A88587:143
A modest and clear vindication of the serious representation, and late vindication of the…
A modest and clear vindication of the serious representation, and late vindication of the ministers of London, from the scandalous aspersions of John Price, in a pamphlet of his, entitled, Clerico-classicum or, The clergies alarm to a third war. Wherein his king-killing doctrine is confuted. The authors by him alleged, as defending it, cleared. The ministers of London vindicated. The follies, and falsities of John Price discovered. The protestation, vow, and the Covenant explained. / By a friend to a regulated monarchy, a free Parliament, an obedient army, and a godly ministry; but an enemy to tyranny, malignity, anarchy and heresy.A modest and clear vindication of the serious representation, and late vindication of the ministers of London, from the scandalous aspersions of John Price, in a pamphlet of his, entituled, Clerico-classicum or, The clergies alarum to a third war. Wherein his king-killing doctrine is confuted. The authors by him alledged, as defending it, cleared. The ministers of London vindicated. The follies, and falsities of Iohn Price discovered. The protestation, vow, and the Covenant explained. / By a friend to a regulated monarchy, a free Parliament, an obedient army, and a godly ministry; but an enemy to tyranny, malignity, anarchy and heresie.
London: printed for Stephen Bowtell, 1649
Title page typeset from the transcription.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
2. I would as•, why would you take the Covenant to preserve the Kings person, even then when His person & authority stood more in competition then afterward they did? for then He was in the Head of an Army, but since cast himself on His people; then unwilling to yield to any reasonable terms, but since offered more for the Parliaments safety & peoples good (though I wished he had yielded to more) then ever any Prince that sate upon the English Throne.
2. I would as•, why would you take the Covenant to preserve the Kings person, even then when His person & authority stood more in competition then afterward they did? for then He was in the Head of an Army, but since cast himself on His people; then unwilling to yeeld to any reasonable terms, but since offred more for the Parliaments safety & peoples good (though I wisht hee had yeelded to more) then ever any Prince that sate upon the English Throne.
3 Is it not most inequitable that you should take away the life of the King because His person and authority stood in competition, and yet you and your faction the only men that hindered the Kings person and authority from a conjunction with His two Houses of Parliament? The truth is, the Kings person, and the Armies designs stood both in competition; and therefore they must destroy the one to carry on the other. If the King in person would have had engaged in a combination or conjunction with the Armies Counsels▪ all the blood that had been spilt, or the evils that He had done would have been forgotten, you would not once have muttered that his person and authority had then stood in any • Competition.
3 Is it not most inequitable that you should• take away the life of the King because His person and authority stood in competition, and yet you and your faction the only men that hindred the Kings person and authority from a conjunction with His two Houses of Parliament? The truth is, the Kings person, and the Armies designes stood both in competition; and therefore they must destroy the one to carry on the other. If the King in person would have had ingaged in a combination or conjunction with the Armies Counsels all the blood that had been spilt, or the evills that Hee had done would have been forgotten, you would not once have muttered that his person and authority had then stood in any Competition.