1661. deal of art and cunning will appear, in gradually bringing upon members of parliament, and subjects, the heavy burdens they were under before the (year) 1638, and not a little of the serpentine subtilty of Mr. Sharp, who came lately from England with ample directions concerted with the highfliers there, to bring this church back to its deformed state, about twentythree years ago. The first printed act is concerning the president, and oath of parliament.* The civil part of it, their making the chancellor, or any for the time, nominate by the king, president, I do not meddle with; every thing now must be done antipodes to the practice of the covenanters, be it ever so reasonable in itself: and it does not appear unreasonable, that a judicatory, such as this, choose their own mouth. But waving this, let me consider a little the oath inserted in this act; the form of which is, "I, , for testification of my faithful obedience to my most gracious and redoubted sovereign Charles, king of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, defender of the faith, do affirm, testify, and declare, by this my solemn oath, that I acknowledge my said sovereign, only supreme governor of this kingdom, over all persons, and in all causes; and that no foreign prince, power, or state, nor person civil or ecclesiastic, hath any jurisdiction, power, or superiority over the same: and therefore I utterly renounce and forsake all foreign jurisdictions, powers, and authorities; and shall at my utmost power defend, assist, and maintain his majesty's jurisdiction foresaid, against all deadly, and never decline his majesty's power or jurisdiction, as I shall answer to God." Members of parliament were to add, "And I shall faithfully give my advice and vote in every thing that shall be propounded in parliament, as I shall answer to God." Many particulars may be noticed as to this oath. In the title of the act, it is termed "an oath of parliament;" in the body of the act, it is called "an oath of allegiance." There are here two very different oaths; and it was not without a cause why it was huddled over in parliament, under the notion of an oath of parliament, that persons upon whom the first part was to be imposed, might not too soon spy out the design upon them. Yet they must have been very heedless who did not observe, that this oath, in both its views, was calculate to shuffle out our former establishment, and the covenants, and in its nature eversive of them. This new-coined oath might be compared with the English oath of supremacy, which no doubt was its model; every thing now being to be brought as near the English pattern as possible. It appeared to * Act concerning the president, and oath of parliament. Forasmuch as it hath pleased Almighty God to compassionate the troubles and confusions of this kingdom, by returning the king's most excellent majesty to the exercise of that royal government, under which, and its excellent constitution, this kingdom hath for many ages enjoyed so much happiness, peace, and plenty; and it being, upon good and important considerations, an inviolable practice in this government before these troubles, that the person nominate by his majesty to be his chancellor within this kingdom, did of right, and as due to his place, preside in all meetings of parliament, and other public judicatories of the kingdom, where he was present for the time: and his majesty now considering the great advantages do accresce to the public good of his subjects, by the due observance of such ancient and well grounded customs and constitutions, and the prejudices that do accompany a change thereof: "therefore his majesty, with advice and consent of his estates of parliament, doth declare, that the present lord chancellor, and such as hereafter shall be nominate by his majesty, or his royal successors, to succeed in that place, and, in case of their absence, such as shall be nominate by his majesty, are, by virtue and right of the said office, and such nomination respective, to preside in all meetings of his majesty's parliaments, or other public judicatories of the kingdom, where they shall happen to be present, and that they are now and in all time coming to enjoy this privilege. And in discharge of this trust, they are, at the first down-sitting of every parlia ment, to administer to all the members thereof, the oath of alegiance. (See the oath above.) Likeas, his majesty, with advice foresaid, doth hereby rescind and annul all acts, statutes, or practices, as to the president or oath of parliainent, which are prejudicial unto, or inconsistent with this present act, and declare the same to be void and null in all time coming. many to have in it the most choking clause of the supremacy; indeed, in so many words, it does not formally assert the king's power in ecclesiastical matters as the other does; but its general and extensive clause, " in all causes and over all persons," takes it in, and appears even somewhat wider than the English phrases themselves. It seems evident, that this Scots oath of allegiance and parliament, and really of supremacy, is ambiguous in its expressions. The terms of it are artfully enough formed, so as to bear a double face. Presbyterians cheerfully allow the sovereign a civil and sanctional power in ecclesiastical matters and causes, as well as a supreme power over all persons. And there was some shadow of ground for understanding the oath in this safe and favourable sense at this time, when the commissioner and chancellor declared again and again in face of parliament, that they intended not to give his majesty any "ecclesiastical," but only " a civil supreme power." Yet in a little, when ministers offered to take the oath in this sense, they were not allowed. And it would seem those declarations were made from the throne, upon other views than appeared; for when the earl of Cassils and laird of Kilburny demanded those declarations might be insert in the registers, it was peremptorily refused. This demonstrates the ambiguity of the phrases. In themselves, and by reason of this ambiguity, several phrases in the oath were at best dark. To say nothing of the others, that expression, "I renounce all foreign jurisdictions, and shall maintain his majesty's authority foresaid," without explication, may reach further than "foreign prince, power, or person," since "foreign," as it stands here, seems to include "all jurisdiction and power," except the king's, as supreme: and thus it would be an absolute renunciation of all ecclesiastic judicatories. So it proved in the issue, and the whole church power came to be lodged in the bishop, as deriving it from the king. I know this clause relates, in its ordinary sense, to popery, and in so far was safe; but it might, yea actually was further extended, and consequently was dark. clause of this oath simply unlawful. 1661. This oath, though thus involved, as we have heard, was stuck at by very few in the parliament. The earls of Cassils and Melvil, and the laird of Kilburny, refused it; whether there were any more, I have not heard so well disposed were the members In short, a good many reckoned the last to go in with every thing that came about. 1661. By their 4th act, they go on, and statute, Having thus inaugurate the king a su- | freedom of their acting in a parliamentary preme civil pope, if not some more, capacity. by steps they proceed, in the following acts, to assert, explain, and extend the royal" that no convocations, leagues, or bonds prerogative. At this time the parliament's darling design and beloved work seems to have been, the enlargement of his majesty's power, without any great regard to religion, liberty, or property; and they begin with civil offices and by their 2d act declare it to be "his majesty's prerogative, to choose officers of state, counsellors, and lords of session, as may be seen in the printed acts; and they screw up this branch of the prerogative to a jus divinum: perhaps this is the first time that ever the nomination of servants and counsellors is derived from heaven. In the rescissory part of this act, they run pretty high, and pronounce "the contrary laws and practices, and acts since the (year) 1637, to have been undutiful and disloyal," though the king himself was present at some of them. In their 3d act, as may be seen in the printed acts, they assert the king's prerogative to be," the calling, holding, proroguing, or dissolving all parliaments, conventions, or meetings of estates; and that all meetings, without his special warrant, are void and null." In the preamble, out of their great loyalty, they declare the "happiness of the people depends upon the maintenance of the prerogative." The presbyterians for many years felt how much their happiness depended upon this, in the parliament's sense, by bonds, imprisonments, hanging, heading, and murders in the field and highways, without any sentence. It is added, they make this law "out of conscience, and from its obligations." Upon how good grounds they assert this, most of them have answered ere this time at a higher tribunal. An odd enough sanction is annexed to this," that no subject question or impugn any thing in this act, or do any thing contrary thereto, under the pains of treason:" which seems to involve all the members of parliament in a wretched necessity, to vote many of the following acts when proposed, as they would not be guilty of treason; and it is abundantly plain, that piece by piece they prelimited themselves, and gave up the be made without the sovereign," and declare against all such, made without his consent; and tacitly insinuate, that the work of reformation since the (year) 1638, confirmed by the king and his father, "had well nigh ruined both king and subjects;” and cast a new tash (stain) upon all that was done in that period by his majesty and many of themselves, as being done on pretext of preserving the king's person, religion, and liberty." They declare "this gloss was false and disloyal," and rescind all done, or to be done, without the king's consent; by which undoubtedly our glorious revolution must come in as black treason. Further, by their 5th act, they clothe their king with the "sole power of making peace and war." Without any great necessity from the matter they are upon, or connexion with the subject, in the preamble they assert, that "the king holds his crown from God alone;" and statute and declare, "that the raising of subjects in arms, is and was the sovereign's undoubted right; and that it shall be high treason for any subjects, upon any pretext whatsomever, to rise in arms without the king's allowance." It was well they made not this law to look back, as several of their acts did, else the commissioner, and the greatest part of them, had been pronounced traitors. One would think, by this time, the parliament were near to the plucking up the covenant by the root, and so they were; but an unnecessary step must be taken for the better securing their project, and that is, by act 6th, to declare the convention of estates 1643, who entered into the solemn league and covenant with the parliament of England, void and null. That convention was not called by a king, and therefore all they did must be a nullity; and all acts approving that meeting are rescinded, even the ratification by the parliament, where the king was present. This seems to be a very needless act, since the convention was on the matter rescinded in their 3d and 4th acts; but they must make their game sure, |