show that those of the outed Ministers to whom the Magistrate had granted the peaceable publick exercise of their Office in some Parishes in their returning to those Parishes where they were formerly ordained Ministers or not having access to the peaceable exercise of their Ministry in their own Parishes upon the â—nvitation of destitute Congregations with the consent of Presbyterian Ministers concerned going to exercise their Office in those destitute Congregations till they might have access to return â—o their own Parishes That these Ministers in so doing did sin Of what Law of God is this practice of theirs a Transgression Is it a sin for Ministers whom God hath called to the work of the Ministry to exercise their Office in the Parishes where they were ordained Ministers or to help destitute Congregations who desire them to come and help them Is it a sin because the Magistrate permits them to preach The Author himself dare not say this as appears from his first Answer to the first Objection A Minister â—ins not in preaching the Gospel though an Uâ—urper a Robber permit him to preach and much â—ess doth the Permission of the lawful Magistrate render his preaching sinful Object The Magistrate appoints them to preach and to preach in such or such a parish and therefore it 's sinful Ans 1. If it were a sin in the Magistrate to appoint a Minister to preach in such or such a place and a sin for the Minister to preach because the Magistrate appointed him to preach in such a place then the Ministers who wrote the first Book of Discipline and the Church of Scotland who approved it did sin in desiring the Magistrate to appoint Ministers to preach in such and such Parishes We did shew from the first Book of Discipline That they desired the Magistrate to do this and more too even to compel them to preach 2. This Author grants in his Answer to the third Objection That the Magistrate may place Ministers when the Church is corrupt and all things are out of order the vanity of his evasion by which he seeks to elude that Argument taken from the 10th Chapter of the second Book of Discipline is before discovered 3. Suppose it were unlawful for the Magistrate to appoint a Minister to exercise the Office of the Ministry in a particular Parish yet it would not be sinful for that Minister to preach in that Parish if the Parish were vacant and earnestly desired him to exercise his Ministry among them and if his preaching there were not injurious to any if the Magistrates appointing a Minister to preach c. in a Parish render the Ministers preaching in that Parish sinful then the Magistrate by such appointments might make the exercise of the Ministry in any Parish or in all Parishes in his Dominions sinful which is a most absurd Conceit Or is it sinful to accept of the peaceable exercise of their Ministry in such or such Parishes because the Magistrate gives them Injunctions and Rules to regulate them in the exercise of their Ministry But 1. These Injunctions were the Magistrates Acts and not the Ministers 2. The Ministers accepted not of these Injunctions but declared they could receive no such Ecclesiastick Rules from the Magistrate and that they had full Prescriptions from Christ which they behoved to observe as they would be answerable to him of whom they had received their Ministry 3. The Act of Instructions as it was distinct from the Act of Indulgence in which the publick peaceable exercise of their Ministry was granted and came not to the Ministers hands for a considerable time after they had received the Act of Indulgence so there was a great difference in the nature of the Acts and the Indulged Ministers did right in making use of what was good and refusing what was evil 4. If the Magistrates sending Injunctions to Ministers renders the exercise of their Ministry sinful then the Magistrate may render the exercise of the Ministry in any place in every place of his Dominions sinful by sending Instructions to all the Ministers in his Dominions which is another absurd Conceit which if it were received would make it easie for an ill-disposed Magistrate to mar all preaching by writing and sending Acts of Instructions to all the Ministers in his Dominions Object The Act of Indulgence flowed from a sinful Supremacy and therefore it was sinful to make any use of it Ans To say nothing of the making use of a Pass given by a Captain of Robbers or of a Covenant of peaceable commerce made with an Usurper who hath no just title which Casuists do not condemn I answer That that Act which indeed was the Act of Indulgence and which the Indulged Ministers made use of viz. The Relaxation of the Civil Restraint which hindred the peaceable exercise of their Ministry or the granting of the publick peaceable exercise of Ministry was no Act of any sinful Supremacy but the exercise of that power which the Magistrate hath from God for doing good As from the right stating of the question it evidently appears That this accepting of the publick peaceable exercise of the Ministry was not sinful so it evidently appears That it was lawful and commendable and a duty to which they were obliged as the work of the Ministry is a good work so the peaceable setled exercise of it under the protection of lawful Authority is a great mercy that hath many blessings and advantages in it it 's a promised blessing it 's a blessing for which the people of God should pray and because the peaceable setled exercise of the Ministry cannot be where Magistrates are without their allowance or permission therefore it 's duty to pray That the Lord would incline the heart of Rulers to grant the peaceable publick exercise of Religion in their Dominions and when the Lord inclines the hearts of Rulers to this we should not slight such a promised Mercy nor refuse the return of our Prayers but thankfully receive this blessing of God conveyed by the hand of the Magistrate and make use of this Talent to the Glory of God and edification of his Church I remember I have spoken before of the advantages of the peaceable setled exercise of the Ministry and of the necessity of accepting of it especially in answering the last head of the Authors Arguments and shall say no more of the state of the question but this That they who but understand the terms of the question will see that all the Arguments which the Author brings to prove the accepting of the Indulgence sinful do evanish as smoke and lose all colour when they compere before the light of naked Truth And they will see that what these Ministers did in exercising their Ministry in these desolate Congregations when the Lord in his good Providence had given them peaceable access thereto was so evidently a religious work a labour of love a work of mercy a seasonable expedient necessary work
hath ever been in the Church is made a sort of Martyrdom This Doctrine was first whispered to the People in private Conferences then it was dropped now and then in the Sermons of one or two then some rash youths made it a great part of their discourse in publick then we had Letters and Questions from Holland with Advertisement that the Press was travelling with the History of the Indulgence which is now brought forth And although any thing to the purpose in it hath either been answered or grounds laid down from which it may be answered in the Answers which were given to the Authors Letters and Questions yet because some have alledged that this Book is so irrafragible in its reason that the many who are against it shall never be able to answer its Reason and a friend of this Historian threatned that he would make all the Indulged Ministers run before him and because the People who withdraw from the Indulged Ministers are confident that this Book will never be answered and so are hardened in their Separation and because there are many dangerous and destructive Tenets in this Book and the Epistle prefixed to it which if reduced to practice would fill the World with Confusion I shall for Vindication of the Truth and out of Love and Compassion to the People who are deceived by this Book and for the just Vindication of the reputation of the Indulged Ministes who are very injuriously reproached in this History examine all that looks like reason in this Book And though I be of their Opinion that all that hath any shadow of Reason in this Book might be answered fully in a few Pages yet seeing many are so possessed with a conceit of the Unanswerableness of this Book that if any part of it were left unanswered it would be alledged that it could not be answered and this might be a snare to the poor people who lay so great stress upon this Book I hope the judicious Reader will forgive me that I put my self to so much labour which to him seemeth needless for though it will not only seem but be really needless to the Judicious Reader yet it is necessary for the weak for whose sake I especially put my self to this trouble The Historian gives his Book the Title of The History of the Indulgence shewing its Rise Conveyance Acceptance together with a Demonstration of the Vnlawfulness thereof If under the name of Indulgence he comprehend all the Acts of the Magistrate which he records in this History he abuses the word Indulgence and he abuses his Reader for there are several of the Acts which he relates as for Example the Act of Instructions and the Act of Fining the Ministers who kept not the Twenty ninth of May which were not Acts of Indulgence The Acts of Indulgence were only those Acts which granted the peaceable Exercise of the Ministry to some Presbyterian Ministers notwithstanding of the Laws which established Prelacy and enjoyned Conformity But this Confusion runs through his whole Book in which he would have his Reader believe that the Indulged Ministers accepted of all these Acts which he calls or rather miscalls by the name of Indulgence and this confusion is one main foundation upon which his confused Babel is found Whether he hath demonstrated the unlawfulness of the Magistrates Acts in which these Ministers are permitted and allowed to preach the Gospel or the unlawfulness of the acceptance of the peaceable exercise of the Ministry we will see when we come to his Demonstrations and his answers to contrary Objections As for his Vindication of such as scruple to hear the indulged it is a rare undertaking and looks liker the attempt of a Knight errant than of a solid and peaceable Divine for a scruple as he might have learned from Amesius in his Cases of Conscience 1 Book and sixth Chapter is a rash and groundless fear and therefore he hath been very ill advised to undertake to maintain those who scruple to hear Indulged Ministers this was a rash and frantick act of Casuistick Chivalry his prowess would have been better proved and approved of all sober persons in setting these people free from these rash and groundless fears for that would have been a right Vindication of those Scrupulous people to have delivered them from their rash and groundless fears which scare them from their mercies and the means of their Salvation and was an injurious cruelty to their souls The Historian designs himself a Presbyterian in great Letters and yet this Book is a History of warring against Presbyterians and if it were fair War it were more tollerable but as the War is groundless and unjust so it is very foully managed non amice factum ab amico And though he be a Presbyterian in great Letters in uberiore forma and the Indulged stand before him in the frontispiece of his Book in a very small Character yet he should have remembred that he was but one and they were many and it is not a Presbyterian practice but a Popish Prank for one to stigmatize censure and condemn many his Designation should have put him in minde of Presbyterian Practice and that among Presbyterians matters are carried by the Plurality of voices and not by the will of one how great soever he imagine himself to be but there are so many things in this History which are inconsistent with Presbyterian Principles and which overturns the very foundation of Presbyterian Government and of all Government and there is so much Satyrick insolent insulting over his Presbyterian Brethren that he had some reason to fear that he would be taken for some other sort of Creature than a Presbyterian and therefore he hath done as the Painters they say were wont to do when the Art of Painting was rude and it was not easie to know where a Horse were a Horse or an Ox what was defective in their Painting they helped it by writing and in good great Letters wrote down this is an Horse and this an Ox that none might mistake I cannot but resent the injury which he hath done to Presbyterians and to their cause in calling himself a Presbyterian and then acting the part sometimes of a Pope and sometimes of a Separatist and venting extravagant wild conceits which are contrary to the received Tenets of Presbyterians but I am hopeful that no â—ngenious Person will impute all this Authors conceits to Presbyterians because he calls himself a Presbyterian Before I come to the History I find an Epistle to the Christian Reader written by the Historians Friend who was like-minded with him in these matters relating to the Indulgence This Epistle is particularly directed to the suffering Ministers and Professors of the Church of Scotland To these Christian Readers he says he need not tell them that the knowledge of the Times and what the Israel of God ought to do should be their Ornament and Cognizance distinguishing them from others who are brutish in
false Reasonings there are Contradictions and Inconsistences Now the God of Truth puts it not upon mens hearts to write Untruth There are many bitter Reproaches and Calumnies much of the Wrath of man many things which are not for Peace and Edification the design of the Book is a vile Separation and Schism These things are not from God who is Love who is the God of Peace who hath commanded us to do all our things in love and not to forsake the assembling of our selves together My third Question is How he will refute those who alledge that the Writing of this Story came in the Head and Heart of the Historian as it came in Davids head and heart to number the People The Lord was angry against Israel and he left David to the temptation of Satan and to his pride and he numbred the People and this brought on the Plague The Lord was angry at the People who were weary of the Ordinances and were disposed to lightly Ministers and the Lord in his righteous judgment may justly leave men to their Pride and Self-conceit to Write and Print Calumnies against Ministers c. for a Plague upon those who depise his Servants and Ordinances so filling them with their own ways this Book is a great Plague to such people hardning them in their neglect of Preaching Catechising to the increase of ignorance unbelief ungodliness The dismal effects which he spake of are not the effects of the Magistrates granting or the Ministers accepting of the peaceable exercise of the Ministry Pag. 3. he charges the Indulged Ministers with a fearless making and medling with the stated enemies of Gods work ere they had mourned over former unfaithfulness and miscarriages and ere Brethren equally concerned were consulted Ans How knows he that they were fearless or that they had not mourned for their former miscarriages by what evidence doth he thus judge of the frame of the hearts of his fellow-servants especially when he was at such a distance from them when they medled in this matter and I suppose he will not conclude that they had no fears nor tears because they did not Print them and send them over sea seeing they have been and are mourners of whose tears the World gets not notice and I am inclined to think that the deepest sorrow makes least dinn Every mourner hath not the opportunity of publishing their tears in Print and many Mourners have put Books to the Press whose Modesty would not suffer them to mention their own Tears As there is rashness in his judging concerning the inward frame of his Brethrens heart in intruding into those things which he hath not seen so there is something more than rashness in his alledging that Brethren were not consulted for he might have known if he would have been at the pains to have enquired that Brethren were consulted and that the generality of the Ministers in Scotland were for Ministers returning to their own charges and that those who had not access to their own charges might upon the Invitation of vacant Congregations go and exercise their Ministry among them But I perceive that he is against all medling with the present Magistrates because of the ill they have done and do design He looks on all making and medling with them as Defection and the cause of further Defection for saith he what else but further Defection could be expected as the issue and result of those medlings the Author of the Cup of cold Water advises to stand aloof from all listnings to proposals coming from them or making any to them and he conceives we are called of God to take this course as that way wherein alone we can expect his approbation and countenance Pag. 41. Again pag. 42. he saith it passeth his ken what Address can be made to him except it be to tell we can make none or to beseech him to forbear to persecute the Mediators Embassadours and that he seeth not and hopes never to see with his eyes who can see how Addresses to them in Church-matters can consist with the resentment of their Usurpation of Christs Throne and after in that same Page We have nothing to seek from any who sets in our Masters Chair of State God forbid that ever we should be seen to bow or beg to them while they sit there however when we are passive we may make use of what liberty is given yet it 's our Peace c. to abstain from seekings and receivings from those who stand in such terms of Opposition to him Ans This is new Doctrine a new light which I suppose come never to light till now if the Author hath learned it of any I wish he would tell us who are his Authors I doubt if he can shew us a Precedent going before us in this way in which and which is more strange in which alone we can expect Gods Approbation and Countenance I wonder how he hath come to have so great Confidence in this untrodden Path that Subjects are called of God to keep at such a distance from their Rulers as to stand aloof from all listnings to their Proposals And that Subjects are called of God to stand aloof from making any Proposals to their Rulers And that this Course is the way and the only way wherein they can expect Gods Approbation and Countenance are strange and bold Assertions which should not have been obtruded upon us by his Conceit A Divine call and Divine approbation should have been confirmed by Divine Authority what knoweth he but the Lord may put some good motion in their hearts he hath put good things in the hearts of Idolaters Heathen Princes to which the Lords People did listen and to which they were obliged to listen and for which they found themselves bound to bless the Lord who had put such things in their hearts the Lord can put good Motions in the Hearts of ill Men and to refuse to listen to those Motions which are good and of God is to refuse to listen unto God How can this consist with the Honour which all Inferiours Servants Children Subjects are bound to give to their Superiours I suppose there is no Superiour who would not judge it to be a manifest Contempt in his Inferiour if he should keep at such a distance from him as that he would neither hear what he proposed to him nor yet would propose any thing to nor desire any thing of his Superiour I cannot see how a man can bind himself to keep such a distance from any man Superiour Equal or Inferiour as not to listen to any thing he says be what it will This standing aloof from all listnings to any Proposals made to us and from making any Proposals to them if we like not those that are made by them seems inconsistent with common Civility and humanity This is a new sort of an Act of Intercommuning Let us hear his Reasons for it pag. 41. first saith he This is the most
to this purpose in the place cited but from what hath bin cited from the Authors mentioned whose Books are common and no doubt have been seen by the Author of the Epistle he might have seen that it was great rashness to suppose that none would or could deny that Christ by his blood did intercede for vengeance Those Authors mentioned have a far other up-taking of Christs Priestly Office and of that part of it his Priestly Intercession by his blood for they think his Priestly Office was wholly an Office of Grace and altogether an Office of Grace founded in Grace and Mercy and that Mercy is an essential qualification of a Priest as a Priest that it 's an Office for men for expiating sin and not for punishing it that the designe of it is mercy and grace that the Priestly intercession is only for the Elect and in this distinguished from Christs Royal Power which as it is for protecting the Elect so it is for punishing the enemies of his Church 2. But suppose Christ did intercede by his blood against some I enquire at him how he knows that he intercedes by his blood for vengeance upon the Authors of the Indulgence what knows he but some of them may be elect I am sure he will not say that the blood of Christ which was shed on earth for the Elect doth plead against them within the vail in Heaven if he say that he knows they are all Reprobates he knows more than the Author of the Cup of cold Water knew in the year 1678. for pag. 40. he says It may be there are some of the Elect so far left at present as to run along with this course I hope he will not take on him to say They have sinned the sin against the Holy Ghost If by vengeance he mean eternal vengeance he must conclude them Reprobates if he mean temporal vengeance how knows he that Christs blood pleads for that We see Aaron as Priest stood betwixt the dead and the living to stay the Plague he made an atonement to avert the wrath of God and not to bring it on Numb 16.46 47 48. And the Plague which came after the numbring of the people is stayed by building an altar It belonged to the Priest as Priest to bless in the name of the Lord for ever 2 Chron. 23.13 and offering burnt-offerings and peace-offerings 2 Sam. 24.25 Again whatsoever Christ intercedes for by his blood he obtaineth it now how knows he that temporal vengeance will certainly come upon the Authors of the Indulgence May not Sovereign grace avert the temporal judgment which mens heinous sins have deserved who can set bounds to the Grace of God who hath Mercy on whom he will have Mercy and hath shewed mercy to some of those who were the chief of sinners 3. Suppose that were granted that Christ did by his blood intercede for vengeance and that the Author of this Epistle could condescend upon the particular persons against whom Christ intercedes and that he intercedes against the Authors of the Indulgence because of the complex of this deed of the Indulgence yet this would make no discrepancy betwixt Christs Intercession in Heaven and Mr. Hutchesons Speech upon earth for except he proves that Christ intercedes for vengeance upon them for their taking off the civil restraints of penal Statutes and granting the peaceable exercise of the Ministry all he says is nothing to the purpose For Mr. H. and the Indulged Ministers did give thanks for this and not for the complex of the Indulgence for they never gave thanks for the Instructions He will never prove that Christ as King willeth the execution of vengeance upon Magistrates for taking off such undue restraints and much less will he be able to prove that Christ as Priest intercedes by his blood for vengeance upon that account And as for the Prayer which is in the end of Mr. Hutchesons Speech That the Lord would bless his Majesty in his Person and Govenment and their L. L. in the publick Administration that was according to the Lords Command 1 Tim. 2.1 2 3. where it is expresly said That this praying for Kings and all that are in Authority is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour And what they meant by his Majesties Government is clear from what they said before in the Description of Magistracy which they design lawful Authority and the excellent Ordinance of God Seeing Mr. Hutcheson spoke according to the good and acceptable will of the Lord revealed in his word this alledged discrepancy betwixt Christs Intercession and their Speech is one of the Authors roaveries a Melancholy dream with which he may affright himself but the Indulged Ministers are not such weak Fools as to be affrighted with his many terrible words of terrour trembling confusion of face shame and astonishment This minds me of the censure which I saw of him in an Answer to the History of the Indulgence that he hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 passions without reason The Indulged Ministers believe that they have followed the Lords will in not slighting the opportunity of the peaceable exercise of their Ministry which the Lord in his good providence did offer to them and they look upon the direction which they had from the Lord in this matter to chuse the good and refuse the ill and upon the Lords assistance of them in the exercise of their Ministry and his helping them hitherto to run with patience in the course of their Ministry notwithstanding of the contradictions and false reproaches they have met with from some from whom they expected better things and upon the blessing of the Lord in the exercise of their Ministry as the fruits of Christs Intercession so far are they from being confounded and terrified with reflecting upon the Intercession of Christ There are other things in this 3d. Question which may be denyed at for example That our Rulers in affronting Christ have outdone all that ever went before them and were resolved never to be out-done by any who should come after them What no not by the Council at Jerusalem who condemned him of Blasphemy and after commanded his Apostles not to speak at all to any man in the name of Jesus But the Gentlemans observation holds here for he goes as far as his fancy can go he minds me of a Drunken man in the times of Popery who could not get on upon his Horse at length having prayed to the Haly-rude of Crail to help him on he went to some advantage and did cast himself over the Horse and then he blamed Haly-rude of Crail because it could not do except it did over-do I wish his stile were as solid and temperate as that Speech of Mr. Hutchesons which though he slightingly calls an Harangue yet was such as did well become a Minister of the Gospel whereas this Author by a flood of great swelling words is often carryed away beyond all bounds of Rime
that right whom he had wronged before and besides is obliged to make reparation for the wrong done but much less could he be obliged by his silence or could his silence be interpreted to be a consent to it But the Indulged Ministers need not this Answer for they witnessed a good Confession before the Rulers If he had formed his similitude thus A Father restrains his Son from some external duty in Religion which the Son is called to of God and when he takes off the restraint takes upon him to give Rules of worshipping God to his Son which the Lord hath not given the similitude would have been more to the purpose And if the Son had accepted of the freedom from the former restraint and withal had told his Father he had full Prescriptions from God how to worship and that the matters of Divine worship are not to be ordered by the will and pleasure of Parents but by the Will of God none would imagine that the Son had accepted of these Instructions Pag. 90. He undertakes to shew how contrary the acceptance of the Indulgence is to Presbyterian Principles If he would have disputed against what the Indulged Ministers did he should have disputed against their use-making of the relaxation of the civil restraint as was said before But he still mistakes the question and plays in the general confused words of accepting of the Indulgence Veterator ludit in generalibus He hath wasted much time and Paper in vain in fighting against an imaginary accepting of the Indulgence which is a man of straw of his own making and he may use it as he pleaseth We have already spoken of the qualifications which he speaks of in his first Section and are not to weary our selves or the Reader with needless Repetitions In that same pag. Sect. 2. He alledgeth That the Magistrate did all which belongs to Church Judicatories in conveying Ministerially the Office and Power to persons qualified and in granting a potestative mission in sending the Indulged to such and such places and that the Council only clothed them with Authority for that effect An. 1. These are still his own fancies and dictates for he cannot prove from the words that the Council used that they did assume any such thing as a Power of potestative mission In the first Indulgence they appoint Ministers to preach and exercise the other Functions of the Ministry at such and such Kirks as he relates pag. 19. In the second Indulgence they appoint the Ministers to repair to such and such Parishes and to remain therein confined permitting and allowing them to preach and exercise the other parts of their Ministerial Function in the Parishes to which they are confined Now the words of appointing allowing permitting to preach import no potestative mission The Magistrate may in some cases not only permit allow appoint but compel Ministers to preach yea they may place them which is much more than appointing them to preach If any please to read the Book of the Discipline of the Church of Scotland they will find in the first Book of Discipline in the 4th head of that Book concerning Ministers and their lawful Election and under the title of Admission and toward the end of that title these words That their Honours they mean the great Council of Scotland to whom the Book was directed were bound by their Authority to compel such men as had gifts and graces able to edifie the Church of God to bestow them where there was greatest necessity And after we cannot prescribe unto your Honours how that ye shall distribute the Ministers and learned men which God hath already sent unto you And after they say and therefore of your Honours we require in Gods Name that by your Authority ye compel all men to whom God hath given any Talent to perswade by wholesome Doctrine to bestow the same if they be called by the Church to the advancement of Christs Glory And afterward they desire them to assign unto their chief workmen nâ—â— only Towns but Provinces And in the head of Superintendents they think it expedient in that necessity that their Honours by themselves nominate so many as may serve the forewritten Provinces and that the same Ministers being called in your presence shall be by you and such as your Honours pleases to call unto you for consultation in that case appointed to their Provinces And in the last Title of that Section they say Of one thing we must admonish your Lordships that in the appointing of the Superintendents for this present ye disappoint not your chief Towns and where Learning is exercised This first Book of Discipline was approven by the Assembly met at Edenburgh July 30. An. 1562. And in the second Book of Discipline which was often examined in several Assemblies and appointed by the Assembly at Glasgow April 24. 1581. to be registred among the Acts of the Assembly and to remain there ad perpetuam rei memoriam and the Copies thereof taken out by every Presbytery and every Minister was by the Assembly August 4th 1590. appointed to subscribe the said Book of Discipline in the first Chapter of that Book it 's said The Civil Power should command the Spiritual to exercise And Chap. 10. which is the Office of the Christian Magistrate it 's said That it pertains to the Office of the Christian Magistrate to see that the Kirk be not invaded nor hurt by false Teachers nor the rooms thereof occupied by dumb Dogs or idle Bellies and to make Laws and Constitutions agreeable to Gods Word for the Advancement of the Kirk and Polity thereof without usurping any thing that pertains not to the Civil Sword but belongs to the Offices that are meerly Ecclesiastical as is the Ministry of the Word and Sacraments using Ecclesiastick Discipline and the Spiritual Execution thereof or any part of the Power of the Spiritual Keys which our Master gave to the Apostles and their true Successors And although Kings and Princes that be godly sometimes by their own Authority when the Kâ—râ— is corrupted and all things out of order place Mâ—nisters and restore the true Service of the Lord after the example of some godly Kings of Judah and divers godly Kings and Emperours also in the light of the New Testament yet where the Ministry of the Kirk is once lawfully instituted and they that are placed do their Office faithfully all godly Princes and Magistrates ought to hear and obey their voice and reverence the Majesty of the Son of God speaking in them I shall but subjoyn one other Testimony which may be instead of many and that is the Testimony of that man of God Mr. Welsh who was very tender of Church-priviledges in his Epistle Dedicatory to King James prefixed to his Book against Mr. Gilbert Brown Priest he says to the King Follow these examples Sir send Pastors throughout all the Borders of your Kingdom to teach your Subjects the Law of the Lord and the
Gospel of their Salvation establish Religion and Justice in all the Cities of your Kingdom cause the waters of Life to run from the heart of your Kingdom unto the Borders thereof establish Pastors in all your Kingdom strengthen them in their Offices and speak to their hearts And afterward in the next page he saith to the King I have heard your Majestâ— gravely protest before God in two General Assemblies That it was one of your Majesties greatest desires and ye were even as it were ambitious of thâ— work to plant every Parish within your Kingdomâ— with a Pastor that the Posterity to come mighâ— say That King James the sixth had done such notable Work in his days Confirm your self Sir in that purpose for ye know who hath said I will honour them that honour me Thus we see Mr. Welsh makes use of the words sending and establishing Pastors and does not find fault with the Kings using the word of planting Parishes Mr. Welsh by the Kings sending doth not mean a potestative Mission he understood himself better than so He knew the King could not ordain Ministers but the Kings sending is his commanding his appointing Ministers to go and preach throughout the Kingdom but if the Council in the Acts of Indulgence had made use of the word of sending and other words in the Books of Discipline O what out-crying would some folk have made seeing they make the simple words of appointing and permitting to be no less than a potestative Mission which is a manifest abuse and perverting of Words It is well known that the Papists give Magistrates much less than they should in Church-matters yea they make them meer Executioners of Kirkmens Decrees yea some of their Writers have not been ashamed to compare Kings and Emperours to beasts in respect of their Kirkmen Let any read Prin's Preface to his Book called a Quenchcoal and he will see in that Preface which was directed to the late King Pag. 44 45 46. he will find that Becanâ—s calls the Pope a Shepherd and Kings and Emperours Dogs of this Shepherd and Gasper Sâ—iâ—â—pius calls the Bishops the men who are the Mulietiers and Ass-drivers and the Catholicks Asses and the Catholick Kings Asses with Bells and Charles the Great he says was a far greater and wiser Ass than these Kings who cast off the Popes yoak And yet though they make Kings and Emperours meer Servants to the Pope and Bishops implicitely and blindly to execute their Decrees yet they grant that the Magistrate may apply the Church-men to the use and exercise of their Office yea even the Jesuits who are most addicted to the Pope grant this as Becanus the Jesuit in his Manual of Controversies of the Time Book 5. Chap. 19. pag. 746. and withal shews that this is the common use among them hoc passim apud Catholicos in usu est From what hath been cited from the Books of Discipline we may see that the Church of Scotland did not look upon the Magistrates appointing and much less on their permitting Ministers to preach as a potestative mission or as any part of the power of the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven The Author of the History of the Indulgence mentions not that I remember what I have cited out of the first Book of Discipline he only pag. 116. objects in the 3d. objection what is cited out of the the second Book of Discipline Chap. 10. concerning Magistrates placing of Ministers when the Kirk is corrupted and all things are out of order and he answers That in such times Magistrates may do much more than at other times yet saith he I suppose none for shame can make use of such a Concession now I suspect the Author hath been gravelled and picked with this Objection and therefore he would shuffe it off with scorn and disdain but this is a piece of Art in some to seem to make nothing of these objections to which they see they can give no satisfactory answer but when any will without passion consider this passage in the second Book of Discipline they will see that the placing of Ministers implies more than permitting them or appointing them to preach for though the Magistrate appoint a Minister to preach in such a Parish if the Parish do not invite him or if the Invitation be not satisfactory to the Minister he may forbear to go to that Parish to preach but when a Minister is placed he is actually setled in a Parish and therefore the Book of Discipline allows of the Magistrates doing more than permitting and appointing Ministers to preach Again it appears from this That the Magistrates permitting or appointing Ministers to preach in a Parish is not in the Judgment of the Kirk of Scotland contrary to Presbyterian Principles for the Authors of the second Book of Discipline and the General Assembly of Scotland who examined that Book so carefully and appointed all the Ministers of the Church of Scotland to subscribe it understood what were the Principles of Presbyterian Government better than this Author did And these great Seers did see no abomination of desolation in Magistrates placing Ministers and much less did they or could they see it in their permitting them or appointing them to preach when the Church is corrupted and all things out of order but why thinks he that none can for shame make use of that Concession now He gives this Reason Seeing says he our Church was constituted and well ordered and had all her Rights and Privlledges But I wonder that he for shame could make use of this answer If he could have said Seeing our Church is constituted and well ordered and hath all her Rights it had been a pertinent answer if it had been true but when he says only our Church was constituted and well ordered and had all her Rights he grants that the Church now is not constituted nor ordered nor hath not her Rights he clearly yields the cause and acknowledges that our Church is in such a case as that is of which the second Book of Discipline speaks He might have considered that the Readers of his Book would be very sensless if they could not see a difference betwixt what once was and what now is but this was good enough to put off simple people who cannot distinguish betwixt wat is past and what is present But he adds When the Magistrates with their own hands have overturned all shall this Objection be made use of to countenance their after-practises that were indeed to teach Magistrates a way how to usurp and take to themselves all Church-power viz. let them once by Iniquity and Tyranny break the glorious Order of the Church and bring all into Confusion and then forsooth they may warrantably assume to themselves an exercise all Church-power according to their mind Ans He seems to insinuate that the second Book of Discipline yields that the Magistrate may assume all Church-power which is an insinuation very injurious to
then the Magistrate may appoint permit allow Ministers to preach in such and such Kirks For if the Magistrate may do what is more then they may do what is less in the corrupt state of the Church But the state of the Church is such and therefore if the Magistrate may in this case place c. he may much more permit c. He grants all the major is evident from the place cited and he grants it to the minor which was as he proponed it but so it is now with us he answers that our Church was a constituted and well-ordered Church but that now Confusion is come and so in effect he yields all but I remember he spoke to this before What he says of the Magistrates bringing on this Confusion is no evasion for the Book of Discipline does speak generally of a Church corrupted whatever way it hath been corrupted whether by Magistrates or Ministers that 's neither up nor down A Magistrate that hath disordered the Church is so much the more obliged to right those disorders and if a Magistrate hath disordered the Church by thrusting Ministers from the peaceable exercise of their Ministry he ought to retract what he hath done by allowing them the peaceable exercise of their Ministry if he did wrong in thrusting them out it 's right to let them in and the Church of Scotland in that place cited hath declared That in that case Ministers should not refuse to preach in any place because the Magistrate hath interposed his Authority for setling them He insinuates in the end of this Answer That this Concession gives the Magistrate all Church-power but this is a groundless and injurious alledgance the Authors of that Book and the General Assemblie's which after exact examination of every part of it concluded it to be subscribed by every Minister of the Church of Scotland understood the Nature of Church-power much better than he did and they were so far from thinking That the Magistrates who in the corrupt and disordered state of the Church interposes their Civil Authority for setling Ministers does in so doing assume unto themselves and exercise all Church-power that they commend what they did in that case as a practice well-becoming godly Kings and Princes and Emperors This Insinuation is highly injurious to those wise and godly men who compiled and approved subscribed that second Book of Discipline for if this Concession did yield all Church-power to the Magistrate then those who compiled and subscribed it do quite subvert what they had immediately asserted viz. That the Magistrate may not usurp any thing which belongs not to the civil Sword but belongs to the Offices which are meerly Ecclesiastical as is the Ministry of the Word and Sacraments using Ecclesiastical Discipline and the Spiritual Execution thereof or any part of the power of the Spiritual Keys which our Master gave to the Apostles and their Successors As it cannot be supposed that so wise men would so quickly contradict themselves in a Book so deliberately and after so many Debates concluded so it cannot be imagined that they would design Kings and Princes godly for doing that which would quite swallow up and subvert the holy Calling of the Ministry This one passage in the second Book of Discipline does quite ruine the cause of the Author of the History of the Indulgence and approves the practice of the Indulged Ministers so that what they have done they have done it according to the mind of the Church of Scotland expressed in the second Book of Discipline The Book says That godly Kings both in the old and in the light of the New Testament have placed Ministers when the Kirk was corrupted c. This not only may be but it hath been and the Author denies not that the Church was corrupted at the time of the Indulgence and all things out of order and in confusion and thus he really yields the cause and concedes all when the Church is corrupted and all things out of order the Magistrate may place Ministers and Ministers may be placed by Magistrates but at the time of the Indulgence as the Author grants the Church was corrupted and all things out of order and therefore at the time of the Indulgence the Magistrate might place Ministers and Ministers might be placed by Magistrates according to the 10th Chapter of the second Book of Discipline It 's true that the Magistrate should not have broken the order of the Church â—ut to conclude that the Magistrate cannot place Ministers because he thrusts them out or that he cannot do them right in granting to them the peaceable exercise of their Ministry because he did them wrong in restraining them â—rom the exercise of it or to conclude That â—he Magistrate by breaking the order of the Church loses all Authority to do any good to â—he Church afterward or that we may make â—o use of any good that the Magistrate does â—ecause he hath done evil or because at the â—me time he does some things right and some â—ings wrong that we cannot chuse the good because we must refuse the evil is a most unreasonable way of reasoning and at this rate a man may conclude quidlibet ex quolibet any thing he pleases from whatsoever he pleases any Conclusion he pleases from any premisses Neither doth the acceptance of the peaceable exercise of the Ministry from the Magistrate who had formerly restrained Ministers by penal Statutes that they could not without molestation exercise their Ministry teach Magistrates a way how to usurp all Church-power for the taking off of Restraints was a doing of right and no Usurpation He might as well alledge That if one by strong hand wound a man and put him out of his own house and take his Goods and afterward be willing to cure the wound and admit the man to return to his House and Goods that the injured man by admitting the Cure and returning to his own House and Goods teaches the man who injured him to wound intrude and spoil To the 4th Objection taken from the examples of Hezekiah and Josiah who commanded the Priests and Levites to do the work of their Calling he answers nothing to the purpose If Hezekiah and Josiah did right in setting the Priests in their Charges and the Levites in their Courses and in commanding them to do the work of their Calling and if the Priests and Levites did right in obeying those Commands then Magistrates may not only permit and allow but also command when there is need Ministers to do the work of their Ministerial Calling and Ministers may and should obey such Commands but the former is true for these Kings are commended for doing so 2 Chron. 35.2 c. 2 Chron. 29.2 3 4 5. c. 2 Chron. 31.2 and therefore the latter is true also He answers That our Rulers have done many evil things which these Kings did not but will he conclude that because they have done evil which these Kings