ANIMADVERSION upon Sect. I.

IN this first Section, we have a first-fruits of Mr. Love's Confidence in his death, together with a taste of that pleasant Fancy, on which (it seems) he fed with much contentment whilest he yet lived; viz. how honorable that Death which he was now to suffer would be unto him, as wherein he should parallel those great Worthies of heaven, Iohn the Baptist, Paul, and the Saints beheaded in the Revelation. Far be it from me to envy either Mr. Love's or any other man's confidence in their death. The great Desire and grand De­sign of my Soul is, to consult (with the utmost of my endeavors) the Confi­dence of men, yea of all men without exception, in, and at their death. But though I envy no mans confidence in death, yet I confess I pity the confidence of many at such a time; yea I pity many surviving, fearing lest the confidence of some dying, should prove a snare of death unto them. Mr. Love's confi­dence upon the Scaffold my soul pitieth, having so many and such pregnant grounds of Reason in mine eyes to judge it, if not hollow and heartless, yet bottomless and groundless; Yet I confess I pity those more, who through ig­norance of their grounds, live under much danger of being ensnared and hard­ned in evil, by occasion of the said confidence: For when evil doers (especial­ly the first-born of this generation, Traitors) shall without repentance, and this some ways professed, die full of confidence in God, whether real or pre­tended, it is a sore temptation upon men, not to be so tender or fearful of such [Page 33] practices, as the hatred and high displeasure of God against them, admonish­eth them to be. Therefore, for the sakes of such persons who are in danger of being made confident in evil by Mr. Love's confidence at his death, I shall brief [...]y account unto them the grounds of my great jealousie and fear, that this confidence was (as the Apostle speaketh) in the face onely, and not in the heart; or if in the heart, yet without any substantial or sufficient ground for the raising of it.

1. The holy Ghost himself mustereth Traitors, Heady, High-minded, per­sons without natural affection, amongst such men who have [i. e. sometimes have, or may have] the Form of Godliness, and yet deny the power thereof. Now though Mr. Love and his Abettors in their equivocal Dialect, wherein like Canters, they use common and familiar words in uncouth and unknown sig­nifications, will not (it's like) call men of his [Mr. Love's] practices and ways, either Traitors, Heady, High-minded, without natural affection, &c. yet in the ordinary and best known signification of these terms, and in the sense wherein the holy Ghost useth them (unless they will quarrel our English Translation) he was both Traitor, Heady, &c. and so look'd upon and ad­judged, by persons who are not wont to pervert or wrest words into by-signi­fications to make the innocent guilty. I do not speak now of the Parliament, Councel of State, or High Court of Justice onely, but of all sorts of persons in the Land, who have not either their hand or their heart in Mr. Love's coun­sels and practices. I mention those whom the Apostle terms [...], with­out natural affection, in reference to Mr. Love, because it was the observation of some who were present at his Execution from first to last, that though he prayed for his fellow-Traitor and the Scots, not onely the profess'd, but highly exprest Enemies of his Countrey and Nation, yet he made not the least men­tion either of his wife or children, either in his Prayer or Discourse. Now if Mr. Love at his death was no better then a person having the Form of Godli­ness, but denying the power thereof, there was no good ground for that his con­fident rejoycing therein.

2. The Lord Christ saith expresly, That if we forgive not men their trespas­ses, neither will our Heavenly Father forgive us our trespasses. Now though Mr. Love pretends fairness and clearness of spirit in this kinde again and again, and that he brought no rancor or revengefulness of heart to the Scaf­fold; yet that he was inwardly full of this rottenness, his most venemous, vi­rulent, false and bitter Insinuations against the Parliament and State, uttered upon the Scaffold, testifie to the face of his greatest Advocates: See especially upon this account Sect. 12 where you will finde him so unchristianly, and with such insufferable rancor and malice inveighing against the State, that one of the present Magistrates, acknowledged by Mr. Love himself (and not with­out [Page 34] cause) a good Friend of his, openly professed that he was not able to en­dure it. Now if Mr. Love died upon such terms, that his Heavenly Father could not, according to his expresly declared will, forgive him his trespasses, cer­tainly he could have no sufficient ground for that confidence which he expres­sed at his death.

3. We read in Scripture of many confidences and rejoycings in men, and these Professors, without sufficiency of ground to justifie or bear them out. Paul speaks of some who gloried [...], in the face, or in appearance, not in the heart. And our Savior himself speaketh of many, who (as he saith) will say unto him [i. e. think at present that they may with confidence say unto him] in that [great] day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy Name? and in thy Name cast out devils? and in thy Name done many wonderful works? To whom notwithstanding he will reply and profess, that he never knew them: De­part from me ye that work iniquity, Mat. 7. 22, 23.

4. Mr. Love did not, could not at his death out-confidence the ordinary sort of Papists, Priests and Jesuits amongst us, that have from time to time drunk of the same cup with him (as well as John Baptist or Paul) and upon the same account, in which particular John Baptist and Paul separate from him (as we shall see presently) and leave him in the company of those other.

5. It is no very hard matter for a man strongly acted and assisted by a spi­rit of popularity (a spirit with which Mr. Love hath been observed by many to have been one spirit or flesh rather, for many years past) to harden himself against the fear of Death; to suppress, smother and keep under those work­ings of Nature and Conscience, which ordinarily discover themselves upon the approaches of Death, in such persons who have no design to drive by the smo­thering or suppressing of them; nor any collateral help or aid from any such spirit, to enable them to the subduing and vanquishing of them.

6. Mr. Love (it is more then probable) was not onely vehemently exhort­ed, encouraged, importuned, but even solemnly by all the sacred Interests of high Presbytery, conjured by his Clergy-companions, to die like a valiant and resolute Champion of the Cause, and not to bewray the least grudging of any fear or repentance, for any thing he had acted upon the service thereof; lest it should be said of Presbytery, Her glory was stained and betrayed by the cow­ardice of her first-born.

Seventhly (and lastly) when I consider these passages in Mr. Love's Prayer, [Sect. 30.] O blessed Jesus, apply thy blood, not onely for my Justification unto life, but also for the comfort, for the quieting of my Soul, that so I might be in the joys of Heaven, before, &c. And farther, Hear the Prayers of all thy people that have been made for thy servant; and though thou hast denied Prayer as to the particular Request concerning my life, yet let herein the fruit of prayer be [Page 35] seen, that thou wilt bear up my heart against the fear of death; When (I say) I seriously consider the express import of these passages, they raise this appre­hension in me, (and questionless upon the same terms they will raise the same in any other man) that Mr. Love's confidence was not at least as yet (I mean in the entrance and beginning of his Speech) ascended so high in his heart and soul, as his tongue reported it unto the people. When Saul was dead, David prayed no more for deliverance from him. And if Christ (as Mr. Love him­self confesseth) denied Prayer concerning his life, why might he not deny it as concerning the quieting of his soul, and the bearing up of his heart against the fear of Death? And if this be granted, evident it is that M ^r Love did but [...], theatrically act the part of a Confident man upon the Scaffold.

Several other things there are, which much dis-satisfie me touching the le­gitimacy and well-groundedness of M ^r Love's rejoycing and confidence at his death, which I shall not at present (for brevities sake) mention: How mat­ters stood between God and his Soul at his giving up of the Ghost, is a secret too hard for my soul to enter into. I had rather hope (as M ^r Ash said unto him) that he made a Christian end: nor do I desire to leave any touch or tincture of a contrary impression in any man; My whole intent in what hath been said hitherto, is to put that confidence to rebuke which he brought with him to the Scaffold, not to prove that he died in unbelief.

Concerning that vain-glorious and light Conceit, That his Death should turn to such an high Account of Honor unto him, because John Baptist and Paul glorified God by the same death, and because he read of Saints to be behead­ed, &c. I shall speak little to it, supposing that it weighs no more then the dust of the Ballance in the Judgement of any considering man. M ^r Love well knew, that it is not poena, but causa, quae facit Martyrem, not the punishment (much less the kinde of punishment) that makes a Martyr; Which makes me a little to marvel with what face he could say (as afterwards we shall hear him saying) That whatsoever men may judge, yet he died a Martyr. Iohn Baptist was be­headed, not simply for his Conscience, or for the discharge of his Conscience, but for the discharge of his Conscience, being honest and good, and rightly in­formed: Whereas M ^r Love suffered a beheading, if for the discharge of his Conscience (which I think to considering men must needs be very question­able) yet was it for the discharge of an erroneous conscience (as his Petition­ers themselves pleaded by way of extenuation of his Crime) yea, indeed of a conscience so desperate erroneous and corrupt, that the like conscience hath scarce been heard of, no not among the Heathen themselves (much less among Christians) viz. That a man stands bound, in stead of being subject to the Powers that are (which is the express Commandment of God) to destroy or practice the destruction of these Powers: So that M ^r Love's conscience for [Page 36] which (as he saith) he suffered, being truly interpreted, was such a conscience by which he judged himself bound to act in a Diametral opposition to the plain and express revealed Will of God; And whether such a conscience as this be a Christian foundation of Martyrdom, let M ^r Love's greatest Friends judge. Concerning Paul and the Saints spoken of in the Revelation, they were beheaded for the Word of God, and for the testimony of Iesus; Whereas M ^r Love (as himself acknowledged in his Narrative written with his own hand, and delivered unto the Parliament) was to suffer beheading (in case he should not obtain pardon from them) for his sundry and great Offences; confessing with­al, that by what he had done, he was an object of their just displeasure: and a­gain, that by their justice they might in one day leave a Flock without a Shep­herd a Wife without an Husband, Children without a Father, &c. Doubtless neither Paul nor the Saints mentioned by M. Love, were objects of the just displeasure of those who beheaded them; nor were they beheaded for their sundry and great Offences, nor yet by the justice of those who punished them with death. Therefore M. Love being partaker with Iudas in his sin, the cause of his death, can reap no honor for having Iohn or Paul, or the Saints his com­panions in the kinde of his death: And indeed, might he not as well (yea and much better, all this duly considered) have prophesied of shame and dishonor likely to acrue unto him by such a kinde of death, which had been frequently inflicted upon Papists, Priests and Iesuits for treasonable practices against the State and Supream Rulers thereof, as indulge himself with a conceit, That his death must needs become a Crown of Honor unto him, because Iohn Baptist and the great Apostle Paul died the same kinde of death, though (as the world knoweth) upon far different occasions?

ANIMAD. upon Sect. 2.

In this Section Mr. Love busieth himself in washing a Blackamoor, hoping by that time he hath done, to make him as white as Snow: That he suffereth for the Word, and Conscience, and not for medling in State-matters; he proves, 1. Because it is an old guise of the Devil, to impute the cause of Gods Peoples Sufferings, to be Contrivements against the State. 2. Because the Rulers of Israel would have put Jeremy to death upon a Civil account, whereas the true ground was the truth of his Prophesie, and that this made them angry with him. 3. Because Paul, though he did but preach Christ, yet the people would have him dye, under a pretence that he a was mover of Sedition. 4. (And lastly) because himself saith, That his Life is pretended to be taken away upon a Civil account, whereas it is indeed, because he pursueth his Covenant, will not prostitute his Principles, &c. Light and darkness have (in a maner) as much communion between them, as the three first of these Arguments with his Cause; For, is any guise of the Devil whatsoever, a Demonstration or proof [Page 37] of Mr. Loves Innocency, or that he must needs suffer for the Word and Con­science, and not for Statizing out of his Sphaer? Who is able to finde out the Quadrature of this Circle? Or must Mr. Love needs be innocent of the Crimes charged upon him, and proved against him; because Ieremy and Paul were in­nocent from those Imputations, which without any proof at all were charged upon them? Or must those Magistrates, who, being persons of known godli­ness and worth (at least a great part of them) yea, and Mr. Loves real and cordial Friends (most of them) upon Tryal found Mr. Love guilty, and passed Sentence upon him accordingly; must these (I say) of necessity be Corrupt, Malicious, Enemies to the Truth and Word of God, because the Rulers of Israel, with whom Ieremy had to do, and the people with whom Paul had to do, were of no better Principles or Temper? Certainly, neither Satan, nor Ieremy, nor Paul, nor their Adversaries, are any Legal or Rational Compur­gators for Mr. Love in his Cause now in Agitation: Indeed if he, or any Ad­vocate for him, could as substantially prove, as he confidently asserts, that which follows in the fourth place, viz. That his life was pretended (I suppose he would rather have said, intended, though neither would be very proper) to be taken away because he pursues his Covenant, and will not prostitute his Con­science to the ambition and lusts of men, this would amount somewhat near to a Proof of his Conclusion: But alas! for him to affirm such things as these, not onely without any sufficient, yea, or tolerable proof, or colour of proof, but even against his own Concessions and Confessions (in his Narrative speci­fied under the former Section, wherein he pretends over and over to Inge­nuity) proves nothing else, but that either he wanteth ingenuity, or the know­ledge of his own heart, or both; when he spake (§. 4.) thus, God is my re­cord, whom I serve in the Spirit, I speak the truth, I lye not, I do not bring a revengeful heart to the Scaffold this day, &c. I marvel what the man means by a revengeful Heart, Rancor, bitterness of Spirit, Animosity, &c. Surely he is a Barbarian unto me, and speaks a Language which I understand not: To charge Ingenuous and Conscientious men with taking away his life because he pursues his Covenant, will not prostitute his Principles and Conscience to the ambition and lusts of men (with much more of like strain, of which afterwards) is in my understanding, as pregnant as express a Symptome of a revengeful Heart, Rancor, &c. as a person in his condition is lightly capable of. Can (saith Bildad in Iob) the Rush grow without mire? Or is it possible that such virulency and viperousness of words as those, should proceed from any other Principle, but from an heightned spirit of Rancor, Bitterness and Revenge? But what Article in Mr. Loves Covenant was it, for his pursuit whereof his Life was taken from him? Is there, was there any such Article in this Covenant, by which he stood in conscience bound to trinket with the declared and pro­fessed [Page 38] Enemies of the State and Nation, to attempt the undermining or di­sturbing of the present Government here, by Correspondencies and Commu­nication of Councels with Forreign States? Or was it for any thing else, but such accursed Practices as these, and that proved against him by many witnesses, yea, and confessed in his Narrative by himself, that his Life was taken from him? When I compare those Passages in his Narrative (which he would it seems have looked upon as a Masterpiece of Ingenuity) wherein he owns the Iustice of the Parliament, confesseth himself an Object of their just displeasure, craves pardon for his sundry and great Offences, &c. with the words lately men­tioned, and many others of like strain in the sequel of this Speech, wherein he justifieth himself in the highest, makes himself a Saint in what he had done; a Martyr, in what he should suffer, chargeth his Judges and the State with per­secuting him for the Word of God; his Conscience, for not prostituting his Principles and Conscience to their Ambition and Lusts (with several other ex­pressions of a like Hellish import) I cannot but stand amazed at the searedness and debauchery of the Conscience of the man, or how it should ever enter into his heart to think of being honorable in his death, who thus notoriously and desperately prevaricated with his own former ingenious Confessions at the time of his death: Either let one or other of his Friends or Advocates name what Principle it was, one or more; for the non-prostitution whereof to the ambition and lusts of men, he was adjudged to death, and make it good, that it was for such a non-prostitution that he was thus adjudged; or else the world shall have ground in abundance to believe That Mr. Love acted the part of a most Unchristian Calumniator upon the Scaffold in the very approaches of death.

ANIMAD. upon Sect. 3.

Here we have the second part of the Theatrical flashy flourishes of Mr. Loves confidence: But strange it is, that such virulent and desperate ca­lumnies as he had breathed out from his soul in the words immediately pre­ceding, should be seconded with such confidential raptures and gloryings as these. Is the exercising of revenge upon his enemies, the rise and bottom of Mr. Loves confidence in God? Doubtless Mr. Love here sacrificed to an un­known God: But the copyhold of his confidence hath been touched already; whereas he assumeth unto himself the honor of having been an Instrument in the Church-Pulpit of bringing others to Heaven, it is well if he stretcheth not himself beyond his line. Whether he hath brought any to Heaven, or no, I know not, possibly it may so be: But certain I am, that of later times he hath brought many to some Hellish practises. The several happy changes which here he promiseth unto himself, I could with more liberty of Faith have be­lieved might be performed unto him, had he not so lately made that unhappy [Page 39] change of an humble Penitentiary and Confessor of his sin, into an haughty and stubborn justifier of himself, and calumniator of other men. How his Speech upon the Scaffold should bring glory to God in any other sence, then that wherein (in the Apostles phrase) The lie of men aboundeth to his glory, I under­stand not. I hear that one who was present at it, openly said, That there was more Divinity in Canterburies death then his (or words to such an effect;) and that another having heard the said Speech, brake out in these or the like words: Lord have mercy upon us, what shall we say, or do, when men will (or dare) tell lies at their death.

ANIMAD. upon Sect. 4.

In this Section we have a most worthy and Christian Profession, as far as the interest of words can lightly contribute towards it. O that there had been an heart in the Professor to have given a real account of Truth in this his verbal Profession. But alass! The same Fountain, though not out of the same hole, which sends forth these sweet Waters here, sends forth most bitter Waters elsewhere, as we have tasted in part, and may taste further afterwards. Doth Mr. Love think that either God or men, will judge such a man to be free from all rancor, all bitterness of spirit, a revengeful heart, that he hath forgiven from his heart his worst enemies, &c. Who loveth all words that may do them mischief, who cuts them with his Tongue as with a sharp Razor, who spits out of his mouth the poyson of Aspes in their very Faces, and at the time of his going out of the world, is more intent and bent in his spirit (as far as a rea­sonable estimate can be made) to leave them an inheritance of Hatred, Igno­miny, Trouble, and of all maner of mischiefs, and evil intreaties from the world, then upon any other design whatsoever? whereas he seems desirous to disparage his Enemies (as he calls them) in comparison of himself in this, That though they denied mercy unto him, yet he had begged mercy for them; and though they would not forgive him, yet he had forgiven them; the truth is, That even this also is no better then a slander: For upon what ground could he judg, That they had not as well begged mercy for him, as he for them? Or did they therefore deny him mercy, or not forgive him, because they executed the Laws of God, with the execution whereof they were entrusted? I believe they forgave him in such a sence as he forgave them; and if so, they forgave him much more then he them. I presume Mr. Love forgave them onely such debts as they had contracted by injuring him, not what they had contracted by sinning against God: If so, then all that Mr. Love forgave them, amounts to nothing at all; and this by his own confession (a little before) who ac­knowledged the Justice of their proceedings against him: Therefore if they forgave him (as I presume in charity they did) the debt which he had con­tracted by injuring them, their forgiveness of him was much more Christian [Page 40] and worthy then his of them. But the forgiveness of the debt which he had contracted by sinning against the Laws of God, the just Laws of the Land (so acknowledged by himself) the peace of the Nation, the lives of other men, by the non-execution of Justice, he had no reason to expect at their hands, considering that they are the Ministers of God to take vengeance on them that do evil, Rom. 13. 4.

ANIMAD. upon Sect. 5.

If Mr. Love may be his own Judge, nothing capital was sufficiently proved against him: Allow him his own sence of the words, capital and sufficiently, and possibly he may be innocent. But the High Court of Justice, though a great part (I think I might say, the greatest) of the Members of it, were very real friends to him, and their hearts much set to have holpen him out of the bryars, as far as Justice and a good Conscience would give way, were not of Mr. Loves minde touching his Innocency; yea Mr. Love in his Narrative was not of the same minde (in this point) with himself here; How he came by so much Innocency between the time of his exhibiting the said Narrative to the Parliament, and the time of his coming to the Scaffold, his best Advocate (I suspect) would be ashamed to declare. Innocency is not contracted by obsti­nacy, or by the greatest confidence in denial of the Truth. Mr. Love when he ingenuously (as himself professed) acknowledged the Justice of the Parliament in their proceedings against him, did plainly enough confess that the Proof a­gainst him, was not empty, but as high and full as the Charge it self. Those Expressions, That no witness proved that ever he writ a Letter or directed any man to write a Letter into Scotland, &c. plainly prove him to have been more cautelous then chaste: and that he walked all along with his fellows in their unhallowed practices, under the protection of that Motto, Si non castè, tamen cautè. He that desires to know more particularly how Mr. Love with the rest of his fellow Trinketers, divided their thoughts and endeavors between doing of mischief on the one hand, and the keeping themselves out of danger, what mischief soever they should do on the other hand, may receive satisfacti­on onely by a perusal of the six and seven pages of a small Discourse lately published under the title of, A short Plea for the Commonwealth; whereas he affirmeth, That all that was sworn against him, was, That he was present when Letters were read, and that he made a motion to give Money to Massey, is a most shameless and horrid untruth, as appears by the Depositions of several Witnesses against him. Captain Potter deposed, That he carried the Letters sent from Bampfield, from Argile, Loudon, Lothian, Belcarris, and another from a nameless person (supposed to be Mr. Baily) to Mr. Love to take ad­vice upon them. This Letter had the letter L endorsed upon it, whereupon this Captain Potter conceived it to have been intended to Mr. Love, and there­fore [Page 41] carried it to him. This witness further deposed, That Mr. Love himself and Mr. Jaquel read those Letters that were opened, and opened the others al­so and read them likewise, and discoursed of them, and upon advice resolved to do nothing in it (the business negotiated in these Letters.) This is more then that All, which Mr. Love affirmeth was sworn against him. The same witness yet further deposed, That Mr. Love and Dr. Drake were appointed to draw up a Letter to be sent into Scotland to Col. Bampfield, and that this Letter was left at his shop, and that he apprehended that it came from Mr. Love. This is yet more then Mr. Loves All. Major Robert Huntington (another witness) deposed, That a Question being moved about a Commission to be sent into Holland to the Lord Willoughby of Parham, Col. Graves, Massey, and others; what power they had to give or send such a Commission, Mr. Drake answered, We have the Kings Command for it, and the Authority of some secluded Parliament men, which I look upon as the Power beyond that now sitting: Whereupon Mr. Love replied, Come, come, let it go. This is not sim­ply more, but much more (in import and weightiness of crime) then what Mr. Love affirmeth was sworn against him. Instance might be given in sundry particulars besides these deposed upon Oath against him by other the Wit­nesses, whereby Mr. Love may be evicted not to have been so consciencious or tender of speaking nothing but Truth, as becomes a Minister of the Gospel, especially at such a time, when he is called immediately to give up an account of his Stewardship to his great Lord and Master, with whom there is no place for any man that loveth and maketh a lye, Revel. 22. 15.

ANIMAD. upon Sect. 6.

We heard (§. 1.) that M. Love pleased himself much with his Conformity to John Baptist in the kinde of his death (though he was conformable to Iu­das in the occasion and cause of his death) here to make his face to shine like the Sun in the eyes of weak and dim-sighted men; he conforms himself to Christ himself in his Accusers; although herein also he much forgets himself in calling those Christs Accusers, whom the Evangelists call Witnesses. What he affirmeth that he may without vanity or falshood say of his, whether wit­nesses or accusers, as far as my Informations, which I judge competent in the case, do extend, he cannot affirm without both. I never heard of any disa­greement between them in the least about any thing relating to M. Love, much less of any of them contradicting himself; Nor do I know any sufficient ground to believe that one of them should in writing pray him to forgive him the wrong he had done him, or that he told him any such story as he relates; considering first that (§. 8.) he tells an untruth of the same kinde, as viz. that on the night before his Execution, there was an insulting Letter written unto him to tell him, that after he was dead, there should be something published a­gainst [Page 42] him to his shame: The Letter he speaks of, not having the least touch or savor of any insultation, nor threatning any thing to be published to his shame after his death, but was grave and sober, full of love and respects to him, as an unpartial perusal of it will inform any man, (it being since printed by the Author upon occasion of such an unchristian aspersion cast upon it by M. Love. Secondly, that none of his Accusers (as he terms them) or Witnesses, did te­stifie any thing against him, but what (as far as I understand) they stand by and own to this hour; no nor any thing (to my best remembrance) that makes more against him then his own Narrative and Confessions here. Third­ly, Because what he immediately subjoyns (towards the close of this Se­ction) I have reason in abundance to believe is absolutely false; as viz. That some of his Witnesses were terrified, others hired, some fined before they would testifie against him: For though a Fine was pronounced to be imposed on one of them, which after upon his conformity was omitted, yet it was not before he would, i.e. was willing to testifie against him: For this he freely offered in Court to do before his Fining: Nor was he fined for refusing to testifie against M. Love, being ready enough (as was said) to do this without fining, but for refusing to take an Oath according to the Law justly provided in such cases. But for him to affirm that any of his Witnesses were either terrified, or hired, in order to the drawing of any Testimony from them against him, was to wrong his Conscience at such a time, when it most nearly concerned him to have been most tender of it. He hath Friends and Favorers surviving in great numbers, many of them men of learning and parts, and that know how to inform themselves, of any thing that is like to make for his Vindication; One or more of these shall do the office of a friend to his Name and Memory, by engaging themselves to make due proof of what he here affirmeth, viz. That some of his Witnesses were terrified, others, &c. that so the blot and shame of a miscarrying tongue may not test upon him. Fourthly, Because by reason of his swallowing even Camels of untruth so frequently and familiarly as he doth in this Discourse, I have ground to be jealous (at least) lest as the conscience of the Iesuit is moulded into this principle, that it is lawful to say or do things otherwise unlawful, in ordine ad bonum spirituale; so Mr. Love's conscience stood free and large in him, to speak and do almost any thing in ordine ad bo­num Presbyteriale. Fifthly (and lastly) Because M. Love was rooted to the center of the Earth, and built up to the midst of Heaven in such a Princi­ple in Divinity, which gives fair quarter to the foulest practices that are, in the Saints especially, when they certainly know they shall die presently, viz. that no perpetration of sin and wickedness whatsoever, can separate those from the love of God in Christ, who have at any time believed in him.

ANIMAD. upon Sect. 7.

I never met with so many senceless and unsavory Contradictions within so small a compass, as in this Speech: How can Mr. Love say that he will not judge his Judges, nor yet justifie them, when as in the words immediately following, he must of necessity either do the one or the other: For, if he supposeth the Oath, for the sake whereof his Judges (as he saith) cut off his head, to have been justifiable or lawful, and they by the tenor and band of this Oath stood bound to do what they did in cutting off his Head, then he clearly justifieth them; if he supposeth either the said Oath to have been unlawful, or their Fact in cutting off his Head to have been besides, or contrary to this Oath, and that they had no Ingagement upon them otherwise to do it, then he judgeth them. But the truth is, we can upon no better or more favorable account ease Mr. Love in the greatest part of things uttered by him in this Speech, then by conceiving that the words spoken by him, bear a far differing sence and signification in his understanding, from that which they bear in ours: For, what is it to judge in our sence of the Word, then to charge with Inju­stice, Unrighteousness, acting contrary to the Word or Laws of God? And whither Mr. Love doth not again and again, and seven times over (in this dis­course) thus charge his Judges, I refer to his Friends themselves to judge and determine: Therefore in the ordinary acception of the word, Judge, when Mr. Love saith, he will not judge his Judges, he speaks besides the Truth: And though here he refuseth to justifie them, yet when the Spirit of Ingenuity was upon him (as himself once and again professeth it was, in the Composure of his Narrative) he did fairly and fully justifie them, as we have already heard, and is further manifest in the Narrative it self Printed herewith. By the way; of how sad and bleeding a consideration is it, that a man whose heart served him to be ingenuous in his life, should quench so Christian a Spirit, and suffer himself to be hardened at the time of his death. Besides, did he not fully justifie his Judges in his last Petition to the Parliament, in these words: He humbly acknowledgeth that he hath so highly violated the Laws of the Common­wealth, as that thereby he hath rendred himself guilty of the Sentence of death justly passed on him by the High Court of Justice? The words immediately pre­ceding these, are of a like import.

ANIMAD. upon Sect. 8.

I shall say little upon this Section, having already given notice how un­truly and unchristianly he calls the Letter here specified, an insulting Letter. Yet to say, that it was written to him for such an end as here he chargeth it with, viz. To tell him that after he was dead something should be published against him, &c. as if this had been either the onely or the principal drift of the Let­ter, is much more dis-ingenuous. I presume there is no man that shall please [Page 44] to read this Letter (being since printed) but will acknowledge the drift and scope of it to have been honorable and Christian, and not unworthy the best and dearest Friend M. Love had.

ANIMAD. upon Sect. 9, 10, 11, 12.

M. Love here instanceth five Aspersions laid upon him in point of practice. As for those of Extortion and Adultery, I never so much as heard M. Love, and either of them, named together. I will not say that M. Love prudentially sub­jecteth himself to such aspersions, from which he knows he can sufficiently purge himself. But he that lyeth under a suspition of several Crimes, and is able fully to assert his innocency in respect of any one or more of them, gains an advantage hereby to make the purgation of himself from the rest the more cre­ditable. Concerning Murther; neither did I ever hear this formally, or in the letter of it, laid to his charge; But that in his Communications with the King of Scots, and other persons of his adherency, declared Enemies to the State and Government of this Commonwealth, he was eminently and tran­scendently a murtherer, hath been sufficiently proved against him upon oath, by many witnesses; yea his own Confessions in his Narrative and Petitions do not fall much short of such a proof. Therefore whereas (§. 11.) he traduceth those who charge him with the guilt of that blood, which hath been spilt in the pre­sent Wars between the two Nations; that they do by him as Nero did by the Christians, &c. (a notion suggested by the same spirit of Revenge unto his fel­low Gibbons also) he deals by them as Potiphar's wife did by her servant Joseph, who being incontinent her self, accused him of incontinency to his Lord, because he refused to gratifie her lust. M. Love, Mr. Gibbon, and the rest of their Asso­ciation being desirous that this State, and those in present power amongst us, should condescend to their impolitique Principles and Humors, in admitting the Scotish King to a monarchical Throne over this Nation, and herein to own a Scotisb Superintendency over them and the Nation; and they refusing to comport with them in such their lusts and desires, and attempting by the best, and (indeed) the onely means they had to withstand the said King in his claim to the English Throne, together with the Scotish Nation (his imperious and proud Abettors in this his Claim) upon this Account, and this onely, Mr. Love and M. Gibbon charge the Blood that hath been spilt in the present Wars be­tween the Nations, upon the State and present Powers amongst us. Let the world, if there be a part of it yet unbewitched and capable of judging, give Sentence, in case there be blood spilt between a company of Thieves, and a like party of harmless Travellers by the way, upon occasion of an Assault made by the former upon the latter, whether the spilling of this blood be to be char­ged upon the latter or the former. Nor let any Advocate either for M. Love or M. Gibbon, think to justifie them in their imputation of the said blood spilt, [Page 45] upon the State or men in present power, by pretending that they sent an Army into Scotland, and made war upon the said King and Scotish Nation, before they attempted any thing against this: For evident it was, and is, circum­stances purporting hostility in that Nation against this, standing as then they did, that the warlike Preparations and Levies at this time on foot and hasten­ed in that Nation, sorely threatned and endangered this; So that the war since breaking out between the two Nations, was not occasioned (or properly be­gun) by the English Army sent into Scotland, but by those Levies and formid­able Preparations for War, which the Scotish King and Nation were advan­cing with an high hand, before the said English Army came amongst them: Nor is there the least colour or pretext of Reason to think, that in case the said Army had not entred the Scotish Territories, the War hereby might have been prevented; because the Scotish Nation was now big with this bloody birth, ready to cry out and to be delivered, when the said Army entred. All that can reasonably be imputed to the entrance of the English Army into Scot­tish quarters before their entrance into English, is & was, That Scotland by this means became the Seat of the War, which otherwise England must have been. It is the opinion and judgement of Civilians (generally) That men may law­fully make War when they fear, lest themselves should be warred upon. We ought not (saith Albericus Gentilis a learned Civilian in Oxford in Queen Elizabeth's days, we ought not) to expect present Force: it is more safe if we meet with that which is future; with much more to this purpose transcribed by M. Prynne in his third Part of the Soveraign Power of Parliaments and Kingdoms, cap. 14. where a judicious Reader may receive plenary satisfaction, not simply concern­ing the Lawfulness, but also the Necessity of the Parliaments sending an Army into Scotland, under such circumstances as then ruled. So that it was unworthiness of spleen and revenge both in M. Love and M. Gibbons (though they be both great pretenders to meekness and clearness of spirit towards their Adversaries) not goodness of Conscience that prompted them upon the Scaffold with this imputation against those whom they call their Adversaries, viz. That they are the men upon whose heads the blood spilt between the two Nations resteth. And as the high Priest with the chief Priests took it very hainously at the hand of the Apostles, that they should charge them with the crucifying of Christ; (Ye have filled Jerusalem, say they, with your Doctrine, and intend to bring this mans blood upon us:) So do M. Love and his fellows swell with indignation against those, who entitle them to the late blood-shed between the Nations, though their title in this kinde be as unquestionable, as that of the Priests to the crucifying of Christ. It cannot upon any tolerable account of Reason be said, That had not the English Army entred Scotland, no blood between the Nations had been spilt: but it may upon a very lively and pregnant account [Page 46] be said, That had not M. Love, M. Gibbons, with the rest of the Conspiracy tampered the King of Scots into an Agreement with that Nation by solemn promissory engagement of themselves and their Party in England, to stand by him upon that condition, and by signifying unto him and his Party their disaf­fections to the present Government, this blood had not been shed. And this I have credibly heard to be the acknowledged soul-perswasion of one of the greatest and ablest parts amongst the Conspirators. The Conclusion here is, That both M. Love and M. Gibbon wash their hands from blood with very foul water, and which defiles them yet more, when they burthen their Adver­saries (so called by them) with that guilt which sticks so fast and close unto themselves, and is the fruit, not of the Ambition and Lusts of their Adversaries, but of their own.

Whereas in purging himself from the Aspersion of Lying, he saith thus, I hope you will believe a dying man, who dare not look God in the face with a lie in his mouth, intimating, as if his being ready to die, was a bridle in his lips to re­strain him from lying; the truth is, according to that principle of his (former­ly mentioned) that he, who ever once truly believed, can never by any sin or wickedness whatsoever lose the love and favor of God; his being ready to die in conjunction with a perswasion of his Saintship, should rather be a temptation upon him to lie or commit any other wickedness, then an engagement upon him to refrain lying: For in case he were in hope of living still in the world, and should practice lying or any other sin, he had cause to fear, that though God would not cast him out of his saving Love for such practices, yet he might, and would severely punish him otherwise. But when a person of such a principle certainly knows that he shall presently die, he hath no ground to fear any pu­nishment at all from God, for whatsoever he shall now either say or do, be­cause death (according to the said principle) delivers him for ever out of his hand. Nor am I free from all Jealousie, but that the Principle I speak of had some malignant inf [...]uence upon M. Love's spirit, in many of those unworthy strains and misdemeanors which proceeded from him at his death. Whereas he pleads to that particular indictment of lying, insisted upon by himself, That what he denied before the High Court of Justice, he neither afterwards confessed himself, nor was it proved by others against him; very possibly, in his equivocal sence of the words, denying, proving and confessing, that which he pleads may be true: But M. Love, had he been ingenuous when he was before a Court of Judicature, where the common and known Dialect of the Law useth to be spo­ken, and where critical and captious Formalities of speech are not expected, he should have denied onely such things, which according to a Law-sense of the words used by him, he could truly have denied. Upon these terms he could neither have denied that he ever wrote Letter to the King, Queen, Church [Page 47] or State of Scotland; nor yet that he never received any Letter, &c. Because in the Law-signification of the words, writing Letters, they are as well said to write Letters, who are either advising or consenting to, or directing in the writing of them, as they who write them with a Pen: And I presume, That if any man aspersed Mr. Love with the Crime of Lying, in this particular, by ly­ing, they meant equivocating, and so used the milder term of the two in their Charge. But whereas he presently saith, That he came [meaning to die upon the Scaffold] onely for moving for money for Massey, and for being present when Letters were read, &c. How notorious an untruth this is, hath been already shewed; where we found Matters of a far higher Nature proved against him then these: But I cannot but tremble to meet with those words from his mouth, That for the things I am condemned, neither doth God, nor my own Con­science condemn me; When I compare them with words coming from himself, both in his Narrative and Petition a few days before; In his Narrative (as was formerly observed) he acknowledged once and again the Justice of the Parlia­ment, in their Proceedings against him: In his Third Petition, he professeth himself unfeignedly sorrowful for his violating the Laws of this Commonwealth: In his Fourth and last, he hath these words, The consideration whereof [speak­ing of the Grace of the Parliament in his Reprieval] melteth the heart of your Petitioner, and maketh him, after a more narrow search into his heart and ways, more deeply sensible then ever of his sin against God, and more sorrowful for his High Crimes and Offences against the Parliament in his late and great miscarri­ages, &c. Doth not God condemn sin committed against him, as well in Mr. Love, as in other men? Or was Mr. Love Antinomianized at his death, hold­ing that God seeth no sin in believers? Or however, was Mr. Loves Consci­ence so desperately now hardned, as not to condemn him for high Crimes, and great Miscarriages? If his meaning were, That God had pardoned the sins for which he was brought to the Scaffold, and in this respect did not condemn him for them; or that his Conscience, notwithstanding these sins, did not con­demn him for an Hypocrite, nulli fidian, or the like, the words were nothing but a meer delusion of the people.

When he comes to wash off the aspersion of his being a man of a turbu­lent spirit, (§ 12.) How notoriously (and indeed senslesly) doth he prevari­cate with his Cause in hand, doing like a man that should with an importune confidence assert his Chastity; and yet immediately commit the crime of A­dultery in the very face of those, before whom he had endeavored such a Vindication of himself? For who is a man of a turbulent spirit, but he that seeks and sets himself to divide between Rulers, and those that ought to live in subjection unto them, by alienating the mindes and affections of the one from the other: Upon which, there must needs follow an interruption and distur­bance [Page 48] of the Political Harmony and Accord in the State and Commonwealth? Or what course can be taken by any man of a most desperate Consequence, for the firing of the spirits of People, with Hatred and Revenge against their Governors, then to accuse them of Usurpation of their Power on the one hand, and with the Administration of it with Injustice and Cruelty on the other; and withal to labor to possess the people with a conceit, That God hath determined to cast them out of the possession of their Power with Igno­miny and Shame? Or are not these words of Mr. Loves, Those who have gotten power into their hands by policy, &c. Words of this import, and con­quently of as turbulent an inspiration, as a tongue set on fire of Hell (as the A­postle speaketh) could lightly utter? Is this Mr. Loves ingenuity, his meekness, his sweetness of spirit, his forgiving from his heart the worst of his enemies? If this be his forgiveness, what would his revenge have been? How true is that intelligence which we have from Solomon, The tender mercies of the wicked are cruel? Whereas the Cruelties (so called by Mr. Love) of just men, are tender mercies. Neither can the persons whom he so unchristianly traduceth, by any act whatsoever, express more Mercy, greater Compassion towards the many Millions of persons in the Land, then by cutting off evil doers from it by the Sword of Justice, such especially who defile it with Blood. But with what face could Mr. Love charge those in Power, to have gotten this power into their hand by policy; if by policy he means any thing dishonest or dishonorable unto them? Were not those, who now sit in Parliament, lawfully called to these places of trust by the people? Or was it any ways dishonest, or dishonorable in them, to keep their Covenant in bringing the Grand Delinquent and In­cendiary of the Land to condign punishment? Or to dissolve that Govern­ment under the intolerable Oppressions and Vexations whereof the people of the Nation had now groaned these 500 years and upwards; wanting either the heart or opportunity until now, to break the yoke of so cruel a bondage? Or was it any policy in them, but what was most worthy men in those high places of trust, committed unto them by the people; when they clearly, and by sufficient experience found, That the House of Peers who had no Parliamentary Interest granted unto them by the people, together with some of their own Members, daily prevaricating with the common cause, and real Interest of the people, palpably bent in their Counsels and Act­ings, to have kept the Nation under the abomination of that Tyrannical Inso­lency and Power, from which it was now in an hopeful way of deliverance: Was it (I say) any unworthy policy in those now in power, to provide for the Liberties, Peace and Safety of the people, by discharging the one and the other from those places of Interest and Power, which gave them the oppor­tunity of practising with so high an hand against them.

[Page 49] Whereas they are charged to use their Power with cruelty, this is so broad­fac'd a calumny, that nothing need be said for their vindication from it: Ma­gistrates are not therefore cruel, because they carry not the sword in vain, or because, being Ministers of God to take vengeance on evil doers, they fulfil their Ministery in this kinde: Cruelty would be much more truly and justly chargeable upon them, in case they should carry the sword in vain, and suffer evil doers, Traytors, Incendiaries, Disturbers of States and Commonwealths, &c. to pass unpunished: And therefore, unless Mr. Love could either have produ­ced some better ground for his charge of Cruelty against the State then his own sufferings, or else have evicted, not onely the many evidences brought against him as an evil doer, but his own confessions also in this behalf, he had provided much better for his honor and conscience too, by leaving this charge to be levi­ed by some son of Belial, who hath neither honor nor conscience to pollute.

Whereas he undertakes to Prophesie, That those in Power will lose it with Ignominy; it is well for them, that as the wrath of man worketh not the righte­ousness of God, so neither doth the righteousness of God accomplish the wrath of man: But upon what account doth Mr. Love prophesie this hard predi­ction against the State? If God revealed it unto him, certainly it is a new light, and himself in the sequel of this Speech chargeth us to take heed of be­lieving new Lights; it may be because himself had no more, whither wisdom orgrace, then to lose his Ministery with Ignominy, therefore measuring those in Power by himself, he conceived that neither would they have any more, then to lose their Ministery also upon the same terms: But I trust, the persons whom he ignominiously destroys with his prophesie, will by wisdom and faith­fulness destroy the credit of his prophesie, and preserve themselves in Power with Honor whilest they live, and leave it with honor to their Successors at their death: It is most like that Mr. Love adventured his Reputation on this prophe­sie, upon a confidence, That his Reputation amongst unworthy persons was such, that rather then they would suffer him, though dead, to lie under the dis­grace of a false Prophet, themselves would make him a true, by tracing his steps in seeking to d [...]st them with Ignominy of their Power. The seed which he had sown, both f [...]merly in his life, and now at his death, he conceived was too spirituous and pregnant to rot under the clod, and that therefore he might be bold to prophesie the springing up of it after his death.

He doth much more prudently, in referring himself to his Congregational and Domestical Relations, to have it decided by these, whether he was a man of a turbulent spirit or no: It is very probable that where he might rule the rost, and umpire in chief, he might be composed and calm enough: Doth the wilde ass bray (saith Job) when he hath grass? or loweth the ox over his fodder? I believe, that had the State judg'd it meet to be as condescentious to his humors and de­sires, [Page 50] as it is likely the Relations he speaks of were, they should not have tasted much turbulency of spirit in him, at least against themselves: If he were alive, I would calmly put this Question to him, Whither the grief of his heart, which he expresseth for the division amongst Gods people, was occasioned simply by the Division he speaks of, and not rather from hence, That all the Godly in the land would not so far reverence his judgement, as to conform & submit to it; I know no man, the desire of whose soul is not for Ʋnion amongst the Godly, upon such terms. I do in part believe him, That his judgement put him upon endeavors af­ter all honorable and just ways for peace and love among the Godly; but I believe withal, That his Ambition and height of spirit put him upon many ways also in this kinde unjust and dishonorable. His Principle (as he calls it) which teacheth him to declare against ingaging to the present Power, and to term this A Com­bination, rather then a Gospel-Ʋnion, was affronted by a contrary Principle in him a few days before; as, viz. when (in his second Petition to the Parliament) he ingageth himself to preserve the civil peace and welfare of the Commonwealth, and neither to plot, contrive or design any thing to the hurt of this present Govern­ment: A like ingagement (and almost in the very same words) he maketh the se­cond time in his third Petition. In his last Petition, he declareth it as his full re­solution, That he will neither Plot, Contrive, or Design any thing prejudicial to the present Government, but will in his place and calling oppose any designs what­soever, whether in this or the Neighbor Nation, that may tend to the ruine of this Commonwealth. Doubtless, in these promises and ingagements (especially in the last) there is every whit as much comprehended, as can with reason be imagined to be contained or intended in that Engagement to the State, at which his Principle is so much offended; so that it is a plain case, that Mr. Love was as unstable as water in his Principles, and could at pleasure prostitute them, though not to the ambition or lusts of other men, yet to his own: His fear of Atheism and Popery coming into England, would be much more reasonable then yet it is, in case his Design of bringing in the Scotish King to the English Throne should prosper, it being much more likely that he would give his power to the Beast, as his Father, and many of his Predecessors had d [...]e before him, then that those in present Power should do it: I shall not ch [...]ge Mr. Love himself with Atheism; but those words spoken by him to the Sheriff, the occasion considered, Sir, I shall look God in the Face with what I say, have no enmity at all in them against that horrid impiety.

ANIMAD. upon Sect. 13.

In this Section M. Love begins the account of his Principles: Where first he pretends to bless God for that, which is notoriously untrue (unless he speaks Parables in plain words, and hath a meaning which I know not of) viz. That neither an High Court, nor a Bloody Scaffold, hath made him in the least to alter [Page 51] his Principles. His Principles now upon the Scaffold differ toto coelo, from what they were a few days before, unless he then owned Principles that were not his own (as we lately shewed from his own words in his Petitionary Ap­plications to the Parliament.) And what should alter them, but the Scaffold he speaks of, is above my Reach or Reason to conceive. If his meaning be, That his Principles are now, and formerly, the same Geometrically, i. e. Alike proportioned to his respective Conditions, now, and then; so that as then they were prudentially fitted to the exigence of his Condition, as then it stood, and are now fitted with alike Prudence (as he conceived) to his Condition as now it standeth (in a far different posture) I can believe him; But I do not believe that he had any desire to be understood in this sence by his Auditory, when he saith, That he still retains as vehement a detestation of a Malignant Interest as ever: Doubtless he doth not retain the same notion of Malignancy. The word is now of a more contracted signification with him, then formerly. Heretofore they were all Malignants, who assisted the King against the Par­liament; Now, not all they, nor scarce the one half of those who assist him, are such; but onely they that come to his assistance, not having on a Presby­terian Garment. If he had lived until now, he need not have put in a proviso to save in his Covenanting Brethren in Scotland harmless, from the suspition of Maglinancy for assisting their King: For, whether it be the coming of their wisdom unto them, or the return of their Conscience, they have quitted his Assistance.

ANIMAD. upon Sect. 14.

Here he talks of a regulated Monarchy, and a mixt Monarchy. There is little less then contradictio in adjuncto, in both expressions. Law-makers (I con­fess) in Monarchical States, have sometimes done their good wills to regulate Monarchy by Laws: Sed vetuere patres, quod non potuere vetare. Monarchies of the best Regulation by Laws, were yet as exorbitant in the Practique, and in the exercise of Monarchical power, as if they had been Rule­less and Lawless. A mixt Monarchy (in strictness of Speech) is as unproper as a compounded simple. But Mr. Loves judgement concerning the preheminency of a mixt Monarchy amongst Governments, is not of so much weight, as to counterpoise the lightest Argument in oppositum. His affection of hatred equal­ly bent against Court Parasites, who would screw up Monarchy into Tyranny, and against those who pull it down to bring in Anarchy, is praise-worthy; One­ly I suspect (in the latter Clause) an evil eye of insinuation against the Parlia­ment, as if he desired to infuse this foolish Faith into the people, That they pulled down Monarchy, not with any intent to set up a better Government in the stead of it, but to bring in Anarchy or Confusion. Whether he was at any time formerly for putting the King to death, or no, I cannot positively say; [Page 52] if he was not, he was an unhappy man to express himself, both in words and deeds, so like unto a man of such intentions as he did. He confesseth his judge­ment formerly was, and still is, for the bringing of Malignants, who did seduce him, and drew him from the Parliament, to condign punishment. But what if Malig­nants did not so much seduce him in this kinde, as he them? who now deserve, and this according to the express letter of the Covenant, to be brought to con­dign punishment? They that best knew him, have often said, That himself was the head, and not the tayl, of those Councels, by which he acted against the Par­liament. I know no alteration in the Cause, between what is now, and what it was at the time Mr. Love speaks of, unless it be in this; That the Parliament now, both with more Christianity and better Policy, causeth the Presbyte­rian Interest to contain it self in its own proper Channel, which before was like the River Jordan in the time of Harvest, when he overflows his banks.

ANIMAD. upon Sect. 15.

Here M. Love professeth that he dies with his judgement not satisfied to take the Engagement, and yet prays God to forgive those who subscribe it: What is this, being interpreted, but to pray to God to forgive those concerning whom he is not satisfied in his judgement, whether they sin or no? But as Paul, having first given this testimony to the Galatians, ye did run well, then expostulatingly demands of them, who hindred you that you should not obey (i. e. continue to obey) the truth? So let me first give this Testimony to M. Love, (as I have gi­ven it already, being furnished with it from his own Petitions) He did some few days before, run well, not simply in owning the present Government, but also in engaging himself home to it, and for it: and then expostulate with his friends (himself not being in a capacity to answer) who hindred him that he should not hold out in so good and commendable a race unto the end? He la­bors in the very fire to purge himself from the Crime (as now the Scaffold it seems had made it) of his late owning the present Government; but the fire he useth is purely elementary, and will not purge or burn: For if David and Hu­shai gave the Title of King to Absolom, there is little question but in a sense, and that intended by them, it did of right belong to him; Neither the one nor the o­ther of them gave the title of King to him, until he was proclaimed King by the men of Israel, yea and was possessed of the royal city Jerusalem & the Throne; So that he was truly and properly King when the Title of King was given by these men unto him; though it is true, he came to be a King, and so to have right to such a Title, in a most wicked and treasonable way. So that both David and Hushai look'd upon Absolom as a true King, though with usurpation, when they gave the Title unto him; and consequently did nothing contrary to their judgements and consciences herein. But M. Love it seems was not perswaded in [Page 53] his judgement or conscience, that the Parliament was the Parliament or Su­pream Authority of the Commonwealth of England, when he gave these Ti­tles unto them, therefore he sinned against his conscience in so doing: So that saying, That herein he did not wrong or cross his Principles, doth he not plainly imply that his Principles and Conscience thwart and cross the one the other? If he had any such Principle, which either led him or gave him leave to act or speak against his Conscience, it was a Principle of darkness and of death. If Calvin judged that the Title Christianissimus did in no sense belong to the French King, I know not who can excuse him in giving it unto him. And if the Subjects of this Nation did generally give the Title, Defender of the Faith unto Henry the eighth, knowing no sufficient ground why it should, or could with truth be given unto him, neither can they be defended or justified in giving it. But why doth M. Love insert or insist upon these words, In case of Life? Doth he suppose that the case he speaks of will alter the case of own­ing the present Government, from sin to righteousness? Or is it his Principle, That to save his Life he may do any thing whatsoever, and yet be blameless? But how doth he here toyl and turmoyl himself to salve the honor of his Con­science, onely that he might reproach and calumniate the Parliament with the more authority & reputation, yet he that spent so much of his breath (which at such a time when he had so very little of it left, should have bin precious to him) about vindicating his innocency in owning the present Government, though it was (it seems) as much against his Principles to own it then when he did own it, as it is now when he disowns it (no change, as himself professeth, being made in his Principles by the Scaffold) hath not a word, either here or elsewhere, to speak for himself, hath not a drop of water to wash off that foul stain and blot from his Conscience, which it contracted by casting dirt and mire in the faces of those, not onely whom he had a few days before owned in the capaci­ty of their Government and Authority, but to whom likewise he had publique­ly given a large testimony of Justice, Mercy, Wisdom, Gravity, of being the Elect of God, &c. yea and to whom he had publiquely and solemnly promised and engaged himself, neither to plot, contrive or design any thing prejudicial to them, but to oppose any Design whatsoever against them. Doubtless nei­ther David, nor Hushai, nor Calvin, nor any man either of Conscience or Ho­nor, would have broken or falsified, especially so publiquely and in the face of the Sun, such solemn Promises and Engagements made to persons in dignity, and to whom they had so immediately before given such large testimony of many worthy Endowments; and all this without giving the least accompt of such desultory and fedifragous practices.

ANIMAD. upon Sect. 16.

It seems by the Contents of this Section, that Mr. Love's Principles stood [Page 54] fair for the Invasion of the English Nation by the Scotish Army, but fell foul upon the Invasion of the Scotish Nation by the English Army. This he declares against: unto the other he is silent, as consenting to it. All the world may hereby see, that his Principles were calculated according to the exigency of his Interest and Faction, and not for the service of Righteousness and Truth. For was not the Scotish Nation joyned in the same Covenant with the English, wherein the English was joyned with the Scotish? If not, the English made a very sorry Bargain in covenanting with the Scotish. If so, then suppose the Grounds and Reasons for the one Invasion and the other, had been but equal or the same, and that the English could give no better an Accompt otherwise of their invading (as Mr. Love is pleased to clothe a smooth Action with a rough garment) the Scotish Nation, then the Scotish are able to give of their invading England; yet the English Invasion of Scot­land is much more justifiable or excusable, then the Scotish of England, in as much as the Scotish were first in the Provocation. But (as hath been lately proved) the sending of an Army by the English into Scotland, is every ways justifiable, warranted by the judgements and decisions of the best learned in the Civil Laws, who are very competent Judges in the Cause, being alto­gether unrelated unto the persons or Nations; Whereas there hath not yet been (nor indeed can there be) any tolerable Accompt given of the Scotish Invasion of this Nation: Besides what hath been formerly said, to take off whatsoever may seem unjust or hard, in the sending of an Army into Scot­land by the Parliament of England, two things further may here be added: First, that presently after the Execution of the late King, they (the Scotish Nation) proclaimed their own King, King of England. Secondly, not con­tent with this Usurpation over this Nation, they engaged themselves further to assist him in his Acquirement of the English Throne. So that when the English Army went into Scotland, there was no such thing in being as that Co­venant between the two Nations, which Mr. Love speaks of; the Scotish ha­ving before this broken it in pieces, and troden it under their feet, and so had absolutely disobliged the English from the bands or terms of it. But when he saith, [...]hat because Scotland will not be a Commonwealth, they shall not be a People, doubtless in stead of speaking his Conscience, he spits out his Gall; For he could not but know that the English had no quarrel at all, took no of­fence against the Scotish, for chusing themselves to be a Kingdom rather then a Commonwealth; but because they would not suffer the English to be a Com­monwealth, but would compel them by force of arms to be a Kingdom like to them, yea and to take a King of their chusing.

For the Friendly Assistance Mr. Love speaks of, as given by the Scotish to the English, it was rather Assistance then friendly; For with that Assistance [Page 55] they gave they mingled much Hostility, behaving themselves like persons light-fingered, who when a well furnished house is on fire, are easily invi­ted to assist in the quenching of it, and very possibly may do some service this way: but their eye is more upon booty, then service or assistance. However, if the Scotish have given assistance to the English worthy Mr. Love's Epithite, the English are not behinde-hand with them in that kinde of courtesie. A friendly Assistance was very lately given to the Covenanting Party in Scotland, when they stood in mickle need of it by the English; and this not onely with­out any covenanted hire, but also without any uncovenanted spoyl or plun­der. The Scotish were double paid for their Assistance, by the English: the English were royal, and gave theirs freely. I shall not disturb Mr. Love in his cleaving to his Oaths, Vows, Covenants, and Protestations; Nor do I marvel at all, that he should rather desire to dye a Covenant-keeper, then live a Cove­nant-breaker: but this I confess I do more then marvel at; That this being his desire, he should be no more loyal and true to it, then both to live and die, not a Covenant-keeper but a Covenant-breaker, and this in the main and most important Articles of the Covenant, such I mean, which respect the Safety, Peace and Liberties of the Nation.

ANIMAD. upon Sect. 17.

His good wishes to the City of London, God perform; his fears may they vanish, as the grounds of them here expressed are (for the most part) empty and light. As to contempt of the Ministery; the number (I confess) of the children of this guilt, is too great, the Lord in mercy lessen it. Yet (blessed be God) it is not so great as the Arithmetique of Mr. Love's known principles computeth it. They are not all guilty of contempt of the Ministery, who do not honor every man that calleth himself a Minister, or that preach­eth with the invisible Character of Imposition of hands upon him; The con­tempt of some, who look to be honored as Ministers, may rather be matter of wisdom and duty then of sin. There are sundry kindes of Ministers, from whom men are commanded by God to turn away. Such as are Clouds without water, and full of fire in stead thereof, such as are raging waves of the sea, foam­ing out their own shame, such as ordinarily build hey, and stubble, and wood, in stead of silver, gold, and precious stones: the Judgements and Consciences of understanding men will not suffer them to honor; But Mr. Love here, ac­cording to the Politique Dialect of his Tribe, would fain have the neglect, which many Ministers very deservedly suffer, to be thought, not the neglect of their persons, but of their Function and Ministery, that so themselves may not be suspected as accessary to it; Whereas the certain truth is, that far the greatest part of that which he here calls the Contempt of the Ministery, is no­thing [Page 56] else but a Rush growing out of the mire of the Ministers themselves. However, if Mr. Love made an estimate of the Contempt of the Ministery in the City of London, either by his own Parish and People, or by the view and bulk of his more usual Auditory, he had (I presume) no great reason to pro­phesie evil or danger against the City for that sin.

What he means by Opposition against Reformation, is (I suppose) too well known, to be looked upon by men acquainted with the ways, methods and grounds of Gods Judgements, as any thing much endangering the City in this kinde. Opposition (I confess) against that Reformation of the hearts, lives and ways of men, which the Scriptures every where with all importunity press up­on the Consciences of men, is a sad symptom of imminent danger to a City or People where it is general; But Opposition to that which in the Dialect of High Presbytery (which Mr. Love much useth) is termed Reformation, is little sym­ptomatical in that kinde.

There is the same Consideration of his Covenant-breaking. There is a Cove­nant-breaking, which (doubtless) hath brought London much lower, then other­wise it should or needed to have been, and which, if not more repented of, will lay it yet much lower. But the Execution of Justice upon the late King, the Non-admission of the present King of Scotland to the English Throne, the Non-elevation of the Standard of High Presbytery, the Non-opposing of all that Mr. Love opposed, under the name and notion of Error and Heresie, the Non-forbearance of sending an Army into Scotland, which are sufficiently known to be meant by Mr. Love's Covenant-breaking; these are so far from be­ing any ways prognostique of evil towards the City, that to men of free and sound judgements, they are auspicious, of a good and gracious presage.

What he means by his General Apostacy, his Principles considered, I con­fess I understand not. He denies a possibility of Apostacy from any thing that is truly good or pleasing unto God: and how Apostatizing from that which is otherwise, as from Hypocrisie, Formality, Lukewarmness or the like, should be of any ill abode or presage unto men, opposeth my apprehensions. True it is, that the City (as he saith) is a great Receptacle of Error, though, of All, I cannot say with him; But first, all that Mr. Love calleth Error, is not there­fore Error, or proved to be Error because he so calleth it. Doubtless Mr. Love was not greater then Paul, and therefore knew but in part: Now he that knows but in part, is not competent to determine in whole. Secondly, A great part of those Errors with which the City is really polluted, call Mr. Love and Mi­nisters of his Sect, if not Patres, yet Patronos; If he and others of his fel­lows did not broach them, yet have they drawn them forth, and given the City to drink. Thirdly, Another considerable part of them, are the legiti­mate Issue of his and their spurious Doctrines, and nothing else but the [Page 57] natural and express consequents of those unsound principles, wherewith he seasoned many. But I trust that the light of the Truth as it is in Jesus breaking forth dayly with greater brightness, will scatter (a great part at least of) that mist of errours, which yet much darkeneth the City (though it be a Goshen, compared with any other City that I know, or have heard of, throughout the world) so that the errours yet resident in it, shall not be the ruine of it.

ANIMAD upon Section 18, 19, 20.

In these three Sections he commends himself in five particulars of spiritual advice unto the inhabitants of the City.

First, He beggs of them to love their painful and godly Ministers; but lest there should be error in personâ he presently informs them▪ that he means Presbyterian. If these were sometimes counted the Chariots and horse­men of Israel, and are now the great eye-sore; I fear it is because they are turn'd to be the Chariots and horse-men of Aram. But to whom are they the great eye-sore he speaks of? I suppose he means, to the State, and men in power. I confess there is ground enough for Master Love to suspect (I am willing to think that he useth the word know in the lowest signification) that the persons he speaks of are a great eye-sore unto these men, and many others there being so much visible in many of them, which cannot lightly but offend and grieve the eyes of all beholders, whose eyes are not of the same con­stitution and temper with theirs. But the spirit of High-Presbytery is exceed­ing querulous and effeminate. If the State will not fulfill all their pleasure and gratifie them in toto & in solido of all they demand, or expect, it presently casts them into fits of passion and discontent; they are men neglected and de­spised. Setting aside what hath been done to a few of the sons of this late Conspiracy against the State they have no ground at all from any measure they have received from the State, to judge themselves any great eye-sore to it. I know not what they would have more from the State, then what they have; unless it be, All things under their feet. When he tells them, that ten of their godly Ministers are taken from them at one blow, I know not how he will make up his account, unless he reckons himself for more then the one half of them. As for those who fled from them, when none pursued them, but their own guilt, he cannot upon any competent account of truth number these amongst those, that were taken from them by others. But what blow was it, by which so many were taken away from them, as were taken? Or who gave this blow? When God cast off the ten tribes he imputes it to their Idola­try. Thy calf, O Samaria hath cast thee off▪ Hos. 8. So when He and the Jews were parted, or separated the one from the other, He imputeth [Page 58] this separation to their sins, Your iniquities have separated between you and your God, Esa. 59. That which in punishments justly inflicted, is afflicting, or destroying, is not to be charged upon the Judge, but upon the offence and crime committed. Upon this account the blow, by which Mr. Love tells the Citizens of London, that so many of their godly Ministers (ver­bo sit venia) were taken from them, was not given either by the Parliament, Councell of State, or High Court of Justice, but by their own ungodli­nesse, and treasonable practises against the State and Common-wealth: these are they which have taken away so many of their Ministers at once. These Ministers were no waies necessitated to practise that evill, which they did; but their Judges were necessitated in point of Conscience, and by the command of God, to inflict that punishment upon them which they now suffer for their evill; therefore this punishment is not to be imputed to their Judges, but to themselves, and their own miscarriages.

2. He exhorts the said persons of his present addresse, (the Inhabitants of the City) That they would submit themselves to Church-Government, which would lay a curb and restraint upon their lusts, telling them, that it is a golden and easie yoke, &c.

The exhortation (in generall) is weighty and worthy by all men to be received: Church-Government, as the kind, and constitution, together with the administration of it, may, and ought to be, is of a most Soveraign ver­tue and import for that great end he speaks of: But that Church Govern­ment which Mr. Love intends, at least as far as the Christian world hath had the triall of it hitherto, in such administrations of it, as it hath found a­mongst men, hath given but a very slender testimony of any such heavenly vertue or vigor in it. Hâc non succ [...]ssit: aliâ aggrediundum est viâ.

3. He admonisheth them to take heed of Doctrines that come under the n [...]tion of new lights: If by new lights, he means Doctrines brought into the world since the compleating of the Scriptures, and which cannot by a le­gitimate and clear descent derive their pedigree from these, the admoni­tion is wholesome and grave; but if by his new lights, he means all such Doctrines or Tenets, which have not received countenance or approba­tion from the generality of Ministers of a later Edition, and since the times of Luthers and Calvins Reformations, his advice is indeed arti­ficially calculated for the Meridian of high Presbytery, but very disservice­able to the advancement and growth of Christianity.

4. He exhorteth them to bewaile their great losse in the taking away of so many Ministers out of their City; and then recounting the num­ber of them, finds them, if he mistakes not, ten; under the covert of such an exception or reserve, he might as truly have said, they had [Page 59] been twenty. He speaks of some, as being in banishment. Those of them in this condition, were adjudged thither by no other Judges then their own Consciences. When the City of refuge is sought unto, it is a sign that there is bloud shed, and that there is some avenger of bloud that follows the chase. The Ministers he speaks of, he doth the rather lift up unto heaven, with those glorious Elogiums he bestows on them, that so he may cast those so much the deeper into hell in the peoples thoughts, whom he would have lookt upon as the Authors of their taking away. But the Male­factour, as hath been said, not the Judge, is the Author of his sufferings: If they were lights, they were far more burning then shining, but with an un-hallowed fire: if Starres, starres they were of a very Malignant influence upon the State where they liv'd, and in their Conjunction, made a very dangerous and fiery constellation: Those of whom (as the Scripture testi­fieth) the world was not worthy, were a generation of men of another spi­rit, holy, humble, and harmlesse, were content to suffer from the world, to do the world service. Mr. Love's men are a generation that must have the world bow down unto them, and lick the dust at their feet, to strengthen their hand to do them service: neglect from men, is as the shadow of death unto them.

5. (And lastly) He gives them a brief Item, to take heed of being forward to ingage in a war against their godly Brethren in Scotland. If these godly Brethren in Scotland had not been forward to ingage in a war against them, the Counsell had been Christian and prudent. But inasmuch as these godly Brethren first ingaged in a war against their godly Brethren here, (as hath been formerly shewed) it is no point of Christianity or prudence to demurre upon a course of defence, or of prevention of the mis­chiefe.

ANIMAD. upon Sect. 21.

There is a red threed of revenge against the Parliament and State, struck quite thorough this fare-well piece of Mr. Loves to the world, from the very beginning to the end of it, visible enough (and indeed, too much) in every Section, which creates a sad jealousie with me, left his fi [...]s Archi­tectonicus, his predominant end in his last addresse on earth, was to have the men in present Power under the hardest and most hatefull [...]ment with the people, that he could imagine or devise. In many passages he hales in by head and shoulders such things, which a man cannot tell how or why they should come there, but only to asp [...]rse the State, and to enve­nom the spirits of the people against them. In these his Applicati­ons to the godly Ministery (as he terms it) of the City, he doth his best to [Page 60] make them believe (for he affirms that he knoweth it) that they are maligned and threatned; and this the people must conceive to be by the State: yea, and the cause and ground hereof must be supposed to be for setting themselves against the sins and Apostacies of the times, for his faithfulness wherein he himself had procured ill will from men. Poor man! Doth he call his sin against God his high crimes and offences against the Parliament in his late and great miscarriages, for which himself confesseth (in his last Petition to the Parliament, as was formerly shewed) that the Sentence of death was justly passed on him by the High-Court of Justice; doth he (I say) call sin against God, high crimes great miscarriages his faithfulness in setting himself against the sins and Apostacies of this present age? I confess if these were his faithfulness in that kind he speaks of, it was his faithfulness that procured him the ill-will of men. If such notions and conceits as these were the foundation of that abundant peace of his Conscience, and which he saith he hath with God, and with which he dieth, I fear he may be too truly compared to the foolish builder, who neglected the rock, and built his house upon the sand; which soon after fell, and great was the fall thereof. But to perswade the godly Ministers of his present address, (together with the people) the more effectually that they were certainly maligned and threatned, he will needs (upon this account) lift up a prayer for them, in the words of those Christians, Act. 4. 29. And now Lord behold their threatnings, and grant that thy servants may preach the word with all boldness. But is not this an horrid prophanation of the sacred Ordinance of Prayer, and of him that hath appointed it; to represent persons unto God as guilty of such crimes whereof he knows them to be innocent; especially when he also that prayeth, hath no tolerable ground to judge them such▪ as they are represented by him un­to God in his Prayer? What ground or colour of ground, had Master Love to accuse the Parliament or State before God of threatning the godly Mini­sters of the City for preaching the Word of God? What Minister did they ever threaten upon any such account as this? Possibly such Ministers▪s who in their preachings have turn'd the good Word of God, and Gospel of Jesus Christ, into fire-brands of Sedition, into scurrilous and bitter invectives against those, whom God hath set in Authority over them, who in stead of lifting up their voices like Trumpets, to make the people to know their abominations, have lift them like Trumpets to provoke and animate them to commit abominations; possibly, (I say) such Ministers as these they have discountenanced in such ways of impiety and prophanation of the Word of God as these.

His perswasion that the Presbyterial Government makes most for purity and for unity throughout the Churches of the Saints, the experience which the world hath had of this Government in those places, or Churches, where it [Page 61] hath had its throne, doth not much countenance or confirm: but I shall not here counter-argue it. Whereas he beggs of the Ministers that they would keep up Church-Government, and had onely added, and not intermeddle with the Civil-Government of the State, his advice had been both Christian and sea­sonable.

ANIMAD. upon Section 22.

I will not say that Master Love here freeth all the Ministers in the City, those onely excepted who are already discovered from having a hand in his bu­siness (he dislikes, it seems, the word Plot) in such a sense, wherein not long since he freed himself, from whatsoever was not, or could not (as he thought) be proved against him. I judge it not improbable, but that the Ministers of his exemption may be free from all interposure of particularities of advice for the driving on M. Loves designe (this word he owns in one of his Petitions though the word Plot, grates upon his spirit) yea (possibly) they may be free in respect of the knowledge of the particularities of the method, and transactions, by which the Designe was carryed on and ripened from time to time, by the Arch-Contri­vers: such works of darkness are in danger of coming abroad into the light, before their time, and so to mischieve or destroy the workmen, in case the number of those, who either shall meet frequently for the managing and forming of them, or to whom the particulars of them shall be imparted, be too great. It is sel­dom seen, but that that which is known to many▪ soon after comes to be known unto all. Yet I beleeve there is hardly any Minister of the Presbyterian per­swasion about the City, but knew well enough that there was Scotch-Ale in brewing, and that Master Love and his Complices were not asleep as to their Interest and cause. Yea, and that from time to time, though they could not call Master Loves Designe by its proper name, yet they prayed heartily in gene­ral and covert terms for the prosperity of it. But Master Loves Conscience now upon the Scaffold, tells him (it seems) a quite contrary t [...]le, to what it told him a few days before. When he was a Petitioner to the Parliament for his life, his Conscience told him that he had Sinned against God, that his late miscarriages were great, his crimes and offences against the Parlia­ment, high, &c. But in the interim (it seems) the Rabbies of his Con­science, [...] had been with him, and shin'd a new light into him. About the entertainment whereof, had he followed his own Counsel directed unto others in the like case, (formerly mentioned) and had taken heed of receiving it, it had been much better and safer for him.

ANIMAD. upon Sect. 23.

What M. Love gives in honor to his Congregation, I shall not take from them: Onely what he gives unto himself in this kind, as, 1. That he should never have parted from them had not death parted them: 2. That he submit­teth unto death with all Christian meeknesse, &c. I make some question whe­ther he had right to give it, or no. For, he that had parted from one Con­gregation upon a far different occasion from that of death he speaks of; why might he not, his judgment remaining the same touching a lawfulnesse of parting, have parted from another, and another after that, upon a like occasion? Men may be confident of their present intentions and purpo­ses: but to prophesie of their future, is to run an adventure. But whereas he professeth his submission unto death with all Christian meeknesse, I leave him to be judged out of his own mouth, in this very discourse, wherewith he hath avenged himself on his Judges, whom he calls his adversaries, to the uttermost.

ANIMAD. upon Sect. 24.

In the beginning of this Section he professeth his desire to justifie God, and to condemne himself. A Christian and worthy profession! But that which he professeth a desire to do, he doth very faintly, and by halfs: But that which is contrary to what he desires, as he saith, to do, he doth vigo­rously, and with his might. In his justifying of God, he is very generall, and faint: and yet more generall and superficiall, in condemning himself. But in the justifying of himself, and condemning others, he is inlarg'd beyond his line. For the justifying of God, he saith only, that he is righteous: in the condemning of himself, he saith no more, but onely, I have sinned, (which the most innocent and righteous person under heaven may say truly.) But for the justifying, and commending of himself, with a mixture of insinua­tions against others, how copious and eloquent is he? First he saith, his bloud shall not be spilt for nought; wherein he make's himself equall with the Saints he mentioneth from the Psalm. 2. That he may do more good by his death, then by his life: which, though it may be true enough in a sence little to his honor, yet in his notion must imply, either that his Oration, which he was now uttering, was so effectuall and full of power, that ma­ny of those that heard it, would either be converted, or els much edified by it; or els that his dying with so much courage in such a worthy cause, as he was now to suffer for, would make others confident in the further mainte­nance and prosecution of it, whereby God should be much glorified. 3. He sings over his former note of confidence, I blesse my God, I have not the least trouble, &c. I die with as much quietnesse of mind, &c. By which he doth not only commend himself as one of the first-born sons of Faith, but far­ther [Page 63] insinuates the goodnesse and justifiablenesse of his cause, where­by the people may be the more incens'd against his Judges. 4. He saith, that he sees that men hunger after his flesh, and thirst after his blood, which hastens his happinesse, and their ruine, &c. wherein at once he justifi­eth himself in the highest, and condemneth others proportionably. 5. He saith, his blood is innocent blood; (is this to condemne himself, and not plainly to condemne others by his self-justification?) 6. He saith, that his dead body will be a morsell, which he believes will hard­ly be digested, and that his blood will be bad food, &c. What are these but Rhetoricall flourishes of his own righteousnesse and innocency, full of reflexion upon his Judges, as men that had sinned with an high hand against the peace and safety of the Common-wealth, by sentencing him to die.

7. (And lastly) that he may proclaim his innocency, as well in the Nega­tive, as Affirmative, he saith, Mine is not Malignant bloud, though, &c. was Mr. Loves desire to condemn himself, in speaking these things; or are they the words of a man taking shame unto himself, and justifying God thereby: The truth is, he hath condemn [...]d himself by speaking them, all along calling evill good, and good evill, putting darknesse for light, and light for darknesse, bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter, stumblings and mistakes of a very sad import, so neer the threshold of death.

ANIMAD. upon Sect. 25.

In the beginning of this Section, he seems (in part) to repent of the former, but his words are of no good consistence. He proves God to be very just, by this, that his prison was not his Hell, &c. inasmuch as he had de­served it. This is an argument to prove him gracious, or mercifull; but that men have not in punishment, what they have deserved in sin, hath no face of a proof that God is very just. If Mr. Love had here also stood upon his Justification, and said, I have not deserved it, his Argument had been more congruous, though the Sentence more culpable: yet in the sequel of this Section also, he resumes his sweet morsells of self-justification, and self-commendation, and puts them again under his tongue. Here he assumeth the honour of Ma [...]tyrdome unto himself, Whatsoever men judge of me, I am a Martyr too. I have read that Petilian, against whom S. Augustin wrote, cano­nized Iudas for a Martyr Donne. Pseudo­ma [...]. ca. 2.: and that the Circumcelliones, whom the same Au­thor likewise mentioneth, were very earnest with those they met, to kil them, that so they might be accounted Martyrs [...]teol. Hae [...]s. l. 3. c. 19.. And therefore to that de­mand of Mr. Love, What should a dying man be proud of? answer may be, that a dying man, especially touch'd with a spirit of vain-glory, may very possibly be proud that he shall die a Martyr, and enjoy the honour of such a [Page 64] death afterwards. Neither is there any great weight in these glorious expressi­ons▪ Welcome Scaffold, welcome Axe, welcome Death, welcome Block, welcome all, because it will send me to my Fathers house, considering that one of the worst of the Heathen Emperours died with these words in his mouth, Ʋt puto, Deus fio, i.e. Me thinks I am even now ready to be made a God. We gave (upon the first Section, as I remember) a more particular account by what winde Master Love might very probably sayl into that Port of Confi­dence, wherein we here finde him; and yet make Shipwrack too in the Harbour, in case he were not the more circumspect. But Master Love must the rather be a Martyr, that so his Judges may be persecutors. Their defamation to the people, is an Oar that he plyes hard upon all occasions. Witness the words a little preceding those last recited: Would I have renounced my Covenant, and debauched my Conscience, and ventured my soul, there might have been more hopes of saving my life, &c. Unworthy man! who required of him, either the renouncing of his Covenant, or the debauching of his Conscience, &c. in order to the saving of his life? Or if he calls either the disowning of his late treasonable negotiations with the Scotish King, Kirk, and Nation or the owning of the present Government, either a renouncing of his Covenant, or a debauching of his Conscience, or the venturing of his Soul, he vo­luntarily and freely of himself did all these (as hath been shewed over and o­ver from his own Narrative and Petitions) for the saving of his life. And what he should further mean by the renouncing of his Covenant, debauch­ing &c. I confess I understand not, unless it should be the taking of the En­gagement imposed by the State. But that he voluntarily and of his own accord engaged himself (in his last Petition to the House) to do all things required, that are lightly imaginable to be required, in that Engagement, was likewise formerly proved from his own cleer and express words. Nor is the taking of the En­gagement in that formality of words wherein it is recommended by the State unto the Nation▪ any ways inconsistent with the Covenant, no not in any lite­ral or Grammatical sense that can be put upon it: nor needs any man either de­bauch his Conscience, or venture his soul in the taking of it. I fear there are more Consciences debauched, and souls ventured, by the refusal, then by the taking of it. By the way, if Master Love had ventured his soul, whe­ther by taking the Engagement, owning the present Government, or the like, it is a demonstrative Argument▪ according to his principles▪ that he neither was a Saint nor one of the Elect of God, because the souls of all such are out of all possibility of miscarrying.

ANIMAD. upon Sect. 26.

In this Section we have little observable, but onely further inculcations of his courage and confidence in the face and presence of Death (as if he were jealous the people would not believe him at this point, without much importunity of Assertion) together with some more gentle insinuations then formerly of his Innocency; onely the last clause here is very remarkable, God will judge all men, I will judge none: When he saith that He will judge none, doth he not retract and cancel all the hard sayings formerly uttered by him, wherein he had judged and condemned his Judges and the State? But welcome Repentance, though at the Eleventh hour of the day.

ANIMAD. upon Sect. 27, 28.

The heart and strength of these Sections also, is of the same Argument with the former; he displays the Banner of his Confidence yet again and again before the people: Those Expressions, Though men kill me, they cannot damn me; though they thrust me out of the world, &c. are of a Suspitious interpretation, That Mr. Love was not yet perfectly recovered out of his fit of Passion: The denial of Power, in such cases, as that wherein he now speaks, usually supposeth a will or disposition to do that, for the doing whereof, power is wanting. Nor doth he say much either for his own comfort, or for the edification of the people, in saying, That the men who kill him (I suppose he means, who by the Sword of Justice take his life from him, which is very unproperly termed killing) cannot damn him. For first, questionless all the people very well knew, That men could not damn him: Therefore the saying turned to no account of Edification unto them: Nor secondly, was it much for his own comfort, that the men he speaks of could not damn him; because had they had such a power, he had been in never a whit the more danger from suffering from them in that kinde, there being not the least inclination or will in them to make use of such a power, in case they had had it. As they that die in the Faith of Jesus Christ, are in never the more danger of being damned by God, because he hath power to damn them; That justice, of which the men Mr. Love speaks of, were Mini­sters appointed by God, required onely his natural life from him: And far was it from the hearts or thoughts of the Ministers hereof, to require more: Nay, had not Justice very importunely, and with a loud voice called and cryed unto them for that life of his, which is now taken from him, far had they been from taking or desiring it. So that it was but a very Unchristian strain of Mr. Loves exulcerated Spirit against them, to say or insinuate, That they hungred after his flesh, and were thirsty for his blood: And much more to intimate, as if they had a minde or will to damn him, in case they had power. Was it either Chri­stian or proper, for Mr. Love to sanctifie himself unto prayer, especially be­ing now to pray his last, by taking such words unto him as these? How impor­tunely, [Page 66] and with what over-weeningness of conceit of his own worth and ex­cellency, he transfers those words of that Great Apostle, 2 Tim. 4. 6, 7. upon himself, I shall not stand to argue. And with what truth he could say in the Apostles sence (wherein doubtless he would be understood to speak) I have kept the Faith, I leave to his Great Lord and Master, both his and mine to determine.

ANIMAD. upon Sect. 29, 30.

In these two Sections Mr. Love commends by Prayer, both himself and his own Soul, as all others whom he judged it meet to pray for, unto God. In a great part of this Prayer, and of the particular Requests made therein, I ap­prehend nothing but what is savory and Christian. I trust that these words towards the latter end of this prayer, Lord hear, pardon all his infirmities, wipe away his iniquities by the blood of Christ, &c. carried in them an impli­cite Repentance, both of that sin against God, of those high Crimes, and late great miscarriages against the Parliament; for which (as himself a few days before this Prayer, confessed) he was justly condemned, as likewise of all those most untrue, bitter and Unchristian invectives uttered against the Parliament and State in this Speech upon the Scaffold, together with all the rest of the sins of his life. And when in his last Petition, he prayeth to be received by God, pure, and spotless, and blameless before him in love: I trust he prayed not to be received by God as any other person, then what he really and in truth was; and consequently, That he was blameless in love. If so, then was that spirit of spleen and Unchristian bitterness, by which he spake so many unseemly things against those, who little deserved it at his hand, in the foregoing Speech, by this time vanished and gone out of him; And indeed it was now high time to cast him out, because there had been no entrance for Mr. Love into his Fathers house (he speaks of) in his company: When he saith, That he had made God his Hope and his Confidence from his youth up, I wish that his heart did not de­ceive him; It is not lightly possible that men should labor so in the fire, as Mr. Love did, to promote or uphold a carnal and worldly Interest, who truly make God their Hope and Confidence. As in his zeal for God, and for the bringing of the souls of men to heaven, he was equalized, if not exceeded by the Jews in Pauls days, and by the Scribes and Pharisees in our Saviours, (who compassed Sea and Land to make one Proselyte) so was he also in his glorying or boasting in God. Foundations, not Buildings or Superstructions, are the great Oracles in Religion to be consulted about the Spiritual Estates of men. After he had gloried this great glorying in God, Lord, thou hast setled this per­swasion in my heart, That as soon as ever the blow is given to divide my head from my body, I shall be united to my Head in Heaven, he prayeth thus, O blessed Jesus, apply thy blood, not onely for my justification unto life, but also for my [Page 67] comfort, for the quieting of my soul, &c. And again, Hear the Prayers of all thy people that have been made for thy servant; and though thou hast denied Prayer, as to the particular Request concerning my Life; yet let herein the fruit of Prayer be seen, That thou wilt bear up my heart against the fear of death. If the former glorying had succeeded these Petitions, and not gone before them, the consist­ence between the one and the other, had been of a better and more easie In­terpretation. When he prayeth for his Covenant-keeping-Brethren in the Kingdom of Scotland, he prayeth for a Generation of men that is not, Cove­nant-keepers being several yeers since perished from amongst the Inhabiters of that Nation: Covenant-takers are here generally metempsychosed into Cove­nant-breakers. His Petition, To make England and Scotland one staff in the Lords hand; The Lord, I trust, will shortly perform. That he should pray so particularly for men of a Forraign Nation, and for a Brother of remote Blood (though of near relation in guilt) and not once mention in his Prayer, his near­est relations in Nature, Wife or Children, especially having brought them into an afflicted and sad condition by his Miscarriages, was the observation of some sober men present, not without offence.

ANIMAD. upon Sect. 31.

I have nothing to Animadvert upon this Section, but onely that which helps me to hope the better of his present Condition; as viz. That I perceive no breathing at all herein of that evil spirit of Wrath and Discontent, which had wrought so effectually in him until his Prayer (in the two last Sections) and the more immediate approaches of Death. The departure of this spirit from him, before his own, is a ground of good hope, That this latter shall not be sent thither, from whence the former came.