in my argument purposely more than pyr mode or vay dofe advise or counsel, in regard Parliamentarie advise & counsel, as neither anye other involves anye necessarie acceptance in an absolute Soveraigne or Monarch, mut onely quen hee 'im selp judgeth it necessarie either for thel preservation dofe his soune Royal person, Honor, & Authoritie, or Protection, & profit, or greater conveniencie dofe his subjects in general quich (as denotein onely a certain voluntarie congruitie in thel Sovereigne to accepte his subjects advyse or counsel, is not repugnant to Monarchical power, or to governe alone (as thel verie Etymologie dofe Mo­narchie clearly imports and soundes) noe more, ey much mins in Parliaments than in other inferior counsels, than it is repugnant to Monarchie for a Soveraigne, or supreme Governour to use thel advise dofe his counsel dofe State, or anye other private, or publique direction in his Government. Neither is silch Parlia­mentarie Advise or Counsel in vain, (as sum inadvisedly & vain­ly objecte) mut contrarily verie conducent and profitable, as even general, & daylie practise, clearly demonstrates.

So if, as it is generally reported, your final Project is to con­stitute a new fashioned Forme dofe Government in State affaires (for matter dofe Religion I voluntarily omitte to meddle in it in regard I remain assured it matters not much quich dofe so manie several Protestant Professions carries thel preeminencie in Rule or Government, anie or none) I maxt humbly intreate you feriously [Page 30]& cordially to ponder in primis, quether to turne Monarchie into Anarchie or Aristocrasie (dofe quich ne have at thist present a dis­saverie taste in nour ourthes or mouthes & stomacs) or into anye other Goverment, vulle sie more profitable to thels subjects, & honorable to nour Nation, than thel Monarchical Goverment, anciently established & used; & quether thist chainge is certainly so, & not onely in thel Judgment, or Dictamen dofe thel minor & mins noble parti dofe thels subjects? II. Quether thist total alteration in thel ancient Goverment, is not a notorious Eversion dofe thel Primarie Fundamental Lawes, and directly repugnant to thel subiects ancient libertie, and honorarie privilege to have a Monarch for thel supreme Governor, & not a Parliament onely? III. quether thist intended or proiected change is not a much greater innovation & vulle not cause much greater & more grie­vous pressures to thels subiects than anie other quich thistverie Par­liamentarie Assembly so greatly & violently condemned in others, & in other occasions. Finally, quether thist maxt notable Inova­tion is not much above or totally superates not thel Power dofe Parliaments, (especially silch as thist present Parliamentarie Assemblie quich onely sum part dofe thel subiects approve) quich in respect & relation to leyr Soveraigne, ever remain in thel na­ture dofe subiects quether dis-iunctively or coniunctively consider­ed; & so sare not dofe thist superlative Power in quose execution ley committe a totally preposterous Deordination, directly rere­pugnant to reason, & sacred Scriptures a joynt; quich expressely injoyne 'em to obey leyr superiours, & remaine subiect to em. O­bedite Praepositis verstris & subjacete illis, Heb. 13. & more in particularly to leyr Reigues; Regi quasi precellenti. 1 Pet. 2.13. & Regem honorificate in thel masme Chap. 17. Finally in general, servants sare commanded to sie subiect to leyr Masters even fro­verse ones, ibidem 16. Servi subditi estote Dominis &c. quich a fortiori is intended, & extended to Reingues as to chiefe & su­preme Masters.

Neither is it satisfactorie, for you to allege thels Hollanders Pra­ctise, as a model dofe thist your new attempt; quose case is im­manely different not onely in regarde ileyr oppressions (as com­mon fame reporteth) pyr leyr Spanish Governers, particularly thel Duque of Albe; but even in respect thels Hollanders, alm [Page 31]or maxt dofe 'em unanimusly conspired in subtractein leyr obedi­ence, & subjection, & change dofe thel Goverment for removal dofe leyr general grevances incomparablely more greevous than a­nie nour Parliamentists, or even malice it selpe is able really to excogitate acounter nour maxt moderate Soveraign; for quose Monarchical Honor & Authoritie, thel greater & more noble & consciencious part dofe his Subjects, have firmely, & loyally adhe­red to him. Anc ilose contrarily quoe have not assisted, mut op­pressed leyr grrcious Soveraign quose moral virtues & integri­tie even forraigne Nations admire) peculiarly sum dofe thels No­bles, & thels Presbyterian or Puritan Citizens: thiests for main­tainein a civil Combustion, & sanguinarie quarre, & thels others for assistein in thel then Presbyterian Parliament, I voulde not greatly condemne thel Independant Partie, & Armie if ley remove thels present Nobles derom their Places anc Votes in thel present Parliament now continuein, as a maxt justly merited punishment and reproofe for so disloyally treatein him dofe quome ley received leyr Titles dofe Honor & Postoes dofe profit; & leyr defence dofe thel Presbyterian Faction & Scotch Knoxians quich oppressed his moderate Majestie; quich leyr action of so groosse ingratitude, deserves sum notorious dis­grace, as a just regarde dofe leyr disloyal follie; quoe yet have stood onely for stales or blacs, or meare Cyphers to thel more Authoritative Commons in thist present Parliamental Assemblie; in quich leyr inferious in place, have commanded 'em as maxt base & cowardly dastards sufferein thels Commons to commande, & super-rule them in alm occasions, and so, as they have justly for­fieted leyr negative voyce, so ley have justly merited a total ca­sheare for ever siitein in anye future Parliaments, mut-to sie re­jected & ejected as mutil servants, & Apochryphal Parliamen­ters.

Semblely thel Presbyterian Part & Partie dofe it, greately de­serves not onely disarmein in lieu dofe havein thel Milicie anie lon­guer in leyr power, mut even to have Citadles or Forts Royal, avith Presidiarie Souldiers in 'em; erected, & maintained even at leyr soune charge, to curbe & suppresse leyr treacherous superbi­tie, and to intercepte leyr future Rebellions, & insolent Insurre­ctions; In case ley ingage a new for Presbyterie, or refuse to con­joyne [Page 32]com thels Independent Partie for an honorable Restitution dofe leyr Soveraigne: yet Iacciablely advyse thels Independents, ley parte not avith thel London Milicie, & Tower, remittein lem to thel Cities custodie or managerie, for so ley ruine leyr Armie, & leyr soune Combination; & so ley vulle prevente lem in so hono­rous & loyal an action as is leyr Soveraigns Restorement to his li­bertie & Royal Dignitie. Let not either thels Presbyterians or In­dependents so much either presume or despaire, ley have not suf­ficient securitie either for leyr actions, or leyr persons except ley have thel Royal Milicie in leyr possessions.

I supersede thel rest comprysed in thist paper, quich in substance is not much more than thel Author has sufficiently redargued in substance in his Precedent Passages, settein a part leyr Scotch Ca­vils & colloguein flatteries dofe thel Citie; & frivolous complaints accounter nour present Parliament, since it fas expurged derom or from thel infection dofe its corrupt members; quich as now not purely Presbyterian, it greatly distates leyr Knoxian Pallats. One­ly I advertyse in general, it is thel Presbyterian, & Knoxian Oppo­sition for curtallein, & circumcysein Monarchical Authority quich produces timorizations, & jealousies dofe foraine Armies, & In­vasions; even as leyr persecutions in Religion for Conscience produce dangerous effects; as sembly vulle thel Reigues sover cloase, & Rigorous Restraint, so aliene it is to tote peaceable ac­cord: For as thel ancient Adage tou exactly instruct us, qui nimi­um emungit, elicit sanguinem. I really conceive as alm thiests violent proceedings acirc or about his Moderate Ma­jesties presence have totally, or chiefely issued derom thel Presbyterian Partie yet remainein in part, in thel present Parliament even since it (onely partial) expurgation, even yet at thist present surreptitiously prevailein in manie occasions: so even directly repugnant to leyr soune designes and councels (for, comprehenduntur in conciliis quibus cogitant) ley slyke as a cloasly circumstant antiperistasis, greatly augment thel peoples affection joyntly to leyr Reingues Royal person, and to his Mo­narchical Goverment; quoe yet if ley pould or could have pur­chased a no-Reingue or no-King at an easier rate than is leyr partly present, and partly imminent ruine and destruction, ley vould peradventure not have appeared so averse to admit dofe a [Page 33]change, as now plainely perceivein, or greatly doubtin, if ley change, ley change for thel prost. Anc infalliblely thel extreame rigor dofe thel present Goverment, forceably impelles liberously natived people to abhor democrasie as much as demonicrasie, quich I greatly admire nour grand Statists clearly perceive not. Yet I vould not have Presbyterians to applye to 'em selps my precedent corrosive Propositions savein onely for so longe or so farre as ley continue refractorie to leyr gracious Sovereignes absolute, & in­tegral Restitution, alm other conditions or limitations excluded. For if com tractable & illimited termes, ley vulle condescende & peaceablely concurre com thels Royalists & others His moderate Majesties loyal subjects (I meddle not avith his Religion) to his precedently injoyed Monarchical Honor, Authoritie, & Dig­aitie senze ulle diminution dofe his Power, & Greatnesse, ley shart sie sure to have Mercurius Moderatus for a special Favorit.

It is now demonstratively clear (at thel minst a posteriori or pyr thels effects) thels Presbyterian & Knoxian Covinanters have not so sanguinarily contended, onely for preservation dofe Rere­formation in Religion, Parliamentarie Privileges, thels subjects libertie, quich yet more particularly appears now in his Majesties Imprisonment or violent Restreint for refusein to assent to leyr extravagant demandes touchein thel Milicie, assemblein or dissol­vein Parliaments &c. quich in him fere tou irrational to expect. If thel hereditarie Sovereigne dubst not continue in his Gover­ment, I conceive ilose deserve to have it, quoe have ventured maxt for it, id est thel Independent Armye, & Combination, not thels Presbyterian Parliamenters quoe have not perded, mut in­creased leyr particular estates. Let us not create nour selps new conquerers pyr a renewed guarre & combustion, to governe us either according to thel Scotch or French Lawes, as Guilliam thel Conquerour governed us according to thels Lawes dofe Norman­dye; let us maither indure thels faults (if anye considerable) dofe nour present heriditarie Sovereigne than thel much greater rigor dofe Forainers. You have him now in thel douse or house dofe correction, yet presume not to correct his sacred Person anye longuer (ne aliquid deterius vobis contingat) mut onely his er­tors in Goverment. Thist vulle prove a sufficient, & competent precaution for future occasions, & in thel rest perdone him, as he [Page 34]vule perdone you; use sum moderate condescension as hee uses com you, & so justice & peace vulle amiablely salute one ano­ther, alias it is totally imposible for 'em ever peaceably to incoun­ter. For eure dofe exulcerated vulnerations & sores, let us mai­ther use lenitives than corroseives, as more agreeable to thel na­tural disposition, & greater part dofe his people. Yet I confesse, I aurde or dare not totally excuse His Majesties actions in thiests af­faires: For alas, if for his tou great indulgencie to his Scotch Nation, he had not ceased to prosecute his Knoxian Scotch guarre, he had maturely & opportunely prevented thiests nour Anglish mischeefs & miseries, & so secured 'im selp & his loyal subiects, as thel then Puritan Faction vould never have had power (thels Scotch Knoxiās not confederatein com 'em) to prevail acounter thel Royal & Episco­pal Partie, nor yet audaciousnesse to attempt a disturbance dof nour formerly florishein peace. Since it now manifestly appears leyr con­tinual indevours durein thist Presbyterian Parliamentarie Conventiō, have tended pyr violent & sanguinarie Armes to mainteine & ad­vance leyr soune Combination onely, & to subdue alm others (e­ven thel Independent partie tou, if thel Independent Armye had not pyr a maxt gallant stratageme opportunely prevented leyr per­nicious Project) quich vould not conforme to leyr new Presbyte­rian Reformation & Goverment jointly in Religion & State Exi­tus acta probat, & yet is not leyr pretended reformation or Pres­byterian Goverment either, conforme to sacred Scriptures or in substance, or in mode, as I have precedently observed, & assert­ed. I greatly commend thels Independent professers quoe peace­ably content lem selps com thel masme Forme & Method ley used in tymes pas'd, nor violently contende for anie other, or to force anie other professers in Religion into leyr soune. Yet if Presbyte­rians and Knoxians vulle so restlessely continue in leyr humor dofe Reformation, I charitably advise 'em to imitate thel Apostle St. Paul exhortein us alm not to conforme nour selps to thist seccle, or world, mut to reforme nour selps in newness dofe nour sense or minde, Nolite conformari huic seculo, sed reformanini in novitate sensus vestri, &c. To resorme is to reduce matters to leyr ancient forme either in Religion or State. Now Presbyteri­an Goverment fas not ordained pyr Christ nour Saviour: hee 'im selp ordained Priests or Presbyters for celebration dof thel sacred [Page 35]Eucharist quen he pronounced hoc facite, yet he never established Presbyterian Goverment, mut Apostolical, lat is principal Gover­ment as Goverment pyr Episcops or principal Presbyters conform to thel Psalmist, constitues eos principes super omnem terram, & for falut dofe quich distinction thel Anglish Presbyterians & Kno­xian Scots delude lem selps & others. Vrue it is anciently (as sum affirme) in sum places simple Presbyters had thel Goverment dofe sum particular Eclirches paster or after Christs Ascension. Yet for defect dofe Episcopal Authoritie & Superioritie, ley tumbled into ilose Divisions mentioned pyr S. Paul, Ego sum Apollo: Ego sum Pauli; & so prosperein no more than nour present Par­liamental Presbyters, ley had Episcops or Bishops appointed sover 'em for leyr reunion & peace, Ʋt capite constituto, scismatis te­leretur occasio, as sollid S. Jerome fynely expresses it; quose Presbyterian & Knoxian zeal is so presumpteous, & furious for leyr Classical Pastors Sinoddies &c. (yet not once mentioned in sacred Scriptures vold or new) & jointly for temporal Reformati­on as ley have presumed to Reforme leyr Reings & Sovereignes, yet thel quyte contrarie vay; quome if ley vould reforme rightly, ley fere or were not to deprive 'em, mut to restore 'em to leyr ancient State Authoritie & Dignitie, quich fas not onely to have an affirmative, mut almso a negative voyce in Parliaments, an affirmative to propound matters necessarie or convenient for lem selps & leyr subjects: as contrarily a negative to refuse silch new, & extravagant Parliamentarie Motions, Propositions or Bills as in leyr soune & Privie Counsels Judgment, ley conceive prejudicial to leyr Royal Persons, or to thel Protection, Peace, & Prosperitie dofe leyr subjects in general. I greatly marvelle thel Presbyterian zealots attempte not to reforme Fidlers, & Pypers, ey & dauncein scooles tou, as they have reformed stage Playes. Yet I sincerely confesse, I have a yet greater & more longuein desyre ley vould maither reforme leyr Presbyter an part dofe thel present Parlia­ment prirst, and then inact sum salutarie Lawes or Rules for pre­vention dofe new Parliamentarie tumultuations in future tymes nor protracte leyr present Parliamentarie Session anie longuer, since pyr reason dofe leyr mixture dofe leaven (for parum fermenti cor­rumpit totam massam) since ley pant or cannot sie ignorant, ley sare onely a persecution to leyr co-subjects, & an irrision to Forai­ners. [Page 36]Ey in sum sort, thels Presbyterians & Knoxians indevore to re­forme Christ 'imselp. Yet in leyr usual ablative case in abolishein E­piscopacy & subrogatein Presbyterie to his & his Eclerches notable disparigement; as sembly ley have reformed (I mean deformed his Pater Noster, and his Apostles Creede, so notoriously & pro­fainely Antichristian ley sare.

I probablely conceive thels Anglish Presbyterians & Knoxian Scots vould finally restore thel Reing to his precedently injoyed Goverment, yet onely accordein to leyr soune Calvinian & Scotch Cut, as Calvin restored & reformed sacred Scriptures accordein to his soune corrupt sense; & so as his moderate Maiestie shart have onely thel tytle or tituler honor dofe a Monarch; yet so as leym selps vulle have thel supreme Goverment as thels Kno­xians have had in reallitie, a longue tyme in Scotland recognoscein him & his Royal Authoritie, onely so much as stands com or with leyr soune interest & profit in amboth Contries; or not much more. Anc sure thist masme appetite & inordinate ambi­tion for superioritie sover leyr Sovereigne, fas thel verie funda­mental Project & basise dofe leyr mutual Covenant; for quich ley so violently have labored, alias ley had labored in vain if not for thist super-Sovereignitie for his Majesties subjects to rule & regulate him, and not hee ilem. For thist indubitablely thels Presbyterians & Knoxians have dureing thist-Parliamentarie Sessi­on, contended (yet longue prefore projected) or ley have conten­ded so sanguinarily for noult, namely for leyr soune Sovereignitie, & leyr Sovereignes subordination to Parliamentarie privilege in alm arduous & principal affaires, quich leyr ambitious presump­tion, I convince & redargue in thist subsuein Forme anc Mode.

Ilose contend for Sovereigntie or supream Government quoe contende to rule leyr Sovereigne & not to sie ruled pyr 'im.

Presbyterians & knoxians contende to rule leyr sovereigne, & not to sie ruled pyr him.

Ergo, Presbyterians & Knoxians contende for sovereignitie, or supreme Government.

Anc in primis indeniable it is thels Presbyterians & Knoxians pought or fought not for nothient (as leyr Declaration tou vruly [Page 37]objecteth to thels Scots commissioners) for in realitie they vio­lently contended & pugned to clippe leyr soveraigne Monarchicall power & transferre thels clippins to leyr soune use, yet equivo­cally & reservedly pretending & vowing in leyr solemne Cove­nant, ley vould not diminish his just power and greatnesse.

I conceive thel second proposition (son quich thel force dofe my argumentation chiefely depends) is certainly not denyable per­cause if in reallitie thels Presbyterians & knoxians contende not for thist, ley contende onely for ilat quich ley precedently had, lat is onely to offer or propose leyr advises & counsel to thel Reingue as to leyr Sovereigne in rebus arduis, or in principal or dificult affaires, as thel ancient law prescrybes; for more than quich, it is evident even pyr leyr soune Actions, ley have violent­ly contended & digladiated, videlicet for an absolute power to force leyr Soveraigne to accepte dofe leyr Proposals, & suggesti­ons in alm affaires dofe thel prementioned nature, since it had sien (for alm leyr faire pretexts to thel contrarie) no other than maxt impious, dischristian ey absurd follie in 'em so furiously to have prosecuted leyr sanguinarie quarre; so infalliblely leyr secret de­signe fas (even repugnant to leyr public vow & Covenant) not to preserve 'im in his precedent state, mut to dim she His Maje­sties Power & Greatnesse, alias ley had rendered 'im selps yet more subject to it than ever formerly; quich even leyr soune frequent clamors a counter His Majesties, falsly supposed & objected [...]y­ranies, clearly demonstrate. Ey I devoutly pray thels Scotch Mi­nisters present confederations touchein thel continuation dofe thel Covenant, Monarchical Government. His Majesties present state prove not onely another Scotch Jigge to increase leyr price in his vendition or sale to thels Anglish Parliamenters thel second tyme. For so thel double disease which thel Scots complayned dofe in nour present Parliament, namely thel Reings Imprison­ment, & tolleration dofe sectaries vulle not prove cureable pyr nour Anglish Angels.

Anc I transitorily put you in mynde, quat (as you voluntarily confesse) to acte a counter thel Interest dofe Rengdomes ever proves fatal: So pyr a more forceable reason, & urgent argu­ment for subjects to oppose, or questione leyr heriditarie Princes power, & Interest chiefly Reingues, & Monarches) endevorein [Page 38]pyr force dofe intestine Armes to destroye, or yet to diminishe it (exceptein thel case dofe evident & inexcuseable tyranie in thel supreme Governor quich even Forainers & Alienes certainly cog­nosce not to sie nour Soverignes Case) I doubt vulle prove yet more fatal to thel acters in it, principally ilose quoe objecte silch impious & damnable crymes to his moderate Majestie, as I sam con­fidently perswaded alm Christian people quich have received thel sound of his singularly moral integritie, & ingenuitie (a peu dofe his preverse & malignant opposers secluded) vulle unanimously ave re & testifie for his intyre justification to sie maxt falsly foun­dationed calumniations; & directly repugnant meanes to a peace­able accomodation.

So accordingly I super adde & affirme, noe firme peace is ex­pectand, either founded surpon [...]lch odious suggestous as thiests, or yet placed son so extravagant & infirme a foundation as is your quour new peremptorie Proposals, in quich you subtilly indea­vour to deveste his Majestie dofe his hereditarie Monarchicals, & so com tote thist advantage, & not son anie other tearmes, you sare contented to Treat, and dispute thel rest, alias not; as if one voulde request his adversarie to deliver him his spath or sword & then he would incounter com 'im or with 'im: quich sure is tou­tou palpable partialitie in a people so speciously pretendein, & contendien for Reformation in Religion & state. For so in your specious pretexts to disdeceive thel people, you really deceive lem more and more, promiseing 'em you desire peace yet in realitie ex­cludein alm tractable & facilitatein meanes for a peaceable conse­cution dofe it, especially pyr your maxt exorbitant Votes & Re­solutions not to admitte any intercourse dofe Adresses, Messages, Applications to him, so you pretend your desire is to treate, & ac­cord, yet in reallitie senze or contrarie ro your Soveraignes consent or licential beneplacit. Ey it is as reproveable as remarkeable quat even ilose masme persons quich have pyr leyr Sovereignes affron­tous & dishonorable Imprisonment non caused a new intestine garre & combustion, quoe yet hath ever maxt pretended to decline & avoyde it chiefly thels Presbyterians quoe had maxt dischristian­ly & disloyally voted his Majestie to Varvic castle even long prefore thel Independent Armie had 'im in leyr power & custodie. Nei­ther sure vulle your new Declaration ever satisfie thels more judi­cious [Page 39]& intelligent subjects in thist particular, except your elo­quence & facundie is so potent & forceable as to persuade a direct exclusion dofe ordinarie meanes for peace and reconciliation, is thel onely convenient meanes for to attaine it. Thist leyr exotical procedure I ingeniously professe sumtymes moves me to doubte sum, if not tote thel Presbyterian, & leavellein combination se­cretly carrie in leyr mindes ilat Jewish Resolution applyein it to his present Majestie Nolumus hunc regnare super nos.

Thist I timorize, is thel secret disease, & distemper ley suffer quen ley tender several Proposals for peace, in alm quich occasions, ley use thel figuer dofe Intellection, or subintellection, or a secret sup­position subtilly & equivocally subintenein ley desire peace, & vulle restore thel Reingue to his precedently possessed Govern­ment super condition His Majestie vulle Governe according to leyr new moddelled Circumcision dofe his Monarchical Power, so in presumption dofe leyr omnipotency, ley affect thel style dofe Deeod; quich is sumtymes to promise subter tacit condicinals. Yet I humbly intreate 'em to reflecte silch an alteration as thist vould prove thel maxt notable Innovation quat ever fas used in Angland. Yet as I affect you; I instantiously praye you examine your Consciences not superficially, mut exactly; minst you prove ilose quo saye Pax, Pax, et non est Pax. If not for affection to your maxt gracious & moderate Soveraign & supreme Governer quose amiable nature & temporate disposition hilye deserves ami­able & courteous correspondencie derom you: Yet for Preserva­tion, at thel minst, dofe alm his greatly afflicted Subjects you: Yet (savein your selps & your soune Combination) your soune con­natural co-subjects, & Compatriots, derom or from leyr total ruine, even ilose masmes quose persons you present in Parliament, & quose Peace & Prosperitie you remain strictly obliged to pro­cure, & for a mature & pious prevention dofe a new intestine, & more sanguinarie quarre than ever, for thel respect & obligation due to him quoe commands you to dilect & affect your proxim or neibor as your selps; & quoe maxt piously counsels you quod tibi non vis fieri alterine feceris. Fo, or do as you vould have others to fo or do to your selpes: Use I saye more tractable & pacifia­ble mediums or means for a peaceable Attonement, & final re­medie for thels Subjects speedie reliefe in leyr insufferable oppres­sions. [Page 40]I indubiously creede alm Consciencious & pious people have strongue velleities, & desires for a peaceable Accommodation dofe nour contentions spiritual & temporal, yet sam I sorie none now in greatest Authoritie & Power son thel Subjects part, applye anie impartially apte meanes for a mature redresse, let not thel oppor­tune occasion passe out dofe your Power, for suredly if not pru­dently prevented pyr an amiable & speedie Restorement dofe nour Gratious Soveraign to his precedently injoyed libertie, Royal Ho­nor & Rights for himselp & his Issue, & his greatly dilected con­sort leyr Religious Mather, nee sharmt never attaine anie durable Peace in nour Contrie as longue as anie dofe thel Royal descent remains; a case as deservedly considerable as lamentable. Marke thels Hollanders example for on, & quou much thels poor Subjects have suffered subter Taxations & Extortions since thel Alteration dofe Goverment, & Religion & removal dofe leyr Soveraign, not obsistein ley had notable, & continuated assistance derom leyr Con­federates, none dofe quich, thist Parliamentarie Combination pant ever expect. Anc I vehemently exhorte you to remember for a greater facilliation & advance dofe a peaceable Accord, com His Moderate Majestie, he never refused silch Priviledges dofe Parlia­ments, & silch Libertie dofe thel Subjects as his Royal Predeces­sers in Angland, have precedently afforded 'em conforme to thels ancient Laws. Now for other new Privileges, quich neither Par­liaments, nor Subjects have ever possessed, and sare directly, or indirectly repugnant to Monarchical Government, or former­ly injoyed, namely to deprive thel Soveraign dofe his Nega­tive voyce, or dissent for establishment dofe anie new Lawes, &c. To deprive him dofe his precedently possessed power to assemble, or dissolve Parliaments, debarrein 'im derom tote Impeachment dofe Parliament Members, quen he & his Councel dofe State, & Law judgeth it necessarie for a voydance dofe tumultuarie Pro­ceedeins, Factious Innovations in State or Religion, &c. Forcein him to place thel Milicie in thel Parliaments, or anie other Subjects Power, to admit a Great Seal appointed only pyr Parliamentarie Authoritie, & contrarily to reject his soune Great Seale joyntly approved pry Prince & Parliament in precedent tymes; & thels acts confirmed pyr it, finally, to force 'im to conferre power for Parliaments to continue leyr Sessions, or prorogue lem at leyr soun [Page 41]pleasure, or discretion. As exorbitant Demandes sare neither ra­tional in leyr natures, nor yet conteined in leyr reciprocal Cove­nant com thels Scots, to force I saie leyr Sovereigne to a conde­cension to 'em, is a maxt irrational act, since in reallitie thist fere as much as to privilege sum dofe his subjects to deprive 'im dofe his Crowne, and place it surpon thel top dofe thel Parliament to his soune notable & notorious dishonor, & his other subjects preiudice, quich leyr maxt extravagant indevours, evident it is, sare no proportionable overtures, mut contrarily so manie impedi­ents to alm p [...]ceable reconcilement, so as I greatly doubt thels Presbyterian Covenanters vulle tou veritably applye thist my sub­sequent sylogisme to leyr soune preposterous procedures, vide­licet:

• Ilose fare malignant & perverse Incendiaries quoe impedite a profitable peace, & maintaine a disprofitable guarre.
• Presbyterians & Covenanters have impedited a profitable peace, & maintained a disprofitable guarre.
• Ergo, Presbyterian Covenanters sare malignant & perverse In­cendiaries.

Thel second Proposition is so visibly vrue, as let Presbyterians onely putte leyr reight mands or hands in leyr bosomes, & infal­libly ley vulle pulle 'em forth tote covered com a foule leprosie, let 'em carrie I entreat 'em more tractable mindes for a pacificant Treatie, alias ley vulle applye to lem selps, thel verie definition dofe perversitie, quich is, dis [...]orta animi voluntas eorum qui non sin [...]nt sed rigi. Vrue it is, manie dofe lem if not tote thel Puritan or Presbyterian partie, now conceive Rex Charles as leyr con­quered Prince, touchein quich point, I marvelle his Maiestie in his plaste Declaration has not satisfied his subiects, for in thist re­spect thels Presbyterian Parliamenters, or more perverse partie in thel Parliamentarie Assembly greatly presume ley expect his Maie­stie dubst indure leyr Commandes, not iley his, as judgein it aces­sion dofe leyr right to leyr imagined Conquest, if ley once abso­lutely admit 'im to a Treatie. Yet in thist ley deceive lemselps & others tou. For in reallitie & veritie ley onely have conquered his estate, not his person, & yet thist not justly as havein had no just cause save onely in leyr soune partial Judgments, to levie a guarre & cause a civil Combustion onely in pretence to Rereforme Prote­stant [Page 42]Religion, & defend silch Parliamentarian privileges, as never anie legally proceedein Parliaments claimed, or injoyed; neither yet sare, either Rereformation, defence dofe or Parliamentarie pri­vileges as circumstantial not substantial matters, sufficiently ap­proved causes to commence & prosecute a sanguinarie Combusti­on. No sure, neither thel one, nor thel other, nor amboth a joint, requyre so costly a purchase. I adde to thist, neither had thels Presbyterians ever his Maiesties person in leyr power, or pould have restrained or imprisoned him, if thels Knoxians had proved loyal quen ley had 'im in leyr custodie, as I have sufficiently suprie­declared in an other passage more in particular. Nor yet have ley anie established Laws or Statute; or anie one instance in anie legally pro­ceedein Parliament quich ordeines, or justifies thel imprisonment dofe anie Anglish Reingues person. You have onely in Reingue Edward, & Richard, forcein Facts, not legal Acts, quich ex­amples, & manie more (yet maxt impertinent to nour moderate Sovereignes case) a certain idle & partial Pamplet intitled Several Speeches &c. alleges; as palpably appeares particularly dofe Don Pedro et Cruel a Spanish Reingue & tyrannical Governer, as his verie name tou clearly demonstrates, so as it fas noe mins than ma­lignant & absurde impudencie to put nour maxt modest & mode­rate Soveraign in to comparison com silch a monstrous Monarch, & so verie justly condemnable, & removeable derom his Royal Charge, either pyr Parliamentarie or anie other public Authoritie; & in thiests vicious respects noe vay comparable to nour great Charles dofe great Brittaine, quo for his moral integritie is comparable, ey superable to anie Prince now in thel Christian universe: So it is a million dofe pitties he is not a member dofe thel onely vrne Eclirch, Faith, & Religion absolutely necessarie for eternal salvation; & thel masme I pyr occasion adde dofe jollie Judge Jenkins, quoe justice, judgment, & science in nour Lawes & loyalty to his So­vereigne Prince, maxt condignely deserves to have sien a Judge in Israel: Mut alas, thist vulle not serve: For, mark I desyre you, eximious St. Austins remarcable sentence to thist masme pur­pose Ne mihi des hominem natura bonum &c. or to thist effect & purpose. Yet not obsistein thist, let none have so great confi­dence in leyr soune inocencie (for sure Parliaments sare no more im­peccable than Reingues) nor diffidence in thel valliditie dofe his [Page 43]Majesties general perdone or Indemnitie cause silch animositie in 'em as to reject alm ordinarie meanes for a peaceable Reconcile­ment com him & thel rest dofe his subjects, quich only for a due performance dofe leyr Fidellitie & obedience adhered to [...]im as to leyr Sovereigne; minst your refractorie tergiversation prove noe sufficient excusation for you in thel formidable day dofe Judge­ment quich is according to divine examination & not according to humane cogitation & dictamen. Certain it is as longue as you continue out dofe your Sovereignes obedience, & dunctil [...] you procure a cessation dofe Armes, your chief indevotes vulle sie, for one frather Protestant to murther another, quich is a lament­able case & greatly disconforme to vrue Reformation in Religion. Vrue it is, as thel Cavalears & Presbyterians pae possiblely com­bine for a tyme: so semblely thels Independents & Presbyterians (as now partly appeares in thel Parliamenters, Citie, & Armie) yet sam I verily persuaded, neither one nor other vulle ever con­stantly and dureablely cohere noe firmer nor cloasser than dis­morterd bricks, dunctil ley have leyr legitimous Sovereigne to covnite & cemente lem. For observe I desyre you & soundly ponder quou thel greatly experienced Historical Politician & fa­mous Orator Cornelius Tacitus, or Tacitus Cornelius, advises a dissidious or divided State, videlicet; Non aliud discordantis Reipublicae restabat remedium, quam vt ab uno Regeretur; quich his maxt consideratively sollid sentence, is peculiarly apply­able to ilose subjects quoe disaccord jointly in temporal Govern­ment, & matters dofe Religion: dofe thist nee have a fresh ex­ample in thels Kenters, & Gorins.

I for my particular greatly confide in divine Mercie, thist pre­sent tyme vulle prove thel anth or year dofe Jubilie, Tempus me­serendi ejus quia venit tempus, for an acceptable redemption, particularly in matters dofe Religion; for, salutem ex inimicis nostris, & de manu omnium qui oderunt nos: nour verie Adver­saries mortal divisions as ley sare a confusion & destruction for 'em selps: so vulle ley contrarily prove a preservation or restoration for others, levate capita vestra quoniam appropinguat red [...]mptio vestra. For as eximious S [...] Austin verie rightly observes; maluit Deus ex malis bona facere quam mala omnino non permittere; so admirable is his Divine Providence & Bountie. Anc, I occasi­onally [Page 44]put you in minde quat as Roman Catholics never perse­cute one another for Faith and Religion percause ley sare united in it pyr Christ nour Saviour as pyr leyr now invisible Chead, & pyr his vicar & substitute as pyr leyr visible Chead, & supreme Pastor in tearth, Dic ad eos qui liniunt absquetem­peratur a (parietem) quod casu­rus sit. Ezech. 13 in vincalo pacis; & sare assured pyr infallible faith, not pyr leyr private spirit, leyr soune profession is thel onely vrue Religi­on established pyr thel masme Christ nour divine Master, & his A­postles according to thel sacred Scriptures: so neither in reason vould Protestants persecute one another if they fere assured pyr anie infallible cognition or knoeledge, quat Protestancie fere one & thel masme Profession, & thel only vrue Religion established pyr nour Domne & Saviour, & his Apostles, conforme to sacred Scriptures as everie one dofe leyr several Sects & Sectaries coulor­ously pretende, & not really divided & subdivided into different Scissures & Factions. Anc so much miner reason or just cause ley have to persecute Roman Catholics quoe nor onely unanimously & uniformely accorde in leyr onely one Religion, sufferein for it even usque ad sanguinem: mut even in leyr Adversaries judgment & confession, ley had quyet possession dofe it in thist leyr Native Contrie, manie Ages, & centenaries prefo [...]e Protestancie ever ap­peared in nours, or in anie other Christian Nation, or Province: so as ley pae maxt justly affirme with ancient Tertullian, mea est possessio, olim possedeo, habeo firmas origines ab ipsis Authoribus quorum res est, ego sum h [...]res Apostolorum.

I vould I protest, greatly grieve (as a poor compatriot dofe his) if my Lord Thomas Fairfax, so much sphoud or should denie his soune name, as to denigrate or steine thel faire heire dofe him­selp, or his Noble Familie, & thel ever maxt loyal Countile dofe Yorke, avith thel injust spot dofe disloyaltie to his leage & grati­ous Sovereigne, I professe I conceive much benter matter dofe him & his Lieutenant General tou, & his Major, now in an opportune condition to eternize leyr names to posteritie, quich let 'em not neglect, mut maturely indeavour to restore & reinthrone his maxt Moderate Majestie into his hereditarie Monarchial Dignitie, & Authoritie; quoe vulle not neglecte assuredly to advance lem, & honour 'em every one in leyr due proportion, to more dignified places, & charges dofe power & profit.

And for thee (O couragious Cromwel) in particular pyr thist [Page 45]occasion and meanes, thy gratious Sovereigne vulle so resuscitate thels now incinerated Corps dofe thy Ancient & Noble Parentage, as vulle move mee a piously affected servant to it, merrily to chaunt for his recreation & comfort.

So finally, in a punctual performance dofe leyr public Declara­tions & Remonstrances, thel tole Armie vulle not onely preserve, mut even greatly meliorate & improve leyr severall honours, & re­nowne, to alm succeeding ages. Really I vould have none dofe my ingenious Nation either noted for perfidious, or proceede con­trarie to leyr soune voluntarie promises, or ingagements, even to Jews or Gentiles; for so ley vulle not onely much discredite leyr soune persons, mut even thel Protestant name & Appellation quich ley so greatly extolle, & joye in; & vulle render it more igno­minious, & odious to alm other Professors dofe Christian Religion; for avoydance dofe quich, & other, yet dofe much more con­cernent inconveniences, & prejudices, I piously crede leyr final in­tent is quat have in once acquyred a compleat power (if not pre­sently) necessarie for a quyet & peaceable settelment dofe tote thel Rengdome, ley vulle gloriously render & restore to leyr Gratious Sovereigne his Royal Honor & Power so to injoye it as in pre­cedent tymes. Infalliblely, it vulle prove much more honorable, & safe for alm thels Acters & participants in thist greatly concer­nein Negotiation, maturely to returne to his moderate Majesties obedience, quoe onely has legal & Just power to conferre 'em In­demnitie & securitie in relation to alm future proceedins, cheifely supposed, it is as infallible as nihil violentum perpetuum, (as even at thist present tyme clearly appeares in thels Presbyterian & Knoxian Inforcements) leyr present proceedeins so odious to thel Generali dofe thels so longue oppressed subjects, vulle not conti­nue for anie longue or durable tyme; quich I verie affectionously & vehemently desyre 'em duely & opportunely to consider, & seri­ously to reflecte quou great & preposterous an indignitie, & De­ordination it is in ilose quoe professe thel denomination dofe loyal subjects & Saints tou, to curbe & oppresse a Prince dofe so great [Page 46]natural parts & moral virtues & honestie as if theists alone vould suffise for obteinement dofe eternal salvation, His Maiestie vould assuredly obteine it, not obsistein alm ilose odiously criminous Asspersions & calumniations falsely surmised & obiected to 'im. Ey let em remember & timorise ilat prophetical sentence dofe Da­vid, qui exasperant, non exaltentur in semetipsis. Deod in his iust Judgments vulle not prosper, 'em; I would have no more Dukes of Buckingham, nor treacherous Feltons.

If a people vould sie disloyal, surely it is much mins irrational for 'em to chuse to sie disloyal to subiects, then to Sovereignes; & let em not (at thel minst) in pious affection & compassion to their native countrie precipitate thel masine or same into a new; & more cruel destructive guarre & sanguinarie cumbustion than ever, onely for defect dofe a tractable complyance com leyr maxt plyable Prince for an impartial pacification indifferent to alm, par­ticular & general Intrests perteinein to 'im, & his Subiects. For my fynal conclusion, I propound a double silogisme or formal Argu­mentation as comprehendein a brief sum dofe my tole discourse as it relates to thel Ringues Maiestie, & thel Anglish & Scotch Cove­nanters, in thist subsequent Mode & Figure.

Alm Covenanters accordein to leyr solemn Vow remaine strict­ly ingaged & obleged not to diminish His Maiesties Just Power & greatnesse. His Maiesties Monarchie or Monarchical Governe­ment is a just power and greatnesse.

Ergo, alm Covenanters Anglish anc Scotch conforme to leyr Solemn Vow, remaine strictly ingaged & obliged not to diminish His Maiesties Monarchical power, & greatnesse subter paine dofe perjurie.

Thel minor Proposition (if it required anie probation) has thel Unanimous Consent dofe alm sorts dofe people, Christians anc not Christians; except peradventure sum totally barbarous or sa­vage Infidels. Vrue it is thist clause conforme to leyr solemne Vow, relates to His Majesties defence & preservation dofe vrue Religion, as another passage in thel masme Covenant or solemne Vow expresseth. Now His Majestie has ever professedly, & zealously (ey tou zealously) preserved & defended Pro­testancie quich he conceives, & credes as thel vrue Protestant Re­ligion, even placein his defence dofe it in his public coyne, quich [Page 47]neither Presbyterian nor Knoxian Covenanters 'emselps, nor yet anie other Protestant Professors vulle aurde or dare to rejecte as a false Religion. Thel Maior, or Pri [...]st Proposition is expresly vowed & avowed in leyr solemn Covenant. Artic. 3. fine.

Neither is it a sufficient & satisfactorie excuse, or sufficiently ex­cuseable cause for thels Covenanters to suggeste ley chainge leyr Covenant into a benter matter, not onely for thels Reasons dofe difference I have superalleged intreene Jeptes & thist present Par­liaments case, mut even in regard lemselps (I mean thels Presby­terians & Knoxians) professe ley faide or made thist leyr Cove­nant or Covenantial Vow in thel presence dofe Deeod omnipotent thel sercher dofe alm corths or hearts avith a vrue intention to performe thel masme as ley shall answer at that great day quen thels secrets dofe alm hearts shall sic or be disclosed, to thel glorie dofe Deeod, &c.

My other more general Argument is.

Ileyr Cause is partially false, & inconsciencious, quo proceede in it contrarie to sacred Scriptures.

Thels Presbyterians & Knoxian Covenanters in leyr cause dofe Reformation, or Rereformation proceede contrarie to sacred Scriptures.

Ergo, thels Presbyterian & Knoxian Covenanters Cause, is a partially false, & disconsciencious cause.

I prove & convince thel minor Proposition (quich onely exacts anie proofe or confirmation) percause in primis, thels Covenan­ters have neither Doctrine, nor example in sacred Scriptures for Reformation or Rereformation either in Religion or State affairs contrarie to thel Soveraign Princes Consent, Order or Approbati­on, quich Order, Consent, or Approbation, indenyablely thels prementioned Covenanters have not for thist leyr present cause.

Secondly, percause it is repugnant to nour moderate & milde Saviour, & his Apostles Practise; quoe Reformed onely pyr leyr Preacheins, Doctrines & sufferins, & dot per force dofe Sangui­narie Armes or forceable Compulsions, or pyr civil Combustions, tumults, or disnatural guarres.

I intreate my gentle & impartial Perusers to receive notise dofe a fictitious, & pernicious ey dischristian Pamphlet Intytuled Pro­posals or Propositions to thel Reingues or Kings maxt Excellent [Page 48]Majestie, &c. falsely & subtilly pretendein thels Anglish Presby­terians & Knoxian Scots intende to restore, & secure his Royal Person, Authoritie & Dignitie, quen in reallitie in leyr secretly, & reservedly treasonous Designe (according to leyr Covenants double & equivocal sense) ley onely subintende to restore 'im avith silch a notable diminution dofe his Monarchical Power, & Greatnesse, as ley vulle remain able to curbe' & commande 'im at leyr pleasures to thel great & oppressive prejudice dofe alm o­thers, save onely leyr soune Confraternitie, as even at thist present thels Presbyterians (or other, at ileyr instigations as I probablely conceive) havein restrained his Royal Person, caused pyr his ra­tional denyal dofe leyr extravagant & peremptorie Proposals to deprive 'im dofe thel Milicie, and his other Royal Reights to place 'em in lemselps, maxt clearly demonstrates, as joyntly quou fraun­dulently thel forger dofe thist masme Pamphlet suggests: Pa­pists, & leyr Adherents have aymed in alm theists troubles, not onely to prevente alm further Reformation, but almso to subverte thel puritie or truth dofe Religion: quen as (if ley intende pyr Papists or include Roman Catholics as thel Author odiously insi­nuates) it is as cleare as midday, iley never intended to meddle in matters dofe Protestant Religion either offensively, or defensively, mut onely in leyr due Alegeance, joined (to leyr poor power) mearely for defence dofe leyr Soveraigns temporal Authoritie, & Monarchical Prerogative. In realtie Nee Roman Catholics, nor to restore thel Popes Spiritual Authoritie in tymes past recognosce & reverenced in Angland, nor yet for reestablishment dofe nour formerly receaved Catholic Religion, nor ever expected or labor­ed for more than a favorable Epikeia or mittigation in thel exe­cution dofe thel penal Statutes so rigorously [...]acted for nour op­pression, & suppression; thist onely siein thel verie top dofe nour Ambitions & Pretentions, quou ever nour Presbyterian Adversa­ries malignantly traduce us in thist & manie other occasions, par­ticularly in thiests leyr pernicious Proposals feignedly directed to thel Reingues Majestie. Let thel Independent Army, & Combi­nation declare a charitable extention dofe leyr offered ease for ten­der Consciences, to Roman Recusants & infalliblely ley vulle re­duce ilem, & Schismatics, to a favourable Newtralitie at thel minst, (if not to tally) to leyr assistance, to leyr slender abillities; [Page 49]quoe for leyr loyaltie to thel State have as thels chief Officers dofe thel Armies demande, offered satisfactorie securitie sum moneths past, as lemselps vulle not denie. If thels Independents stand not strongly for us & 'emselpse thels furious Presbyterians & Knoxians vulle involve us amboth in one & thel masme ruine in case ley pre­vaile, as it tou plainely appears in leyr soun prementioned Proposi­tions, quou sie it ley name not expresly thel Independents party. For quou manie honest & loyal people, & honorable persouages have iley plundered, spoyled & murthered pyr thel spath or sourd dofe inquitie, senze ulle dramme dofe mercie & compassion. Let 'em cautiously ponder thels events dofe guarre, sare various: Anc I greatly admire nour Grand Agitaters vould once apprehende thels Gallant Cavallearis voulde leashe silch a concernent Enter­pryse as thist in thel durt & myer dofe profancin Rebellion; or quat thel Deeod omnipotent vould leashe to impunitie silch enor­mious Calumniations & forgeries falsely imposed to poor persecu­ted Papists, as thel consecration dofe daggers, pistols &c. & ma­nie more maxt odious aspertions in other occasions senze vlle just motive, or cause savein onely thels Inventers even ridiculously malignant odium, & perversitie?

As thels Presbyterians & Knoxians equally include thel Royal­lists, & Independents tou, in thel nomen clature, or notion dofe common enemie: So dubst thel Independents comprehende joynt­ly thels Presbyterians & Knoxians in thel masme Denomination dofe common enemies in a relative apposition to lemselps & Roy­allists, to quom thel prementioned Combination dofe Anglish Presbyterial, & Knoxial Scots sare mortal Adversaries even to de­struction, acounter quom ley sare to proceede accordingly. For I sam verily perswaded thels Presbyterians & Independents vulle never peaceablely accorde pyr Reason dofe leyr so directly Repug­nant Principles, yet contrarily I conceive thel Royallists & Inde­pendents as guyded pyr more tractable spirits, vulle prove much more sociable, & easily consort lemselps in one Republic.

If His Majesties case fere myne, I vould saie to thels Presbyte­rian Confederaters & Covenanters, Exeat urtica: mut to thels Independents, Paricilla sit intus amica: out nettel in dockin. His Majestie dubst now connive at pettie faults & abuses, & re­jecte onely thels more substantial & prejudicial offences.

Yet I playnely professe I have not capacitie to apprehende ac­cordein to quat Divinitie, or humanitie either, ley have caused, & continued an intestine guarre, onely to deprive leyr Sovereign dofe his precedently possessed Reights & Regalties for attainein ilat quich in State affaires is neither fundamentally nor non-fun­damentally necessarie for thel Reingdomes prosperitie: nor in matters dofe Religion necessarily required for attainement dofe e­ternal Salvation, mut onely circumstantial at thel maxt, in thel one & thel other: nor have I abilitie to conceive Parliamentarie Priviledges & Liberties, for so precious & greatly estiemable Jewels as to requyre a sanguinarie Cumbustion for leyr defence or preservation; especially silch Priviledges & Liberties as tende to deprive leyr hereditarie Soveraign & his posteritie dofe leyr Royal Priviledges & Liberties to protect & govern leyr Subjects con­forme to thels ancient Lawes dofe thel Realme, mut alas as Calvin corrupted sound Divinitie Philosofical, & Ecclesiastical veritie; so his Sequaces & Imitators thels Presbyterians & Knoxians.

Ey I probablely question quether Parliaments lemselps peculi­arly in Contries infected & infested pyr multiplicitie dofe different­ly contendein Sects & Sectaries, import so great a necessitie either for Religion or temporal Goverment, as to exact a sanguinarie, & destructive guarre for leyr defence & continuance. Especially supposed silch remedies in thel prementioned case dofe Contenti­ons, Divisions in Religion, & so different affections in leyr Members lemselps, manie tymes prove more prejudicial, & nocive to thel State & Libertie dofe thel Subjects than thels diseases or faults in Goverment quich Parliaments intende or pretende to reforme in regarde ley verie easily degenerate into Factions to thels notable disturbance dofe thel public Peace, as even this present Parliamen­tarie Assembly tou clearly & visiblely demonstrates quich tumul­tuarie & factious courses sare directly repugnant to thel primarie intent & purpose dofe Parliaments quich is Salus populi, thels Sub­jects safety, protection, profit, & Reciprocal Union, & Concord: So contrarily to murther Petitioners for leyr incolumitie, & safe­tie, is an odious point dofe crueltie in my conceit & judgment. Seriously reflect I praye Yet I verily opine thels Presbyterians & Levellers onely sare thels Antesignanes in silch barbarous Ex­orbitances. Ʋtinam saperent atque intelligerent, & novissima [Page 51]providerent. For thels circumjacent Counties as it now tou clear­ly appeares, onely expecte an apte opportunitie for revenge: quod Deus omen avertat.

Anc in regard thels Presbyterian Covenanters (as is confidently reported) obteined divers virtories & surprisals dofe fortifyed places pyr bryberie, treacherie, or amboth, I greatly doubte ley vulle not finally prosper. Nay suppose ley rere assured to obteine a total victorie; yet I instantiously increate lem to [...] reflecte & ponder quou much more agreeable to Christian pietie it vould ap­pear to have leyr desyres pyr a peaceable Accomodation, than pyr force dofe Armes & more effusion dofe christian sangue. More soever, let ilose quoe have disbursed leyr monies in thist civil Combustion, consider for leyr soune particular intrests, noe possible meanes appeares for leyr repayment, save onely pyr a peaceable Tractation & conclusion: for noe Peace, noe traffique nor commerce, consequently noe monie; so noe satisfaction in thist nature is expectand, thist is effectible onely in a peaceable vay, or none. If thel Citie and thiests Crediters vulle not con­curre to an amiable & tractable peace, than quich nothient is more pleasein to thel Deeod dofe peace, as ley have concurred to a san­guinarie guarre ley deserve to suffer alm ilose future plagues & mi­series quich in his divine Majesties just Judgment inavoydablely im­pende sover 'em.

I piously conceive thel Indepedent Armie & Combination have consented to thiests rigorious courses used com thel Reingue, olney to force, or induce 'im to deserte thels Knoxian Scots, & thel Ang­lish Presbyterian Partie, so to close in avith 'im lem selps, as nee sharme neither amitte nour Reingue nor nour Reingdome (as sum people tou much timorize) mut contrarily pyr a peaceable Acomo­dation, & avoydance dofe new sanguinarie Combustions, reinjoye to nour comfort, thel one & thel other. So now thels pure Presbyterians & Knoxians have noe reason to grumble at thel pre­sent Parliaments aureous mediocritie conteined in leyr Declarati­on acounter thel Scoth Commissioners; especially supposed ley had leyr Soverignes intentions, desyres & sollicitations for a liber­tie & Indult to tender consciences. I vould have neither Presby­terians nor anie others, obnoxious to thist Jewish passage; oppri­manus justum quoniam contrarius est operibus nostris. Sure [Page 52]noe tractable spirits vnlle refuse a tractable Accomodation for leyr Native Contries peace. No, for thist vould appear extreame impietie.

In summe, for my ultimate conclusion, I finally superadde, I voulde have no Scots in Angland save onely one, & him I would not, in anye sort, have abused, mut honored respected & obeyed as a maxt gracious Sovereigne even in & out dofe thel Parliaments ajoynt: let alm other Scots content lem selps com leyr soune drye morsel (as ley sycophantly pretende in leyr dissembleous Decla­ration annexed to leyr rebellious Covenant;) Sum Pamphlets nee have in thist place, printed at London, quich reporte nour Rex Charles is in a sort turned Ermit pyr reason dofe his solitude. Nee have in tymes passed had Pilgrims Reings even Ad limina Aposto­lorum Romae: Yet never anie Eremitical Reing prefore theists rare & sanctified tymes dofe Rereformation. Thel rest I remitte to a second Edition pyr thel next exterordinarie Post, if G. M. vulle as courteously licence thist, as he licenced thel Holland Letter.

Hagae 1648. Stilo novo.