AS there is no Engagement on man more sacred and solemn, then that which is contracted by Oaths and Covenants, (God himself being expresly appealed unto, both as Witness and Judg;) so there is nothing more dangerous and en­snaring, if not warily and honestly entred into, and kept, as well with a clear and sound judgment, as with pure and chrystal affections. The truth of this is evidently demonstrated in the late League and Cove­nant between these two Nations, England and Scotland; which al­though it wanted nothing of Ceremony and Solemnity in its admini­stration, yet hath proved sad and ominous in the use and application of it unto this Common-wealth: And though it was first intended as the best and most proper medium of union and strength to both Nati­ons against the common Enemy, yet hath proved (in several hands) a stratagem to obstruct the most prudential and providential essays of [Page 4] perfecting the Peace and Happiness of both; yea, is onely left as the last reserve and ultimate plea of all sorts of dis-affected and abused spi­rits, who having (with little effect) made use of all sort of weapons, would by it make us miserable, by our own Consciences.

It is not now time to look back, when this Covenant was made, and where, viz. in Scotland; or upon what occasion it was entred into at first: I have so much charity to think there was on all sides good and honest intentions active in the modelling of it, though some had their eyes in their heads, and many objections were made at di­vers expressions, and many desires for explanation of some Articles more fully; yet it was not fit to insist on them, our affairs not admit­ing any delay in our Brethrens assistance, nor their conjunction to be obtained without a Covenant, though the cause was common to both. But after it past the gulf, and was taken by the Parliament and Assem­bly of Divines, and honest men of all sorts had freely lifted up their hands to God in it (not fearing the after-reckoning would be so costly and dangerous) every one began to make his advantage (through the multitude and ambiguity of expression, most unsuitable to a Covenant, which ought to be plain and simple in its terms) and by it to promote his several interest; as if it had been made to engage unto a particular party, not to unite two Nations in a common Interest: Yea, so many several interpretations, variety of sences, have been fixt upon it, as if it were intended rather for Debates then Obedience, and to exercise mens wits, rather then enforce their Consciences to honest and necessa­ry duties; yea (which we may remember with sad hearts) England never knew what it was to have so many sad divisions of parties and interests, until the Covenant came, by the design of some disguised Politicians to be improved to some particular Interests and Parties, who insisting some on one Article, and some on another, in opposition to the rest, as they saw their advantage, have divided the Covenant into several parts (to engage several parties;) others have made one and the same Article to speak several Senses, dividing the sence from the words, torturing the very Comma's and Colons, making a separa­tion between them and the words, which they necessarily distinguish, and all but to strengthen their own Interest, and destroy anothers; that the abuses do seem to be worse, and more heinous, then the breach of it would be.

The first and main advantage that was made of it was to set up the [Page 5] Presbyterial Government in ENGLAND, without any bound or limitation of the Civil Magistrate; and the Scots (who best knew the design of the Covenant) urge their pattern first, as sup­posing their Church to be the best Reformed: and so strongly and vigorously was it managed, that they got so far on the affections of the people by such pleas, that the brand of Heresie and Schism, in the first Article, was fastened on all those that differed or dissented in Discipline from that pattern; and so far on Authority, that none should either preach, or be fit for any place in Government of State, but he that subscribed to that sence; That moderate and wary spirits, (which through Reason and Conscience differed onely in these circumstances) had nothing to relieve themselves by, and avoyd the direful sentence of perjury, layd on them, for not bringing up their Congregations to the Presbyterial Model, but onely that clause which was (happily inserted) [According to the Word of GOD;] But to salve that, and press on the former Interest, the Reformed Churches were brought in (and not onely Scotland proposed) as the main and absolute Rule, and the Word of God to be exegetical and expository, virtually included in them: and so vehemently hath this first Article been prest to that Interest, that all union besides, and agreement in Doctrine, and the absolutes and necessaries of Religion have been accounted of as low and ordinary, in comparison of it, that most men have thought it was a design either to make men doubt that there is any Church-Government Jure Divino, or else that any will serve the turn, which is but popular, and suitable to a present In­terest.

And of such a fundamental consequence hath the Covenant bin judged in Scotland, that they used it as the characteristical difference of all per­sons both in Church and State, and looked on it as the best constituting principle of Saint-ship and holiness, and the visible qualification of members of Churches, and as the onely way of admission at first, or re-admission on relapse; for when in the first expedition many had re­volted from them to the common Enemy, and were excommunicated, both whole Shires and Parishes, It was put unto the question in the General Assembly, What way should be taken for the Tryal of their REPENTANCE, and to receive them in again? It was absolutely carryed by Vote, by a new taking of the Cove­nant.

[Page 6] And that there might be no further difference between England and Scotland, it was often urged, that by it we might be made one King­dom, and no more be distinct in Priviledg, seeing we were all one by Covenant, that the name of great Britain might contain us all, yea by the Covenant our brethren challenged a Priviledg in framing our own Propositions for our own safety, and to determine what we should Pro­pose, and what not, with the Order and method of them, and a mutual disposal of the Offices, and Officers, with the rest of our affairs, claiming an equal share in all our Priviledges, and the management of the Go­vernment it self.

The next, and more special use of it, was to further a Personal Trea­ty, wherein the Scots Commissioners had the principal hand, as being most privy to the first intention of its compiling: For when the inter­pretation of the first Article was out of credit, and the disguise of it pluckt off by that expression, The word of God, that the Ecclesiastical mediums would not serve the turn, they fall on another Article, where­in they finde but only a bare mention of the Kings Person, (charitably, and yet limitedly inserted) and propose, and press the Parliament upon pain of perjury, and without any reserve, unto a Personal Treaty, wave­ing the safe and best resolv'd on way of Treating by positive, and Fun­damental Propositions: And so eager and fierce were they on it, that the Commissioners in the name of the rest, in that notable Remonstrance of theirs for a Personal Treaty, quoted the name of the Covenant more then Twenty times in one Page, and tax the Parliament with breach of Covenant, but for omitting a supposed method, not placing of it in that order in the Propositions which they thought most fit, urging still no way of fulfilling the Covenant but by Personal Treaty, forgetting all the rest of the Articles that speak of Religion, a Common Enemy, the Priviledges of Parliament, of bringing Delinquents to Justice, and so procuring Liberty; but these were first in intention, and must be last in execution.

The next party that entered the stage with the Covenant in their hands, was the old Malignant and Common Enemy (who waited on our trifling Transactions) who seeing what use was made of it by the Scots Presbyterian Party, and how nigh the Commissioners of Scot­land had driven it to their interest, emprove all their former Transacti­ons with the Parliament, and on that stock graff a design of a new and bloody War, and the scean being changed from England to Scotland, [Page 7] Duke Hamilton (having got the major Vote in the Parliament) Levies an Army of Scots, who joyning with Sir Marmaduke Langdale, and o­ther desperate English Malignants, enter England with a great Ar­my, seconding the Commissioners Remonstrances, using their own ex­pressions in their Declarations, holding forth the Covenant as their En­signe both of honesty, and hopes of Victory, professing to be moved to that expedition by nothing but the Covenant; and for more effectual prosecution of the ends of it in a Personal Treaty, to suppress Heresies, and Schismes, and settle the affairs of the Church in greater security, and beauty, free from Error or Faction: Thus the Covenant was used, (and in as good words) to maintain the Malignant interest, and to unite the Common Enemy both in Scotland and England, which was intended against both; and though many of the Kirk disclaimed these proceedings, and saw the disguise rather in the Persons, then the things, yet they profest, and acted no more above board, then their own Dele­gates had beforehand with publique approbation by them, and intenti­ons are only known unto God.

Thus hath this Solemn League and Covenant, which our Brethren and others may well call Sacred, and the most sure engagement between creatures in this world, been by every hand made common, and pro­phane, ravished by the interest and ends of sinister and self-ish Spirits; tost up and down, and turnd, as a nose of wax, into the form of every de­sign; yea, so abused and rent one part from the other, the Means from the End, and one Article from another, that it seems to have no more substance left intire, then what you find preserv'd in the Stationers shop by a true impression, or in the Churches, and Publique places, by the careful hands of the Wardens kept untorn; nor any more Soul and Life in it to bind a mans Conscience, then only what the disaffected Spirits of some persons have of late breath'd into it.

But the last and worst abuse of it (which may well be put down In­star omnium) is, That it is now sent forth as a Bull, to denounce the Dreadful sentence of perjury on the Parliament, and High Court of Justice, for taking away the Kings person, and as the great obstruction, and plea against compliance with this present Government of a Com­mon-wealth; and is so ordered in this last use, That when through the glorious actings of Providence we have escaped the Common snare, we must by our own Consciences be made Religiously miserable: And how sad must it needs be to all honest hearts, That the Covenant which [Page 6] was at first intended as the most adaequate means of peace and happiness to these two Nations, should at last be formed into an Engine of divisi­on, and the greatest and only Impediment to a compleat Setlement of Peace, and administred as the last Cordial to revive the lost hopes of our dying Enemies? And after we have (through God) struck out all the Carnal weapons out of their hands, yea, separated the Head from that great body, we should furnish them with refined and Spiritual Artille­ry, and having cast off their chains, should bind our selves by the wriths of Circumstantial, and supposed Ingagements. What are now the eryes and Lamentations in prayers, and Pulpits, but the breach of The So­lemn League and Covenant? all the discontents, Animosities, disobe­diences to Authority, take their Sanctuary in the Covenant; there they are maintained and live, and at length are resolv'd into this Grand case of Conscience, viz:

Whether we may without perjury submit to the Government of a Common-wealth, and take the new Ingagement enjoyned by the Par­liament, seeing they have taken away the Kings Person whom we Co­venanted to preserve, and have altered the Government, all which is contrary to our former ingagements in the Covenant?

Though this be an old way used by most men to countenance their dislike of present duties, by flying to conscience, & urging former ingage­ments, as the Malignants did against the first Protestation, and of late against the Covenant, pressing their former Ingagements by the Oathes of Supremacy and Allegeance: Yet because it is the utmost, and last Plea that can be made against this Government, and that honest and Consciencious men (with whom I only desire to deale in this discourse) may see what a weak Foundation they build their disaffections on, and how little reason they have to stand off from obedience to this present happy setled Authority, notwithstanding all that they have been for­merly bound unto by The Solemn League and Covenant, I shall offer to their view these following considerations about the nature of Obli­gations by Oathes and Covenants, the ignorance or mistake of which, is the cause that men either bind themselves to what they should not, or else look on themselves as bound when they are free.

An Obligation is nothing else but a bond or tye on men, to do or omit any act, the force of which is to contract and fix the strength of mens abilities to some certain object, and manner of acting, or utterly to restrain and keep in that power from the doing of any such act which is unsutable and contrary.

[Page 9] The most usual distinctions of such Obligations, are by Promises, Oathes, and Covenants, which do not differ in their nature, but in the Solemnity of expression; a promise bindes as well as an Oath, but the one bindes with more Religious ceremony, an Oath being a Religious Act whereby we bind our selves to the doing, or omitting any Act, Deo teste, & vindice, Gods name being invocated to judge and revenge, if there be any guil in the intentions, or willing defect in the perform­ance; and the same is implicitely in every promise; for what I promise I mean to perform as in the presence of God; and my Conscience as Gods Vicegerent, takes Record of the Act as if it had been exprest; only an Oath by its publique and Solemn addition of Gods name, doth more fix the Obligation on the heart, and makes men more careful out of fear of punishment to perform.

But as in all Acts which are imployed about any Object, there is a presupposal of some formal reason, which is the ground of the Act, and unto which the Act must necessarily and sutably answer; so much more in Obligations, by any Moral or Religious Act (wherein the best of our understandings and hearts should be imployed) must there be pre­supposed some fundamental Consideration and Reason, which gives life and power to any such Engagement for which a man doth engage himself: Else no man can act Rationally, or Honestly, or swear in judgement or truth, nor perform in righteousness the three absolute re­quisites to the Obligation of any Promise or Oath. Therefore there can be no Obligation to what is in it self sinful or unlawful, or what is im­possible to be done, because there is no reason to bind a man to it, nei­ther can that be the Object of Obligation which God hath forbidden, or hath not given ability to perform, or what may cross any moral or absolute good.

And these formal reasons or conditions, are either so in regard of the Objects, as flowing from the nature of the things themselves to be done, and so are essentially annexed to them, that they are absolutely Independent from any Human will or power to alter and change them, or disingage men lawfully from them.

Or else these reasons are not simply and necessarily annexed to the na­ture of the Object, but may be added at pleasure, and no Obligation a­riseth from the thing it self until it be made by us.

Of the First sort are all Divine Acts of Worship, and all the Moral rules of Honesty and Goodness which do binde for ever, [Page 10] and at first sight, (no other reason intervening) but what they carry in their own natures; therefore is not left to any humane power or arbi­trement, whether they shall worship God, or in what form, and way, whether men should be temperate, and just, and honest, and do acts suta­ble to these, the mention of them doth oblige all men to conform their wills and practise to them, and yet oftentimes (to help our natural dul­ness and indisposition) we bind our selves again to these things we were formerly and necessarily bound unto, that we may be more hear­ty and careful in the performance of them, most men thinking they are bound unto nothing so strongly, but what they bind themselves unto, and by their own consent stablish as a Law.

But these Obligations which are of the latter sort, do only depend on our Wills, and Voluntary judgements, and are then Valid, when the Object of them is good, and honest, and the Conditions on which they are made be kept.

And because the Object, and matter of these Obligations, being Hu­mane affairs, are changeable, and subject to several perplexities in the mannagement, and under many casualties (being rather intended as Mediums to other good ends, then having any real excellency in them­selves) no man can judiciously, as a prudent, and knowing man, bind himself absolutely, and swear to the performance of any such thing for the future; for the matter it self is obnoxious to Providence, and to be changed whether the person will or no; and that which is for pre­sent, necessary and convenient (in these things) are in materia contin­genti, for the future contingent, and hazardous afterwards, and the Object is in its nature separable from the Oath.

And as some things carry their reasons with them, and need no act of ours to stablish them in their Authority, and just Obligation; so other things have their reason of Obligation from us, and are only binding, as they are fit means to attain to more Fundamental and necessary ends, and their reason lies in their conveniency, and proportion to moral and honest effects.

Hence it follows, That these special reasons, or absolute respects ceas­ing, the obligation which is drawn from them wholy ceaseth also, these Principles being not only as Causa fine qua non, without which no man would ingage, but constitutive principles of the goodness of the action; for by the absence of these, the whole Essence and Nature of the thing is changed as in respect of Obligation, for there is [Page 11] nothing left in the nature of the matter to oblige me to it, and the first and only Reason that ingaged me is taken away, which doth not hold the same in all circumstances, which accidentally and occasionally ad­here: For the destruction of them doth not alter the Nature of the thing it self; as he which takes away the Rational soul destroys the Man, but not he that takes away his Beauty, or acquired learn­ing.

It is therefore apparent, and undeniable, That in all Obligations there must be some conditions either puctually exprest, or tacitely im­ply'd, which are as first motives to actions, and the only ground for which they are to be Acted, and according to the terms, and respects of which they are to be performed, which being either not kept, or re­moved, the Obligation is no more: for this Condition is so essential, and so fixt in the heart of him which is ingaged, That if it be lost, the whole Foundation is overturn'd, and the man cannot act as a man, or as a Christian afterwards, notwithstanding his verbal ingagement; and take it whether tacitely, or expresly, yet without such a condition, no man would ingage in such an act; neither hath the man a mind to do it, (other things considered) though he may have a full power of effect­ing it.

And therefore its concluded by the most Criticall Casuists, That if the thing alter and change from what it was in the eye when the Ob­ligation was made, the Obligation is also null; for that thing is not in re­rum natura which I ingaged my self unto, or if it have a being, yet is under another form, and shape, different from the first reason, and ground of my Obligation; and no man can be obliged unto that which he never thought of, or when he doth think of, abominates; therefore its unlawful and most deregatory unto Reason, that any man should bind himself to all eases, and circumstances, come what will come, or notwithstanding what ever may fall out; for in the most perempto­ry, and absolute obligations, wherein there is scarce a condition (through love and modesty) conceived, yet men are not bound to all emergencies, casualties, circumstances, but only so long as the Special, and formal reason remains intire, and whole, and only unto these cases, unto which the Foundation will extend. Thus some Obligations are made absolute, not because there may not possible be an excepted case, but because the very mention, or supposal of the Condition, may create suspicion, and jealousie, and seems to be so much against nature, that no ingenious, or [Page 12] modest heart will admit the thoughts of them, therefore they are ut­terly omitted. As for example; Man promiseth simply and without condition, never to depart from his wife as long as he lives, which yet contains a secret condition, if she behave her self as a wife; the expres­sion of which condition, that love and endearedness to her would not admit, no not of the thought; and the very apprehension of it would be a temptation, and most contrary to the unprejudiced and single thoughts of lovers, and most dissonant to that simple & individual union between man, and wife; among whom there should be but one Soul in two Bodies, or one body acted by two united Spirits; and yet if any wife should commit Adultery, or seek to destroy her husband, (things that the pure and chast intentions of love durst not suppose, yet may be possible in corrupted nature) he is free from all other Obligations to her, she having unnaturally, and beyond expectation dissolved the uni­on by destroying the main ends of marriage, which are communion, and mutual comfort and preservation; and so having acted contrary to the Fundamental reason of that Obligation, hath ipso facto put her self into another condition, and discharged by her own act, all former Ingage­ments. The like may be said (as hereafter) between King and people.

Hence therefore its demonstrative, that if any through ignorance, or overactings of a design, should not foreseeing the nature of things, or forecasting events, ingage himself to two things imcompossible, or which through any necessity of divine acting, or in the order of natural and moral affairs, should prove inconsistent by some special emergence; he is bound to omit that which is less principal, and perform that which is most positive, and necessary. As suppose one in taking the degree of Doctor in the Popish Dominions, (as its used in the form of their Oaths) doth solemnly bind himself to embrace the Doctrine of Christ, and as much as in him lies, to promote the Doctrine of the Church of Rome, which is really contrary to Christ; doth not sound Reason, as well as Christianity teach us, That he is only bound to do the one, and neglect the other? And though the thing we swear to perform, be not in it self unlawful; but magis bonum morale impediens, hindering a more special good, as Grotius (lib. 2. de jure Belli, & pacis, p. 245.) well observes: the Obligation ceaseth from that, and is necessarily contract­ed on that which is most necessary and best to be done. If this were not so, in the multiplicity of humane transactions most men would be [Page 13] bound only to one act, and so be kept from performance of all other duties which did not depend on that, or were not Subordinate to it; and by one ingagement (though it may be hastily entered into) a man must be for ever unuseful in matters of higher, and more peculiar impor­tance; and have no remedy, no not of repentance and better thoughts for his suddain surprizal.

And as no man is bound thus to any thing less considerable, or oppo­site to a Common and publique good, so neither can there be any Obli­gation to any medium which any man hath bound himself unto, if by that means he cannot most effectually obtain the principal end: as if the Hebrews had by Covenant ingaged unto Pharoah, that they would use no other mid-wifes but the Aegyptian women, the edict being proclaim­ed of killing all the Male children, they were disobliged from any ne­cessity of obeying it, it being contrary to principles of nature, (which must be first served) whereby all men are taught to preserve by the best ways they can themselves, and what is properly their own; and had they kept such an ingagement, they had been not only witnesses of, but legal completters in the murther of their own children.

By all this we see as it falls out many times, That even Scelus est si­des, the very swearing is sin, as Seneca (lib. 2.) expresseth it; so as Ambrose saith (off. 1. c. ult.) est contra officium nonnunquam solvere promissum, juramentum custodire, it's sometimes against a mans duty to keep his promise, or perform his Oath; and in the most solemn in­gagements (especially about temporary, and controvertible things:) the first grounds and reasons must be most weighed, (omitting preju­dice, and accidents) and what is most positive, and humane, insisted on, and adhered unto.

By all this I may seem but to waste paper, and take up time, but I hope the application will make amends for the defects in the doctrine: have­ing laid this general foundation, let us now come particularly to see how far we are ingaged by this Covenant unto the Kings Person, and his Posterity, and Monarchichal Government in them, and how far we are free and disingaged from them, and at liberty to imbrace any other form of Government.

To this purpose let us as warily view the Covenant, as we have done the nature of Obligation, and consider the matter, and ends of it, and we shall finde in the Preface and Contents these for­mal Reasons positively exprest, The honour of God, the safety of the two [Page 14] Nations in the preservation of Religion, and Liberty, which were first in the eye of the imposers, and the golden apples cast before us, to allure us unto the ingagement, and are as the vital spirits that run through e­very vain of it, without which it were but an unnecessary and dead ceremony. And these being as Fundamental to the Obligation of the Covenant, as the form in Phisicals to the constituting of a distinct be­ing, the whole strength of the Obligation lies on it, and only unto the performance of these things, which are most apt to effect these ends; and if any thing we have ingaged our selves unto, shall be found either not fit to promote these, or destructive to them (though at first they have seemed never so convenient, and plausible) they must be removed out of the way, as diseases in the body, which hazard the dissolution of the union.

This being laid as the Primum mobile of the ingagement, and set in the Covenant as the common centre, many lines were drawn towards them on every side, in order to an union in the first principle, and many Articles proposed as mediums thought most sutable and necessary to ad­vance these ends.

And as these ends or first reasons were of two sorts, viz: Religion, and Liberty, the means were proportioned (as was then thought fit) for the happier effecting both.

Religion being chief, it was first proposed, and the preservation of it taken care for more expressely in the first, and second Articles against the Common enemy (who was then well known:) and as in order to that, we ingaged to a Reformation of it in Doctrine and Discipline, ac­cording to the word of God, and the best Reformed Churches, to extir­pate Popery, Heresie, Episcopacie with all its attendants, that being unto Religion as the suckers to the tree which diverts the moisture from the natural branches, and by this we thought Religion sufficiently provided for in its preservation, and Reformation.

The next in order was the just Liberty, and Freedom of the Nations, and the advancement of it, & as mediums unto that, the Covenant in the third and fourth Articles, as most absolutely necessary to preserve the Priviledges of Parliament; and because we would let nothing out that might be probable (though ex suppositione remota, and from a strain'd charity) we ingaged to preserve the Kings person, yet with a wary Salvo, in the preservation of Religion, and Liberty.

And lastly, to prevent any design against both, we ingaged to disco­ver, [Page 15] and bring to condign punishment, all Delinquents and Incendia­ries that acted contrary to these proposed ends.

Thus you have the whole Covenant anatomized, the two great pillars on which its Obligation stands, which though of different Na­tures, yet are inseparably united to the preservation of each other: Now if any thing without should oppose either Religion or Liberty, or any thing in any Article exprest should afterwards prove malignant to either or both, or interfer with any other Article which hath more of the efficacy of a medium to these ends, the Obligation to that ceaseth, because it will destroy the Formal Reason by which I am obliged. Thus it will follow, That if the Kings person, which we are engaged to preserve, (take him in his best capacity) shall set up Popery and Prelacy, contrary to Religion, and ad­vance Malignancy and Tyranny, contrary to Liberty, we have no Obligation by the COVENANT to preserve him, seeing be is destructive to these absolute Ends, for which, and in the PRESERVATION of which, we engage to preserve Him.

But that we may deal plainly and freely in a Case of Consci­ence, let us a little compare the King, and his actings, more par­ticularly with the Convenant, and we shall finde at last, that we are not onely not engaged to preserve him, but bound by the strength of the Covenant to cut him off, as a dead member that is gangrened.

I have often wondered out of what sort of charity or design the Kings name was inserted in the Covenant, as distinct from the Common Enemy (against whom we were first sworn) seeing he was the Head that gave life and motion to every part of that Body, (without whom they were but as a great Body without Soul or ani­mal Spirit) they onely fought under his Banners, for his Interest, in opposition to the first grounds of the Covenant, to distinguish the Head and the Members in one Common Cause, and to swear against the one, and swear to preserve the other, was too great a Criticism to be put in an Oath that must binde the Conscience. For my part, from the first I saw that name there (considering the state of Affairs then) I looked upon him as SAUL among the Prophets, or as in su­perstitious times they set up stately Images to draw men to Church, and more to reverence the place; or as sugar put on bitter pills to [Page 16] make them down the better, with less scruple of the palate, or nau­seousness of the stomack: And if I may use the words of Learned Calvin, in another case, which you shall finde in his Epistle prefixed to his Commentary on the Corinthians, having been forc'd to change the Dedication, and alter the Title of it which was in the first Im­pression, he to whom it was first dedicated proving an Apostate: Ʋtinam (saith he) quo primum tempore in lucem prodiit hic Com­mentarius,vel mihi ignotus, vel saltem probe notus fuisset ille cujus nomen huic paginae hactenus inscriptum nunc delere cogor: It had been happy for ENGLAND that we had either not known him, or known him better (as we had Reason) and either wholy let out his name, or had better reasons to have put it in; for he ever stood as the great errata in it, and we might easily have fore-seen what end he was designed to make, which had such a beginning: But however, though through hope and charity his name was inserted, yet now Reason and Conscience, yea the COVENANT it self, hath given just grounds to blot him out, he being the onely obstacle to attaining all the honest and necessary Ends of it.

Let us but (without prejudice) view, how that one name, and the preservation of it, stands opposite to all the other Articles and expres­sions in the COVENANT, and makes them all useless and of no consequence, that there is an imcompossibility of keeping our Engage­ment to him, and to keep the others.

First, for Religion, and these Articles which are sworn unto in or­der to its preservation, the preservation of the Kings person would directly be the overthrowing of them: we had absolutely sworn to extirpate Popery and Prelacy without any limitation, which could not possibly be done with the preservation of his Majesties person; for Popery, though I cannot tax him with the profession of it, yet many correspondencies have been between him and Rome, and Spain, even from a childe; his QUEEN a profest and Jesuited PAPIST, who not onely lay in his bosom, but ruled and guided most of his counsels, that you must have either left him a Husband with­out a Wife, and have divorced him from his own Soul and Self, (and from her whose he was eternally) or else grant at least a TOLERATION to POPERY, after we had sworn against it; Besides his MAJESTY was in Debt, and so far [Page 17] in Arrears to the Popish party in England and Ireland, for their faithfull services to him, that he could not be free of regall pro­mises, and Covenant-Engagements to them, which must have been remembred upon every advantage, neither could he in honour or ingenuity have consented to extirpate them, who had so great an influence to his affairs, and ventured so hard for his Preroga­tive; thus the King and the first and second Article are become incompetible, cannot stand together, and be both preserved.

The next thing we ingaged in order to Religion, was the extir­tion of Prelacy, and all that Hierarchy, as that which hindred the strength and growth of the power and life of it, which could not be hoped for, with the preservation of his Person, nothing being so dear and precious in his eyes, or more sacred then that Order; and he profest, never to give consent to abolition of it, though he was willing to have a reformation of it, or to give a to­leration or triall to Presbytery, untill he could get power enough to set up the other; so that what would become of the two first Articles, while the Kings name stood in force in the Covenant, except Popery and Prelacy could help to the reformation and e­stablishing of Religion? And as the religious part of the Cove­nant would not onely be weak'ned, but absolutely destroyed, so the secular and humane part, viz. the preservation of Liberty and Freedome, and all the Articles concerning it, could not be kept, or possibly be made instrumentall to their end, if his Person were preserved; for besides the first wide breach he made on the Liberties of both Nations by his tyrannical Power and Prerogative, after we had wrung the weapons wherewith he fought against us, out of his hands, and had tendered to him by Bills and Propositions once and again, the just foundations of our Liberties and Freedom, he continually refused to sign them, and onely pick't out some which we could best spare, and went on in raising of a second warre, that we had almost lost both name and thing. And where­as we had ingaged to preserve the Priviledges of Parliament, it was impossible we could do it, while he still retained his power of a Negative voice, and challenged a right in ordering the affaires of the Kingdome by a Supreme power; much lesse could we ima­gine to bring Delinquents to justice, while he himselfe was the [Page 18] head of them: And if the native and true sense of the Cove­nant be the maintenance of Religion and Liberty, against a com­mon enemy, and the King hath proved the chiefe and most dan­gerous Enemy against both, doth not the Covenant oblige all men against him? yea, to remove him out of the way, that all the other Articles may have their full power, tye and efficacy, and the ends not have their authority and goodnesse subordinate to one rash expression? The putting his name in the Covenant shewed enough the reall desires we had for his safety, and hap­pinesse, (though there was too much ground of suspition, yea for unbeliefe, that he would never prove instrumentall) and too much honour and respect to be given to the first and grand enemy of both Nations; but it would be sad and desperate, that our love and good hopes should be so ill requited, as to be left remedilesse, and at a perpetuall losse in all our con­cernments by one exotick name thrust into the Covenant, the verie mention of which, expunges all the other Arti­cles.

If experience or sense could open our eyes, we must needs see that there was nothing the King hated so much as the Co­venant, yea, so hated it, as it's thought he ever loved his name the worse after he saw it there; and if his [...] may be his judge, that supposed booke of his, which most of his friends owne, there is nothing he spends his venome at more then Covenant and Presbytery, as if he had an Antipathy to both, not a sigh of sense ever came from him for all the blood shed, nor a repenting expression for any Act done, but his consent to the Bill for taking off the Earle of Straffords head, being more touch'd for a Parasite then the ruine of three King­domes; not any thing could ever be gotten from him in con­sent to any Bill or Proposition proposed for our Liberties, but came as a drop of blood from his heart, and as under force, with many premeditated reserves, and at last sealed his Pre­rogative with his own blood, without shewing the least remorse for former Acts, or acknowledging any boundary to his will but God himself.

And yet this man (as if he were the unum necessarium, and all [Page 19] Religion and Liberty were essentiall to his Person) must onely be lamented, and all the breach of Covenant fast'ned on the Act of Justice on him, without which neither the Covenant or any Article in it could be dutifully performed. And how much have men lost of their understandings, and the puritie of their affections to the Covenant, that shall be willing to have the Co­venant rejected, and all the ends and ingagements of it bro­ken, so they might have but one expression preserved? Had the Parliament given a toleration to Popery, set up Prelacy, prote­cted Delinquents and Incendiaries, that our Religion and Liber­ties might have been pluck't up by the roots, and set up the King in his Throne, and intail'd the Crowne more firmly on his poste­rity, notwithstanding all these considerations in the Covenant, besides, taking hold of that one clause; would the Covenant have been then kept? let all honest men judge; and yet they had done all these vertually, and would have done them really in time, had they but complied with the King, or done any other­wise to him, then passing a legall and judiciall sentence on him.

But we need go no further then the words of the Ingagement concerning the King, which are very observable, and will end the controversie if honestly observed: For whereas all the Arti­cles of the Covenant are positive and absolute, Religion to be reformed according to the Word of God, Popery and Episcopa­cy to be extirpated without any distinction, the Priviledges of Parliament to be maintained, Delinquents and Incendiaries to be brought to justice, without any discrimination or favour, when we come to Covenant concerning the Kings Person, (as justly fea­ring, if not fore-seeing what he would prove) it's with an expresse restriction, and his whole Person and concernments wrapt up in this clause: In the preservation of Religion & Liberty, which was not only an Exposition of what we intended concerning him, or on­ly a limitation, or qualification of our endeavours concerning him, (though that were enough) but an absolute and expresse con­dition and determination of the way and meanes of preserving him only in the preservation of Religion and Liberty, in which [Page 20] he was included as the lesser in the greater; that if these two can­not be preserved in preserving him, he is left alone, for they are not to be preserved in him, but he in them: And this condition is so plaine, that you must either be bound to the King absolutely, without consideration of Religion or Liberty, or must when they become incompossible, stick to that which is principall, and of most concernment; and if this clause had not been either exprest or supposed, no knowing man who loved his conscience could in­gage, that being the fundamentall reason of our Engagement, neither can it be well supposed that most of the godly and un­derstanding people of both Nations vvould desperately svvear a­vvay all the priviledges both of Religion and Liberty, in a kind and loving mood, and to preserve the Kings Person, prove he Ty­rant or Turk, which they must needs do, if they did not ingage to preserve the King in the preservation of Religion and Liberty; seeing therefore that these were the essentiall conditions of our Obligation to his Person, and they have grown incompatible to­gether, yea diametrically opposite, and the ends primarily inten­ded in the Covenant, could not be attained without removing his Person, vvho hath so little reason to doubt, but vvith a good con­science, yea by the very constraints of conscience, vve are dis­charged from that part of the Covenant, and capable of closing vvith any other that is more fit to prosecute these ends.

So that you may novv perceive that the Kings name vvas in the Covenant but as a separable accident in its subject, Quod potest ad­esse vel abesse sine subjecti interitu, the Covenant stands firme on its true and sound basis, and is kept in its best intentions and ends, though his Person be removed, and that else the Covenant it self vvould have been a meer Skeleton and religious cypher, that could neither be rationally binding, or possibly kept.

Neither can it be by any observant eye conjectured, that his Son should promise better things, (by vvhom the Succession is chal­lenged) yea farre lesse may be expected from him, vvho hath natu­rally sucked in all his Fathers principles, and been at a greater distance from all good counsell and advice, and hath had the most desperate of the first Incendiaries to breed him up, and be his on­ly counsell, that nothing but the change of the Government can [Page 21] free us from the succession of tyranny and Prerogative, or give us any hopes of being happy in after daies.

And if we do soberly consider it, we have not broken at all the Covenant, nor changed it in any speciall condition of it, but only blotted out an unnecessary and destructive name, and inserted a more direct medium, for the preserving the Covenant, and ad­vancing the more noble and best intentions of it, and by taking this new engagement (which is short, and plain without ambigui­ty) we take away the grand obstruction, and set it right in its pri­mitive beauty, and free it from any future hazards or misinterpre­tations, the nature of a Common-wealth being to promote com­mon and publique concernment, both of Religion and Liberty.

By this time I hope all men may see that (among the most) its not conscience but choler, animosity, if not malignancy that keeps men from taking the late Ingagement of the Parliament, there be­ing nothing in the Covenant contrary: and seeing no man can be obliged unto any act which is contrary to a natarall, and morall good, and that all obligations cease with the first reasons, or con­ditions on which they were made, it must necessarily follow that all our Ingagements to the Kings person, and Monarchicall Go­vernment cease also, there being nothing left of reason to engage us to them, but our own affections, yea the whole state and nature of persons, and things being necessarily changed from what they were, when we first engaged our selves, & better & more effectuall waies propounded, we ought to close in with them, and make conscience of it.

But what need I spend time, and put any to paines to read this discourse, when the Assembly of Divines have determined the cause concerning the obligation of former oaths, and Covenants, in their exhortation to the taking of the solemn League and Covenant, ordered by the Parliament to be added to it (p. 4.) which is spe­cially spoken to perswade Clergy men from that plea of their for­mer engagements to the Bishops, as you may read in these words.

And as for those Clergy men, who pretend that they above all others cannot covenant to extirpate that Government (meaning Episcopall) because they have (as they say) taken a solemn Oath to obey the Bi­shops in licit & honestis: they can tell if they please is that they [Page 22] that have sworn obedience to the Laws of the Land, are not thereby prohibited from endeavouring by all lawfull means the a­bolition of these Laws, when they prove inconvenient or mischie­vous, and if yet there should be any oath found, unto which any Ministers or others have entred, not warranted by the Laws of God, and the Land; in this case they must teach themselves and o­thers, that such oathes call for repentance, not pertinacy in them.

There needs no Comment on this, its a full solution to all such Pleas which are drawn from former engagements, when new and more necessary duties are to be presently performed, or the former oaths prove mischievous to more fundamentall and speciall acti­ons. There remains nothing now, if we mean to reconcile the Co­venant with it self, and make it whole and entire again (having ra­zed out the grand Errataes of it, and written it over in fairer and more legible Characters, and all ominous expressions expunged) but to take the new Ingagement to the Common-wealth of Eng­land, and which is the most fit Appendix that can be imagined to be added, and the last and most probable means of preserving all the ends, and Articles in it; without which we may fondly think to sa­tisfie our consciences, but shall never be able to keep the Covenant, it being not rationally to be supposed, that any thing but Popery, Prelacy, and Malignancy should flourish under either the late King or his Successors, who were and are engaged only to these inte­rests, by education and acquaintance, by contract and relations, by disposition and revenge, yea by all the common ties of friendship, and love, yea and of debt and duty also: that if we now passe this year of Jubilee, we deserve not only to have our ears boared, but our consciences, and to be made by a divine judgement perfect slaves, as we shall be by our voluntary consents.