shall please them within their own Diocese and there all the Clergie of the Diocese are bound to conveene and all matters which concerne the Diocese are therein to be determined by the Bishop So likewise albeit that in the first book of Discipline there is no mention of Synodall or Provinciall Assemblies yet after by Acts of Generall Assemblies it is appointed that every Superintendent and Commissioner shall hold Synods in their own bounds wherein all matters pertaining particularly to their own Diocese or Province shall be determined as appeares by the Assemblie at Edinburgh March 5. 1570. wherein these two Acts are set downe first It is ordained that offenders in hainous crymes shall not appear before the generall Assembly but shall be called before the Superintendents and Commissioners of Provinces to appear before them in their Synodall Conventions and there to receive their injunctions conforme to the order used before in Generall Assemblies Itein It is ordained that all Questionâ— concerning the Province shall be propounded first to the Superintendent et Commissioner to receive resolution in their Synodall conventions and if they be diffieile to be propounded to the next generall Assemblie by the Superiatendent or Commissioner with certification that no Question shall be received hereafter from any private Minister So likewise in the Assemblie at Edinburgh 1568. It is ordained that no Minister exhort or reade or other person shall trouble the Generall Assembly with such matters as Superintendents may and ought to decide in their Synods And if they doe so their Letters shall be rejected Fiftly As no Pastor ought to have place in Nationall Assemblies except such as are authorized thereunto by their Ordinarie Bishop according to the custome of the ancient Church Although our Bishops in Scotland since they were re-established did never usurpe this power to themselves but left the Election of the Commissioner in the power of the Brethren of the Presbyterie So likewise it was ordained in the Assemblie at Edinburgh 1568. That no Minister should have voyce in Generall Assemblies nor leave their flocks to attend thereat unlesse they be chosen by their Superintendent as men known able to reason and of knowledge to judge in matters of weight The same likewise we see testified to have been the Custome of the Church of Scotland by a Letter written by the Lord Glames then Chancellor of Scotland unto Beza about the year 1575. when Episcopacie began to be quarrelled wherein Quaest. 2. he saith Post reformatam Religionem consuetudine receptum est ut Episcopi under which word he comprehendeth the Superintendents ex Ministris Pastoribus ac Senioribus tot quot ijdeâ— Episcopi jusserint unum in locum conveniant cum praecipuis Barronibus ac Nobilibus Religionem veram profitentibus de doctrinâ de moribus inquisituri Sixtly As all the presentation of Benefices vacant were to be directed to the Bishop of the Diocese where the Benefice lyes so that if the person presented be found qualified he may enjoy the same So is it appointed at the Assembly holden at St. Iohnstone Iune 1563. That when any Benefice shall chance to vaick or is now vacant that a qualified person be presented to the Superintendent of that Province where the Benefice lyes and that he being found sufficient be admitted Minister to that Kirk c. Likewise in the Assembly at Edinburgh 1578. wherein they alleage the second book of Discipline was agreed unto one of the Petitions of the Assemblie preferred to the King and Councell was That all presentations to Benefices may be directed to the Commissioner or Superintendent where the Benefice lyes Seventhly As the Ordination of Ministers appertaines peculiarly to the Bishop of the Diocese So likewise the Ordination which by the stile of Scotland is called Admission or Conftirmation not onely of Ministers but also of Readers Schoolmasters and Principalls of Colledges did appertaine to the Superintendents in their owne bounds as is evident by the fifth Chapter of the book of Discipline in the Article of Superintendents and in the Article of Schools and Universities Eightly As Bishops have at all times had power to examine the life doctrine and behaviour of the Clergie of his own Diocese and to admonish correct or censure them accordingly So likewise in the same book of Discipline Cap. 5. the Superintendents received power and authoritie to visit the Churches of their bounds so often as they may and therein not only to preach But also to exmine the life diligence and behaviour of all the Ministers as likewise the orders of the Kirks and manners of the people and to admonish where admonition needeth and to correct them by the censures of the Kirk c. Ninthly As Bishops have power of suspension or deposition of Ministers who are either scandalous in their lives or hereticall in their doctrine So by the book of Discipline and divers Acts of the Assemblies that power doth appertaine to Superintendents Commissioners or Visitors as is manifest by that place of the book of Disciplince cited by us in the former Article and by the Assemblie holden at Edinburgh April 1576. wherein it is said Anent the demand made by Mr. Andrew Hay Parson of Ranthrow if every Commissioner or Visitor in his own bounds hath alike power and Iurisdiction to plant Ministers suspend and depose for reasonable causes the Assemblie resolved affirmative that they have alike power and Iurisdiction therein as is contained in the particular Acts concerning the Iurisdiction of Visitors Tenthly As Bishops because of their places and great charges in overseeing all the Churches have greater rents appointed to them than to other Pastors So likewise by the book of Disciplie Cap. 5. in the Article for the provision of Ministers is appointed almost foure times asmuch stipend for the Superintendent as for other private Ministers Moreover it is evident by many Acts of Generall Assemblies that those Bishops who had joyned themselves to the reformed Church retaining still the office and title of Bishops did by approbation of the generall Assemblies exercise their Iurisdiction over the Ministrie and people of their own Diocese even from the beginning of the Reformation almost for in the Assembly at Edinburgh 1582. Alexander Gordon Bishop of Galloway was authorized to plant Ministers exhorters and readers and to doe such other things as has been heretofore accustomed to be done by Superintendents or Commissioners In the Assembly at S. Iohnstone Iunc 1563. the Bishops of Orknay and Kaiâ—hnes are allowed to exercise the same Iurisdiction and to shew that they did not this by compulsion of Superior Authoritie but of their own voluntary motion in that Assembly it is appointed that a Supplication shall be preferred in name of the whole Assembly to the Queens Majestie that she would be pleased to remit the thirds of the Bishopricks which were then in the Queens hands to the Bishops who were allowed by the Church to be Commissioners for planting of
I am assured that the greatest part are not perswaded in their Conscience of the truth of all this Book of Discipline nor will swear to adhere thereto all the dayes of their lives let them put their Covenanting Noblemen and other Gentlemen possessors of the Church Rents to an assay to swear that point of this Book ca. 9. That to take any part of the patrimony of the Church consisting of Tithes Manses Glaebs Possessions Lands Biggings Annuall rents and any other thing which hath been at any time before or shall be in times coming given for the use and utilitie of the Church and convert it to the particular and profane use of any person we hold it a detestable Sacriledge before God Or that point Cap. 12. That this order which Gods Word craves cannot stand with patronages or power of presentation c. put them I say to this Oath particularly and make them understand that by swearing to the discipline of the Church of Scotland they are sworn also to this point and then you shall find that they will rather renounce your Covenant before they take such an Oath Or if they have so bad a Conscience as to swear so directly against their mind before they perform really that which they swear by restitution of the patrimonie of the Church and quieting the Right of Patronage they shall rather revolt from your Covenant and conforme themselves to the Book of Common Prayer Book of Canons and high Commission likewise So if you should put many of the Ministrie especially those who possesse rich Parsonages to swear particularly that point of the Policie appointed by this Book Cap. 9. Cap. 12. To suffer the Deacons to intromet with all their Church Rents and to distribute the same by the direction of the ruling Elders giving one fourth part for the maintenance of their Lay-Elders and Deacons another to their poore Hospitals and Schools another for upholding the fabrick of the Church and other extraordinary affayres and only a fourth part to be given to the Minister they should find few of them who would imbrace their Covenant upon those Conditions So then to perswade people that by swearing to adhere to the discipline of the Church of Scotland they swear also to this book and to all the points therein whereunto the whole Church did agree fully in that Assemblie 1578. as they alleage either it is a false deluding of the whole Kingdom in drawing upon their consciences the burden of a fearfull perjurie or else the Covenanters themselves remaine as yet under that fearfull perjurie notwithstanding of the renewing of their Covenant whereby they think that their perjurie is expiate for they have not as yet renounced those things which they are bound to renounce by their oath 4. This Book of Discipline is deficient in the principall points of Church discipline there is no order set down therein of the censures of the Church nor of the manner of proceeding to the sentence of excommunication against offenders or in the absolution of the penitent or of receiving them again into the Church who has been excommunicated in which points that which properly is called the Discipline of the Church doth consist Every Church hath her Ecclesiasticall Canons whereby those things are directed but this book omitting those Canons hath done as that Painter who having portraied every Nation in its proper habite did paint the French man naked with a paire of Taylors sheers in his hand to shape to himself a fashion of Habite because he changeth yearly according to his fancie even so this book of Discipline hath given to the Ministers and Lay-Elders in their Elderships a power to shape to themselves a new forme of Discipline every year as they please so that as I know perfectly there were few Presbyteries or Sessions in Scotland but had different manner of proceeding in these things as I could instance in divers particulars having seen and perused many Presbyteriall and Session books And there is none amongst themselves who frequented divers Presbyteries but they know this to be true Finally this Book is superabundant also meddling with those things which doe not appertaine to Ecclesiasticall discipline as setting down rules restraining the civill and supreme Magistrate in the execution of his charge committed to him by God debarring him from meddling with Ecclesiasticall matters and not giving him so much power therein as to a Shoemaker or Taylor being a ruling Elder and giving him no definitive power but only to be an executioner of that which they define and such other points of Iesuiticall doctrine Seeing therefore this book of Discipline was never fully approved nor practised by the Church nor fully ratified by the estate and kingdome nor received fully by the Covenanters themselves and since it is deâ—icient in principall points of Discipline and superabundant in meddling witâ—things impertinent it cannot be accounted that discipline whereunto all are sworn by the oath of the Covenant And therefore that all those Acts of Assemblies cited here for the establishing thereof are impertinent to prove their conclusion CHAP. XIII VVherein is discussed that Act of the Generall Assemblie at Dundee 1580. Condemning Episcopacie as it was then in Scotland THe principall Act whereupon they chiefly insist and ground this abjuration and meaning of the Church in these years when the Covenant was sworn is that Act of the Generall Assemblie at Dundee Iuly 1580. whereby The office of a Bishop as it was then used in Scotland is condemned as unlawfull in it self and that Act at Glasgow in April 1581. explaining the same declaring it to be understood not of the spirituall function only but of the whole office of a Bishop as it was then used Albeit the Church appeareth wholly to have condemned by those Acts all the points of the function of a Bishop yet if we consider rightly we shall finde nothing in them which proveth directly the determination of this Assemblie for I cannot see how the whole Church of Scotland did agree at that time in condemning as unlawfull in it self either this point of Episcopacie which is condemned by this Assemblie of Covenanters 1638. or any Substantiall point either of the Spirituall or temporall function thereof except they grant that the Church at that time did contradict it self First I am assured they intended not to condemne in Bishops as unlawfull it self the preaching of the Word the Administration of the Sacraments and the exercise of Ecclesiasticall Discipline since they acknowledge themselves that these are the principall points of their spirituall function in that Act of the Assemblie 1575. discussed here before Secondly neither did they condemn as unlawfull in it self the name and title of a Bishop to be appropriated to some Pastors by others for first they did allow the title of Superintendent to be appropriated to some pastors which is a word of the same sense and signification and importing as great Authoritie and Iurisdiction as the other And
EPISCOPACIE NOT ABIVRED IN HIS MAIESTIES REALME OF SCOTLAND CONTAINING MANY Remarkable passages NEWLY PVBLISHED The Contents of the severall Chapters follow in the next page Printed 1641. The Contents of the severall Chapters in this BOOK CHAP. I. COntaining a Comparison betwixt this Assemblie and the Councell of Trent 1. They agree in like subtill policie in their proceedings specified in 6. points 2. They disagree in that the Councell of Trent in externall order was more formall than this and more substantiall in discussing the Articles CHAP. II. Containing two reasons why we intend to speak onely against the Act condemning Episcopacie 1. Because the rest of the Acts are established upon the same grounds 2. Because their principall purpose in desiring this Assembly was to suppresse Episcopacie 3. The Act it self is set down verbatim as it was set down in their printed Coppie subscribed by the Clerk CHAP. III. Discussing their foure Considerations in their preface whereby they alleage they were moved to make this Act 1. The Consideration of the great mercie of God in the work of the reformation wherein three notable falshoods are remarked 2. That many evill innovations were obtruded upon the Church wherein also three notable falshoods are remâ—rked 3. That by the Kings urging the book of Common Prayer they were moved of Necessitie to make their Covenant wherein are remarked 7. notable falshoods 4. That many having subscribed the Covenant without their applications yet according to the meaning it had 1580. therefore it is necessary that the Assembly should declare the true meaning wherein are shown divers falshoods and impertinencies CHAP. IIII. Containing the state of the Question as it was proponed to be voyced in the Assemblie 1. The necessitie of right stating the Question 2. That their proposition is captious and confused including three severall Questions of divers natures wherunto no one Categoricall answer could be given 3. That they set it down in many ambiguous words and termes 4. It is sophistically and subtilly drawn à Thesâ—ad Hypothesin 5. That being proposed in that manner it could not possibly resolve the doubts but rather increase them 6. The Question simply proposed had been fitter to resolve doubts 7. There are two points which they intend to prove unlawfull in Episcopacie 1. That they have charge over moâ— particular â—â—ocks than one 2. That they have power and preheminence over their Brethren CHAP. V. That this power and preheminence is not contrarie to the Confession of Faith in the Church of Scotland but most conforme thereto and to the first book of Discipline and continuall practice of the Church of Scotland 1. A distinction of the Confessions of Faith so called in a positive and negative and that the positive is the only proper Confession of the Church of Scotland 2. That there is no Article of this Confession condemning this power and preheminence 3. That the meaning of this Confession concerning the point of Government set down in the first book of Discipline and long practice of the Church doth expresly approve the same 4. A paralell betwixt Superintendents and Bishops wherein is shown that the power of Superintendents was no lesse than that which Bishops require now 5. That Bishops retaining the office title and Benefice of Bishops had the power for 20. yeers after the reformation and that by approbation both of the Church and Civill estate CHAP. VI That this power and preheminence of Bishops was not abjured by the negative Confession or Covenant 1. That this negative Confession is not the proper Confession of the Church of Scotland but an Appendix thereof 2. That it is only the first Confession whereunto all were sworn to adhere 3. Two reasons shewing that by the oath of the Covenant or negative Confession Episcopacie was not abjured 1. Because it cannot have a meaning contrary to that whereof it is an Appendix 2. Because it belongeth only to the King and not to an Assemblie of the Church without the King to declare in what sense the oath was required CHAP. VII An Answer to those passages alleaged in the Act out of the Abjuration 1. Answered in Generall by Consideration of the words themselves 2. By the confession of the Moderator and his associats 3. A particular answer to the first passage shewing it to be cited falsly and impertinently CHAP. VIII An Answer to the second passage of the Covenant wherein is shown clearly 1. A notable falshood in the citation both by changâ—ng words and adding others not contained in the originall 2. Divers reasons why this passage doth prove nothing to their purpose CHAP. IX An Answer to the third passage wherein are these particulars 1. It is shown to be impertinent 2. What is meaned by the word Hierarchie 3. That there may be an Hierarchie neither Antichristian nor wicked proved by the testimony of Calvin 4. Their first reason to prove that Episcopall Government is the Antichristian wicked Hierarchie is by a false Syllogisme ex omnibus particularibus affirmantibus in secundâ figurâ 5. This reason passable amongst themselves because no man durst examine it under paine of the censure of the Church 6. Their second reason childish and Sophisticall 7. Their third reason impertinently applied 8. Their fourth reason hath no consequence and farre from the purpose 9. Their last reason is grounded upon a place in the second book of Discipline falsly related CHAP. X. An Answer to the fourth passage containing three particulars 1. An explaining of the words 2. That the Doctrine and Discipline whereunto we are sworn to joyne our selvs is not all the doctrine and discipline taught and practised in the Church of Scotland 3. That this Doctrine is expresly limitated in the Covenant by foure limitations by every one of which it is cleered that this power and preheminence of Bishops is not abjured 4. The first limitation that we swear only to adhere to that which is taught by Gods Word wherein there is nothing contrary to this point but all is conforme thereto 5. The second limitation is that Doctrine which is professed by many notable Realms and Churches no Realm nor Church did condemne this except Geneâ—a and that not absolutely but many Churches did approve it expresly 6. The third limitation is the doctrine particularly expressed in the first Confession of Faith but no doctrine is expressed therein contrary to this point 7. The fourth limitation is that Doctrine which was for a long time before professed by the King and whole body of the Kingdome But the King and body of the Kingdome did expresly professe that they did approve this point here damned 8. The discipline is limitated by the same limitation 9. The discipline is either taken in a strict and proper sense for the censures of the Church or else in a large sense signifying the whole policy of the Church 10. In the first sense it was as yet retained precisely in the Church of Scotland under Episcopall Government and
place according to his degree with such gravitie modestie and decencie as did become Reverend Fathers distinguished one from another by their habits appointed by the Canons of the Church making it appear to the beholders a Venerable Assemblie 3. In their proceedings were appointed the wisest of the Bishops and most learned amongst the Doctors to frame the Articles and being framed were particularly one by one discussed by weighty reasons maturely in severall dayes and diets all doubts particularly moved and Objections solidly answered according to their grounds using not onely the testimony of former approved Councels Fathers and learned Schoolemen but also very frequently the Authority of Sacred Scriptures So that if in their conclusions they had pondered well the reasons alleaged and had concluded according to the same and not according to the Popes sole Authoritie that Councell might have had a more happy event for the weell and peace of the Christian Church But in this Assemblie at Glasgow was not observed that forme order or decencie which did become a venerable Ecclesiastick meeting for first these who were ever esteemed the Principall members of all generall or Nationall Councels to wit the Reverend Bishops of the Church were excluded a company of Lay-men Earles Lords Gentlemen and Burgesses without warrant Authoritie or example of the ancient Church were thrust in their roomes bearing chiefe Sway in the Assembie carrying all matters violently for their own ends so that it was remarked by wise and grave men that one Earle and one Lord made more speech in the Assemblie than all the Clergie except the Moderator 2. In their Sessions no order or decencie observed all sitting pel-mell without distinction of Degrees save onely that Lay-Noblemen and Gentlemen occupied the chiefest roomes with their swords and pistolls by their sides The Ministers mixt amongst Burgesses Merchants and Noblemens servants hardly to be discerned from them by their Habite or Carriage Many of the Ministers in coloured clothes all in short cloakes except the Ministers of Glasgow who had their Gownes so that unlesse one had known their persons before they should scarcely have discerned the Ministers from the Merchant or Taylor 3. The Ministers were not there by the approbation of their Bishops according to the custome of the Primitive Church and Acts of the generall Assemblies of Scotland long after the Reformation as for instance in that Assemblie at Edinburgh Iuly 1568. It was expresly ordained that no Minister should leave his Flock except such as were chosen by their Superintendants but by Commissions from their new invented form of Presbyteries wherein Lay-men had the greatest rule or rather from the Tables of the Covenant who did not choose the most wise modest and learned Brethren but the most turbulent seditious and bold to oppose Authoritie fit members indeed of such an Assemblie 4. In discussing of the matters which were concluded no reasoning but superficiall no carefull pondering of the Reasons but all taken Implicit fide which had any shew no exact distinguishing of the Articles but many matters of different nature were hâ—dled up together confusedly and with great precipitation were voyced and concluded The Assembly continued onely a moneth and a great part of that time to wit from the 21. of November to the 4. of December was consumed in circumstantiall points concerning the persons to be admitted to have voice in receiving and discussing their Commissions in Contestations betwixt the Commissioner and the Covenanters in excluding some of his Majesties Counsellors authorized by him to have voyce in the Assemblie contrary to the Practice of all Ancient approved Councels either Generall or Nationall in rejecting most just protestations of divers Presbyteries against this Assemblie as that of the Presbyteries of Glasgow of Pâ—ables of Aberdeine of the Channonry of Rosse in refusing to heare read the most just declinature and protestations of the Bishops And finally in declaring certaine books of the former Assemblies to be Authentick registers At last the fourth of December they enter to the principall matters for which this Assembly was required beginning at the condemnation of the six last generall Assemblies conveened continued and concluded by the Kings Majesties Authoritie and full consent of the Church and ratified by the whole bodie of the Kingdome in Parliament which they did in shorter space then could suffice to reade them over so precipitate were they in condemning absolutely so many grave Assemblies with such unanimous consent as never one was called but without reason or judgement condemned them all in one word by implicite faith given to some few neither of the most wise or learned of the company who had a Committee to invent some apparant reasons to anull the same and that is most certaine that the two part of those who voyced against them had never seen the Acts and the proceedings of these Assemblies or at least had never read nor perused them But out of a blind zeal and Iesuiticall obedience did it only because they were so directed by the Tables of the Covenant and their rebellious Leaders In another Session they deposed and excommunicated summarily fourteen Bishops upon a pretended false Libell produced before the Presbytery of Edinburgh against them which by no law or reason could be competent Iudges to their processe without lawfull citation contrary to the Acts of many generall Assemblies the Books of Discipline and perpetuall practice of the Church For the Church of Scotland was never accustomed no not in the most strict times of Presbyteriall government to proceed so summarily to the sentence of excommunication against most notorious offenders without mature deliberation and long space granted to the Accused either to justifie himself or declare his repentance 1. There was used three private personall Citations to appear before the Presbytery next if those were not obeyed three publik Citations one three severall Sabbaths 3. Followed three publik prayers for their conversion and if at any of these times they did appear either to purge themselves of the crime imputed to them or submitting themselves to the censure of the Church The sentence of excommunication was not pronounced against them In another Session they condemned with one voyce the Book of Common Prayer the Book of Canons the Book of Ordination of Ministers and Consecration of Bishops together with the Court of the High Commission which space was not sufficient to have read over all those books muchlesse to peruse them throughly and discusse the controverted points therein which was necessarily requisit to be done before they had been absolutely rejected But this is strange that the principall and most weighty point for the which chiefly they did procure this Assembly should have been so slightly with such precipitation handled to wit whether Bishops should be reteined or removed forth of the Church of Scotland A Doctrine so universally approven by the whole Christian Church even in her purest time since the Apostles dayes and allowed in Substance by
the meaning of the Church and Kingdome who accepted and approved the same as the true Doctrine proved by Gods Word thereby to condemne any such thing yea it is most evident that they had a quite contrary meaning as they themselves did publikly declare in the first book of Discipline shewing therein what manner of Government and Policie they doe require in the true reformed Church to wit that it should be governed by Superintendents in every Province having power and preheminence over all the Ministers and all the Parishes within their bounds for this book of Discipline was framed by the same persons who set down that confession of Faith and at the same very time or shortly thereafter and that by the command and direction of the great Councell of Scotland admitted to the Government by common consâ—nt of the whole estates in the Queens absence being for the time in France and ratifiâ—â—â— by Act of Councell and manuall subscriptions of the Counsellors and of divers other men of worth the 17. of Ianuary 1560. approved by many generall Assemblies and the continuall practice of the Church for twice as many years thereafter as Presbyteriall Governmental remained in force Then that we may see how farre this power of Superintendents did extend we must consider that the first Reformers of Religion because of the detestable enormities of Papisticall Bishops which made their persons offices and very names to be detested out of a certaine zealous scrupulositie would not at first give the title of Bishops to the rulers of the Church yet neverthelesse by the example of many other reformed Churches gave to those who were appointed to their charge a title of the same signification calling them Superintendents So changing a proper Greek word into a barbarous Latine for the Greek word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} and the Latine word Superintendens doe both signifie one thing to wit such a one as is set over others to oversee their actions Albeit by this book of Discipline the whole Kingdome was divided in ten Dioceses expresly so called and over every Diocese a Superintendent appointed to be set yet in all the books of Assemblies we find onely foure who carried expresly this title to wit Mâ— Iohn Spotswood father to the late deceased Iohn Archbishop of St. Anâ—â—â—ws called Superintendent of Lâ—â—thran or Edinburgh Iohn Areskin of Diune Superintendent of Angus and Mearnes or of Brechin Mr. Iohn Wonram Superintendent of Fyfe or S. Andrews M. Iohn Wâ—llocks Superintendent of the West or Glasgow those who were set over the rest of the Dioceses were called Commissioners either because at that time they could not fiâ—d so many sufficient men or for lack of sufficient meanes to maintaine the estate of Superintendents or as some rather thinke because they esteemed this too absolute a Title and neere in signification to the title of Bishop therfore they thought it more fit to call them Commissioners as importing morse a dependencie upon the generall Assemblie of the Church from which they received Commission to exercise their charge not for any definite time but ad vitam or ad culpam Those same are at sometimes called Visitores by a word of the like signification with Episcopus for {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} signifieth likewise a Visitor and {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Visitation as 1 Pet. â— 12. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} is translated by all interpreters in dievisitationis and so the Hebrew word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} from the known word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} visitavit by the Septuagints is translated {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} and by Latines Inspector Visitator or Praefectus Howsoever they were diversly named they had all a like power and Iurisdiction which was no lesse then in the Church of Scotland than the power which the Bishops had in the ancient Church or in the Church of Scotland these many yeers by-gone as may appeare by this paralell betwixt the power of Bishops and the power of Superintendents A Paralell betwixt the power of Bishops and the power of Superintendents FIrst as every Bishop hath his own Diocese over the which he hath Superioritie and Iurisdiction and therin a speciall Citie for his sea and place of Residence called the Metropolitan or Cathedrall Citie So every 〈…〉 by the first book of Discipline Cap. 5. Art 2. 〈…〉 pointed to him his own Diocese to have 〈◊〉 power over all persons both pastors and people 〈◊〉 that bounds and therein a certaine place of ordinary residence called there the Superintendents towne which for the most part were the same Cities from which the Bishops of Scotland are now denominated Secondly As all the Clergie in every Diocese are bound to give 〈◊〉 obedience to their ordinary Bishop according to 〈◊〉 Canons of the Church Right so by a speciall 〈…〉 Generall Assembly at Edinburgh Iuly 30. 1562. It is concluded by the whole ministers there Assembled that all Ministers shall be Subâ—â—ct to their Superintendents in all lawfull 〈…〉 as well in the book of Discipline as in 〈…〉 Election of Superintendents which is no other 〈…〉 but Canonicall obedience Thirdly As all Bishops are to be 〈…〉 of Generall or Nationall Councels 〈…〉 been in all ages and needed not any 〈…〉 thereto from the time that they were 〈…〉 consecrated to that office So likewise in all 〈…〉 Superintendents and Commissionâ—◠〈◊〉 were constant principall members of 〈…〉 Assemblies and needed not any particular Commission thereto but being once admitted to the office were ever acknowledged thereafter and received without any other Commission as is evident by that Assemblie at Edinburgh Iuly 1568. wherein the members of the Generall Assemblie are divided in two Ranks some are appointed to be ordinary and perpetuall members as Superintendents and Commissioners of Provinces the other sort are mutable as Commissioners of Churches Vniversities Townes and Provinces the first had no need of particular Commission but were perpetuall and first called in the Roll the other were changeable from Assemblie to Assemblie and had new particular Commissions from those by whom they were directed In the Assemblie at Edinburgh 1563. that every Superintendent shall appear the first day of the Assemblie at Edinburgh March 1578. the same Act is renewed and Bishops also are appointed to be present at all Assemblies or else to be accounted unworthy of the office and by divers other Acts yea after that the othee of Bishops begun to be questioned in the Assemblie 1579. Iuly 7. Sess. 9. It is ordained That Bishops and Comâ—issâ—ouers of Provinces who abjent themselves from 〈◊〉 Assemblies shall be censured according to the Act august 12. 1575. and that Act to be understood not onely 〈◊〉 Bishops having power of Visitation from the Church but also of such as have not that office Fourthly As all Bishops have power to hold their Synods twice in the year when and where it
his Majestie both before this time at this time and after did shew evidently that he did approve the office of a Bishop as he testified by his divers protestations against those Assemblies which pressed to suppresse the same and by his presentation of Bishops to the places whensoever they hapned to be vacant as he did at that same very time present M. Rob. Montgomery to the Archbishoprick of Glasgow and by that Act of Parliament 1584. whereby the whole Iurisdiction of Bishops was ratified by his Majestie with consent of the whole estates of the Kingdome Seeing then that this Abjuration or Confession call it as they please was framed by the Kings Majestie appointed to be subscribed and sworn by his Authoritie and that in such a sense as that thereby Episcopacie was not understood to be abjured It must be also presupponed that all those who did swear or subscribe the same did it in no other sense or meaning otherwise they did swear falsly sophystically and by Equivocation therefore it must necessarily be concluded that by that Oath of the Covenant 1580. 1581. 1590. and 1591. Episcopacie nor the power and preheminence of one pastor over others or moe particular flocks than one was not abjured by honest men who had an efold and upright meaning in taking their Oath Neither can the interpretation of this Assemblie at Glasgow 1639. give any sure warrant to those who hath sworn in a sense contrary to the Kings meaning for if this Abjuration or Covenant had been the Act of the Church properly there had been some appearance that a lawfull generall Assembly now might give forth the true interpretation thereof but since it is the King and Councels Act and the Oath thereto required of all the Subjects by his Authoritie it doth not appertaine to the Generall assembly especially such an unformall and unlawfull one as this to declare in what sense it should be understood So that it is but false and vaine fear wherewith they would burden the consciences of all the Kingdome of Scotland as being fearfully perjured by establishing contrary to the pretended oath of the Covenant the office of Bishops in Scotland and giving obedience unto them But on the contrary they are rather forsworn and perjured who contrary to the meaning of their first oath have by their new rebellious Covenant and ordinance of their Assembly abjured Episcopacie And of this no man needeth to doubt but that all those who have acknowledged Bishops and have taken their oath of Canonicall obedience and now by perswasion of their Leaders have broken their solemn Oath in disobeying and contemning their authoritie and ratifying their disobedience by another Oath are evidently forsworn as most of the Ministers of that Assembly have done Let them in sincerity of mind search their own consciences in this point and I doubt not that if it have any life therein they will finde themselves sensibly pricked thereby CHAP. VII VVherein is answered to their Argument taken from foure severall sentences of the Abjuration and particularly to the first HAving now shown that neither by the principall Confession of Faith nor by the Appendix thereof called Abjuration nor by the first book of Discipline nor by any Acts of Assemblies nor practice of the Church many yeers after the reformation this power and preheminency of Bishops here controverted is condemned it rests that we answer to those Arguments which are brought by them in the body of the Act to prove the determination of the Assembly which are neither brought from the Word of God nor from the testimonie or practice of the primitive Church immediately after the Apostles dayes nor from any words of the perfect Confession of Faith in the Church of Scotland but all their Arguments are of a later foundation and may be in summe reduced to three sorts first they bring certaine broken sentences â—ut of the Abjuration in the Covenant which they call the Confession then some Acts of their late Generall Assemblies and thirdly some passages out of the second book of Discipline to the which we shall answer in their own order And first they bring foure severall sentences out of the Abjuration or negative Confession falsifying and wresting them strangely as to make them appeare to have some shew of proving their determination The first passage is in these words We professe that we detest all Traditions brought into the Kirk without or against the Word of God and Doctrine of this reformed Kirk The second is We abhorre and detest all contrary Religion and Doctrine but chiefly all kind of Papistry in generall nad particular heads as they were then damned and confuted by the Word of God and Kirk of Scotland when the said Confession was sworn and subscribed Anno 1580. and 1581. 1590. and 1591. The third is That we detest the Roman Antichrist his worldly Monarchy and wicked Hierarchie The fourth is That we joyne our selves to this reformed Kirk in Doctrine Faith Religion and Discipline promising and swearing by the great name of God that we shall continue in the Doctrine and Discipline of this Kirk and defend the same according to our vocation and power We answer first in generall to all these passages that by none of them is either Episcopall Government abjured for first in the words themselves there is no mention either of Bishops or their power and preheminency over others or their charge over moc particular flocks or of Presbyteries of absolute parity of Pastors Therefore except they have recourse to some secret meaning these passage can serve nothing to their purposes and we have shown before both by the meaning of the principall Confession of Faith whereof this Abjuration is an Appendix and by the explained meaning of his Majestie by whose appointment this abjuration is framed and who required the oath and subscription thereunto that it cannot be understood in such a sense as that this power and preheminencie of Bishops should be thereby abjured and therefore neither the words nor the sâ—nse can be able to pâ—ove their purpose Secondly we prove the same by the Confession of the Moderator M. Alexander Henrison and his Associats the Apostles of the Covenant for they in their Disputes with the Doctors of Aberdeene doe confesse plainly that by swearing this Confession of Faith Episcopacie was not abjured and that any man might safely swear that Confession and their Covenant also without abjuring Episcopacie and by this profession they entised many to sweat and subscribe their Covenant who otherwise would nâ—t have done it Now either they spake sincerely at that time according to their knowledge and conscience and so did flatly contradict this position That by swearing the Confession of Faith Episcopacie was abjured or else by dissembling policie they did so professe contrary to their own mind to serve their own designes in advancing per fas nefas their rebellious Covenant And so did shew themselves Iesuiticall temporizers and time-servers En graine abusing
people most impudently to promote their own ends Albeit this that we have spoken already may suffice to cleer that Abjuration and Covenâ—â—t or any part thereof of any such meaning as they pretend yet that the matter may be more evident we shall examine particularly every one of these foure sentences cited by them shewing that all of them are either falsly or impertinently alleaged by them to prove such a conclusion As to the first sentence here produced by it we may judge tanquam ex ungue Leonem what we mâ—y expects of the rest of these reverend Fathers 〈◊〉 they begin with a manifest falshood and we 〈…〉 divers more in that kind the words according to that citation are We professe that we detest all traditions brought into the Kirk without or against Gods Word and Doctrine of this Reformed Kirk Whereas in the Covenant it self it is otherwise for there the words are And finally we detest all his to wit the Roman Antichrists Traditions without or against Gods Word First we answer that there is a great difference betwixt All Traditions absolutely and the Roman Antichrists traditions for albeit we detest as sincerely as they doe all Antichristian traditions yet doe we not so detest all traditions absolutely which have not expresse or particular warrant from Gods Word if they be not repugnant thereto the Traditions of the Roman Antichrist are those which are invented by him for upholding his tyrannie over the consciences of men made equall to Gods word and intruded upon the Church as parts of Gods worship those we detest and abhorre from our very heart but to abjure absolutely all Traditions which are not expressed in Gods Word it was never the meaning of the reformed Church of Scotland nor of any well reformed Church for all the ancient Fathers of the Primitive Church and all Neoterick Orthodox writers doe teach that some Apostolicall and Ecclesiasticall traditions are not onely profitable but also almost necessary to be retained in the Chruch Necessary I say if not ad esse simplicter yet ad bene esse such as are according to these generall rules of the Apostle 1 Cor. 14. According to decency and good order and tending to Edification and such as are according to that rule of S. Austin lib. 4. contra Donat. cap. 41. Quod universa tenet Ecclesia nec concilijs constitutum semper retentum est non nisi Apostolicà authoritate traditum rectissimè crediture of which there are many profitably reteined in the Church both concerning doctrine manners government and circumstances of Gods worship as the distinction of Canonicall books from Apocrypha the Constitutions of the Apostolick Creed the manner of the celebration of Marriage before the Church the sprinkling of water upon the head of the Child in Baptisme to be sufficient the gesture of kneeling in the Supper of the Lord the time and place of the ordinarie Celebration thereof in the morning and in the Church and such likewise are the Appropriating of the name and title of Bishops to these Pastors who are set in Authority over others and divers Ecclesiasticall Canons concerning the manner of their Government Secondly albeit it had been so that all Traditions had been simply abjured which men of understanding would not have done yet this sentence could not have served to prove their Conclusion for although some of the points of the office of a Bishop now appertaining thereto be by Apostolick tradition or Ecclesiasticall constitution yet this point here called in Question that one Pastor may have power and preheminencie over others or over more particular flocks is not a Tradition either against or without Gods Word and Doctrine of this reformed Church but first it is a most certaine written veritie approved by Gods Word expresly and the Constant practice of the Church of God from the very first Constitution of the visible Church and publik exercise of Gods worship not only under the old Testament but under the new also continued in all Churches untill this lust age which cannot be denied without great impudencic then it is not against the doctrine of the reformed Church of Scotland but most conformable thereunto as we have sufficiently declared before therefore it is manifest that this passage can prove nothing for their purpose but is both falsly and impertinently produced by them CHAP. VIII VVherein is answered the second Passage of the Covenant THe second passage cited from the Negative Confession or Abjuration is no lesse falsified than the former both in the change of words and addition of others not contained in the Originall the words of their citation are We abhorre and detest all contrary Religion and Doctrine but chiefly all kind of Papistrie in generall and particular heads as they were then damned and confuted by the Word of God and Chruch of Scotland when the said Confession was sworn and subscribed Anno 1580. and 1581. 1590. and 1591. But the words in the Originall are only these As they are now dawned and confuted by the Word of God and Kirk of Scotland So that they change that particle now in then and adde more which is not in the Originall when the Confession was sworn and subscribed Anno 1580. 1581. 1590. 1591. Albeit this Alteration seemeth but small to change now in then yet in effect it is very matteriall and subtilly made to wrest the meaning of the words to their own purpose contrary to the intention of those who framed this Abjuration in making this Now relative to the damning of Episcopacie in that Assemblie at Dundie 1580. and others thereafter albeit it be evident that there was no such thing intended in the framing of this Abjuration for divers reasons First that now in the Kings Covenant is not to be understood of that present definite time then when the Covenant was framed or subscribed but as it is expresly exponed a little before Now for along time to wit from that time when the large Confession of Faith was set forth Anno 1560. and approved by the Generall Assembly and ratified in Parliament 1567. By the which Confession those particular heads of Papistrie were condemned and confuted and the true Doctrine opposite thereunto Now for a long time openly professed by the King and whole body of the Kingdome as it is expresly set down in the same place of the Covenant therefore it is manifest that this Now is not relative to that Condemnation of Episcopacie 1580. which was not then for a long time condemned but only for that present yeer Secondly albeit we should grant that this Now was not to be understood of that definite time yet doth it not serve to prove the point in Controversie for albeit by that Assembly 1580. Episcopacie as it was then used in Scotland was condemned yet this power and preheminence by approbation and practice of the Church of Scotland were standing in force in the persons of Superintendents Commissioners or Visitors and not abrogated
cap. 7. intituled of Ecclesiasticall Discipline in the second book of Discipline every where and most frequently by all Ecclesiasticall writers and therefore those who have obeyed and received Bishops are not perjured nor have broken that oath whereby they did swear to adhere to the Discipline of the Church of Scotland But on the contrary those of this Assembly who have deposed and excommunicated with such precipitation so many Bishops and Ministers without observing in their proces these formes prescribed by the Discipline of the Church of Scotland are evidently perjured according to their own grounds Secondly the word Discipline is taken at some times in a more large and ample signification for the whole Policie of the Church which in the second book of Discipline cap. 1. is defined to be An order or form of Spirituall Government which is exercised by the members thereto appointed by the Word of God for the we â—ll of the whole bodie which policie cap. 2. is divided first in regard of the persons in that part which concerneth Rulers and that which concerneth them who are ruled secondly in regard of the thing subject to this Policie in three parts 1. The policie which concernes the preaching of the Word and the administration of the Sacraments 2 That which concerneth the censures of the Church or Discipline so properly called 3. In that which concerneth the collecting and distributions of Almes and â—ent of the Church Now if any will be so obstinate as to contend that the word Discipline is taken in this large sense in the Oath of the Covenant for their satisfaction likewise we must consider that in this Discipline or Policie it is requisite that we distinguish the points which are essentiall and perpetuall from the points accidentall and mutable or as it is expresly distinguished in the first book of Discipline cap. 9. Intituled of the Policie of the Church in things utterly necessary without the which there is no face of a visible Church and in things profitable and not meerly necessarie the points utterly necessary are those which are prescribed by Gods Word to endure perpetually as that there be Pastors Teachers and Rulers in the Church that Gods Word be truely taught and Sacraments administred according to Christs Institutions and that the censures of the Church be exercised against scandalous persons and such other like things The points not meerly necessary but profitable are those which are not particularly prescribed by Gods Word but left to the libertie of the Church to constitute by Ecclesiasticall Canons setting down the formes Ceremonies and Orders to be observed in Gods worship and ruling of the Church according as the divers circumstances of time place and persons doe require Such as how many Pastors under what names and titles they ought to bear rule in the Church over what bounds or what particular persons they ought to have charge when where in what order gesture or what habite they ought to preach pray or administer Sacraments and exercise their Authoritie and divers other Ecclesiasticall Constitutions concerning their particular manner of Government The first sort ought not to be altered or changed in substance since they are appointed by God to be perpetuall in the Church and the oath taken in Baptisme or entrâ—e to a calling doth oblige every one within the Church according to their place and station therein to observe them perpetually albeit there had been no other Oath But so it is that this power and preheminencie here condemned is not contrary to any of these essentiall points of the policie of the Church appointed by Gods word but most conforme therto according to the practice of the Church both under the Old and New Testament And therefore in swearing to adhere to these points of Discipline none have abjured this power and preheminence but therewith have retained those essentiall points without change or Alteration There be other points of Episcopacie which are comprehended under the accidentall parts of the Policie of the Church such as are by what titles or names those who bear chief rule in the Church ought to be called Whether Bishops or Superintendents or Commissioners or Presidents or {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} or Moderatores by whose advice they should exercise their Authoritie whether by Chapters or Synods or Presbyteries or by other wise godly and learned men assumed by their own choice to be their Câ—uncell Albeit indeed it be more expedient to use these titles and names which have ever been used in the Apostolick and Primitive Church and continued by long prescription in after ages than those new invented titles by men affecting Singularitie These points being alterable in their own nature as not being precisely commanded in Gods word may be changed by the Church in whose libertie they were left and therefore no Oath could bind any man to the perpetuall observation thereof in case it pleased the Church for reasons of expediency to alter them for according to that Common Regula Iuris Iuramentum sequitur naturam actus super quo interponitur if the things we swear unto be of their own nature perpetui Iuris the oath taken thereupon biâ—des to the perpetuall observation and no Creature is able to absolve us of that Oath But if it be Iuris positivi and onely a Constitution of the Câ—urch or Common-wealth concerning these things 〈◊〉 are left to the libertie of the Church or Supreme 〈…〉 then certainly the oath taken thereupon 〈…〉 longer than the Constitution standeth in force but being altered by that same lawfull Authoritie whereby it was established all are ipso facto loosed from the bond of that Oath yea all those who have sworn to adhere to the Discipline of the Church of Scotland are bound by vertue of that oath to follow the Church in the alteration she makes in those mutable points and to obey the new Acts and Constitutions that concerne the same Although they be different or contrary to the former Acts and all those who disobey therein contemptuously are guiltie of perjurie Therefore since the Church hath altered upon good and grave reasons those formes and Constitutions of Presbyteriall Government established for a time not upon so good grounds unto the ancient approved manner of Episcopall Government all those within the Church are obliged notwithstanding of their former oath to follow the Church in her change without fear of perjurie And on the contrary all our Covenanters who before the lawful abrogation of the Constitutions of the Church established by lawfull Authoritie have not conformed themselves thereto but disobeying them in their own persons and by their exemplary practice intised yea compelled others to disobey and rebell to the disgrace of their mother their Church and breaking of the bond of peace whereby the Unitie of the Spirit is conserved doe lye under a fearfull perjurie untill they doe seriously repent CHAP. XI Answering to the Acts of the Generall Assemblies produced against Bishops untill
to all their doubts and that the posteritie afterward may be fully perswaded of the true meaning thereof after earnest calling upon the Name of God so religiously â—â—tested in the said Confession have entred into a diligent search of the Registers of the Kirk and books of the Generall Assembly which the greatest part of the Assembliâ—â— had not 〈◊〉 before and which by the speciall providence of God were â—reserved brought to their hands and publikly acknowledged to be authentick and have found that in the lâ—ter Confession of the Kirk of Scotland We professe 1. That we detest â—ll Traditions brought into the Kirk without or against the Word of God and Doctrine of this reformed Kirk Next We abhorre and detest all contrary Religion and Doctrine but chiefly all kind of Papistry in generall and part 〈◊〉 heads as they were then damned and 〈◊〉 by the Word of God and Kirk of 〈…〉 when the said Confession was sworn and subscribed Anno 1580. 1581. 1590. 1591. Thirdly That we detest 〈…〉 Antichrist his worldly Monarchie and wiâ—â—ed Hierchieâ— Fourthly That we joyne 〈◊〉 selves to this reformed Kirk in Doctrine Faith Religion and Discipline promising and swearing by the great Name of God that we shall continue in the doctrine and discipline of this Kirk and defend the same according to Vocation and Power all the dayes of our life But so it is that Episcopall government is abhorred and detested and the Government by Ministers and Elders in Assemblies Generall and Provinciall and Presbyteries was sworn to and subscribed in subscribing that Confession and ought to be holden by Vs if we adhere to the meaning of the Kirk when that Confession was framed sword to and subscribed unto which we are obliged by the Nationall oâ—th and subscription of this Kirk as is evident by the Acts of Generall Assemblies agreed upon both before 〈…〉 after the swearing and subscribing of the said Confessions in the yeare above mentioned and the book of Policie agreed upon in the Assemblie which was holden at Edinburgh the â—4 of Aprill and 24. of October Anno 1578. 〈◊〉 in the Register of the Kirk by Ordinance of the Assemblie holden as Glasgow 1581. and to be subscribed by all Ministers that then did bear or thereafter were to bear office in this Kirk by ordinance of the Assemblis holden the 4. of August at Edinburgh 1500. and at Edinburgh the 2. of Iuly 1591. but specially in the 2. 3. 4. 6. 7. and 11. Chapters of the said Book The Bishops being tollerate from the year 1572. till the Assembly holden in August 1575. And all this time the Assembly being wearied with the Complaints made against them did enter in search of the office it self and did agree in this that the name of a Bishop is common to every one of them that hath a particular flock over which he hath a particular charge as well to preach the Word as to minister the Sacraments At the next Assembly which was holden in Aprill 1576. such Bishops were censured us had not taken them to a particular flock in the generall Assemblie conveened in April the year of God 1578. Sess. 4. Intimation was 〈◊〉 as followeth For so much as the heads of the Policie being concluded and agreed upon in the lust Assemblie by the most part of the Brethren certaine of the Brethren had some difficultie in the head de Diaconâ—tâ— whereupon further reasoning was reserved to this Assemblie It is therefore required if any of the Brethren have any reasonable doubt or argument to propone that he be ready the morrow and then shall be heard and resolved In the 6. Sess. April 26. According to the Ordinance made the day before all persons that had any doubt or argument to propone were required to propone the same But none offered to propone any argument on the contrary In the Assembly holden at Edinburgh in October 1578. It was shownâ— by the Moderator thereof to the Noble who were present viz. My Lord Chancellor the Earle of 〈◊〉 my Lord Seatâ—n and my Lord Lindâ—ey What care and 〈◊〉 die the Assemblie had taken to entertaine and keep the puritie of the sincere Word of God unmixed with the inventions of their own heads and to preserve it to the posteritie hereafter and seeing that the true Religion is not able to continue not enduce king without a good discipline and policie in that part also have they imployed their wit and studie and drawn forth out of the pure fountaine of Gods Word such a Discipline as is meet to remain in the Kirk In the same Assemblie the speciall Corruptions were set down which they craved such of the Bishops as would submit themselves to the Assemblie to remove with prâ—mise that if the generall Assemblie hereafter shall find further corruptions in the said Estate then hitherto are expressed that they be content to be reformed by the said Assemblie according to the Word of God when they shall be required thereto First That they be content to be Pastors and Ministers of one flock that they usurpe no criminall Iurisdiction that they vote not in Parliament in the Name of the Kirk that they take not up for the maintenance of their Ambition and Riotousnesse the Emoluments of the Kirk which may susteine many Pastors the Schools and the poore but be content with reasonable Livings according to their office that they claime not to themselves the titles of Lords Temporall neither usurpe temporall Iurisdictions whereby they are abstracted from their office that they empyre not above the particular Elder-ships but be subject to the same that they usurpe not the power of the Presbyteries The Question being propounded by the Synod of Lowthian in the Assembly holden in Iuly 1579. aâ—ent a generall order to be taken for the erecting of Presbyteries in places where publike exercise is used untill the time the Policie of the Kirk be established by a Law It is answered The exercise may be judged to be a Presbyterie In the Assemblie holden at Dundie in Iuly 1580. Sess. 4. The office of a Bishop was abolished by a particular Act as appeareth by the tenor of the Act following For so much as the office of a Bishop as it is now used and commonly taken within this Realm hath no sure warrant Authoritie nor good ground in the Scriptures but is brought in by the folly and corruption of mans inventions to the great overthrow of the Kirk of God the whole Assemblie of the Kirk in one voyce after libertie given to all men to reason in the matter none opponing himself in defending the said pretended office findeth and declareth the said pretended office used and termed as is abovesaid unlawfull in it self as having neither fundament ground nor warrant in the Word of God And ordaineth that all such persons as brook or shall brook hereafter the said office shall be charged simply to dimit quit and leave off the same as an office whereunto they are not
called by God And such like to desist and cease from all preaching ministration of the Sacraments or using any way the office of Pastors while they receive de â—ovâ— Admission from the generall Assembly under the paine of excommunication to be used against them wherein if they be found disobedient or contradict this Act in any point the sentence of Excommunication after due admonition to be executed against them In the same Assembly holden Anno 1580. Sess. 10. This Article was appointed to be propounded to the King and Councell that the book of Policie might be established by 〈◊〉 Act of privie Councell while a Parliament be holden 〈◊〉 which it might be confirmed by a Law The extent of the Act maâ—e at Dundie was interpreted and explained in the Assembly holden at Glasgow in April 1581. Sess. 6. as followeth Anent the Act made in the Assembly holden at Dundie against Bishops because some difficultie appeared to some Brethren to arise out of the word Office contained in the said Act what should be meaned thereby the Assembly consisting far the most part of such as voted and were present in the Assembly at Dundie to take away the said difficultie resolving upon the true meaning and understanding of the said Act declare that they meaned wholly to condemne the whole estate of Bishops as they are now in Scotland and that the same was the determination and conclusion of the Assembly at this time because some Brethren doubted whether the former Act was to be understood of the Spirituall function onely and others alleaged that the whole office of a Bishop as it was used was damnable and that by the said Act the Bishops should be charged to dimit the same this Assembly declareth that they meaned wholly to condemne the whole estate of Bishops as they were then in Scotland And that this was the meaning of the Assembly at that time The Kings Commissioner presented unto this Assemblie the Confession of Faith subscribed by the King and his houshold not long before together with a plot of the Presbyteries to be erected which is Registrate in the books of the Assemblie with a Letter to be directed from his Majestie to the Noblemen and Gentlemen of the Countrey for their action of Presbyteries consisting of Pastors and Elders and dissolutions of Prelacies and with an offer to set forward the Policie untill it were established by Parliament The Kings letter subscribed by his hand to the Noblemen and Gentlemen was read in open audience of the whole Assembly This Assembly ordained the book of Policie to be insert in the Register by the Act following For asmuch as travell hath been taken in the framing of the Policie of the Kirk and divers suits have been made by the Magistrate for Approbation thereof which yet hath not taken the happy effect which good men would wish yet that the posteritie may judge well of the present Age and of the meaning of the Kirk the Assemblie hath concluded that the book of Policie agreed to in divers Assemblies before should be registrate in the Acts of the Kirk and remaine therein ad perpetuam rei memoriam And the Copies thereof to be taken to every Presbyterie of which book the Tenor followeth c. Immediately after the inserting of the book of Policie called therâ— the book of Discipline The Assembly ordained that the Confession of Faith be subscribed as followeth Anent the Confession of Faith lately set forth by the Kings Majestie and subscribed by his Highnesse the Assembly in one voyce acknowledgeth the said Confession to be a true Christian and faithfull Confession to be agreed unto by such as truely professe Christ and have a care of Religion and the tenour thereof to be followed out efoldly as the same is laid out in the said Proclamation wherein that Discipline is sworn to In the generall Assemblie holden at Edinburgh in October 1581. Sess. 10. Mr. Robert Montgomery is accused for teaching that discipline is a thing indifferent Sess. 23. The Assemblie gave Commission to the Presbytery of Stirling to charge Mr. Robert Montgomery to continue in the Ministry of Stirling and not to meddle with any other office or function of the Kirk namely in aspiring to the Bishoprick of Glasgow against the Word of God and Acts of the Kirk under the pain of Excommunication In the same Assembly it is acknowledged that the estate of Bishops is condemned by the Kirk Commission for erection of moe Presbyteries was renewed and a new Ordinance made for subscribing the Confession of Faith and to proceed against whatsoever persons that would not aknowledge and subscribe the same In the Assembly holden in April 1582. there was a new Commission for erection of Presbyteries where none was at yet erected Mr. Robert Montgomery pretending to be Bishop of Glasgow was ordained to be deposed and excommunicate except he gave evident tâ—kens of Repentance and promise to superseed which he did not and therefore was excommunicate shortly after according to the ordinance of this Assembly In the generall Assembly holden at Edinburgh 1582. The Generall Assembly gave Commission to some Presbyteries to try and censure such as were called Bishops for the great slander arising by their impunitie Commission was given at this Assembly to present some Articles to the Councell and estates for approving and establishing by their authoritie the Presbyteries the Synodall and Generall Assemblies in the 19. Sess. the Assemblie declared that 〈◊〉 Bishop may â—it upon the Councell in name of the Kirk In the Assemblie holden Anno 1586. these two Articles were agreed upon First It is found that all such as the Scripture appointeth Governors of the Kirk to wit Pastors Doctors and Elders may conveene to the generall Assemblies and vote in Ecclesiasticall matters Secondly There are foure Office-bearers set down to us by the Scriptures to wit Pastors Doctors Elders and Deâ—cons and the name of Bishop ought not to be taken as it hath been in the time of Papistry but is common to all Pastors and Ministers In the Assembly holden Anno 1587. Sess. 8. It was ordained that the admission of Mr. Robert Montgomery by the Presbyterie of Glasgow suppose to the Temporalitie of the Bishoprick only be undone and anulled with all possible diligence to the effect Slander might be removed from the Kirk In Sess. 15. Mr. Rob. Pont sheâ—ed the Kings presentation to the Bishoprick of Cathnes and desired the Iudgement of the Assemblie The Assemblie in their Letter to the Kings Majestie declared that they judged the said Mr. Rob to be a Bishop already according to the doctrine of S. Paul but as to that corrupt estate or office of these who hath been termed Bishops heretofore they found it not agreeable to the word of God and that it hath been 〈◊〉 in divers Assemblies before In the Instructions given to such as were appointed to waitâ— upon the Parliament it was ordained in the same Assembly Sess. 17. thâ—t they be carefull that
Iohnstone Clerk thereto under my signe and subscription manuall A. Iohnstone Cler. Eccl. Edinburgh the 12 of Ian 1639. CHAP. III. Discussing the foure Considerations whereby they were moved to make this Act OUr Covenanters before they come to the point in the beginning of the Act have set down foure considerations whereby they alleage they were moved yea forced of Necessity to conclude this Act against Bishops and albeit they doe not directly appertaine to the substance of the Controversie yet we will shortly observe some few notes thereupon to shew upon what impertinent Considerations this Act hath been grounded Their first Consideration is of the unspeakable goodnesse and great mercie of God manifested to this Nation in that excellent and divine work of Reformation brought to perfection not onely in Doctrine and worship but also in Discipline and Government c. Whereupon first we must remark that if they had soriously considered that excellent work of Reformation with due respect towards these worthy Reformers whom God used as instruments in effectuating that work they should never have been moved thereby to have concluded such an Act as this so directly contrary to their mind for they at the Reformation did establish such a discipline and government in the Church according to Gods Word as whereby one Pastour under the Name of Superintendent might lawfully have power and preheminence over other Brethren of the Ministrie and over moe particular flock than one which discipline and government continued with happie successe in the Church of Scotland above thirty yeers after the Reformation but they have made this Act quite contrâ—dictorie thereto That it is not 〈◊〉 for one Pastor 〈◊〉 have power and preheminence over other Brethren nor over moe particular flock than one 2. That which they alleage that the second Book of Discipline is the perfection of the work of Reformation can no wise be true for that cannot rightly be called the perfection of any thing which doth reverse and destroy the substance and nature thereof but so it is that the Government established by the second book of Discipline which was presbyteriall including an absolute paritie amongst Pastors did reverse and destroy the nature of the government established by the Reformation which was Episcopall including directly Superioritie of one Pastor over others and therefore it could no wayes truely be called the perfection thereof 3. It is false that this Discipline was established by the Confession of Faith as shall be hereafter qualified by discussing all the passages falsly and impertinently alleaged for the same As likewise I see not how it can be true that this book of Discipline was established by the continuall practice of the Church for some points thereof were never practised in the Church of Scotland and those which were practised contrary to the estate of Bishops were not oâ— long continuance the practice of 8. or 10. or 15. yeers which is the most I can reckon cannot be accounted such a continued practice as may make prescription against the continuall practice of the whole Christian Church for many hundred yeares before and above six and thirtie yeeres since the approved practice of the principall points of their Discipline were discontinued as we shall shew more particularly hereafter Their second Consideration is that by mens seeking their own things and not the things of Christ many Innovations and great evils have been obtruded upon the Church to the utter undoing of the work of reformation and change of the whole forme of worship and face of the Church To this we answer that those Constitutions of the Church which they call Novations and Evils such as the establishing of Bishops Baptisme in private places in â—ase of Necessitie reverent Kneeling in the Act of receiving the Supper of the Lord not refusing to give it to the sick who earnestly desire it the thankfull remembrance of Gods speciall benefits by prayer and preaching of the Word upon certaine appointed dayes the Cateâ—hizing of yong children and presenting of them to the Bishop to blesse them by prayer for increase of knowledge and continuance of Gods grace are neither evils in themselves but tending to the removall of evils from the worship of God as irreverence and contempt of the Sacraments neglect of a thankfull remembrance of Gods speciall benefits and ignorance in youth and to the establishing of great good in the Church as sound Government Reverence in the worship of God thankfulnesse for Gods benefits increase of knowledge in the yonger sort and Spirituall comfort to Christian soules in Distresse Neither are they to be accounted Novations but rather a restoring of the ancient Constitutions and Customes of the Primitive Church in her purest times 2. These things cannot be said to be obtruded upon the Church which were received by the Consent both of the Church in Generall Assemblies and by the whole body of the Kingdome in Parliament as all those Constitutions which they challenge have been but on the contrary those things are said more truely to be obtruded upon the Church which are not brought in either by Assemblie or Parliament yea directly against the Acts of both standing in force are violently urged upon the people not onely to receive them simply but likewise to swear solemnly to the truth thereof by the great name of God and that not by any having authority or lawfull calling thereunto but by certaine seditious private persons and such are their seditious Covenant and impertinent applications or false interpretations of the Confession of Faith whereby many persons of sundry estates were by false allurements and violent threatnings forced against their minds to swear directly disobedience to the Kings Laws and Constitutions of the Church Finally it is also false that those things which they call Novaâ—ions have undone the work of Reformation and changed the whole forme of Gods worship or face of the Church For the work of Reformation is rather restored by the establishing of Bishops which was destroyed in that point by their Presbyteriall Government and absolute paritie of Pastors as we have touched already and shall be more fully cleered hereafter Then albeit some Circumstances and Ceremonies in Gods worship and externall apparell of the Church have been changed yet the substance and forme of Faith Religion worship and the Beautifull face of the Spouse of Christ the Church doth notwithstanding remaine still without change or alteration which S. Austin Epist. 86. expresseth fitly speaking of the like Novations in these words Vna fides oft universa Ecclesiae tametsi ipsa fidei unitas quibusdam diversis observationibus celebratur quibus nullo modo quod in fide verum est impeditur omnis enim pulchritudo filia regis intrinsecùs illa autem observationes quae variè celebrantur in ejus veste intelliguntur That is to say The faith of the universall Church is one although the unitie of the Faith it self be celebrated by some diversitie of observations whereby the truth
of Parliament before this Abjuration was sworn by which limitation is excluded from this oath all points of Doctrine and Discipline added since either by Acts of Generall Assemblies Synods or Presbyteries since that Confession was received as that Act of the Assemblie at Dâ—ndie 1580. and at Glâ—sgow 1581. Condemning Episcopacie and others of that kinde and such are our Covenanters Additions or Applications of the Confession of Faith expressed in their Rebellioâ—s Covenant And the truth is that they neither have nor can produce one word of that Confession condemning this power and preheminence neither had the Church who established it any such purpose or intention to doe so But on the contrary the same Church at the same very time in setting down the first book of Discipline did approve that power and preheminencie under the title of Superintendents therefore this point was not abjured by the Oath Fourthly the matter of this Oath is determined to be that doctrine and discipline Which was for a long time before the first framing of this Oath professed by the King and whole body of this Kingdome But so it is that no point of Doctrine condemning this power and preheminence was professed for a long time before this by the King or body of the Kingdome therefore that power and preheminence was not abjured by that Oath For the Kings profession we have shown Cap. 6. what it was at that time and both before and after then the profession of the whole body of the Kingdome cannot be determined by particular mens opinions but by publik Acts either by the Supreme Civill or Ecclesiastick Court And they have not produced any Act of either of those Courts long before shewing such a profession and therefore it is to be presupposed that there was none such But on the contrary we can produce Acts of both those Courts not onely long before but also continually since the Reformation yea at that same very time when this Abjuration was first made and some yeers after standing in force approving this power and preheminence the first Act they can produce having any appearance of condemning Episcopacie as unlawfull is that Act of the Assemblie at Dundee 1580. which notwithstanding doth not serve their purpose first because this Act was not long before if not after this Abjuration was first framed being even that same very year about that same time Secondly albeit the office of a Bishop as it was then in Scotland be condemned yet notwithstanding this point that it was lawfull that one Pastor might have power and preheminence given him was agreed unto by the whole Assemblie as we have signified before and shall more fully declare hereafter Thirdly long before this the power and preheminencie of Superintendents and Commissioners was publikly approved by the first book of Discipline and by divers Acts of Generall Assemblies even then and some years after standing in force unrepealed which we have before faithfully cited cap. 5. And as for the civill Courts both of Councell and Parliament they declared their profession by rejecting of divers suits made for ratifying the second book of Discipline which seemed to condemne this power and preheminence as in the Assemblies 1578. 1579. and 1580. cited here by themselves It is declared that divers suits were made for establishing the second book of Discipline by Act of Parliament or otherwise if that could not be obtained by Act of Councell but both the one and the other were often refused Moreover it was declared by the King and whole body of the Kingdome assembled in Parliament at Edinburgh May 22. 1584. that they had no such profession but on the contrary in the 129. Act of that Parliament representing the whole body of the Kingdome the whole power preheminence and Iurisdiction of Bishops was ratified and confirmed in most ample forme By which it is evident that there was no point of Doctrine long before the swearing of this Covenant received beleeved and defended by the King and whole body of the Kingdome condemning this power and preheminence now in question And therefore that it was not abjured by the Oath of the Covenant And since it is so it is strange with what face or conscience they can so 〈◊〉 abuse Christian people as to impose falsly â—uch a burden upon the Consciences of all persons within the Kingdome both King and Subjects Pastors and people in pressing to perswade them against so many evident reasons that they are all by vertue of that Oath so fearfully perjured who have consented to the 〈◊〉 of Episcopacie But because this point of Episcopacie is understood by them rather to be abjured under the name of Discipline than under the name of Doctrine therefore to take away all way of Escape or subtâ—rfuge we shall examine the point of Discipline also and shew how farre it is included in the Oath and albeit it be by all those former limitations excluded also for these limitations are to be applied aswell to the Discipline as to the Doctrine Yet for further resolution we must consider that the word Discipline is taken in divers significations first strictly and properly for that part of the Policie which concerneth the censures of the Church to be practised upon those who doe erre either in doctrine or in manners of life And so Episcopacie or power and preheminence of one Pastor over others is not contrary thereto but may very well subsist therewith and hath subsisted actually both during the Governement under Superintendents or Commissioners as also under the Government of Bishops since they were re-established for the same censures which were established by the book of Discipline by the order set down before our Psalm books and by divers Acts of Generall Assemblies long before Bishops were re-established did still remaine the same admoâ—itions private and publik the same sentence of excomâ—unication and manner of proceeding therein by three private and three publik Citations before Ecclesiasticall Indicatories the same publik prayers â—ppointed by order of the Church of repentance to the delinquent upon three severall Sabbath dayes the same forme of pronouncing the sentence and enjoyning private or publik satisfaction the same manner of receiving and absolving of the penâ—tent As all within the Church of Scotland doe know And therefore it is evident that this power and prehâ—minence of Bishops is not contrary to the Disciplâ—â—e of the Church of Scotland taken in this â—eale 〈◊〉 apparently it is taken in the Oath for in â—ll speeches or wâ—â—â—s of conâ—sequencâ— chiâ—â—â— those which are see down for a solâ—â—â— oath â—hich ought to be plain and cleer the words 〈◊〉 be taken in their proper and most usuall sense rather than in an unproper and figurative except by some evident reason it appear that it must be taken improperly And this certainly is the most proper and usuall meaning of this word Discipline as it is taken in the order set down before our Psalm books in the second book of Discipline
is common to every one of them that hath a particular flock but dissembles the other points of agreement which we have rehearsed importing this power and preheminence because they found them directly contrary to their Conclusion Thirdly albeit they intended at this Assemblie presently to have thrown down Episcopacie to the ground yet because many wise learned and godly Brethren did oppose them standing firmly for the ancient discipline of the Church there passed five or six years in these contestations before the finall sentence was pronounced in the mean time those Episcopomastiges ceased not to labour diligently by all meanes to draw others to their judgement using likewise the perswasions of men of speciall note beyond Seas as in the time of the Contestation the Lord Glames then Chancellor of Scotland was moved by our Genevating Ministers to write to Beza craving his opinion concerning the present Government under Bishops Superintendents to the which letter Beza made a large answer condemning the present Government and setting down a plot of that Policie and Discipline which he desired them to imbrace according to the which they did frame their second book of Discipline and that in many points ipsissimis verbis as may appear by conferring the Book with his Epistle That second citation from the Assembly April 1576. serves nothing to their purpose for albeit Some Bishops were censured because they had not betaken themselves to a particular flock yet this might consist with power and preheminence over other as is cleer in the Superindents who albeit they had particular flocks wherein they were specially bound to attend in preaching the Word and administration of Sacraments yet that did not hinder but that they might have charge over other Pastors and moe Parishes Finally those corruptions of the estate of Bishops which are set down in the Assemblie at Edinburgh 1578. were not fully concluded in that Assembly to be damned absolutely but only proposed by some and craved to be considered CHAP. XII Answering to the Acts for establishing of the second Book of Discipline THe second Rank of Acts cited out of Generall Assemblies are those which concern the establishing of the second Book of Discipline such as are that Act of the Assembly in April 1578. Sess. 4. that in April 1578. Iuly 1579. Iuly 1580. Sess. 10. April 1581. 1590. 1591. Sess. 4. to the which they need no particular Answer but Generally concerning this book of Discipline we answer first that this Book of Discipline was brought in head and urged by the same means and occasions whereof we spake before to subvert the former established Government and to bear down Bishops that the Church the more easie might be robbed of her patrimonie by Noblemen and Courtiers gaping after the Church-rents and factious humours striving to singularity contrary to the mind of the wisest and gravest and most modest of the Ministry and opposed continually by the King Councel and whole body of the Kingdome as the very Acts themselves here produced by them doe evidently declare Secondly the Acts of those Assemblies can be of no greater force than the book it self for the establishing whereof they were made But so it is that this Book is not in it self that Discipline whereunto we swear to joyne our selves in the Oath of the Covenant first because at this time the book of Discipline was but onely a thing in fieri not as yet concluded when the Oath was made and therefore could not be accounted to be comprehended therein for that Ordinance of the Assemblie at Glasgow 1581. whereby that Discipline was appointed to be registrated in the Assembly books did not make it a binding Law neither was it intended for that end but as it is expresly set down in the Act it self ad perpetuam rei memoriam and that the posteritie should think well of the intention of the Church So it was but a thing intended by the Church but not effected as likewise that Ordinance of the Assembly at Glasgow 1590. concerning the subscription to that book did not extend it self to all but to actuall Ministers only and yet of those many did resist it as particularly the Ministers of Angus and Mearâ—es and divers other parts of the Kingdome for the which cause it was thought needfull that a new Act should be made Anno 1591. injoyning againe the subscription under a penalty and particularly to those of Angus and Mearâ—es This book was never ratified by any Act of Estate either in Councell or Parliament without the which they themselves confesse it could not be a Law as they doe in that Assembly Iuly 1579. and that Assembly 1580 Sess. 10. As for that Act of Parliament 1592. here alleaged first it was after the last urging of the swearing of the Covenant 1591. and therefore could not be included in the Oath Secondly it was but a partiall ratification not of the whole book but of Generall Synodall and of Presbyteriall Assemblies and Parish Sessions which did still remaine under Episcopall government with greater regularitie than they were before 2. This book of Discipline many years after the first motion thereof could not be agreed unto by the greatest and best part of the Ministrie finding it for the most part but an Imaginary plot which could be hardly effectuate or indure long in the Church without great corruption as the event proved Some of it never put in practice either in the Church of Scotland or any other Church in the world like to the frame of Policie in Plato's Republik or of Outopia as those points de Diaconatu concerning the collecting and distribution of the rents of the Church in some points the contrary hath ever been practised as it is appointed by that Book Cap. 7. That Landward Churches should not nor could not have particular Elderships and yet ever after there was not so small a Landward Church but had their particular Sessions consisting of the Ministers Elders and Deacons It is likewise there appointed that Elders once lawfully called to the office may never leave it again and yet it hath ever been an use that he who was Elder this year should be casheered the next and every year a new Election made Item it is ordained Cap. 3. That all Ecclesiasticall Parsons as Pastors Elders and Deacons should receive the Ceremonie of ordination to their office which are declared to be Fasting and Prayer and imposition of hands of Elderships and yet they did never practise imposition of hands upon Elders or Deacons but only in the Ordination of Pastors many other points might be brought which either were never practised or the contrary practice brought in 3. If this Book of Discipline be a declaration of the meaning of Church whereby the negative Confession in the Covenant should be interpreted then those who have sworn the Covenant have sworn also to this Book of Discipline if it be so then which of all the Covenanters can free themselves of perjurie for
therefore it were but a foolish Logomachie or strife about words to allow the one title and condemne the other Secondly it may aswell be condemned as unlawfull to appropriate the name of Minister to the degree of preaching Pastors which is common to all those who have charge in the Church or to appropriate the name of Elder to their ruling Elders only which is common to all Pastors Apostles Evangelists and Bishops Thirdly neither did they condemne as unlawfull in it self their power and preheminence over the Ministers in their Diocese or charge over moe particular Parishes first because there were points agreed upon by both parties before this Assemblie and approved by a speciall Act as we have shown before Cap. 11. Secondly because this power was as yet still remaining in the persons of Superintendents Commissioners and Visitors and long after this time Fourthly neither did they condemne as unlawfull in it self their power of Convocation of Synodall Assemblies and their moderation therein for the Church acknowledged this power to be lawfull in Superintendents as we have shown by divers Acts of Assemblies Cap. 5. for if it were unlawfull in it self it could not be thought lawfull under any title whatsoever Fiftly neither did they condemne as unlawfull in it self their sitting and voycing in Councell or Parliament or other Civill Iudicatories for they acknowledge in the second book of Discipline Cap. 11. That Pastors may and should assist their Princes when they be required in all things agreeable to Gods Word whether it be in Councell or Parliament or otherwise So a little before this time M. Robert Pont who was a Pastor and Commissioner of Caithenes had licence from the Assemblie to exercise the office of a Senator of the Colledge of Iustice which was a civill Iudicatorie That proviso which is added to this doth not import any unlawfulnes in the office Providing they neglect not their own charge nor by flatterie of Princes hurt the publik estate of the Church if any doe so it is but a personall fault and not essentiall to the office for Bishops may doe more good in those places for the publik weal of the Church than their Apostles of the Covenant by their long staying in Edinburgh farre from their own particular charges attending the tables of the Covenant and gadding up and down the Countrie to stirre up the Kings Subjects to rebellion against him and to disturb the estate of the Church and Kingdome as many of the Covenanting Ministers have done These are the principall points both of the Spirituall and temporall functions of the Bishops and since they were not accounted by the Church unlawfull in themselves how can this be that this Assembly hath justly condemned The whole estate of Bishops as unlawfull in it self except the Ambiguitie lurk in these words which are there added and often repeated As it is now used in Scotland signifying that it was only the corruptions which were in those who were Bishops at that time which they did condemn and not Episcopacie absolutely It may be true indeed that there were some corruptions at that time in those who had the office of Bishops or that they did not exercise their office aright retaining some corruptions of the Roman Church but for these personall faults the office should not have been condemned of it self since these corruptions might have been separated from the office as they were indeed by the new re-establishment of Bishops in the year 1606. 1608. And certainly they understood those corruptions which are remaked to have been in the Bishops by the book of discipline Cap. 11. whereof some are corruptions indeed but not competent to that office as it was now established in Scotland by generall Assemblies and Acts of Parliament others of them are only supposed corruptions which cannot be convinced to be such indeed either by Gods Word or testimonie of approved Fathers or practice or example of the primitive Church 1. They say it is a corruption that the name of Bishop should be appropriated to some few we have answered to this a little before shewing that this is only a proud doting about questions and strife of words as the Apostle sayes 1 Tim 6. 4. 2. They account it a corruption that they addict not themselves to a particular flock I answer that they doe so for their Diocese is their particular flock Then it is neither necessarie nor expedient that he to whom the generall charge of many parishes is committed should astrict himself to one Parish only nor can the contrary be convinced from Gods Word wherein we finde no such divisions of Parishes as is now 3. They challenge them that they are called Lords over their brethren and over the inheritance of the Lord But first we say that they are not called Lords in regard of their rule over their Brethren but in regard of their temporall Lordships bestowed upon them by the Liberalitie of Princes and in regard of their place in Parliament and Councell then this title of Lord like as Dominus in Latine and {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} in Greek is sometimes a word signifying absolute and illimitated Dominion So we see that divers Emperors albeit in effect they had absolute dominion yet did they refuse often the title of Dominus because it was odious to people and in this sense Bishops are not called Lords neither doe they arrogate to themselves such absolute and unlimited dominion as to doe what they pleased but they must be ruled by the Canons of the Church But otherwise the title of Lord is only a word of honour competent to every man of respect to whom it pleases the Prince or custome of the Countrey to give that title as in France we see the Bishops are no otherwise intituted than other ordinarie Gentlemen calling them Mounsieur so likewise in Spaine and Italy Seignior which title is also given to any other man of worth it is only the custome of the Countrey of England and Scotland whereby this title of Lord is given to Bishops and not for any absolute Dominion they arrogate thereby 4. They account it a corruption that Bishops should have further bounds to visite then they may lawfully they would say conveniently but that corruption may easily be amended by division of the Diocese as is lately done in the Diocese of St. Andrews without abolishing the whole office 5. That a Pastor should have criminall Iurisdiction we answer they have not this as Pastors or Bishops but as a priviledge by the Laws of the Countrey annexed to their temporall lands which notwithstanding they doe not exercise in their own person but by their Stewards or Bailifâ—es 6. They count it a corruption that Bishops would not subject themselves to the correction and censures of the particular Elderships or Presbyteries this is but a supposed corruption and if it were so it were a great corruption indeed and a most uncomely and confused disorder to give libertie to
doctrine contained in the Confession of Faith From this then that we have shown to be true we may bring a forcible argument to prove that by this abjuration the power and preheminence of Bishops is not abjured For this abjuration being but an Appendix deduced by necessary consequence it could not of it self have another meaning or at least not a contrary sense to that Confession whereupon it depends but so it is that the meaning of the Confession of Faith as it was explained by the Church was no other but that it was lawfull for one Pastor to have this power preheminencie over others c. Therfore the abjuration could not have a contrary meaning towit that this power and preheminencie was unlawfull in it self The assumption of this argument is already sufficiently qualified in the former Chapter by the book of Discipline Acts of divers generall Assemblies and long continued practice of the Church The proposition is evident in it self for it is an absurd thing to say that an Appendix should have a contrary sense to the principall proposition from whence it is deduced by necessary consequence all good Logicians know this of which number to my knowledge the Moderator is one who hath in his time composed many accurate propositions with their Appendices and would not have suffered one of his Schollers with patience to set down their Thesis with so evill knit consequences as they would make us beleeve is betwixt the confession of Faith and the Abjuration of the Covenant depending thereupon I can finde no reason why he and other learned men of that Assemblie should be so farre misled against all true Logick and sound reason except it be as appeares that they have captivated their understanding to the Tables of the Covenant that for obedience thereto they have forgot all rules of Logick to advance per fas nefas their Idoll of Presbyteriall Government But our Covenanters objects that albeit the Confession of Faith might have been understood so by those who have set it down and so interpreted by the Church for a long time as that thereby this power and preheminency was not condemned yet the Generall Assembly of the Church to whom it appertaines to interpret the Confession of Faith might understand and interpret it otherwise as it did in that Assembly at Dundie 1580. wherein Episcopacie was condemned and now in this Assembly at Glasgow 1639. To this we answer first It is possible indeed that men might understand it otherwise then it was understood at the beginning yea in a contrary sense as the Covenanters doe interpret it now But the Question is whether both those contrary sense can be the true meaning of the Confession I hope they will not judge so except they would make the Confession of Faith like a nose of wax as some blasphemous Papists speak of the Scripture or that they would make the Confession which ought to be a firme and constant rule to try the doctrine of all within the Church like a Lesbian rule which may be applyed both to crooked and straight lines or to contrary and contradictory senses Then if it be so it may be asked which of those is the true meaning Certainely there is no reasonable man but will esteeme that to be the true meaning which is intended and expressed by the author thereof For as we say Vnusquique est suâ—ruâ—â— verborum optimus interpres except such a one as speaketh non-sense but so it is that they that framed the Confession of the Church of Scotland and the Church who received the same did declare their meaning therein to be such as that thereby this power and preheminencie was not damned but directly approved Therefore that contrary meaning which they ascribe to the Church in the year 1580. 1581. 1590. must needs be false Secondly This Covenant and abjuration therein was neither framed by the Authoritie of the Church or generall Assembly nor was the Oath required by their Authoritie but both was done by the Authoritie of the King and Councell at whose direction this Covenant and abjuration was framed and the Oath and subscription thereto required of all his Subjects by his Commandment therefore it appertaineth onely to his Majestie and Councell to declare the meaning thereof and in what sense he did require the Oath of all his Subjects For this is a most true Axiom agreed unto by all orthodox writers That all Oathes required by a Magistrate should be taken according to the direct and plaine meaning of him who requireth the same But it is most manifest that neither the King nor Councell did require that oath in such a sense as thereby Episcopacie should be condemned for he and his Councell did plainely declare before that time at that same very time and many times afterward that his expresse meaning purpose and constant intention was to continue the estate and office of a Bishop in the Church of Scotland and to withstand all motions tending to the overthrow thereof as we shall shew more particularly For first that this abjuration was set forth by the King and Councels appointment and that by his Authoritie onely the Oath was required is manifest both by that Act of Councell March 5. 1580. which they have prefixed before their Rebellious Covenant pressing thereby to make people beleeve that it was authorized by the King as likewise by the Acts of Assembly cited here by themselves wherein is declared That the Kings Commissioner presented to the Assembly in April 1581. the Confession of Faith subscribed by the King and his houshold not long before and in that Act approving this Confession cited here by them it is expresly acknowledged that it was set forth by the Kings Majestie Next that it was to be understood according to the Kings Majesties meaning appeareth also by the same Act where it is said That it should be followed out efoldly as the same is laid out in the Kings Proclamation for that word Efoldly signifieth that they should follow not onely the words but likewise the sense and meaning which was intended in his Majesties proclamation not in a twofold sense as if the Assemblie would intend one sense and the King another but simply and sincerely by all in the same words and meaning which his Majestie did expresse in his Proclamation Thirdly that his Majestie did not intend that it should be sworn and subscribed in such a sense or meaning as that thereby Episcopacie should be condemned is also most manifest 1. By his Majestie and Councell often rejecting the instant petitions of divers Assemblies for establishing the second book of Discipline whereby the power of Bishops is impaired and absolute paritie of all Pastors established as they acknowledge themselves by that Act of the Assembly at Glasgow 1581. cited here by them wherein are these words Because divers suits have been made to the Magistrate for approbation to the book of Policie which yet have taken no great effect Then because