the subjected Assemblies But seing the Bishop in his last conference hath passed from this Article I shall not pursue it any further only the gradation here traced of Presbyteries Synods and Provincial Assemblies moveth me to enquire wherefore no mention of National Assemblies a Court not only the Supreme in that scale but so distinctly defined by a particular Act viz. Act 4. 1663. in its Members methods of procedor and extent of power that I cannot judge its omission accidental and undesigned nay in effect it is a reserve which doth so unquestionably secure the whole interests and designs of Prelacy and so evidently redargue all the proposals made of a trepanning mockery that as I seriously marvel how the Accommodators knowing of this ultimate resort so strongly complicated of all the strength of the Supremacy and Prelacy did not extend their other concessions to all things else that could be demurred so I am no lesse to seek wherefore the Brethren who treated did except so little against it I need not here exhibite any long description of this Court which I have several times above mentioned The Act is full and plain to the meanest capacity The King in the very entry assumes to himself not the indiction only Which was all that after long contendings the more consistent usurpation of former times did by the Act 1612. ascribe unto him but the constitution of this National Synod whereby having named and appointed the members and the Archbishop of S. Andrews for President with an expresse limitation of the time and place of their meeting to his Majesties order and of the matters to be treated and determined concerning Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government to his Royal pâ—easure to be signified in write to the President above named The â—ing with the advice of the Estates confirmeth the same as the lawful constitution of our Church-assemblies provided that the King or his Commissioner be alwayes present and that no Act or Oâ—der be owned as such but that which shall be agreed upon by the President and major part of the members and not contrary to the Kings prerogative or law of the Kingdom And lastly that no Act matter or cause be debated consulted and concluded but what shall be allowed and confirmed by his Majesty or his Commissioner for the time Now I say this Act and Constitution still standing remaining let any ingenuous person declare singly what he thinketh all the proposals so long tinckled upon can signify or what liberty have the dissenting Presbyterian brethren which may not hereby be restrained and rendered ineffectual And what abatement is there condescended unto of the exorbitant powers of Prelacy which is not here either formally or virtually repaired And in a word what good can we expect by any Accommodation which may not by this frame be certainly frustrat and made void I have not in this place noted the strange and palpable usurpations of the Supremacie against the Lord and over his Church which this device and project containeâ— because as in all the parts and passages of our present establishment the vestiges of that wickednesse are very conspicuous so it is in this Act that they are visible in their highest exaltation From all which it may very easily be gathered that the Bishop's policy in his silence on this point was no lesse necessary for the carrying on of his intention then the reservation of the thing the very colluvies of all corruption of Church-governmentâ— deriving its influence and perversions unto all inferior and subordinat Assemblies doth render all the other overtures of agreement elufory and insignificant The fourth Article is that Intrants being lawfully presented by the Patron and â—â—ly tryed by the Presbytery there shall be a day agreed upon by the Bishop and Presbytery for their meeting together for their solemn ordination and admission at which there shall be one appointed to preach and that it shall be at the parish Church where he is to be admitted except in the case of impossibility or extreme inconveniency and if any difference fall in touching that affair it shal be referable to the provincial Synod or the Committee as any other matter This is the Article but there is nothing sound the very entrie offends not that I judge that for the single cause of Patronages being restored and presentations made requisite for intituling to a â—tipend or benefice Intrants all other things being plain should stand off and may not lawfully enter that way No though patronages be indeed in themselves a heavy grievance and in their exercise for the most part partial and sinful and upon these grounds by an expresse Act in the year 1649. abolished yet to Intrants otherwise innocent they are certainly only the greatest injurie But the thing I except is 1. That according to this proposal it seems Ministers formerly lawfully called and ordained and now wrongfully outed shall have no regresse to the exercise of their Ministry save by this method which certainly in these circumstances can not but render the pressure far more uneasy 2. What shall become of Patronages pertaining to Bishops and of other Churches which are of their patrimony Certainly this is a point not so far without our line but at least in a conjunction with the many other things that justly grieve us it may make a part of our regrete But I proceed to take notice of the manner of Ordination here discribed and passing the trial previously appointed It is proposed that there shall be a day agreed upon by the Bishop and Pâ—esbytery for their meeting together for the solemn ordination of Intrants By which it is evident that it is not the vote of the plurality that in this matter can make a determination no the Bishop and Presbytery must both agree to this appointment the whole Presbytery cannot overrule him in it And here I cannot but observe the cunning slieness of this draught The Bishop in all his discourses and treaties hath still in this point of Ordination kept himself in the clouds To assume to himself the sole power of Ordination or a negative voice and part in it is more then all his musty alledgeances from obscure antiquity and declining purity for his fixed presidency will amount unto and to descend to posterior Ages of the Church would be of a consequence no lesse dangerous as to the many corruptions that then were crept in then the ascending to the prior times of scripture light would prove contrary to this prelatick arrogance On the other hand seing both the humor and design of Episcopacy ingage him to be principal in the action of Ordination therein to be subject to the determination of the susfrage of the Presbytery is nothing agreeable and can not be digested And what variety in his discourses this halting ambiguity hath produced I leave it to such as have had the opportunity to observe But now that we have him in write it is worth our pains to consider the
its Assemblies and all other Acts whatsomever giving any Church-power Iurisdiction or Government to its Office-bearers or Meetings other then that which acknowledgeth a dependance upon and subordination unto the Soveraigne Power of the King as Supreme and which is to be regulated and authorized in the exercise thereof by the Bishops and Archbishops who are to be accountable to his Majesty for ther administration And moreover by the same Act the Act 1592. whereby Presbyterian Government was anciently confirmed and which by vertew of the above mentioned Act Rescissory did now in so far by the Act 1612. stand rescinded in respect that it doth also limite the Kings prerogative to be without prejudice or derogation to the priviledge that God hath given to the Spiritual Office-bearers in the Kirk concerning heads of Religion Heresie Excommunication Collation or Deprivation of Ministers or any such like Censure specially grounded in the Word of God This Act I say 1592. is now for this reason totally annulled in all the heads articles and clauses thereof from which Act of Restitution although the nature of our present Church-constitution may be very obviously gathered yet there are two other also to the same purpose of which I cannot but take notice The one is that concerning a National Synod wherein his Majesty by vertew of his Supremacy doth more absolutely appoint and determine upon the manner and members thereof then if it were a meer civill Court unquestionably dependent upon his Royal Authority reserving to himselfe aswell the proposal as the final approbation of all matters to be therein treated The other is the late Act 1669. asserting the Supremacie whereby the Supreme Authority over all persons in all causes Ecclesiastick is so fully declared to appertaine to the King and that by vertew thereof he may dispose upon the Government and Persons Ecclesiastick and enact concerning the Churches meetings and matters therein to be proposed as he shall think fit that a more absolute power in any thing can hardly be devised in his favours These Acts lying so well together I could not but lay them forth to a joint consideration And from them I suppose it will be very evident that the work of the last revolution was not only an invasion made upon the Churches Government by the setting up of Bishops and their usurpation over Presbyteries and Synods as hapened in their former introduction preceeding the year 1612 But that the alteration made is plainly fundamental and that by his Majesties assuming all Church-power to himself as the proper right and prerogative of the Crown without so much as pretending with the Pope a Commission from Iesus Christ for this effect and conveying the same by these communications alone which he is pleased to dispense and to such persons and meetings as he thinketh good to appoint and maketh to himself accountable there is not so much as that Genus of Ecclesiastick Government recognosced by Presbytery as only fountained in and derived from our Lord as Head of the Church let be its specification from our Classical form at present to be found in being in this Church But it may be said that I seem to make a difference betwixt the former and the latter erection of Episcopal Government in this Church and yet when Bishops were brought in in the year 1606. the Kings prerogative was by the then Parliament first enacted and by the next Act their restitution is thereon also founded and in like manner by the Act 1612. Presbyteries and Synods are turned to exercises of the Brethren and Diocesian visitations and the power of ordination deposition and excommunication is given to the Bishop and to compleat all by the same Act the Act 1592. was also rescinded So that it appeares that betwixt the former practices and the late establishment there is no great disparitie 'T is answered the apparent resemblance of the things objected is nevertheless accompanied by such reall and materiall differences that it doth only the more notablie evince the strangeness of the methods and nature of the present establishment beyond all that the same designes in former times could suggest King Iames was indeed bent for Prelacie as all do acknowledge but by seeking thereby to qualifie and oversway the Government of the Church in effect to subvert all Government given by our Lord unto his Church is an absurditie which his better understanding did prudently forbear and nothing save either the mysterie of this growing iniquity or the precipitancie of our times could have produced Now that this is the true state of the difference betwixt our and the former times the particulars following will easiely evince And first it is true the Parliament 1606. doth by their first Act declare the Kings prerogative but only upon the narrative of the accession of the Crowns of England and Ireland and in general over all estates persons and causes without the least derogation to the explication made in favours of the Church by the Parl. 1592. Whereas in our dayes this Supremacy hath been asserted declared and exercised in order to Ecclesiastick Persons meetings and matters not only far beyond any thing pretended to in civils but above all that ever was arrogate either by Pope or temporal Potentate Next by the second Act of the fore-mentioned Parliament 1606. the Estate of Bishops is indeed restored and that upon the ground of the Kings prerogative but to what To ecclesiastick power presidencie jurisdiction c. Fye Not at all but only to their former honours dignities prerogatives priviledges livings lands teinds rents c. And chiefly and especially against the Act of annexation 1587. These though unjustly bestowed were yet proper subjects for a King and Parliament as for other things purely ecclesiastick they rightly judged them to be without their line Whereas by the late Act. 1662. the King with consent of the Estates restores the Bishops both to the same things and also to the exercise of their Episcopal function presidency power of ordination and others above rehearsed declaring himselfe to be the proper and supreme Head whence all Church-pover doth flow and to whom the Bishops ought to be accountable An attempt so impertinent to secular Powers and subversive of the very subject matter of Ecclesiastick government that the former times not from any greater tenderness in these things but meerly from a clearer knowledge of their inconsistencie did not once dream of and therefore in the third place King Iames who knew well eneugh that neither did his prerogative extend to the proper power and jurisdiction of the Church nor could this be thereupon founded and that for him to assume the disposal and dispensing thereof was in effect to destroy it although by vertew of his Supremacy he restored the Bishops to their honours temporalities and possessions yet as to the power Ecclesiastick by them acclaimed he applyed himself to compass the same only by the suffrage determination of Church-assemblies and accordingly we see
the Act Parliament 1612. giving unto Bishops their Church-power and jurisdiction not to be founded in nor flow from the Supremacy but to proceed simply by way of ratification of an Act of a General assembly made two years preceeding and by the same Act. 1612. The Act 1592. establishing aswel the Protestant Religion as Presbiterian government and also limiting the prerogative as I have said is only rescinded in so far as the same is derogatorie to the Articles then concluded whereas the King with consent of Parliament by the Act 1662. laying down the Supremacy for the basis and ascrybing to himself the origen of Ecclesiastick power restores the Bishops in the same manner as if they were his own Commissioners and Delegates And to the effect the Supremacy may transcend all the Act 1592. is totally rescinded without so much as a reserve for the Protestant Religion as is above declared Fourthly in former times whatever were the errors and wrongs either of Church or State or both in the bringing in of Bishops yet this is very certain and important that the Church-assemblies at first conveened by warrand of the Churches intrinsick power and after confirmed by the Parliament 1592. were not upon the change discontinued but honest men did therein maintain both their right and possession except in so far as the same were invaded and they hindered by the Bishops their prevalencie whereas of late not only were the former Presbytries and Synods raised dissolved but the new meetings now conveened in their place were appointed to sit down as they sould be authorized ordered by the Bishops and Archbishops who thereafter are by Act of Parliament restored and impowered by the King as supreme over Persons and Causes Ecclesiastick and declared Arbiter by right of his Crown in these matters So that it is evident that they both are called in his name and do sit and act by vertew of a power acknowledging a subordination unto and dependence upon his Soveraignity by reason whereof they are also to him made accountable I grant that for better concealing the mysterie of this Supremacie Prelacie the present meetings were set up for the most part in the same bounds much under the same forme and name with the old presbyteries and synods But seeing their precarious dependence on Bishops with the Bishops their proper absolute subordination to the King as Supreme over the Church is undeniable from the above cited Act. 1662. that therefore the present Church-government as it is freqently called in the late Acts of Parliament so de facto is his Majesties government and not that of our Lord Iesus who hath not invested him therewith either by deputation or surrender is evident above exception Neither are these things so only in the law and appointment as is by some alledged no the frequent examples of Bishops their deposing and suspending in Synods after having asked meerly pro forma the advice of a few next to them without the vote of the whole their renversing the deeds of Presbyteries controlling whole Synods by themselves alone with his Majesties granting of the High Commission impowering Seculars to appoint Ministers to be censured by deposition and suspension as well as Ecclesiasticks to punish by fining consining imprisoning his removing and placing Bishops at his pleasure and his late granting a Commission of oversight or episcopacie for the Diocesse of Glasgow to him who mostly scrupled at a Patent of the Bishoprick because of its temporalitie These examples I say do clearly bring up our practice the full length of all enacted Having thus explained the condition of our present Ecclesiastick constitution in its authority principles and practices wholly different from any model that ever was seen in this Church I think were it not for the clearness of method I might leave the description of the present Prebyteries and Synods to the Readers own ingenuous collection but tò render my discourse the more easie I say that the Presbiteries and Synods which are now so termed amongst us are meetings for Church-matters conveened by his Majesties call acting by his authority in a precarious dependence upon the Bishops and absolute subordination to the Supremacie and this definition is so manefestly the result of what is premised and composed as it were of the Act of restitution and supremacy and proclamation so often mentioned that none can deny it Neither is it the present question whether we may simply joyne in these meetings or not For seeing that not only this conjunction would be an acknowledgement of the supremacie nothing different from yea rather worse then the sitting in the High Commission and an active submission to and owning of Prelacie in its highest usurpation But even the Articles of Accommodation by offering a mitigation do evidently suppose it to be inconsistent with Presbyterian principles It is clear that a simple unqualified Union with and in these meetings is not the case of the present debate The point therefore that comes next to be examined is whether or not the Articles do indeed contain such condescensions and conditions as may fully releive us of our just exceptions Which leads me to take notice of the Fifth Article as I said before in the first place as that which appears to be most direct to this purpose And the contents of it are 'T is not to be doubted that my L Commissioner his Grace will make good what he offered aneâ—â— the establishment of Presbyteries and Synods and we trust his Grace will procure such security to these brethren for declaring their judgement that they may do it without any hazard in contraveening any Lawâ— and that the Bishops shall humbly and earnestly commend this to his Grace These are the termes of the Article and for all that I have yet heard I am not so doubtful of the Comissioner's performance as I am still uncertain of what was offered The Brethren who conferred in the Abbey told us that Presbyteries were offered to be set up as before the Year 1638. and that the Bishop should passe from his Negative voice and so forth But what may be the import of the first part of this offer or how far it may conduce to the clearing of our Consciences I confess I am still in the dark That which the dissenting Brethren do and every true Minister of Iesus Christ ought to seek after is a Court meeting in the Name and acting by the authority and rules of our Lord and Master Any other Court called by the King and acting by an authority derived from the Supremacie If in matters properly Ecclesiastick is but a complexed usurpation against Christ whose the Government is both in the Constituent and actors If in Civils then it is wholly without the Ministers Sphaere and not to be medled in by them Now that before the 1638. the Presbyteries and Synods then sitting were for the most part our Lords Courts in so far as they were by Succession the same
contrivance We have heard in the second Article that he is willing that Chnrch-matters be managed in Presbyteries and Synods by the vote of the plurality a fair insinuation that the matter of Ordination shall be in the same manner transacted And in this Article he leaves the trial to the Presbytery consents that if possible the Ordination be at the parish Church where one shall be appointed to preach and lastly is content differences falling in be referred to the Superior Courts all fair generals But wherefore no mention who shall be the actual ordainers whether the Bishop and whole Presbytery or the Bishop alone in behalfe and as Mederator of the Presbytery or the Bishop alone as indeed something greater whether as in a superior order or only in a higher degree is but a School nicety then either a Presbyter or the Presbytery to whose office this part doth properly belong And as to these things though we be left in the dark yet many palpable indications lead us to feel this last to be the thing designed against which if I might now stand to debate I could show this not only to be contrary to Evangelick parity and simplicity and Apostolick practice and destitute even of these pretended testimonies of the next Ages for a fixed prostasia but that it hath been one of the main impostures of the prelatick Spirit first injuriously to usurpe and then mysteriously to involve the matter of Ordination that the Bishops might have the dignity to be its proper dispensators and the mystery of iniquity be the more thereby advanced But the point here most remakable is that apprehending his condescendencies might render him as being obnoxious to the plurality of voices of lesse power and influence in this affair Behold how craftily he goeth about to salve his negative which he may not for fear of a discovery plainly owne and that is by making the appointment of the day for ordaining to depend on his and the Presbyteries joynt agreement wherein if he please to be a dissenter It is certain that his not assenting to this circumstance will be of no lesse consequence for his purpose then if he had reserved unto himself an inhibiting veto upon the substance of the whole businesse Now that this power in what sort soever by him couched and covered is not to be allowed his want of any sufficient warrant for it doth aboundantly evinceâ— And further what the Scripture and Apostolick rule in this affair is these few considerations may in this place satisfie 1. That the power of Ordinantion is certainly annexed to dependent upon the pastoral charge for seing that the cure committed to the Apostles and by them to succeeding Pastors could not be perpetuat without a succession the evident reason of the thing it self with the import of that command The things that thou hast heard of me the same commit thou to faithful men who shall be able to teach others also do plainly perswade the assertion 2. As we find in Scripture the Apostles and others upon occasion by themselves alone ordaining so whereever a concurrence did offer we may observe the Act to be alwayes joyntly done and administrat so we find the twelve joyntly ordaining and laying their hands upon the seven Deacons without any prerogative acclaimed by Peter who yet if falshoods may be compared hath more apparent grounds in Scripture for his Primacy then can be shewed for the Presidency of any Bishop Next we have the fraternity of Prophets and Teachers at Antioch sending forth and imposing hands upou Barnabas and Saul by a like equall conjunction 3. It is said of Paul and Barnabas that they in a plural union Did ordain Elders in every Church And 4. it is manifest that Paul by reason of his concurrence with other Presbyters in the Ordination of Timothie doth attribut the same act indifferently to his own hands and to the hands of the Presbytery Which Scripture-grounds being joyned to the want of any probable reason for this singularity and the manifestly woful and sad consequences of this Episcopal imparity with the present unquestionable design of bearing down the just liberty and authority of the Lord's Ministers in a convenient Subserviency to mens lusts and wickednesse by the stiff and inflexible retaining of this privilege do I am confident make out the eccentrick preheminence acclaimed to be not only in it self unlawfull but by our solemn Oaths to maintain Presbytery and extirpat every thing that shall be found to be contrary to sound Doctrine and the power of godlinesse perpetually abjured Seing therefore that this Article doth certainly imply this corruption as I have above declared that it can have no better acceptance from us then the preceeding needeth no further reasoning As for the other trifling circumstances whereby the principal thing in it is endeavoured to be palliat they do not merite any more speciall inquiry The fift Article is It is not to be â—oubâ—ed but the Lord Commissioner will make good what he offered anent the establishment of Presbyteries and Synods and we trust his Grace will procuâ—e such security to the Brethren for declaring their judgment that they may do it without any hazard in counterveening any law and that the Bishop shall humbly and earnestly recommend this to his Grace This Article made up of uncertain assurances ridiculous trusts and the Bishop's conformable undertaking is already by me sufficientâ—y examined in the very entry of this discourse and there told that what the Commissioner did undertake anent the establishment of Presbyteries I did not exactly know but if it was that which is reported viz that they should be set up as preceeding the 1638. I thought it could contribute notâ—ing to the removal of our just exceptions I shall not here offend the Reader by a vain repetition but seing the grounds formerly laid down are very material and yet by the most part little adverted to it will not be amisse that after the full and plain account I have given of these matters I again run over them and 1. That according to the principles of truth Presbyteries are not founded in any humane establishment but in the right and Authority which our Lord hath given unto his Church is our constant perswasion so that though the accessory confirmation and countenance of the powers may be of great use to and no lesse acceptance with the Church yet it is no part of their original right 2. Before the 1638. and even until the Year 1661. Presbyteries were founded and did continue in this Church not by vertue of any Act of â—arliament whereby they were properly authorized but upon the basis of that intrinseck right which I have already mentioned Thus having conveened and settled themselves shortly after the Reformation they continued their possession uninterrupted until the Year 1661. It is true they obtained the confirmation of King and Parliament in the Year 1592. as also in the Year 1612. many corruptions introduced and
an inquirie And therfore omitting to preface any thing upon the first proposal of this Treatie and the methods of its prosecution that have since been practised I shall take its termes from their most assured warrant viz. the Articles lately given in at Paseley to the Mimisters there conveening under the title and of the tenor following Articles proposed by the Bishop of Glasgow to the dissenting Brethren 1. THat if the dissenting Brethrâ—n will come to Presbyteries and Synods they shall not only not be oblidged to renounce their own private opinion anent Church-government and swear or subscribe any thing thereto But shall have libertie at their entrie to the said meeting to declare and enter it in what form they please 2. That all Church affairs shall be managed in Presbyteries or Synods by the free vote of Presbyters or the major part of them 3. If any difference fall out in the Diocesian Synods betwixt any of the Members thereof it shall be lawfull to appeal to a Provincial Synod or their Committy 4. That Intrants being lawfully presented by the Patron and duely tryed by the Presbyterie there shall be a day agreed on by the Bishop and Presbytrie for their meeting together for theiâ— solemn ordination and admission at which there shall be one appointed to preach and that it shall be at the Parish Church where he is to be admitted except in the case of impossibility or extream inconvenience And if any difference fall in touching that affair it shall be referable to the Provincial Synods or their Committy as any other matter 5. It is not to be doubted but my L. Commissioner his Grace will make good what he offered anent the establishment of Presbyteries and Synods and we trust his Grace will procure such security to these Brethren for declaring their judgement that they may do it without any hazard in contraveening any Law and that the Bishop shall humbly and earnestly recommend this to his Grace 6. That no Intrant shall be engadged to any Canonical Oath or Subscription to the Bishop and that his opinion anent that Government shall not prejudge him in this but that it shall be free for him to declare These being the conditions offered in order to the intended Accommodation it is evident that for a due understanding of their import we ought first to know what is the nature of these Meetings called Presbyteries Synods and Provincial Assemblies to which the Brethren are invited And for that end we must not only transpose the fifth Article to the first place and supplie it with such other probabilities as may be had but also arise a little higher to remember the changes that we have lately seen and from what and to what they have carried us For seing our joyning in the present Presbyteries and Synods with or under Bishops as they are offered to be reduced is that which is principally demanded of us it is so little possible without this previous examination rightly and fairly to define the case in contratraversie that I can hardly acquit the preposterousness and deficiencie in the Articles of a greater error then a common mistake The thing then which comes first to be noted in point of fact and which I shall represent with that truth and impartiality that I hope none shall deny it is that this Church having in the Year 1638. abrogat and abjured the Government of the Kirk by Bishops and set up Presbyterian Government in its purest simplicity and paritie we together with the renewing of the National Covenant solemnly engadged Constantly to adhere unto and defend the true Religion then established in Doctrine Worship and Government contrary to all the novations and corruptions from which it was at that time reformed and to labour by all means for the purity and liberty of the Gospel as it was established and professed before these novations After which time the Church in our acknowledgement did enjoy a Ministrie and Government truely Ecclesiastick committed to them by and depending upon our Lord Iesus Christ alone as King in Zion and Head of his Church Thereafter by an Act Rescissorie it was declared and statute by both King and Parliament in the Year 1640. and 1641. agreeably to the Oath formerly taken that the sole and only power and jurisdiction within this Kirk did stand in the Kirk of God as it was then reformed and in the General Provincial and Ptesbyterial Assemblies with the Kirk Sessions established by Act. P. 1592. in like manner by the Solemn League and Covenant entred into in the Year 1643. the whole Kingdome doth again swear to the preservation of the Reformed Religion of the Church of Scotland in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government and to extirpate Popery Prelacie Schism Superstition Profannesse and whatsoever shall be found contrary to sound Doctrine and the Power of Godliness Which engagement we are bound all the dayes of our life zealously aud constantly to continow in against all opposition and to promove the same according to our power Thus matters stood both in obligation and general observance until the Year 1661. At which time the Parliament then sitting having prepared their way by exalting of the prerogative in opposition to and for the overthrow of the practices of bygone times specially that of entering into Leagues and Bonds they at one blow rescinde all Parliaments after the year 1633. and the Government of the Church being thereby wholly deprived of the civill sanction and its continowance by another Act permitted and declared to be only precarious during the Kings pleasure Afterward all Ecclesiastick meetings in Synods Presbytries and Sessions are by proclamation the 9 Ianuary 1662. discharged untill they should be authorized and ordered by the Archbishops and Bishops then nominat by his Maiestie upon their entering into the Government of their respective Sees By which means the former Government being overturned and razed unto the very foundation at least as much as the wit and power of man could effectuat the next thing that offers is the new structure and frame that is raised in its place And in the year 1662. the Parliament again meeting by their first Act for re-establishing of the Government of the Church by Bishops laying it for the ground That the disposal of the external Government of the Church doth properly belong unto his Majestie as an inherent right of the Crown by vertew of his Supremacie They do thereby redintegrat the estate of Bishops not only to their places in Parliament and their accustomed dignities and priviledges but also to their Episcopal function Presidency in the Church and power of Ordination Censures and all Church-discipline to be performed by them with the advice of such of the Clergie as they should find to be of known loyalty and prudence And for removing of all scruples the Parliament doth furder rescinde all former Acts by which the sole and only power and jurisdiction within this Church doth stand in the Church and
for the former part of the assertion the Acts other things by me premised do abundantly clear it As for the latter that the King hath no such power in and over the Church it being uncontroverted in the Presbyterian perswasion and the Supremacy made the ground of the abovementioned Act of Restitution being to them a greater cause of offence then any of these difficulties in this matter of conjunction with Presbyteries Synods intended by the Accommodation it was the part of the Accommodators either by conviction or condescendence to have removed it However I may not digresse only I am assured if these three things be considered which I am readie to demonstrat against whatsoever Opponent 1. That this Ecclesiastick power is the sole prerogative of Iesus Christ whereof the administration was committed by our Lord to his Church when no Magistrat was a Member thereof and that upon the Magistrats becoming Christian there is no ground adduceable whereupon it could accrease to him 2. That all the power of the Magistrat is under God from the People and in such things over and about which the original power was to them competent to which this Church-power can in no sort be reckoned 3. That all the extraordinarie interpositions of good Kings and Emperours in matters of Religion did no wayes flow from any inherent right or prerogative they had conversant in these matters but were the pure product of necessitie sustained by the righteousness of the work deficiency of the more proper means These things I say being duely considered I am very confident that all the pretensions of the Supremacy will very quickly evanish and therefore it inevitably followes that seeing the Kings Supremacy is a high usurpation against our Lord Master all Courts depending thereon and acknowledging the same partaking therein what ever opinion a man do reserve or whatever declaration be made anent it must also be rejected But here there ariseth a great noise and clamor what are the present Presbyteries and Synods no Presbyteries and Synods then are the present Ministers no Presbyters But their is no such haste neither have these things any further connexion then that the present Ministers are not Presbyters in so far as the same denotes a power of ruling committed by Iesus Christ which truly I think in ingenuitie they can not deny specially seing that although they hold themselves to be Ministers by mission from Christ yet they do nevertheless acknowledge their power of Ecclesiastick Government and Iurisdiction to be from the King on whom they grant that the Ministerie as to other things doth not in such a manner depend Whereupon it evidently followeth that if the power of government do as well and in the same manner flow from Iesus Christ as the power of order as the Schools speak doth and that thereby true Presbyteries and Synods do only subsist then these meetings which recognosce his Majesty as Supreme for and in the exercise of the power which they acclaime can no more be truly such then he who by vertew of his Soveraign's mission would pretend himself to be a Minister But what need of more words if the present conform Ministers and there meetings have disclained Iesus Christ for their immediat Head in matrer of Government and owne no power thereof but what acknowledgeth a dependence upon and subordination to his Majesty as Supreme wherewith nevertheless he himself is not at all vested and if on the other hand we do disallow all Church-Government and medlings and meetings thereof which do not hold their commission and warrant from Christ alone as the Head of the Body what concurrence can we make in on and the same Assembly Or by what salvo may my sitting and acting be justified in a meeting in the power whereof I hold it unlawful to partake For my part since in the matter of Ecclesiastick Government they do not hold the true Head but have betaken themselves to another to whom they do referr are accountable for all their power if we who in Conscience do both detest this usurpation and disclaime all share in any power save what our Lord hath committed unto us desire to be excused from these Assemblies I think until they first convince us of our mistake in these things they cannot rationally blame us for Separation And therefore what ever may be the effect of an entrie qualified either by declaration or protestation in order to the freeing of the partie from an apparent constructive accession to certain accidental corruptions that may be in a meeting to which he is otherwise obliged to joine yet sure I am in this case where the very constitution it self is so unwarrantable and corrupt that non can actively partake therein without sin this remedie here offered is altogether insignificant The next thing that here occurres is that although this reservation of opinion and declaration permitted could be a salvo as to the evills of the constitution yet without doubt there is a consideration to be had in such conjunctions of the persons also with whom it is to be made There may be an Assembly nay a Presbyterie or Synod of evill doers which we are bound to hate and even the Assembly of the wicked who inclosed him and pearced his hands and his feet wanted not a specious name yea it was the house of his friends sure no man will think that a simple protestation may warrant constant presence in these cases but rather encline with Ieremiah to leave and to draw from an assembly of treacherous men What for assemblies the present Church-meetings are I can be no more tender then it is superflous to utter only this I will say that if it be once granted that such may be the condition of a meeting by reason of the quality of its members that no declaration can warrant any fellowship therein I am certain that the subsumption viz. that such are the Courts to which we are invited may be to the satisfaction of all unbyassed men upon these sufficient grounds of notorious perjury intrusion profanitie and insufficiencie unquestionably made out But I proceed to the next Article bearing That all Church-affaires shall be managed in Presbyteries and Synods by the free vote of Presbyters or the Major part of them This is indeed the main principal condescendence and it is to this place that aswel for the satisfaction of such Brethren as possibly will not so easily at first admit of the foregoing reasons as for a full answere to all that can be said for this Accommodation I have reserved to discourse upon it at more length and on all fair and probable Suppositions In supplement therefore of this Article and to take it in the most advantageous sense that the Proposers can desire I adde that consistently therewith it seems the Bishop is to be reduced to a constant Moderator whence in prosecution of my declared purpose waving any further exceptions against the nullity of
obligation and in that seem invincibly perswadedâ— it is very pertinent if true to declare the consistencie of the present government even with that obligation 'T is answered these insinuations of irregularity and violence being only general without so much as a condescendencie let be any verification I might very justly neglect them but being made by a person who after being eye witnes to the courses which he reproacheth did both take the Covenant himself and administrat it to others and now notwithstanding that all the cavillations and objections of adversaries have been answered without reply hath under his hand renounced it I can not pasâ—e them without â—ome admiration of such inconscionable insolence of which â— do hereby defye the Author to acquit himself by any rational and probable instanceâ— we â—ave indeed heard the proud calumnies of prevailing Adversaries but seing these are certain truths viz. â— That this Landbeing in the beginning lawfully ingaged in the National Covenant did upon the occasion of the ensuing and growing defections and novations very justly both renew and explaine their ingagements and also censure such who by refusing their assent did evidently declare their apostasie 2. That not only the communion of Saints but the very force of that obligement of constant defence and adherence contained in the National did so constrain us to make the League and Covenant as the visibly necesâ—ary mean for that end and without which conjunction the prelatick partie in England which had twice from thence perfidiously attacâ—qued us prevailing there had in all probabilitie overwhelmed us that the refusal of this second Covenant by any who had taken the first could not but be construed a breach thereof and expose them to condigne punishment 3. That the countenance and confirmation of Authority being demanded and unjustly refused to that for preservation and maintenance whereof Government it self was set up can not in reason make the deed so done for want thereof unlawful And 4. That the sufferings of recusants in our former times were either for the merit or number of the delinquents very small and inconsiderable and have been by the renversings and persecutionâ— of these laâ—e times so many degrees exceeded that it is ashame for any person of ingenuity by accusing the past and owning the present to shew such partialitie These I say being certain truths and so fully held out by several writings on our side it is impossible but the same being duely perpended all the vapour of this smoak must instantly evanish But in the next place comes the Authors kindnesse and charitie to relieve such who labour under an apprehended inconsistencie of these their Oaths with this fixed Presidencie in prosecution hereof he sayeth That if men would have the patience to inquire this our Episcopacie will be found not to be the same with that abjured for that is the government of Bishops absolutly by themselves and their Delegates Chancellours Archdeacons c. As it is expressed in the Article was on purpose expressed â—o difference that frame from other forms of Episcopacie particularly from that which is exercised by Bishops joyntly with Presbyters in Presbyteries and Synods which is now used in this Church And here I might again take notice of the grossness of this mistake supposing our present Church-government because forsooth it is not exercised by Chancellours Archdeacons and the rest expressed in the second Article of the Covenant therefore not to be that which was abjured but a distinct from managed by Bishops joyntly with Presbytersâ— whereas it is evident as the Sun-light that our Parliament did not only in preparation to the late change make void the obligation of our Covenants and all the Acts and Authority of former Parliaments whereby Episcopacie had been abrogate But also restore and redintegrat the estate of Bishops to a more full injoyment of Church power and prerogatives then formerly was granted unto them yea unto the sole possession and exercise thereof under his Majesty above all that their Predecessors did ever acclaim As both from the Act of Restitution and the consequent practices of our Bishops I have already plainly evinced that so it is beyond all controversie that the same Episcopacy abjured what ever it was was by our late Parliament again restored But Secondly admiâ—ting that our present frame were in esse such as it is represented or at least by the proposal of Accommodation offered As the mistake or rather wilfull error of this passage doth borrow its colour and preâ—ext from the second Article of the Covenant obliging us to the extirpation of Poperie and Prelacie that is to say c. according to the description there set down so the thing obvious to be observed for clearing thereof is that in order to our case in Scotland it is not the obligation of this second Article to extirpate that we are principally and in the first place to regard but it is the positive ingagement of the first binding as to Scotland to preserve and as to England and Ireland to reforme that is in a manner the key of the whole in as much as by the Church of Scotland and to endeavour the seâ—lement of the Church of England the second Article is manifestly subjoined by way of execution viz. that for attaining the ends of the first we should endeavour the extirpation of all things therein either generally or specially enumerat which two Articles the one to preserve the then constitution of our Church with so great contendings lately reformed from this corruption amongst others of the Bishops their constant Moderatiship and the otheâ— to extirpate every thing found to be contrary to sound doctrine and the Power of Godlinesse as Episcopacy in all its degrees had been by our Church declared to be doth certainly make up an obligation most directly opposite to and inconsistent with this Presidencie re-obtruded Thirdly If thir luk-warm Conciliators were as mindful to pay their vows to the most High as they are bold to devour that which is holy and after vows to make inquiry in place of this impertinent wresting and misapplication of these obligements in the League and Covenant which do more properly concerne the at-that-time-unsetled Estate of England and Ireland then the established condition of the Church of Scotland as we shall immediatly hear they would rather consider their own and our obligations by the National Covenant and how in that day of our distresse and wrestlings from under the yoke of Prelacie we swore unto the Lord to defend that Reformation whereunto we attained and constantly to reject and labour against all these Novations and corruptions from which we were then delivered Under which Head of Novations and Corruptions I am assured that every considerat person will so easily perceive this Presidencie and Moderatorship oâ— Bishops to have been abjured that he will almost as much wonder at the heedlesse expositions of our Adversaries put upon these Covenants as pity the sin of their
backsliding and overtâ—rning of our dayesâ— their godly sorrow would work in them a carefulnesse a clearing of themselves an inâ—ignation a fear a vehement desire a zeal yea and a revenge above all the detestation that our Author and his followers do commonly calumniat as fury amongst us And Cyprian in place of his particular above cited Conâ—titutâ— c. opposed to the then aspiring Prelaâ—y would become a Presbyterian of the strictest form and therefore though I do not owne these accusations of schism total breach of communion with the Church wherein the Authour is pleased to state and phrase the difference of present practice from that of the ancient Church But on the contrary I have often and plainly declared that the sin attending the compliance urged is the plain cause and measure of our withdrawing Yet that our abstaining from the present Church-meetings so widely differing from these of the ancient Church and invironed with circumstances no lesse variant doth not give ground to so much as that seeming opposition in practice which the Author objects But on the contrary is the very same which all the faithful therein would have chosen upon the like exigence I am confident all true and serious observers will very readily acknowledge and consequently that this the Authors one and last word notwithstanding of the enforcing epithets of undeniable and very considerable wherewith he seconds it is neverthelesse nothing singular from all the rest premised Having thus largely digressed in the review of these Papers and therein discussed most of the arguments used for this Accommodation it remains that I follow forth the second Article where I left And though for the better reaching of the outmost of our Adversaries pretensions I have supposed Prelacy to be thereby reduced to a simple Presidency and in this sense argued against it yet since it is certain that the nomination and election of the Episcopus Praeses who when present is to preside and when absent doth at best only permit a precarious suffection is not to be committed to the Presbyteries suffrage but absolutely reserved to his Majesty and next that the general of all Church-affaires and what may be meant by management whether the decision only when proposed to the Assembly or both the proposing and deciding do seem to require a further explication I think the Article is further liable to these exceptions I shall not here repeat what I have said against the unwarrantablenesse and inevitable prejudice of the abridgement of tâ—e Churches just liberty in the choise of its Moderators in its several Assemblies and his Majesties usurpation in this point the thing which I at present note as defective and which was also much desiderat is a clear explanation whether the power and liberty of proposing be aswel offered in this Article to the free vote of the meetings as the power of deciding seems thereby to be conceded or whether according to the scheme of our National Synod as now setled by Authority of Parliament the power of proposing is not still to be the privilege of the constant moderatorâ— or rather his Majesties prerogative to be exercised by the meer intervention of the fixed Praeses as his instrument I shall not criticize nor ask how the proposal came to be set down in these terms That all Church-affaires shall he managed in Presbyteries Synods by their free vote rather then thus that they shall be managed by Presbyteries Synods their free vote Onely this I may affirme that the second member of my doubt is no lesse probable consonant to the tenor and prescript of the Act mentioned then evidently elusory of all the other liberties proposed But wherefore do I hesitat in these smaller mattersâ— The thing here principally to be observed is that as by the present establishment annexing Church power and jurisdiction to the Kings Crown and Prerogative and thereby subverting all true Church-government and making the pretended Presbyteries and Synods only the â—ing and the Prelats their pitiful Conventicles the first Article inviting to Presbyteries Synods is rendered vain and void all its cautions impertinent So the Supremacy now more then ever prevalentâ— is with this second article and all the offer of liberty therein held out plainly inconsistent for proof whereof I only desire that the two may be impartially compared The Article sayes that all Church-affaires shall be managed in Presbyteries or Synods by their free vote And the Act of Supremacy statutes that his Magesty may enact concerning all meetings and matters Ecclesiastick what in his Royal misdome he shall think fit How then can these two consist or in what manner can they be reconciled If these Meetings and the power of the Supremacy were both of the same kinde and did stand in the same line I know the subordination of Synods and Presbyteries to General Assemblies might easily explain the difficulty but seing a subordination of this â—ort betwixt these Courts and this high prerogative would in effect distroy their true being and essence and on the other hand to imagine that by this Accommodation there is any derogation of the Supremacy intended so much as to be connived at were foolish and presumtuous It is clear that the Supremacy and the liberty here pretended cannot rationally be composed if therefore the Accommodators would deal uprightly in this affair let them first shew us where these Presbyteries and Synods are to which they would have us to come and next cause us to understand the truâ—h and reality of the just liberty they seem to offer and then boast of their condescendencies But while they suppose things for uncontroverted grounds which are warrantably and plainly by us denied and then would ingage us by a form of specious concessions wanting al real foundation they only discover their own palpable weaknesse or more unpardonnable disingenuity The third Article bears If any difference fall out in the diocesian Synods betwixt any of the members thereof it shall be lawful to appeal to a Provincial or their Committy That this Provincial is founded upon and overswayed by the Supremacy and therâ—by manifestly disprovable as neither a true Ecclesiastick-Court nor enjoying any competent measure of power liberty is abundantly confirmed by the arguments above adduced against the preceeding articles The singularites that here occurre are that the constitution of a Provincial Assemâ—ly being a Court not in use amongst us should have been expresly declared 2. That if we may guesse at this by Vshers reduction and according to the present establishment it must consist of members viz. the Bishops and Deans or constant Moderators of the province both more unwarranâ—able as to their office and corrupt in their practices then the ordinary constituents of inferior meetings 3. That this provincial is to have a Committie which being yet very unlawfully established for a perpetual Court can only conduce to the greater strengthening of the Archbishop's primacy and the oversway of
therefore once for all review and summe up the manifold and manifest evils of this device not more conceited and boasted of by its contrivers the Servants of men then deservedly rejected by all the true Ministers of our Lord Iesus Christ Notwithstanding of all the specious pretexts and fair smoothings that have been adhibite for triming up this Accommodation to an alluring and taking condescendence yet I am perswaded that who ever seriously ponders what hath been said upon it will be quickly convinced that the difficulties following do still remain as invincible impediments to all conscientious men First That a conjunction with and in the present Church meetings is a certain acknowledgment of and participation with the present Ecclesiastick-government which in effect is not truly such but a meer politick constitution wholly dependent upon and resolving in the Supremacy wherein no faithful Minister can take part Seconâ—ly That this conjunction doth evidently infer a consent and submission to this Supremacy as arrant an usurpation upon the Kingdom of Iesus Christ in and over his Church as ever did dare the King of â—ings and Lord of Lords in any age Thirdly That though this consent could not be objected yet such is the present elevation of this all-swaying Prerogative not intended to be depressed that all other concâ—ssions though in themselves satisfying would thereby be deprived of any consistent assurance and rendered wholly elusory And really when I reflect upon these particulars I cannot forbear to ask with what conscience can Ministers rather partake in Church-meetings framed by and under the power of the Supremacy then if the Bishops were therein still to domineer after the rate of the highest Prelacy Or what delusion can be more ridiculous then that men excepting against meetings because of the Bishops usurpation therein should upon the vacating and reassuming of this power by the King as Supreme be thereby entised unto a compliance But Fourthly as these meetings are founded upon and absolutely subjected unto the Supremacy so the often cited Proclamation and Act of Resâ—itution tell us that they are authorized and ordered by the Archbishop and Bishop and consequently do in such manner derive their Authority from them that the Members do only act therein as the Bishops their Delegates or rather as the subdelegates of his Majesties Delegates a strange accumulation of absurdities which I am certain this constitution standing cannot be salved by any overture whatsomever Fifthly The meetings whereunto we are invited do consist of â—uch members for their perjurious intrusion and canonical servitude to say nothing of their more extrinseck delinquencies of profanity insufficiency and irreligion as may not only warrant a non-conjunction but a positive separation And certainly if the lower degree of these crimes in the time of the former Biâ—hops did even under that different constitution offend some of the Lords faithful servants to an abhorrent with drawing how much more should their brimful measures in our dayes with the duty of a testimony which our Covenant and mens unparalleled backslidings do now require justify our detestation It is true G. B. tells us that under this there may be a fear in us that we shall not carry things as we would which he thinks is very little suitable to the patience we pâ—ead for But really so long as our will is moved and directed by the Rules and in order to the ends which our Lord hath appointed to these Courts I see not how this fear can be condemned as either ambitious or disagreeable to our principles Sixtly Notwithstanding of any thing conceded by the Articles and over and above all that hath been said against an Epâ—scopus Praeses even in the most moderate acceptation the â—iâ—hop as offered to be reduced is repugnant both to Scripture purer antiquity and our solemn Oaths and Ingagements inconsistent with he principles of Presbytery and in effect very little lowed from any of these powers and hights which he acclaimes in asmuch as he is still at the King's nomination and not subject to either the censure or control of the meetings over which he doth preside 2. He retaineth all his vain and absurd temporalities 3. As constant Moderator the power of proposing and the method of handling and voting any matter controverted with the care and direction of the execution of any sentence pronounced pertaineth to him solely 4. For any thing as yet declared the Bishop must have at least a more eminent power and suffrage in the matter of Ordination and Excommunication and in this point not only the Articles are most suspitioâ—sly reserved and obscure but if we take notice of the Accomodators their other discourses and writings we have little reason to doubt that the power of both is to abide with him as it was established by the Act 1612. and observed before 1638. So that in my opinion all the ease offered by the Accomodation may be very quickly calculat and in a word amounts to this only that where now these meetings do by a precarious tolerance consult and determine in lesser matters and in things more weighty do rather prepare and ripen to the Bishop's decision who also ordaines and censures with very little ceremony by this Treatie and its Articles over and above the wretched salvo of a pactioned and contrariant protestation this tolerance is to be changed into a more assured liberty as to the Bishop but every whit as dependent upon the King as Supreme And the acts of ordination and excommunication are to be passed and performed more publickly and with greater solemnity Which observation I must confesse is to me so obvious that it hath been alwayes attended with no lesse perswasion that if the Bishop did not judge our consciences as peevish and fickle as he asteemeth the matters in difference frivolous and empty trifles he would not have this risced his own reputation in all the business and stir he hath made about such a nothing of condescendence Of which I am the more confirmed that though the papers which I have discusâ—ed were by the Bishop acknowledged to have been written some years ago and do all along conclude a conformity to the present establishment yet the Bishop very justly though imprudently supposing the case to be still the same hath made much use of them of late without the least alteration to ingage us unto the terms of his new agreement Seventhly This Accommodation utterly disowns cuts off the Ruling Elder an officer not only clearly warranted from Scripture and the nature of the Churches constitution and singularly commended by his usefulness but in some respect countenanced even by the mixtures we see in his Masters ecclesiastick commission Eightly The Terms offered being proposed with this expresse condition Episcopacy being alwayes preserved and in effect so fully retaining the substance of all the corruptions and grievances of that model and frame by us very solemnly and often abjured both by the National and the Solemn League and
invasions made by the Prelats upon the rights and privileges of these Assemblies were bâ— the same Authority ratified and approven but as by the latter Act their being was not totally dissolved so it is not unto the former that they do owe their fundamental establishment 3. All that can be probably gathered from what is promised is that possibly to some such apparent mixture of Episcopacy and Presbytery now to be formed as did result from tâ—e intrusion of Prelats upon Presbyteries before the 1638. the civil sâ—nction may be interposed But since now the case is vastly altered and that in effect at present there is not so much as any kinde of true Ecclesiastick-government or meeting to be found among the Prelats and their Dependents nay that all we are to expect is some hodge podge device of Supremacy accommodat to its desires and directly and absolutely subjected to its pretended omnipotency it is clear and certain that this mistaken project can affâ—rd us no clearing If any man judge me uncharitable how glad would I be to be found really in â—he wrong But seing it is evident that the Supremacy is rather more and more ascendent and that there is not the least probability either of its mitigation or of the rescission of the Act for Restitution c. Anno 1662. and yet far lesse the retreating of the Proclamation Ianuary 1662. dissolving Presbyteries and of their and their true members reestablishment all requisite to give the Lord Commissioner's offer if any such was made a genuine and satisfactory meaning why should we preserve an illusive charity to plain and solid ingenuity But if any man will still contend the comparing together of the first and second part of this Article I am certain will prove sufficient to convince the most inflexible opiniaster In the first part It is not doubted but the King's Commissioner will make good his offer viz. to set up Presbyteries as before 1638 In the second it is hoped that he will procure due security to the Brethren in the free declaration of their judgment But if true Presbyteries be rightly restored this security is clearly superfluous and if they shall not be restored in that integrity but by vertue of the Supremacy on which they depend reduced to the figure of the then model by authorizing the above mentioned mixture it is evident that in place of resolution we have only an arbitrary politick alteration a compliance wherewith no declaration protestation can in any wise purge as I have already fully proven And this is indeed one of the reasons why I termed the Bishops trust ridiculous But yet I confesse there are other causes that do more provoke me to this character the one is that it should be imagined that Governours will give an antecedent licence to transgresse lawes which neverthelesse in all probability they have not the least intention to repeal the other is that the Bishop should suppose that a testimony requisite upon the account of duty may be either forborn or suspended for want of an assured immunity whereas it is most certain that whereever faithfulnesse to God doth require our appearance though in the things that are least the fear of man that bringeth a snare is not to be regarded much lesse to be therewith ballanced I acknowledge indeed that the faint and pusillanimous dealing of some of the Brethren who conferred in making this their scruple seems to have drawn from the Bishop this insinuat sollution and I should verily have taken it for a scornful indulgence if he had not to his hope adjoyned the promise of his humble and earnest intercession But seing it is to be by all regreted we hope shall be by the decliners themselves bitterly mourned for that being in so just and so good a cause not only called but in effect openly provoked and bafled to give an answere whith reasons to the demand made unto them they did not so sanctify the Lord God in their hearts and with their tongues as to shew a readinesse thereto with meeknesse and fear let be to give a testimony for God in such an important exigence it is evident that this pitiful caveat with the promise annexed are at best but the effects of a carnal condescendence unto a sinful fear If the Lord call for our confession who ever heard that that which is its special grace even the obvious apprehension of hazard should be its hinderance Nay who is man in that case of whom we should be afraid But and if the Lord require it not this is certainly a foolish antidote to a vain solicitude And thus we are arrived at the sixth last Article That no Intrant shall be ingaged to any canonical oath or subscription unto the Bishop and that his opinion anent thaâ— government shall not prejudge him in this but it shall be free for him to declare And this is truly the only fair condescendence that of them all hath any thing of a just ease But seing it is very inadequat to the main difficulty and for an apparent liberty of opinion doth certainly tend according to the late morality of these times to involve us in many sinful and inconsistent practices I shall not further urge it And now having finished the examination of these six Articles therein amongst many other empty pretensions and inextricable ambiguities rencountered a most cunning viperous invective against the League and Covenant consisting of the like number as if it were a meer politick complication of doubts and snares for the more clear redargution of the Authors presumption and malice I cannot but desire my Reader impartially to consider both and what and with what successe boht of us have objected and I am confident that though an al most infinite over proportion of matter for importance aswel as variety the greatest diversity of humors interests opinions nay and almost of Nations that ever concurred in one treaty with the no lesse disproportion of parts and abilities in us the two Antagonists do every way increase and accumulat the disadvantages on my part yet it will appeare that such is the power and vertue of a righteous cause that where in the attacquing the Covenant the Authour hath carried back nothing but his own shame and our scorne the truth not I hath on the other side dissipated and routed his Articles with an entire victory which if he or any man account vain or a preposterous triumph it is only truths confidence and I do hereby confirm it with a no lesse resolute defiance Hitherto I have examined this overture of Accommodation according to its terms contained in the above-written Articles As for the exceptions that may be made against it from its contrivance tendency and circumstances the inconveniencies that would ensue upon it and other more remote arguments they are so easily deduceable from the preceeding grounds that it were superfluous to prosecute them by any more distinct proposal That we may