The Levites Scourge, Postscript to the reader
Post-script to the Reader.
COurteous Reader, I know thou expectest that here the Doctors whole letter should be added. But for the avoyding of ta…toligies, because all the substantiall contents, so far as in the Diurnall… and Mecurie they have been heretofore objected to the Doctor, they are in in the Gentle Lash, and in this Treatise related in severall sections and fully answered; I shall intreat thee to be contented with the remainder thereof, faithfully transcribed out of the originall sent to the Primate of Ireland.
Doctor Featley having written a letter to the Lord Arch-bishop of Armagh,Mercurius Aulicus 41. week, 1643. to give his Grace an account of his demeanour in the businesse of the Scottish Covenant, was committed Prisoner to the Lord Peters house, both his Livings given away to others, and his Books bestowed upon that old instrument of sedition, White of Dorchester. But it was the Doctors reasons against their Covenant, which raised all this stirre, which (the originall Letter being now in my hands) I shall here impart, and the pretended Houses who got a copie of it, can testifie it to be true. First the Doctor excepted against those words [Wee will endeavour the true Reformed Protestants Religion in the Church of Scotland, in Doctrine, Discipline, Worship, and Government, according to the Word of God.] These words (said the Doctor) imply that the Worship, Discipline, and Government of the Church of Scotland, is according to the Word of God, which (said he) is more then I dare subscribe, much lesse confirme by an Oath. For first, I am not perswaded that any platforme of Government in each particular circumstance is jure divino. 2. Admit some were, yet I doubt whether the Scots Presbytery be that. 3. Although somewhat may seeme to be urged out of Scripture for the Scots Government▪ with some shew of probabilitie, yet far from such evidence as may convince a mans conscience, to sweare it is agreeable to Gods Word. Next the Doctor excepted against that passage [I shal endeavour the extirpation of Prelacy in the Church of England, &c.] I (saith he) dare not … that: First, in regard that I beleeve Episcopacie is an Apostolicall Institution. 2. That the Church never so flourished, as within 500 years after Christ, when it was governed by Bishops. 3. That our English Episcopacy is justified by the prime Divines of the Reformed Churches beyond the Seas. 4. that our English Bishops now & ever since the Reformation▪ have disclaimed all Papall dependency. 5. That the foure Generall Councels (confirmed in England by Act of Parliament, 1 Eliza.) assert Episcopacy. And 6. (which all men had need consider) the Ministers of the Church of England, ordained according to a forme (confirmed by Act of Parliament) at their Ordination take an Oath that they will reverently obey their Ordinary, and other chiefe Minister of the Church and them to whom the Government and charge is committed over them. This Oath I and all Clergy-men have taken; and if we shall sweare the extirpation of Prelacy, we shall sweare to for sweare our selves. Lastly, he excepted against that passage [I will defend the Rights and Priviledges of Parliament, and defend His Majesties Person and Authority, in defence of the true Religion and Liberties of the Kingdome.] Here (said he) the Members are put before the Head; the Parliaments Priviledges before the Kings Prerogative, and the restraint of defending the King, only in such & such cases … to imply something, which I fear may be drawne to …ll consequence.
FINIS.
End of the text · Daniel Featley, The Levites Scourge (1644)