The modern pleas for comprehension, toleration, and the taking away the obligation to the renouncing of the covenant considered and discussed.

ART. 3.

We shall with the same Sincerity, Re∣ality and Constancy in our several Voca∣tions, endeavour, with our Estates and Lives, mutually to preserve the Rights and Privileges of the Parliament and the Liberties of the Kingdoms; and to preserve and defend the Kings Maje∣sties Person and Authority, in the Pre∣servation and Defence of the True Re∣ligion and Liberties of the Kingdom: That the World may hear witness with our Consciences of our Loyalty, and that we have no thoughts and intenti∣on to diminish his Majesties Iust Power and Greatness.

This Article hath been very much

and very much insisted on and gloried in for the seeming Loyalty of one Ex∣pression in it: But, in order to a right understanding; let us consider how Affairs stood at that time: It is well known, that the Compilers and Enjoyners of this Covenant were, at that very time, in actual Arms (I hope that it is no offence, if I say in actual Rebellion) against the King. This ve∣ry Covenant was a great Instrument by which they did carry on their De∣sign then on foot against Him: The King was betrayed and sold by one part of the Covenanters, those from Scotland, he was bought, imprisoned, and in effect deposed by another part of the Covenanters, those in Eng∣land, and by the most Loyal of them, even the Lords and Commons Assem∣bled at Westminster; who by their Votes of Non-address, Febr. 17. 1647. (which, let us note, was long before the Seclusion by the Army) did de∣clare, First, That they will make no far∣ther Addresses or Applications to the King: And in the fourth Vote, That they will receive no more Messages from

the King, and do enjoyn that no Person whatever do receive or bring any Mes∣sage from the King to Both or either Houses of Parliament, or to any other Person; which Votes they published with a Declaration, wherein they lay down some few of those many Rea∣sons (as they express it) why they cannot repose any more Trust in Him.

Nay, long before that time, when the Scots complained of some rigours used towards His Majesty, as being contrary to the Covenant, the House of Commons did return them this An∣swer, Novemb. 18. 1646. We observe that you mention the Defence of the King twice, from the Covenant; but in both places you leave out, in the preservation of the true Religion, &c. A main Clause without which the other ought not to be mentioned. Which very Answer themselves did afterwards receive from their own Army, in a Declarati∣on from St. Albans, Novemb. 18. 1648. Where they reminded their Masters of their own Doctrine, The Defence of the King, say they, is to be under∣stood with this restriction; In the Pre∣servation

of, &c. or otherwise the whole Proceedings of Both Kingdoms in make∣ing and maintaining War against Him in Defence of Religion and Liberties are questionable for breach of Covenant; since that way of preserving did proba∣bly tend to the destruction and was with∣out any safe provision, either for his Person, or that Authority which can properly be called His, or understood in Conjunction with His Person; but that therein His Person might probably have been destroyed under the Sword or by a Bullet, yea was ordinarily endeavoured to be so, as well as the Persons of others in Arms with Him; and that Authori∣ty of His was certainly opposed and en∣deavoured to be destroyed thereby, in∣stead of being defended. Remonstrance from St. Albans, P. 55.

Indeed, about the time of the King's Murther, many of the Cove∣nanters did declare themselves a little dissatisfied with that way of Proceeding against Him; and did (how reasonably upon their own Grounds, I know not) urge the Cove∣nant for His Preservation: But of

their Behaviour in this Case, I shall give only the Account of an Author, who lived in those times when they had opportunities enough to have taken what account of Him them∣selves pleased. His Words are these, in a Book entituled, A short View of the Life and Reign of King Charles the First, Monarch of Great Britain, pag. 94. The Presbyterians carried on this Tragedy to the very last Act, from the first bringing in of the Scots to the be∣ginning of the War, and from the begin∣ning of the War till they had brought Him Prisoner to Holmby-House, and then quarrelled with the Independents for taking of the Work out of their hands, and robbing them of the long ex∣pected fruit of their Plots and Practi∣ces. They cried out against them in their Pulpits and clamoured against them in their Pamphlets for that, of which them∣selves were at least parcel-guilty, Et si non re at voto saltem Regicidae, &c. On the other side, the Independents, who washed their hands in the blood of the King, seemed as desirous as the Presbyte∣rians to wash their hands of it: By them

it was alleadged more calmly, that they had put Charles Stuart to death, against whom they proceeded as the Cause of so much bloodshed; but that the King had been muthered a long time before by the Presbyterians, when they deprived Him of His Crown, His Sword, His Scepter; of His Crown, by forcing from Him those Prerogatives which placed Him in a Throne of Eminency above His People; of His Sword, by wresting the Militia out of His hands, by which He was made unable to protect them; and of His Scepter, in divesting Him of His Power of calling Parliaments, and of His Negative Voyce in making those Laws by which He was to govern all Estates of Men under His Dominion: And more than so, they had deprived Him of His Natural Liberty as a Man; of the Society of His Wife, as he was a Husband; of the Conversation of His Children, as He was a Father; of the Attendance of His Servants, as He was a Master; and in a word, of all those Comforts which might make Life valu∣ed for a Blessing: So that there was no∣thing left for the Independents to do,

but to put an end to those Calamities in∣to which this miserable man, this Vir dolorum, as He might very well be call∣ed, had been so accursedly plunged by the Presbyterians.

To which I shall only add this far∣ther, that notwithstanding all that Loyalty which the Covenanters have so often boasted of, from the Obliga∣tion of the Covenant; yet it is well known, that the Covenant was placed by themselves as a bar between him and his Throne, that without sub∣mitting to this, they could not endure to think of His Restauration to that; and this to so high a degree, that even in Ianuary, 1648. Notwithstanding the apparent danger which the King's Life was known to be in, yet even then, the General Assembly of Scot∣land did violently oppose all courses thought upon for His Relief, and pres∣sed earnestly, That His Majestie's Con∣cessions and Offers concerning Religion may directly and positively be declared unsatisfactory to the Parliament, and that there shall be no engagement for restore∣ing His Majesty to one of His Houses

with Honour, Freedom and Safety, be∣fore Security and Assurance be had from His Majesty by His Solemn Oath under Hand and Seal; that He shall for Him∣self and His Successors consent and agree to Acts of Parliament enjoyning the League and Covenant, and fully esta∣blishing Presbyterian Government, Di∣rectory of Worship, and Confession of Faith in all his Majesties Dominions; and that his Majesty shall never make opposition to any of these, or endeavour any change thereof. Vid. Declar. of Jan. 10. 1648.

Now therefore, seeing it is so plain a Case, that in the Opinion of the Compilers and Enjoyners of the Co∣venant; all the fore-mentioned Vio∣lences both might and ought to have been used against the King, by vertue and in pursuance of the Covenant: It thence follows unavoidably, that His Majesty is not a little concerned to be very watchful over all those Per∣sons who are so tender of the honour of the Covenant, that they demand it as the Condition of their Admissi∣on into the Church, that they may by

no means be questioned concerning their Opinion about its Obligation.