Reliquiæ Baxterianæ, or, Mr. Richard Baxters narrative of the most memorable passages of his…

Note, That the two Papers which the King's Declaration publisheth his Offence against, were 1. A Declaration which the Scots drew the King to publish when they Crowned him in Scotland, disclaiming his Father's Wars and Actions, in Language so little tender of his Father's Honour, that it was no wonder that the King was hardly drawn to it then, nor that Cromwell derided their Doings as Hypocritical, nor that the King ⟨p. 265⟩was angry with those rash People whoever they were, who now reprinted it.

2. A Book of Dr. Cornelius Burges, who (though he was for a moderate Episcopacy) had written to prove the Necessity of a Reformation in Doctrine, Discipline and Worship: whereas in all our Treaty we had never meddled with the Doctrine of the Church: Because, though the most part of the Bishops were taken to be Arminians (as they are called) yet the Articles of Religion we took to be sound and moderate, however Men do variously interpret them.

2. A Book of Dr. Cornelius Burges, who (though he was for a moderate Episcopacy) had written to prove the Necessity of a Reformatation in Doctrine, Discipline and Worship: whereas in all our Treaty we had never medled with the Doctrine of the Church: Because, though the most part of the Bishops were taken to be Arminians (as they are called) yet the Articles of Religion we took to be sound and moderate, however Men do variously interpret them.

§ 106. When we had received this Copy of the Declaration, we saw that it would not serve to heal our Differences; Therefore we told the Lord Chancellor (with whom we were to do all our Business still before it came as from us to the King) that our Endeavours as to Concord would all be frustrate, if much were not altered in the Declaration (I pass over all our Conferences with him, both now and at other times): In conclusion, we were to draw up our Thoughts of it in writing; which the Brethren imposed on me to do. My judgment was, That all the Fruit of this our Treaty (besides a little Reprieval from intended Ejection) would be but the Satisfying our Consciences and Posterity that we had done our Duty, and that it was not our Fault that we came not to the desired Concord or Coalition, and therefore seeing we had no (considerable) higher hopes, we should speak as plainly as Honesty and Conscience did require us. But when Mr. Calamy and Dr. Reignolds had read my Paper, they were troubled at the plainness of it, and thought it would never be endured, and therefore desired some Alteration; especially that I might leave out 1. The Prediction of the Evils which would follow our Non-Agreement, which the Court would interpret as a Threatening. 2. The mentioning the Aggravations of Covenant-breaking and Perjury. I gave them my Reasons for passing it as it was. To bring this to pass more effectually they told the Earl of Manchester (with whom as our sure Friend we still consulted, and whom the Court used, to Communicate to us what they desired): And he called the Earl of Anglesey and the Lord Hollis to the Consultation as our Friends: And these three Lords, with Mr. Calamy and Dr. Reignolds, perused all the Writing, and all with earnestness persuaded me to the said Alterations. I confess I thought those two Points material which they excepted against, and would not have had them left out, and thereby made them think me too plain and unpleasing, as never used to the Language or Converse of a Court: But it was not my unskilfulness in a more pleasing Language, but my Reason and Conscience (upon foresight of the Issue) which was the Cause. But when they told me that it would not so much as be received, and that I must go with it my self, for no body else would, I yielded to such an Alteration as here followeth. It was only in the Preface that the Alteration was desired.