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

But those that thought otherwise, said, That there is no power but from God, and therefore none against him or above him; and therefore none against or above his Laws]: which how true soever, seemeth not at all to decide our Case: For though it follow never so much that such Acts against God are not Acts of Authority, yet the same Person that hath not Authority to do this, may have Authority in other matters, and may be our rightful Governor, and therefore must be obeyed in all things lawful, (though not in this;) and his Person defended. And therefore how they could refuse to receive the King, till he consented to take the Covenant, I know not: unless the taking of the Covenant had been a Condition on which he was to receive his Crown by the Laws or Fundamental Constitution of the Kingdom (which none pretendeth). Nor know I by what power they can add any thing to the Coronation Oath or Covenant, which by his Ancestors was to be taken, without his own Consent. But in their Zeal for the Church, the Scots did cause the King, when he was come over to them, not only (mutat is mutandis) to take the Covenant, but also to publish a Declaration to the World, that he did it voluntarily and heartily, and that he lamented the Sins of his Father's House, acknowledging the Guilt of the Blood of the late Wars, &c.] In all which it seemed to me and many others that they miscarried divers ways: 1. In imposing Laws upon their King, for which they had no Authority. 2. In forcing him to dishonour the Memory of his Father, by such Concessions. 3. In tempting him to speak and publish that which they might easily know was contrary to his heart, and so to take God's Name in vain. 4. And in giving Cromwell occasion to charge them all with dissimulation.

But those that thought otherwise, said, That there is no power but from God, and therefore none against him or above him; and therefore none against or above his Laws]: which how true soever, seemeth not at all to decide our Case: For though it follow never so much that such Acts against God are not Acts of Authority, yet the same Person that hath not Authority to do this, may have Authority in other matters, and may be our rightful Governour, and therefore must be obeyed in all things lawful, (though not in this;) and his Person defended. And therefore how they could refuse to receive the King, till he consented to take the Covenant, I know not: unless the taking of the Covenant had been a Condition on which he was to receive his Crown by the Laws or Fundamental Constitution of the Kingdom (which none pretendeth). Nor know I by what power they can add any thing to the Coronation Oath or Covenant, which by his Ancestors was to be taken, without his own Consent. But in their Zeal for the Church, the Scots did cause the King, when he was come over to them, not only (mutat is mutandis) to take the Covenant, but also to publish a Declaration to the World, that he did it voluntarily and heartily, and that he lamented the Sins of his Father's House, acknowledging the Guilt of the Blood of the late Wars, &c.] In all which it seemed to me and many others that they miscarried divers ways: 1. In imposing Laws upon their King, for which they had no Authority. 2. In forcing him to dishonour the Memory of his Father, by such Consessions. 3. In tempting him to speak and publish that which they might easily know was contrary to his heart, and so to take God's Name in vain. 4. And in giving Cromwell occasion to charge them all with dissimulation.