of the Common Prayers of the Church of England or the Genevian Liturgy For we no where read of a Third ever pretended to have been used in those times in Scotland Now that it was not the Liturgy of Geneva is plain for besides that it is utterly incredible that there could have been so many Copies of the Genevian Form in the vulgar Language then in Scotland as might serve so many Parish Churches Nay that 't is highly probable there was not so much as one Besides this I say in the Genevian Form which was afterwards used in Scotland there is no Order for no footstep of the observation of other Holy-days besides Sunday Neither is there any Order in it for Reading of Lessons of the Old and New Testament except in the Treatise of Fasting which was not compiled till the year 1565. There indeed Lessons are appointed such and such Psalms and such and such Histories in the Old but not so much as one Tittle of the New Testament In all the rest of the Book a deep Silence about Lessons than which there cannot be a clearer Demonstration that the Book appointed to be used in December 1557 was not that of Geneva Indeed 2. None of our Presbyterian Historians neither Petrie nor Calderwood have the confidence to pretend nay to insinuate the possibility of its being the Common Order of Geneva which 't is very probable they would have done if they had had the smallest hopes of making it feasible On the contrary Calderwood seems fairly to acknowledge that it was the English Liturgy but then this acknowledgement lies at such a distance from the year 1557. that no doubt he thought himself pretty secure that few Readers would reflect upon it as ane acknowledgment he doth not make it till he comes to the year 1623 when he had occasion to tell how the use of the English Liturgy was brought into the New Colledge of St. Andrews Take it in his own words Upon the 15 th of January Master Robert Howie Principal of the New College of St. Andrews Doctor Wedderburn and Doctor Melvin were directed by a Letter from Doctor Young in the Kings Name to use the English Liturgy Morning and Evening in the New College where all the Students were present at Morning and Evening Prayers Which was presently put in execution notwithstanding they wanted the warrant of any General Assembly or of any CONTINVED PRACTICE OF THE FORM in time by-past since the Reformation Where you see he lays the stress of his Argument against it on its nor having had a continued Practice since the Reformation which is a clear concession that at the Reformation it was in practice tho that practice was not continued But whither he acknowledged this or not is no great matter we have sufficient Evidence for the point in hand without it For 3. Buchanan's Testimony which was adduced before about the Scots subscriving to the Worship and Rites of the Church of England is unexceptionable And yet it is not all For 4. The Order as you see it appointed by the Lords of the Congregation Decem. 3d 1557. is That the Book there authorised be used in all Churches from that very date but we find by the First Book of Discipline That the Order of Geneva was only coming in to be used then in some of the Churches i. e. 1560. And it had nothing like a public Establishment till the General Assembly holden at Edenburgh Dec. 25 1652. For then and not till then It was concluded that ane Vniform Order should be kept in the Ministration of the Sacraments Solemnization of Marriages and Burial of the Dead according to the Kirk of Geneva So it is in the Mss. and so Petrie hath it But Nature works again with Calderwood For he has no more but this It was ordained that ane Vniform Order be kept in the Ministration of the Sacraments according to the Book of Geneva Omitting Marriage and the Burial of the Dead Marriage I believe to bear the other Company for the Burial of the Dead was the Dead Flee Why The Book of Geneva allowed of Funeral Sermons as he himself acknowledgeth A mighty Superstition in the opinion of Prerbyterians so that it would have been offensive to the sincerer sort as he commonly calls those of his own Gang and inconsistent with the Exigences of the Good Cause to have let the world know that A General Assembly had ratified the Order of that Book about Burials and thereby had justified the Superstition of Funeral Sermons Nay 5. It seems this Act of the General Assembly Decem. 1562. has not been strong enough for turning out the English Liturgy and introducing the form of Geneva For if we may believe Calderwood himself The General Assembly holden at Edenburgh Decem. 25. 1564. found themselves concerned to make another Act ordaining Every Minister Exhorter and Reader to have one of the Psalm books lately printed at Edenburgh and use the Order contained therein in Prayers Marriage and Administration of the Sacraments Where observe further that Prayers not mentioned in the Act 1562. are now put in from which it may be probably conjectured that as much as Knox was against the English Liturgy he found many difficulties to get it laid aside so many that it has not only been used by some few or many I cannot tell in the Ministration of the Sacraments c. after the Act 1562. But the Clergy have not found themselves obliged to forbear the use of it in the publick prayers so that it was needful in this Assembly 1564 to make a New Act restricting them both as to Prayers and other Ministrations to the Order of Geneva And if this holds we have the English Liturgy at least seven Years in continued practice in Scotland But it is enough for my main purpose that it was once universally in use which I think cannot be denied by any who impartially considers what hath been said And now 6. May not I adduce one Testimony more 'T is true it is of a latter date But it is very plain and positive and what I have adduced already is security enough for its Credibility It is the Testimony of the Compilers of our Scottish Liturgy which made the great Stir in the year 1637. And was made one of the main pretences for the first Eruptions of that execrable Rebellion which ensued The Compilers of that Liturgy I say in their Preface to it tell us That it was then known that diverse years after the Reformation we had no other Order for Common Prayer but the English Liturgy A Third Principle wherein our Reformers agreed with the Church of England and which stands in direct contradiction to the Principles of our Presbyterians is that they own'd the Church had a great Dependance on the State That it belong'd to the Civil Magistrate to reform the Church That People might appeal from the Church to the Civil Magistrate c. I
were deposable by the Superintendent of the Diocess and the Elders of the Parishes where they were Ministers but of this more hereafter But by that same First Book of Discipline the Superintendent was to be judged by the Ministers and Elders of his whole Province over which he was appointed and if the Ministers and Elders of the Province were negligent in correcting him one or two other Superintendents with their Ministers and Elders were to conveen him providing it were within his own Province or Chief Town and inflict the Censure which his Offence deserved Of the Reasonableness of this afterward 4. There was as remarkable a difference in point of Ordination which in the then Scottish stile was called Admission Private Ministers were to be admitted by their Superintendents as we shall find afterwards But by the First Book of Discipline Head 5. Superintendents were to be admitted by the Superintendents next adjacent with the Ministers of the Province 5. In the case of Translation the General Assembly holden at Edenburgh Decem. 25. 1562. Gives power to every Superintendent within his own bounds in his Synodal Assembly with consent of the most part of the Elders and Ministers of Kirks to translate Ministers from one Kirk to another as they shall consider the Necessity Charging the Minister so translated to obey the Voice and Commandment of the Superintendent But according to the First Book of Discipline Head 5. No Superintendent might be translated at the pleasure or request of any one Province without the Council of the whole Church and that for grave Causes and Considerations 6. A special care was to be taken of his Qualifications and Abilities for such ane important office for thus it is appointed by the First Book of Discipline Head 5. That after the Church shall be established and three years are past no man shall be called to the Office of a Superintendent who hath not two years at least given a proof of his faithful Labours in the Ministry A Caution simply unapplyable to Parish Ministers 7. He had a living provided for him by the First Book of Discipline Head 5. about five times as much yearly as was alotted for any private Minister And it is to be observed that this was in a time when the Popish Bishops still brooked their Benefices But when the Resolution was Anno 1567 to deprive all the Popish Clergy it was agreed to in the General Assembly by the Churchmen on the one hand and the Lords and Barons on the other That Superintendents should succeed in their places as both the Mss. and Spotswood have it expresly 8. Superintendents by vertue of their Office were constant Members of the General Assemblies Therefore the General Assembly holden at Perth Iune 25. 1563. statuted That every Superintendent be present the first day of the Assembly under the pain of 40 sh. to be given to the poor without Remission So it is in the Mss. but Petrie has it barely That they shall conveen on the first day of every Assembly And it seems because that punishment had not sufficient influence on them it was again ordained by the G. Ass. at Edenburgh March 6. 1573. That they shall be present in the Assembly the first day before noon under the pain of losing one half of their stipend for a year c. So both the Mss. and Petrie But as we shall find afterwards such presence of Parish Ministers was not allowed far less necessary 9. It belonged to them to try those who stood Candidates for the Ministery thus 1. B. of Disc. Head 4. Such as take upon them the Office of Preachers who shall not be found qualified therefore by the Superintendent are by him to be placâ—d Readers And again Head 5. No Child nor person within the age of 21 years may be admitted to the Office of a Reader but such must be chosen and admitted by the Superintendent as for their Gravity and Discretion may grace the Function that they are called unto And the Ass. at Edenburgh Dec. 15. 1562. Ordains That Inhibition be made against all such Ministers as have not been presented by the people or a part thereof to thâ— Superintendent and he after Examination and Tryal has not appointed them to their Charges So the Mss. and so Petrie and Spotswood cites another Act of the General Assembly at Edenburgh 1564. to the same purpose 10. As appears by that Act of the Assembly Decem. 25. 1562. just now cited and the 7 Act Parl. 1 Iac. 6. cited before also Superintendents had the power of granting Collations upon presentations And the Assembly at Perth holden in Iune 1563. appoints That when any Benefice chances to vaik or is now vacant that a qualified person be presented to the Superintendent of that Province where the Benefice lyeth and that he being found sufficient be admitted c. So I find it cited by the Author of Episcopacy not abjured in Scotland 11. A Superintendent had power to plant Ministers in Churches where the people were negligent to present timeously and indeed that power devolved much sooner into his hands by the First Book of Discipline Head 4. than it did afterwards into the hands of either Bishop or Presbytery for there it is ordered That if the people be found negligent in electing a Minister the space of forty days the Superintendent with his Counsel may present unto them a man whom they judge apt to feed the flock c. And as he had thus the power of trying and collating Ministers and planting Churches in the case of a Ius Devolutum So 12. He had the power of Ordination which as I said was then called Admission as is evident from the First Book of Discipline cap. 5. and several Acts of Assemblies already cited 13. All Presbyters or Parish Ministers once admitted to Churches were bound to pay Canonical Obedience to their Superintendents Thus in the Assembly at Edenburgh Iune 30. 1562. It was concluded by the whole Ministers assembled that all Ministers should be subject to the Superintendents in all lawful admonitions as is prescribed as well in the Book of Discipline as in the Election of Superintendents So the Mss. And by that aforecited Act of the Assembly at Edenburgh Decem. 25. 1562. Ministers translated from one Church to another are commanded to obey the Voice and Commandment of the Superintendent Indeed it was part of ane Article presented by the Church to the Council May 27. 1561. That ane Act should be made appointing a civil Punishment for such as disobeyed or contemned the Superintendents in their Function 14. He had power to visit all the Churches within his Diocess and in that Visitation they are the words of the First Book of Discipline Head 5. To try the Life Diligence and Behaviour of the Ministers the Order of their Churches the Manners of their People how the Poor are provided and how
Schism which then prevailed there as foreseeing that Episcopacy might readily be deem'd a remedy against so great ane evil joyn'd Soâ—thenes with himself in the Inscription of the Epistle that by his own example he might teach how much that Princeliness was to be avoided in Ecclesiastical Conventions seeing the Apostles themselves who are owned to have been next to Christ first in order and supreme in degree did yet Exercise their power by the Rules of Parity Who will not at first sight think this a pretty odd fetch But to go on he further affirms That Episcopacy is so far from being a proper remedy against Schism that it has produced many Grievous Schisms which had never been but for that Humane Invention That the Papacy was the fruit of Episcopacy That the Council of Nice by making that Canon about the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the Ancient customes should continue c cleared the way for the Roman Papacy which was then advancing apace And founded a Throne for that Whore that sits upon the seven Mountains That the Primitive Churches were in a flourishing condition so long as their Governours continued to Act in Parity And had not yeilded to Prelacy And yet he had granted before That humane Episcopacy as he calls it was in vogue in Ignatius his time c. So that I think they could not flourish much having so short a time to flourish in These fewâ— of many such learned Propositions I have collected out of that Book which was so successful at that time in furthering and advancing the Presbyterian Principles in Scotland And could they be a learned Clergy Could they be great Masters at Antiquity and Ecclesiastical History who swallowed down these Propositions or were imposed on by the Book that contain'd them 'T is true this Book came not to Scotland till the end of the year 1577 or the beginning of 1578. But I thought it pardonable to anticipate so far as now to give this account of it considering how proper it was for my present purpose We shall have occasion to take further notice of it afterward Thus I think I have made it appear how advantageous Morton's Proposition was to the Presbyterian party They had occasion by it to fall upon forming a New Scheme of Church Governmet and Polity They were as well prepared as they could be for such a nick and they had a set of people to deal with who might easily be worsted in these Controversies However it seems the common principles of Politicks which God and Nature have made if not inseparable parts at least ordinary concomitants of sound and solid reason did sometimes make their appearances amongst them For that there have been Disputations and Contests and that some at least of the many propositions contained in the Second Book of Discipline have been debated and tossed is evident from the many Conferences were about it and the long time was spent before it was perfected and got its finishing stroke from a General Assembly as we shall find in our progress Proceed we now in our deduction Tho' the Presbyterian Faction had gain'd this advantage in the Assembly 1576 that they had allowance to draw a new Scheme of Polity to which they could not but apply themselves very chearfully yet it seems they were so much humbled by the Repulses they had got as to the main Question viz. the Lawfulness of Episcopacy that they thought it not expedient to try the next Assembly with it directly as they had done unsuccessfully twice before But to wait a little till their party should be stronger and in the mean time to content themselves with such indirect blows as they could conveniently give it such I say their deliberations seem to have been at the next Assembly which was holden at Edenburgh Octob 24. 1576. For not so much as one word in that Assembly concerning the Lawfulness or Unlawfulness of Prelacy either Simply and in it self Or Complexely as then in use in Scotland 'T is true Certain â—reâ—hren says the MS. some Brethren says Calderwood some says Petrie without Question the Melvilians proposed that now that Mr. Patrick Adamson was nominated for the Archbishoprick of St. Andrews He might be tryed as to his sufficiency for such a station according to ane Act made in March 1575. But it seems the major part of the Assembly have not been for it for it was not done as we shall find afterward Nay another Act was fairly dispenced with by this Assembly in favour of Boyd Archbishop of Glasgow For being required to give his answer if he would take the Charge of a particular Flock according to the Act made in April before He Answered That he had entered to his Bishoprick according to the Agreement at Leith which was to stand in force during the Kings Minority or till a Parliament should determine otherwise That he had given his Oath to the Kings Majesty in things appertaining to his Highness That he was affraid he might incur the Guilt of Perjury and be called in question by the King for changing a member of state if he should change any thing belonging to the Order Manner Priviledges or Power of his Bishoprick That therefore he could not bind himself to a particular Flock nor prejudge the power of Iurisdiction which he had received with his Bishoprick c. Thus he answered I say and the Assembly at that time satisfied themselves so far with this answer that they pressed him no further but referred the matter to the next Assembly as even both Calderwood and Petrie acknowledge A fair evidence that in this Assembly the Presbyterian party was the weaker However One indirect step they gain'd in this Assembly also By the First Book of Discipline Hedd 9. It was appointed that the Country Ministers and Readers should meet upon a certain day of the week in such Towns within six miles distance as had Schools and to which there was repair of Learned men to exercise themselves in the Interpretation of Scripture in imitation of the practice in use among the Corinthians mentioned 1 Cor. 14.29 These Meetings it seems had been much neglected and disfrequented in most places It was therefore enacted by this Assembly That all Ministers within eight miles c. should resort to the place of exercise each day of exercise c. This I say was useful for the Presbyterian designs For these Meetings were afterwards turn'd into Presbyteries as we shall find when we come to the year 1579. And so 't is very like the motion for reviving them was made by those of the Faction For no man can deny that they have still had enough of Draught in their Politicks The next Assembly was holden April 1. Anno 1577. No direct progress made now neither as to the main Question And only these indirect ones 1. The Archbishop of Glasgow was obliged to take the charge of a particular Flock if we
may believe Calderwood but neither the MS. nor Petrie hath it 2. The Archbishop of St. Andrews being absent full power was given to M. Robert Pont M. Iames Lawson David Ferguson and the Superintendent of Lothian conjunctly To cite him before them against such day or days as they should think good to try and examine his entry and proceeding c. with power also to summon the Chapter of St. Andrews or so many of that Chapter as they should judge expedient and the Ordainers or Inaugurers of the said Archbishop observe here the Bishops in these times were Ordained or Inaugurated as they should find good for the better tryal of the premisses And in the mean time to discharge him of further visitation till he should be admitted by the Church Here indeed the Melvilians obtain'd in both Instances that which was refused them by the last Assembly However nothing done Directly as I said against the Episcopal Office On the contrary Adamson it seems might exerce it when admitted by the Assembly May I not reckon the Fast appointed by this Assembly as a third step gained by our Parity-men A successful Establishment of perfect Order and Polity in the Kirk was one of the reasons for it And ever since it hath been one of the Politicks of the Sect to be Mighty for Fasts when they had extraordinary projects in their heads and then if these Projects however wicked nay tho' the very wickedness which the Scripture makes as bad as witchcraft succeeded To entitle them to Gods Grace and make the success the Comfortable Return of their pious Humiliations and sincere Devotions I find also that Commissioners were sent by this Assembly to the Earl of Morton to acquaint him that they were busy about the matter and argument of the Polity and that his Grace should receive Advertisement of their further proceedings and that these Coâ—â—issioners having returned from him to the Assembly reported That His Grace liked well of their travels and labours in that matter and required expedition and haste Promising that when the particulars should be given in to him they should receive a good Answer So Calderwood and the MS. From which two things may be observed the First is a further Confirmation of the suspicion I insisted on before viz. That Morton was truly a Friend to the Innovators The second that the Second Book of Discipline had hitherto gone on but very slowly Why else would his Grace have so earnestly required Expedition and hasty Outred as the MS. words it i. e. Dispatch and promised them a good answer when the particulars should be given in to him The truth is there was one good reason for their proceeding so leisurely in the matter of the Book Beza's Answer to Glamis his Letter was not yet returned Thus two General Assemblies passed without so much as offering at a plain a direct Trust against Imparity Nay it seems matters were not come to a sufficient Maturity for that even against the next Assembly It was holden at Edenburgh Octob. 25. 1577. And not so much as one word in the MS. Calderwood or Petrie relating either directly or indirectly to the main Question But two things happened a little after this Assembly which animated Melvil and his Party to purpose One was Morton's quitting the Regency For whatever services he had done them he was so obscure and Fetching in his measures and so little to be trusted that they could not rely much upon him And now that he had demitted they had a fair prospect of playing their game to better purpose than ever They were in possessions of the Allowance he had granted them to draw a New Scheme of Policy They had a Young King who had not yet arrived at the twelfth year of his Age to deal with By consequence they were like to have a divided Court and a Factious Nobility and they needed not doubt if there were two Factions in the Kingdom that one of them would be sure to Court them and undertake to promote their Interests The other encouragement which did them every whit as good service was Beza's Book De Triplici Episcopatu Divino Humano Satanico with his Answers to the Lord Glamis his Questions which about this time was brought to Scotland as is clear from Calderwood Beza it seems put to it to Defend the Constitution of the Church of Geneva had imployed his wit and parts which certainly were not contemptible in patching together such a Scheme of principles as he thought might be defended That 's a method most men take too frequently First to resolve upon a Conclusion and then to stretch their inventions and spend their pains for finding Colours and plausibilities to set it off with Beza therefore I say having been thus at pains to digest his thoughts the best way he could on this subject and withal being possibly not a little elevated That the Lord High Chancellor of a Foreign Kingdom should Consult him and ask his Advice concerning a point of so great importance as the constitution of the Government of a National Church Thought it not enough it seems to return an Answer to his Lordships Questions and therein give him a Scheme which was very easy for him to do considering he needed be at little more pains than to transcribe the Genevian Establishment But he applied himself to the main Controversie which had been started by his Disciple Melvil in Scotland and 't is scarcely to be doubted that it was done at his instignation and wrote this his Book wherein tho' he asserted not the absolute Vnlawfulness of that which he called Humane Episcopacy he had not brow enough for that as we have seen already yet he made it wonderously dangerous as being so naturally apt to Degenerate into the Devilish the Satanical Episcopacy This Book I say came to Scotland about this time viz. either in the end of 1577. or the beginning of 1578. and tho' I have already given a Specimen of it who now could hold up his head to plead for Prelacy Here was a Book written by the Famous Mr. Beza the Successor of the great Mr. Calvin the present great Luminary of the Church of Geneva our Elder Sister Church the Best Reformed Church in Christendom Who would not be convinced now that Parity ought to be Established and Popish Prelacy abolished And indeed it seems this Book came seasonably to help the good new cause for it behoved to take some time before it could merit the name of the good old one for we have already seen how slowly and weakly it advanced before the Book came But now we shall find it gathering strength apace and advancing with a witness Nay at the very next Assembly it was in a pretty flourishing condition This next Ass. met Apr. 24. Anno 1578. And Mr. Andrew Melvil was chosen Moderator the Prince of the Sect had the happiness to be the Praeses of the Assembly and presently
taken from them without a Direct crossing of Christs institution and the horrid sin of Robbing his People of their indisputable Priviledge Patronages are ane Intollerable Grievance and Yoak of Bondage on the Church They have been always the cause of Pestering the Church with a bad Ministery They came in amongst the latest Anti-Christian Corruptions and Vsurpations c. This is their Doctrine tho' 't is obious to all the world they put strange Comments on it by their Practice Well! What were the sentiments of our Reformers in this Matter The First Book of Discipline indeed affirms Head 4. That it appertaineth to the People and to every several Congregation to Elect their own Minister But it has not so much as one syllable of the Divine institution of such a Priviledge On the contrary in that same very breath it adds and in case they be found negligent therein the space of 40 days the Superintendent with his Council may present a Man c. If this Man after tryal is found qualified and the Church can justly reprehend nothing in his Life Doctrine or Utterance then We judge say our Reformers the Church which before was destitute unreasonable if they refuse him whom the Church doth offer And that they should be compelled by the Censure of the Council and Church to receive the Person appointed and approved by the Iudgment of the Godly and Learned unless that the same Church hath presented a Man better or as well Qualified to Examination before that the aforesaid tryal was taken of the Person presented by the Council of the whole Church As for Example the Council of the Church presents a Man unto a Church to be their Minister not knowing that they are otherwise provided In the mean time the Church hath another sufficient in their judgement for that charge whom they present to the Learned Ministers and next Reformed Church to be examined In this case the presentation of the People to whom he should be appointed Pastor must be preferred to the presentation of the Council or greater Church unless the Person presented by the inferiour Church be judged unable for the Regiment by the Learned For this is always to be avoided that no man be intruded or thrust in upon any Congregation But this Liberty with all care must be reserved for every several Church to have their voices and suffrages in Election of their Ministers Yet we do not call that violent intrusion when the Council of the Church in the fear of God regarding only the salvation of the People offereth unto them a man sufficient to instruct them whom they shall not be forced to admit before just Examination So that Book Add to this this consideration That at that time the Popish Clergy were in possession of all the Benefices the Reformed Clergy had not then so much as the prospect of the Thirds which I have discoursed of before These things laid together 't is obvious to perceive 1. That it was only from Prudential Considerations our Reformers were inclined to give the People so much Power at that time It was much for the Conveniency of the Ministers who were to live by the Benevolence of the Parish c. They did not grant them this Power as of Divine Right No such thing so much as once insinuated as I have said 'T was plainly nothing but a Liberty And no injury no violence was done to a Parish even in these circumstances of the Church when the Council of the Church gave them a Minister without their own Election 'T is as plain 2. that so far as can be collected from the whole Period above our Reformers the Compilers of the Book I mean abstracting from the then circumstances of the Church were more inclined that the Election of Ministers should be in the hands of the Clergy than of the People Which I am much inclined to think was not only then but a long time after the prevailing sentiment And all the world sees I am sure it was a sentiment utterly inconsistent with the opinion of the Divine Right of Popular Elections I have been at pains to set the First Book of Discipline thus in its due light that our Brethren may not complain it was neglected not that my Cause required it For that Book was never Law either Civil or Ecclesiastical and so I might fairly have omitted it Let us try next what were truly the publick and Authoritative sentiments of our Reformers The first which I find of that nature is the sentiment of the General Assembly holden in September 1565. The General Assembly holden in Iune immediately before had complained that some vacant Benefices had been bestowed by the Queen on some Noblemen and Barons The Queen answered She thought it not Reasonable to deprive her of the Patronages belonging to her And this General Assembly in September answer thus Our mind is not that her Majesty or any other Person should be defrauded of their just Patronages but we mean whensoever her Majesty or any other Patron do present any Person unto a Benefice that the Person presented should be tryed and examined by the judgement of Learned Men of the Church Such as are for the present the Superintendents And as the presentation of the Benefice belongs to the Patron so the Collation by Law and Reason belongeth to the Church Agreeably we find by the 7 Act 1 Parl. Iac. 6. Anno 1567. The Parliament holden by Murray Regent It was enacted in pursuance no doubt of the Agreement between the Nobility and Barons and the Clergy in the General Assembly holden in Iuly that year That the Patron should present a qualified Person within six Months to the Superintendent of these parts where the Benefice lyes c. And by the Agreement at Leith Anno 1572 the Right of Patronages was reserved to the Respective Patrons And by the General Assembly holden in March 1574 it was enacted that collations upon presentations to Benefices should not be given without consent of three qualified Ministers c. The General Assembly in August that same year supplicated the Regent that Bishops might be presented to vacant Bishopricks as I have observed before By the General Assembly holden in October 1578 It was enacted that presentations to benefices be directed to the Commissioners of the Countreys where the Benefice lyes 'T is true indeed the Second Book of Discipline Cap. 12. § 10. Condemns Patronages as having no ground in the word of God as contrary to the same and as contrary to the Liberty of Election of Pastors and that which ought not to have place in the Light of Reformation But then 't is as true 1. That that same General Assembly holden in April 1581 which first Ratified this Second Book of Discipline Statuted and Ordained That Laick Patronages should remain whole unjoynted and undivided unless with consent of the Patron So that let them who can reconcile the Acts of this Presbyterian
Britain as our Presbyterian Brethren are earnest to have the present Generation believe Again Pag. 449 The Author Narrating how Henry Queen Mary's Husband c was buried Adds in Confirmation of his own Veracity Thus. If there had been any Solemn Burial Buchanan had wanted Wit to Relate otherwise Seeing there would have been so many Witnesses to testify the Contrary Therefore the Contriver of the late History of Queen Mary wanted Policy here to convey a Lie Thus I say the Author vouches Buchanans Authority And it must be Buchanans History that he Refers to For there 's not a Syllable about Henry's Burial to be found in any of his other writings Now Not to insist on the incredibleness of Knox's running for Shelter to Buchanans Authority concerning a matter of Fact so remarkable in its self and which happened in his own time in that very City in which he lived and was Minister Not to insist on this I say Buchanan himself in his Dedication of his History to King Iames 6th Clearly decides the matter He tells his Majesty there were two Considerations which chiefly put him upon writing his History First He perceived his Majesty had Read and Understood the Histories of almost all other Nations And it was incongruous and unaccountable that he who was so well acquainted with Foreign Affairs should be a Stranger to the History of his own Kingdom Secondly He was intrusted with the Kings Education He could not attend his Majesty in that important Office by Reason of his Old Age and Multiplying infirmities He applyed himself therefore to write his History thereby to Compense the Defects of his Non-Attendance c. And from both Reasons it is evident that Knox was Dead before Buchannan applyed himself to the writing of his History For Knox dyed Anno 1572. K. Iames was then but Six years of Age And is it Credible that at that Age he had Read and got by heart the Histories of almost all other Nations Indeed Buchanan survived Knox by ten years And for a good many of them was able to wait and actually waited on the King So that 't is clear 't was towards the end of his days and after Knox's Death that he applyed himself to his History And 't is very well known it was never published till the year 1582. But this is not all The Author of that which is called Knox's History adduces Buchanan's Authority for Convelling the Credit of the Contriver of the Late History of Queen Mary which was written I cannot tell how long after Buchanan was Dead as well as Knox. Further Pag. 306. The Author discourses thus The Books of Discipline have been of late so often published that we shall forbear to print them at this time Now there were never more than two Books of Discipline and the Second was not so much as projected till the year 1576 i. e. 4 years after Knox had departed this life Once more Pag. 286. We read thus Some in France after the sudden Death of Francis the Second and calling to mind the Death of Charles the Ninth in Blood and the Slaughter of Henry the Second did Remark the Tragical ends of these three Princes who had persecuted Gods Servants so cruelly And indeed the following Kings of France unto this day have found this true by their unfortunate and unexpected Ends. Now Charles the Ninth died not till the 30th of May Anno 1574. i. e. 18 Months after Knox. The following Kings of France who made the Vnfortunate and unexpected Ends were Henry the Third and Henry the Fourth Henry the Third was not Murthered till the year 1589. Henry the Fourth not till May 1610. The former 17 the latter 38 years after the Death of Knox. From this Taste it is clear that that History at least as we now have it was not written by Knox. All that can be said with any Shadow of probability is that Knox provided some Materials for it But Granting this how shall we be able to separate that which is Spurious in it from that which is Genuine All I can say is this 'T is plain to every one that Reads it That he has been a thorough-paced Presbyterian who framed it as we have it By Consequence its Authority is stark naught for any thing in it that favours Presbytery or bespatters Prelacy And if it ought to have any credit at all it is only where the Controversies about Church Government are no ways interested or where it mentions any thing that may be improven to the Advantages of Episcopacy just as the Testimonies of Adversaries are useful for the interests of the opposite party and not an Aâ—e farther So that I had reason if any Man can have it to insist on its Authority as I have frequently done But no Presbyterian can in equity either plead or be allowed the same priviledge I could give the Reader a surfeit of instances which cannot but appear to any considering person to be plain and notorious Presbyterian corruptions in it But I shall only represent One as being of considerable importance in the Controversie which I have managed in my Second Enquiry and by that the Reader may make a Judgment of the Authors Candor and Integrity in other things The English Non-conformists zealous to be rid of the Vestments and some other Forms and Ceremonies retained by the Church of England which they reckoned to be scandalous impositions wrote earnestly as is known to several Reformed Churches and Protestant Divines beseeching them to interpose with the Church of England for an ease of these burdens It seems they wrote to some in Scotland also probably to Mr. Knox He was of their acquaintance and they could not but be secure enough of his inclinations considering how warm he had been about these matters at Francfort However it was the Church of Scotland did actually interpose The General Assembly met at Edenburgh Decem. 27. Anno 1566 ordered Iohn Knox to draw a Letter to the English Clergy in favour of those Non-conformists This Letter was subscribed and sent Now consider the Tricks of the Author of the History attributed to Knox. The Inscription of the Letter as it is in Spotswood Petrie and the Manuscript Copy of the Acts of the General Assembly's is this The Superintendents Ministers and Commissioners of the Church within the Realm of Scotland To their Brethren the Bishops and Pastors of England who have renounced the Roman Antichrist and do profess with them the Lord Iesus in sincerity wish the increase of the Holy Spirit Thus I say Spotswoâ—d hath it pag. 198. And the MS. and Petrie Tom. 2. p. 348. have it in the same words only where Spotswood hath wish they have desire which makes no material Difference But the spurious Knox has it thus pag. 445. The Superintendents with other Ministers and Commissioners of the Church of God in the Kingdom of Scotland To their Brethren the Bishops and Pastors of Gods Church in England who profess with us
have once transcribed already from his Exhortation to England for the speedy embracing of Christs Gospel Let no man be charged in preaching of Christ Iesus says he above that which a man may do I mean that your Bishopricks be so divided that of every one as they are now for the most part may be made ten and so in every City and great Town there may be placed a godly learned Man with so many joyned with him for preaching and instruction as shall be thought sufficient for the bounds commited to their Charge Than which testimony it is not possible to find a better Comment upon that period of the First Book of Discipline penned also by Knox himself which is the subject of our present Controversie and it agrees exactly with my Gloss For from this Testimony it is clear that he was for a great number of Bishops and little Diocesses and that in a Church sufficiently provided with Ministers the Bishop should not be obliged to travel from place to place for preaching but might stay at the Chief City or Town of his Diocess What I have said might be sufficient for preferring Mine to the Presbyterian Gloss But I have more to say For 3. This sense of the period accords exactly with the whole tenour of the First Book of Discipline in which there 's not another syllable the most partial Reader can say favours the mistaken Conceipt about the Temporariness of Superintendency but much to the contrary Thus In the Head of the Election of Superintendents the very first words are Such is the present Necessity that the Examination and Admission of Superintendents cannot be so strict as afterwards it must Clearly importing that as Necessity forced them to establish a small number at first so also to take them as they could have them but that a stricter accuracy in their tryal would be needful when the number of qualified men should increase which runs quite counter to the whole design of the Presbyterian Gloss. Again If so many able men cannot be found at present as Necessity requireth it is better that these Provinces wait till God provide than that men unable to edify and govern the Church be suddenly placed in the Charge c. Another Demonstration why at that time they established so few Superintendents Again If any Superintendent shall depart this life or happen to be deposed Rules are laid down for supplying the Vacancy But to what purpose if Superintendency was to be of so short continuance Farther yet After the Church shall be established and three years are past no man shall be called to the Office of a Superintendent who hath not two years at least given a proof of his faithful Labours in the Ministery of some Church What could more plainly import that the Office was to be durable Once more When this Book of Discipline comes to the business of the Vniversities it supposes that Superintendents and Colleges were to be of equal continuance for the Superintendent was still to be at the choosing and installment of Principals and Rectors and the Moneys collected for upholding the Fabrick were to be counted yearly upon the 15th day of November in the presence of the Superintendent of the bounds and imployed with his advice c. Neither is this all yet For 4. The Form and Order of the Election of the Superintendent to be found both in Knox's History and the Old Scottish Liturgy is every way as patt for the continuance of the Office as the First Book of Discipline For the first thing we meet with there as I have already observed is The Necssity of Ministers and Superintendents oâ— Oversecrs without any Exception or Speciality about the one more than the other And as our Reformers had petitioned the Government for the Establishment of a Method to be observed in the Election of Bishops and Presbyters without any intimations of the Temporariness of either Office as we have shewed before so here we find it put in practice as hath likewise before been observed without so much as one syllable favouring the Presbyterian side of the present Controversie but on the contrary all alongst for mine Thus The People are asked If they will obey and honour him as Christs Minister and comfort and assist him in every thing pertaining to his Charge And their Answer is They will and they promise him such Obedience as becometh Sheep to give unto their Pastor not so long as the present Necessity forceth or the present Exigence requireth but so long as he remaineth faithful in his Charge In short the Order or Form for admitting a Superintendent and a Parish Minister was all one and there was nothing in it importing the one Office to be temporary more than the other And however Calderwood thought fit to affirm That Superintendents were not then established as of Divine Institution yet in all this Form the divine Institution of their Office is as much to be found as the divine Institution of Ordinary Ministers The People as we had it just now were asked if they would obey him as Christs Minister And he himself was asked If he knew that the Excellency of this Office to the which GOD CALLED HIM did require that his Conversation should be irreprehensible And again it was asked the People Will ye not acknowledge this your Brother for the Minister of Christ Jesus Your Overseer and Pastor Will ye not maintain and comfort him in his Ministry and Watching over you against all such as wickedly would rebel against God and HIS HOLY ORDINANCE And in the Prayer after his Instalment we have this petition Send unto this our Brother whom IN THY NAME we have charged with THE CHIEF CARE of thy Church within the bounds of Lothian c. Thus our Reformers thought of Superintendency when they composed this Form Now if they lookt upon it as Gods Ordinance c. with what reason can it be said they design'd it meerly to be temporary and for the then Necessities of the Church I think it will be hard to prove that it was the Divinity of these times that men might dispense with divine Institutions but of this more afterwards In the mean time proceed we to a further and indeed ane irrefragable Topick for confirming my side of the present Controversie and that is 5. That as the First Book of Discipline and the Form of admitting Superintendents do both fairly import that our Reformers intended nothing less than the Temporariness of Superintendents so 't is as clear from a vast number of Acts of General Assemblies Most of these Acts I have already adduced for shewing the Disparities between Superintendents and Ordinary Ministers when they are seriously considered will be found uncontrovertibly to this purpose But there are many more for example consider these following The Assembly May 27 1561. addressed to the Council That special and certain provision might be made for the Maintenance of the
Articles about the Thirds in Execution yet the Ministers were forced to wait long enough before they found the effects of it In short they continued in the same straits they had been in before for full two years thereafter that is till Iuly 1569. at which time I find by the Mss. and Mr. Petrie the Church was put in possession of the Thirds for which their Necessities made them very thankful as appears from the Narrative of ane Act of their Assembly at that time which runs thus as I find it in the Mss. For asmuch as this long time by gone the Ministers have been universally defrauded and postponed of their Stipends and now at last it hath pleased God to move the hearts of the superiour power and the Estates of this Realm c. A Narrative which it is probable they would not have used when the Thirds were at first projected for their Maintainance Sure I am of a quite different strain from Knox's Resentment which I mentioned before But by this time Experience had taught them to thank God for little and that it was even Good to be getting something However All this while they continued still to have the same sentiments concerning the Patrimony of the Church that unless God by immediate Revolution should dispense with her Right it belong'd to her unalienably that it was abominable Sacriledge to defraud her of it and that neither Church nor State could be happy so long as it was so much in the hands of Laicks And as they had still these sentiments and no wonder so long as they had any sense of Religion so they were still using their best endeavours trying all experiments and watching all opportunities to bring the Nobility and Gentry to a reasonable Temper and to put the Church in possession of her undoubted Revenues but all in vain On the contrary these Leeches having once tasted of her Blood were thirsting still for more and daily making farther Encroachments For A Parliament met in August 1571 and made ane Act obliging all the Subjects who in former times had held their Land and Possessions of Priors Prioresses Convents of Friers and Nuns c. thereafter to hold them of the Crown This was ane awakening ane allaruming Act. These who heretofore had possest themselves of the Churches Patrimony had done it by force or by connivance without Law and without Title so there were still hopes of recovering what was possest so illegally But this was to give them Law on their side As things stood then it would be easy to obtain Gifts now that the King was made immediate Superiour and then there was no recovering of what was thus colourably possessed So I say it was ane awakening Act of Parliament and indeed it rouzed the Spirits of the Clergy and put them in a quicker motion Now they began to see the Error of Drawing the New Scheme of Polity in the First Book of Discipline and receding from the Old one Now they perceived sensibly that that making of a New one had unhinged all the Churches Interests and exposed her Patrimony and made it a Prey to the Ravenous Laity and that it was therefore time high time for them to bethink themselves and try their strength and skill if possibly a stop could be put to such notorious Robbery And so I am fairly introduced to THE SECOND MODEL into which the Government of the Church was cast after the publick Establishment of the Reformation For The General Assembly of the Church meeting at Stirling in that same month of August 1571. Gave Commission to certain Brethren to go to the Lord Regent his Grace and to the Parliament humbly to request and desire in Name of the Kirk the granting of such Heads and Articles and redress of such Complaints as should be given to them by the Kirk c. So it is in the Mss. and so Spotswood and Petrie have it Before I proceed there is one seeming difficulty which must be removed it is that this General Assembly met before the Parliament How then could it be that Act of Parliament which so awakened them But the Solution is easy In those times Parliaments did not sit so long as they are in use to do now but all things were prepared and in readiness before the Parliament met Proclamation was made a month or so before the Parliament was to meet requiring all Bills to be given in to the Register which were to be presented in the succeeding Session of Parliament that they might be brought to the King or Regent to be perused and considered by them and only such as they allowed were to be put into the Chancellors hands to be proponed to the Parliament and none other c. Whoso pleases may see this account given by King Iames the Sixth of Scotland and First of England to his English Parliament in his Speech dated 1607. Indeed the thing is notorious and Calderwood himself gives a remarkable instance of this method for he tells how in the end of April or beginning of May 1621. A Charge was published by Proclamation commanding all that had Suits Articles or Petitions to propone to the Parliament to give them into the Clerk of the Register before the twentieth day of May that by him they might be presented to so many of the Council who were appointed by his Majesty to meet some days before the Parliament and to consider the said Bills Petitions and Articles with Certification that the same should not be received read nor voted in Parliament except they were passed under his Highness hand And yet the same Calderwood tells us That the Parliament was not appointed to meet till the Twentieth and Third of Iuly so that here were two full months between the giving in of the Bills c. and the Meeting of the Parliament This being the Custom in those times it is easy to consider how the General Assembly tho it met some days before the Parliament might know very well what was to be done in Parliament for if this Bill was allowed by the then Regent to be presented there was no doubt of its passing And that it was very well known what the Parliament was to do in that matter may be further evident from Iohn Knox's Letter directed at that time to the General Assembly wherein he is earnest with them that with all Vprightness and Strength in God they gainst and the mercyless Devourers of the Patrimony of the Church telling them that if Men will spoil let them do it to their own Peril and Damnation but it was their Duty to beware of communicating with their sins but by publick protestation to make it known to the world That they were innocent of Robbery which would e're long provoke Gods Vengeance upon the Committers c. From which nothing can be clearer than that he had a special eye to that which was then in agitation and to be done by the Parliament
and convince them from Scripture and Antiquity and Ecclesiastical History c. that Episcopacy was of divine Institution or the best or a lawful Government of the Church If I mistake not such Topicks in these times were not much thought on by our Statesmen But if they were such Arguments as I have given a Specimen of which they insisted on as no doubt they were if they insisted on any then I would fain know which of them it was that might not have been as readily insisted on by the Clergy as by the Statesmen Nay considering that there were no Scruples of Conscience then concerning the Lawfulness of such a Constitution how reasonable is it to think that the Clergy might be as forward as the Statesmen could be to insist on these Arguments Especially if it be further considered that Besides these and the like Arguments the Clergy had one very considerable Argument to move them for the Re-establishment of the Old Constitution which was that they had found by Experience that the New Scheme fallen upon in the First Book of Discipline had done much hurt to the Church as I have already observed that by forsaking the Old Constitution the Church had suffered too much already and that it was high time for them now to return to their Old Fond considering at what losses they had been since they had deserted it And all this will appear more reasonable and credible still if two things more be duely considered The First is That the Six Clergymen who were commissioned by the Assembly on this occasion to treat with the State were all sensible men men who understood the Constitution both of Church and State had Heads to comprehend the consequences of things and were very far from being Parity-men The Second is The Oddness to call it no worse of the Reason which our Authors feign to have been the Motive which made the Court at that time so earnest for such ane Establishment namely that thereby They might gripe at the Commodity as Calderwood words it That is possess themselves of the Churches Patrimony What Had the Clergy so suddenly fallen from their daily their constant their continual Claim to the Revenues of the Church Had they in ane instant altered their sentiments about Sacrilege and things consecrated to Holy uses Were they now willing to part with the Churches Patrimony Did that which moved them to be so earnest for this Meeting with the State miraculously flip out of their Minds so that they inconcernedly quate their pretensions and betrayed their own interests Were they all fast asleep when they were at the Conference So much asleep or senseless that they could not perceive the Court intended them such a Trick On the other hand If the Court had such a design as is pretended I must confess I do not see how it was useful for them to fall on such a wild project for accomplishing their purposes Why be at all this pains to re-establish the Old Polity if the only purpose was to rob the Church of her Patrimony Might not that have been done without as well as with it Could they have wished the Church in weaker circumstances for asserting her own Rights than she was in before this Agreement Was it not as easy to have possest themselves of a Bishoprick ane Abbacy a Priory c. when there were no Bishops nor Abbots nor Priors as when there were What a pitiful politick or rather what ane insolent wickedness was it as it were to take a Coat which was no mans and put on one and possess him of it and call it his Coat that they might rob him of it Or making the uncharitable supposition that they could have ventured on such a needless such a mad fetch of iniquity were all the Clergy so short-sighted that they could not penetrate into such a palpable such a gross piece of Cheatry But what needs more 'T is certain that by that Agreement the Churches Patrimony was fairly secured to her and she was put in far better condition than she was ever in before since the Reformation Let any man read over Calderwoods account of the Agreement and he must confess it And yet perhaps the account may be more full and clear in the Books of Council if they be extant 'T is true indeed the Courtiers afterwards played their Tricks and robb'd the Church and it cannot be denied that they got some bad Clergymen who were subâ—ervient to their purposes But this was so 〈◊〉 from being pretended to be aim'd at by 〈◊〉 Courtiers while the Agreement was a mâ—kâ—ng It was so far from these Clergy-mens minds who adjusted matters at that time with the Laity these Courtiers to give them the smallest advantages that way to allow them the least Scope for such Encroachments That on the contrary when afterwards they found the Nobility were taking such Methods and plundering the Church they complained mightily of it as a manifest breach of the Agreement and ane horrid iniquity But whatever Truth is in all this Reasoning I have spent on this point is not much material to my main purpose For whither at that time Episcopacy was imposed upon the Church or not or if imposed whither it was out of a bad design or not affects not in the least the principal Controversie For however it was 't is certain the Church accepted of it at that time which we are bound in Charity to think a sufficient Argument that she was not then of Antiprelatical principles She had no such Article in her Creed as the Divine Right of Parity which is the great point I am concerned for in all this tedious Controversie 3. The Third Plea is The Limitedness of the Power which was then granted to Bishops They had no more Power granted them by this Establishment than Superintendents had enjoyed before This all my Authors insist upon with great Earnestness And I confess it is very true This was provided for both by the Agreement at Leith and by ane Act of the Assembly holden at Eden March 6. 1574. But then 1. If they had the same power which Superintendents had before I think they had truly Prelatic Power they did not act in Parity with other Ministers 2. Tho they had no more power yet it is certain they had more Privilege They were not answerable to their own Synods but only to General Assemblies as is clear even from Calderwoods own account of the agreement at Leith In that point the absurd Constitution in the First Book of Discipline was altered 3. One thing more I cannot but observe here concerning Mr. Carlderwood This judicious Historian when he was concerned to raise Dust about the Prelacy of Superintendents found easily 7 or 8 huge Differences between Superintendents and Bishops And now that he is concern'd to raise Dust about the Prelacy of Bishops he thinks he has gain'd a great point if he makes it the same with the Prelacy of
Stipends be assigned to them Ane Article visibly levell'd as the former 5. That Doctors may be placed in Vniversities and Stipends granted them whereby not only they who are presently placed may have occasion to be diligent in their Cure but other learned Men may have Occasion to seek places in Colleges Still to the same purposes viz. the finding reasonable Uses for the Patrimony of the Church 6. That his Grace would take a General Order with the poor especially in the Abbeys such as are Aberbrothoick c. Conform to the Agreement at Leith Here not only the Leith-Agreement insisted on but farther pious Vse for the Churches Patrimony 9. That his Grace would cause the Books of the Assignation of the Kirk be delivered to the Clerk of the General Assembly These Books of Assignation as they call them were the Books wherein the Names of the Ministers and their several proportions of the Thirds were Recorded It seems they were earnest to be repossessed of their Thirds seeing the Regent had not kept promise to them But The Eighth Article which by a pardonable inversion I hope I have reserved to the last place is of all the most considerable It is That his Grace would provide Qualified persons for Vacant Bishopricks Let the candid Reader judge now if Episcopacy by the Leith-Articles was forced upon the Church against her Inclinations If it was never approven when Bishops were thus petitioned for by a General Assembly If it be likely that the Assembly in August 1572. protested against it as a Corruption If the Acts of the last Assembly declaring Bishops to have no more power than Superintendents had and making them accountable to the General Assembly proceeded from any Dislike of Episcopacy If this Assembly petitioning thus for Bishops believed the divine and indispensible institution of Parity If both Calderwood and Petrie acted not as became Cautious Pretbyterian Historians the One by giving us None the other by giving us only a Minced account of this Petition Well! By this time I think I have not intirely disappointed my Reader I think I have made it competently appear That the Agreement at Leith was fairly and frequently allowed approven and insisted on by not a â—ew subsequent General Assemblies I could adduce some Acts more of the next Ass which met at Eden March 7. 1575. But I think I have already made good my Undertaking and therefore I shall insist no further on this point Only One thing I must add further It is this After the most impartial narrow and attentive Search I could make I have not found all this while viz. from the first publick Establishment of the Reformed Religion in Scotland Anno 1560. so much as One Indication of either publick or private Dislike to Prelacy But that it constantly and uninterruptedly prevailed and all persons chearfully as well as quietly submitted to it till the year 1575. when it was first called in Question And here I might fairly shut up this long and perhaps nauseous Discourse upon the Second Enquiry which I proposed For whatever Men our Reformers were whatever their other principles might be I think I have made it plain that they were not for the Divine Right of Parity or the Vnlawfulness of the Superiority of any Office in the Church above Presbyters No such principle was prosessed or insisted on or offered to be reduced to practice by them Before At or full fifteen years After the publick Establishment of the Reformation And if this may not pass for sufficient proof of the truth of my Resolution of the Enquiry I know not what may However because THE SECOND thing I promised to shew tho not precisely necessary to my main design may yet be so far useful as to bring considerably more of Light to it and withal give the world a prospect of the Rise and Progress of Presbytery in Scotland I shall endeavour to make good my Undertaking which was that after Episcopacy was question'd it was not easily overturn'd Its Adversaries met with much Resistance and Opposition in their Endeavors to subvert it I shall study brevity as much as the weight of the matter will allow me In short then take it thus Master Andrew Melvil after some years spent at Geneva returned to Scotland in Iuly 1574. He had lived in that City under the influences of Theodore Beza the true parent of Presbytery He was a Man by Nature fierce and fiery confident and peremptory peevish and ungovernable Education in him had not sweetned Nature but Nature had sowred Education and both conspiring together had trickt him up into a true Original a piece compounded of pride and petulance of jeer and jangle of Satyr and Sarcasm of venome and vehemence He hated the Crown as much as the Mitre the Scepter as much as the Crosier and could have made as bold with the Purple as with the Rochet His prime Talent was Lampooning and writing Anti-tami-Cami-Categorias's In a word He was the very Archetypal Bitter Beard of the Party This Man thus accoutred was scarcely warm at home when he began to disseminate his sentiments insinuate them into others and make a party against Prelacy and for the Genevian Model For this I need not depend on Spotswoods Authority tho he asserts it plainly I have a more Authentick Author for it if more Authentick can be I have Melvil himself for it in a Letter to Beza dated Novem. 13. 1579. to be found both in Petrie and in the Pamphlet called Vindiciae Philadelphi from which Petrie had it of which Letter the very first words are we have not ceased these five years to fight against Pseudepiscopacy c. Now reckon five years backward from Novem. 1579. and you stand at November 1574. whereby we find that within three or four Months after his arrival the Plot was begun tho' it was near to a year thereafter before it came above-board Having thus projected his work and formed his party the next care was to get one to Table it fairly He himself was but lately come home he was much a Stranger in the Country having been ten years abroad He had been but at very few General Assemblies if at any his influence was but green and budding his Authority but young and tender It was not fit for him amongst his First Appearances to propose so great ane Innovation And it seems the Thinking Men of his Party however resolutely they might promise to back the Motion when once fairly Tabled were yet a little shy to be the first Proposers So it fell to the share of one who at that time was none of the greatest Statesmen Iohn Durie one of the Ministers of Edenburgh was the person as Spotswood describes him A sound hearted Man far from all Dissimulation open professing what he thought earnest and zealous in his Cause whatever it was but too too credulous and easily to be imposed on However that I may do him as much justice as
have fully proven and which was all I still aim'd at yet it is easy to Discover they were very far from keeping Closely by the Principles and Measures of the primitive constitution of Church Government This is so very apparent to any who Reads the Histories of these times and is so visible in the Deduction I have made that I shall insist no longer on it Secondly The truth of my charge may further appear from the Instance of Adamson advanced this year 1576 to the Archbishoprick of St. Andrews That Nature had furnished him with a good stock and he was a smart Man and cultivated beyond the ordinary Size by many parts of good Literature is not denyed by the Presbyterian Historians themselves They never attempt to represent him as a Fool or a Dunce tho' they are very eager to have him a Man of Tricks and Latitude Now this Prelates ignorance in true Antiquity is Remarkably visible in his subscribing to these Propositions Anno 1580 if we may believe Calderwood The Power and Authority of all Pastors is equal and alike great amongst themselves The Name Bishop is Relative to the Flock and not to the Eldership For he is Bishop of his Flock and not of other Pastors or fellow Elders As for the Preheminence that one beareth over the rest it is the Invention of Man and not the Institution of Holy Writ That the ordaining and appointing of Pastors which is also called the laying on of hands appertaineth not to one Bishop only so being Lawful Election pass before but to those of the same Province or Presbytery and with the like Iurisdiction and Authority Minister at their Kirks That in the Council of Nice for eschewing of private ordaining of Ministers it was statuted that no Pastor should be appointed without the consent of him who dwelt or remained in the Chief and Principal City of the Province which they called the Metropolitan City That after in the latter Councils it was statuted that things might proceed more solemnly and with greater Authority that the laying on of hands upon Pastors after Lawful Election should be by the Metropolitan or Bishop of the Chief and principal Town the rest of the Bishops of the Province voting thereto In which thing there was no other Prerogative but only that of the Town which for that cause was thought most meet both for the conveening of the Council and Ordaining of Pastors with common Consent and Authority That the Estate of the Church was corrupt when the name Bishop which before was common to the rest of the Pastors of the Province began without the Authority of Gods Word and ancient Custome of the Kirk to be attributed to one That the power of appointing and ordaining Ministers and Ruling of Kirks with the whole procuration of Ecclesiastical Discipline was now only devolved to one Metropolitan The other Pastors no ways challenging their Right and Privilege therein of very slothfulness on the one part And the Devil on the other going about craftily to lay the ground of the Papistical Supremacy From these and such other Propositions sign'd by him at that time it may be judged I say if this Prelate did not bewray a very profound ignorance in true Ecclesiastical Antiquity Ane Arrant Presbyterian could not have said could not have wished more Indeed 't is more than probable as perchance may appear by and by that these Propositions were taken out either formally or by collection of Mr. Beza's Book De Triplici Episcopatu Now if Adamson was so little seen in such matters what may we judge of the rest But this is not all For Thirdly There cannot be a greater Evidence of the deplorable unskilfulness of the Clergy in these times in the ancient records of the Church than their suffering Melvil and his Party to obtrude upon them The Second Book of Discipline A split new Democratical Systeme a very Farce of Novelties never heard of before in the Christian Church For instance What else is the confounding of the Offices of Bishops and Presbyters The making Doctors or Professors of Divinity in Colledges and Vniversities a distinct Office and of Divine Institution The setting up of Lay-Elders as Governours of the Church Jure Divino Making them Iudges of mens Qualifications to be admitted to the Sacrament Visiters of the Sick c. Making the Colleges of Presbyters in Cities in the primitive times Lay Eldership Prohibiting Appeals from Scottish General Assemblies to any Iudge Civil or Ecclesiastick and by consequence to Oecumenick Councils Are not these Ancient and Catholick Assertions What footsteps of these things in true Antiquity How easy had it been for men skilled in the Constitution Government and Discipline of the Primitive Church to have laid open to the Conviction of all sober Men the novelty the vanity the inexpediency the impoliticalness the uncatholicalness of most if not all of these Propositions If any further doubt could remain concerning the little skill the Clergy of Scotland in these times had in these matters it might be further Demonstated Fourthly from this plain matter of Fact viz. that that Second Book of Discipline in many points is taken word for word from Mr. Beza's Answers to the Questions proposed to him by The Lord Glamis then Chancellor of Scotland A fair Evidence that our Clergy at that time have not been very well seen in Ecclesiastical Politicks Otherwise it is not to be thought they would have been so imposed on by a single stranger Divine who visibly aimed at the propagation of the Scheme which by chance had got footing in the Church where he lived His Tractate De Triplici Episcopatu written of purpose for the advancement of Presbyterianism in Scotland carries visibly in its whole train that its design was to draw our Clergy from off the Ancient Polity of the Church and his Answers to the Six Questions proposed to him as I said by Glanus contain'd the New Scheme he advised them to Now let us taste a little of his skill in the Constitution and Government of the Ancient Church or if you please of his accounts of her Policy I take his Book as I find it amongst Saravia's works He is Positive for the Divine Right of Ruling Elders He affirms that Bishops arrogated to themselves the power of Ordination without Gods allowance That the Chief foundation of all Ecclesiastical Functions is Popular Election That this Election and not Ordination or Imposition of hands makes Pastors or Bishops That Imposition of hands does no more than put them in possession of their Ministry in the exercise of it as I take it the power whereof they have from that Election That by consequence 't is more proper to say that the Fathers of the Church are Created by the Holy Ghost and the suffrages of their Children than by the Bishops That Saint Paul in his first Epistle to the Corinthians in which he expressly writes against and condemns the
Reform Religion publickly to Reform it by Force To Reform the State if it would not Reform the Church To Extirpate all false Religion by their Authority To assume to themselves a Power to overturn the Powers that are Ordain'd of God To depose them and set up new Powers in their stead Powers that would Protect that which they judged to be the best Religion Whoso pleases may see this Doctrine fully taught by Knox in his Appellation and he may see the same principle insisted on by Mr. Hendersone in his Debates with K. C. I. And who knows not that our Reformation was but too much founded on this Principle Herein I say we own we have forsaken our Reformers And let our Presbyterian Brethren if they can Convict us in this of Heresie In short our Reformers maintain'd that the Doctrine of Defensive Arms was Necessary That Passive Obedience or Non-resistance was sinful when People had means for Resistance That Daniel and his Fellows did not Resist by the Sword Because God had not given them the Power and the means That the Primitive Christians assisted their Preachers even against the Rulers and Magistrates and suppressed Idolatry wheresoever God gave them Force They maintain'd that the Iudicial Laws of Moses tho' not adopted into the Christian Systeme in many considerable instances continued still obligatory Particularly that the Laws punishing Adultery Murther Idolatry with Death were binding That in obedience to these Laws that Sentence was to be executed not only on Subjects but on Sovereigns That whosoever executes Gods Law on such Criminals is not only innocent but in his Duty tho' he have no Commission from Man for it That Samuel's slaying Agag the fat and delicate King of Amalek And Elias's killing Baal's Priests and Iesabel's false Prophets and Phineas's striking Zimri and Cosbi in the very Act of filthy fornication were allowable Patterns for private men to imitate That all these and more such strange Doctrines were Common and Current amongst them I am able to prove at full length if I shall be put to it Besides they had many other Principles relating to other purposes which I am perswaded were not founded on Scripture had no Countenance from Catholick Antiquity were not aggreeable to sound and solid Reason which we own we are so far from maintaining that we think our selves bound both to Profess and Practice the contrary And how easy were it to Confute as well as Represent some of Master Knox's principles which perhaps were peculiar to him He fairly and plainly condemned St. Paul and St. Iames the first Bishop of Ierusalem for their practice Act. 21.18 19 c. He esteem'd every thing that was done in Gods service without the express command of his word vain Religion and Idolatry He affirmed that all Papists were infidels both in publick and private I cannot think he was right in these things He had sometimes Prayers which do not seem to me to Savour any thing of a Christian Spirit Thus in His Admonition to the Professors of the Truth in England after he had insisted on the Persecutions in Queen Mary's time he had this Prayer God for his great Mercies sake stir up some Phineas Elias or Jehu that the blood of abominable Idolaters may Pacify Gods wrath that it consume not the whole Multitude Amen I must confess it was not without some horrour that I put his own Amen to such a petition In that same Exhortation he prays also thus Repress the pride of these blood-thirsty Tyrants Consume them in thine anger according to the Reproach which they have laid against thy Holy Name Pour forth thy vengeance upon them and let our eyes behold the blood of the Saints required of their hands Delay not thy vengeance O Lord but let death devour them in haste Let the Earth swallow them up and let them go down quick to the hels For there is no hope of their Amendment The Fear and Reverence of thy Holy Name is quite banished from their hearts And therefore yet again O Lord consume them Consume them in thine Anger Let the world judge if such Prayers Savour of a Gospel-spirit Was this loving our Enemies or Blessing them that Curse us or Praying for them who despitefully use us or Persecute us Was this like forgiving others their trespasses as we would wish our own trespasses to be forgiven Was this like Father forgive them for they know not what they do Or Lord lay not this sin to their charge Did Master Knox consider or know what manner of spirit he was of when he offered up such petitions I shall only give one other Specimen of Master Knox's Divinity and because 't is about a point which of late has been so much agitated I shall not grudge to give his sentiments somewhat fully Because perchance he may come to have some credit by it He may chance to be honoured as a Father by the Providentialists The Story is this He wrote a Book against the Regiment of Women as he called it His aim was principally against Mary Queen of England When Queen Elizabeth was raised to the Throne some body having told her that he had written such a Book she resented it so that she would not allow him to set his foot on English ground when he was returning from Geneva to Scotland Anno 1559. This grated him not a little However he could not endure to think upon retracting the Positions in his Book having once asserted them he deem'd it point of Honour it seems to adhere to them for thus he told Secretary Cecil in a Letter from Diepe April 10. 1559. He doubted no more of the Truth of his Proposition than he did that it was the voice of God which first did pronounce this Penalty against Women In dolour shalt thou bear thy Children And in a Conference with Mary Queen of Scotland Anno 1561. He told her that to that hour he thought himself alone more able to sustain the things affirmed in that Book than any ten Men in Europe could be to confute them But for all this Queen Elizabeth as I said was raised to the Throne of England and it was needful her Majesty should not continue to have quarrels with him Her Kindness and Countenance at that time to him and his Projects were worth little less than a Deanry Some Knack was therefore to be devised for making a Reconcilement between his Book and her Regiment Well! what was it he fix't on Why The Providential Right serv'd him to a Miracle For thus he wrote in his aforementioned Letter to Cecil If any Man think me either Enemy to the Person or yet to the Regiment of her whom God hath now promoted they are utterly deceived in me For the MIRACULOUS work of God comforting his afflicted by ane infirm Vessel I do acknowledge And I will Obey the Power of his most potent hand Raising up whom best pleaseth his
endure the Tryal of their own Test. And this brings me to Enquire whither they have stuck so precisely by the principles of our Reformers that they are in Bona Fide to insist on such a Topick And I think they will not be found to be so if I can make it appear that they have Notoriously deserted the principles of our Reformers I. In the Faith II. In the Worship III. In the Discipline And IV. In the Government of the Church I. I say they have forsaken our Reformers as to the Faith of the Church Our Reformers digested a Confession of Faith Anno 1560. They got it Ratifyed in Parliament that same year It was again Ratifyed Anno 1567. and in many subsequent Parliaments It continued still to be the publick Authorized Standard of the Faith of this National Church for more than eighty years Our Reformers design'd it to be a perpetual and unalterable Standard of the Faith of this National Church for ever When the Barons and Ministers gave in their Petition to the Parliament for ane Establishment of the Reformation Anno 1560. They were called upon and Commandment given unto them to draw into plain and several Heads the sum of that Doctrine which they would maintain and would desire the Parliament to Establish as wholesome true and only necessary to be believed and to be received within the Realm And they willingly accepted the Command and within four days presented the Confession which was Ratified and that its Establishment might pass with the greater solemnity and formality of Law The Earl Marshal protested that it might never be altered Yet now Our Presbyterian Brethren have set up a quite different Standard of Faith namely the Westminster Confession and have got it now Ratifyed by this current Parliament Anno 1690. it was never before Ratified by Act of Parliament I call it a quite different Standard of Faith Indeed whosoever diligently compares both Confessions shall readily find it such He shall not only find many things kept out of the Westminster Confession which are in the Confession of our Reformers and many things put in the Westminster Confession which were not in the Confession of our Reformers and many things nicely minutely precisely and peremptorily determined and that in the most Mysterious matters in the Westminster Confession which our Reformers thought fit as was indeed proper to express in very General and Accommodable Terms But he shall meet with not a few plain evident and irreconcileable Contradictions And now by this present Parliament in its Last Session particularly upon the twelfth day of Iune Anno 1693 it is statuted and ordained That no Person be admitted or continued for hereafter to be a Minister or Preacher within this Church unless he subscribe the Westminster Confession declaring it to be the Confession of his Faith and that he owns the Doctrine therein contained to be the true Doctrine to which he will constantly adhere And by unavoidable consequence he is bound to subscribe to and own God knows how many propositions not only not required nor professed by our Reformers but directly contrary to their Faith and principles And now let the world judge if our Presbyterian Brethren are the Successors of our Reformers in point of Faith II. They have forsaken them yet more in the point of Worship and here a vast field opens For to this head I reduce artificially or inartificially is no great matter if I adduce nothing but wherein our Brethren have deserted our Reformers the publick Prayers the publick Praises the publick Preaching of the word the administration of the Sacraments c. with all their Ceremonies Solemnities and Circumstances c. Generally whatever uses to be comprehended in Liturgies 1. In the General our Reformers were far from Condemning Liturgies or Set-Forms in the publick Offices of the Church There 's nothing more plain than that they preferred publick Composures to these that were private Composures digested by the publick Spirit of the Church to Composures digested by the private Spirit of particular Ministers and Premeditated and well digested Composures tho' performed by private persons to the too frequently Rash indigested incomposed performances of the Extemporary Gift They preferred Offices which were the productions of grave sedate well pondered thoughts to Offices which were mostly the productions of Animal Heat and warmth of Fancy Iohn Knox himself one who had as much Fire in his temper and was as much inclined to have given scope to the Extemporary Spirit I am apt to think as any of our Reformers had even a set form of Grace or Thanksgiving after meat he had a set-form of Prayer for the publick after Sermon and he had set-forms of Prayers read every day in his Family In conformity to this principle ouâ— Reformers for seven years together used the Liturgy of the Church of England as I have fully proven When by the importunity and perswasions of Iohn Knox principally I am sure if not only they resolved to part with the English Liturgy they continued still as far as ever from Condemning Liturgies They did not lay it aside to take up none They choosed another to succeed it they choosed that which went then generally under the name of the Order of Geneva or the Book of Common Order Since under the name of Knox's Liturgie or the Old Scottish Liturgie This Liturgie continued in use not only all the time the Government of the Church subsisted by Imparity after the Reformation But even for many Decads of years after the Presbyterian Spirit and Party turn'd prevalent It was so universally received and used and in so good esteem that when it was moved by some in the Assembly holden at Burnt-Island in March Anno 1601. That there were sundry Prayers in it which were not convenient for these times and a change was desirable the Assembly rejected the motion and Thought good that the Prayers already contained in the Book should neither be altered nor deleted But if any Brother would have any other Prayers added as more proper for the times they should first present them to be tryed and allowed by the General Assembly Here indeed was caution and concern about the publick worship worthy of a General Assembly Nay The First-Rate Presbyterians themselves used the Book as punctually as any other People When Mr. Robert Bruce of whose zeal for the good cause no Man I think can doubt was relegated to Innerness Anno 1605. He remained there four years Teaching every Sabbath before noon and every Wednesday And exercised at the Reading of the Prayers every other night And Master Iohn Strimgeour another prime Champion for the cause when he appeared before the High Commission March 1. Anno 1620 and was challenged for not putting in practice the five Articles of Perth Particularly for not Ministering the Eucharist to the People on their knees answered there is no warrantable form directed or approven by the Kirk besides that
after both Covenants were sworn The National I mean and the Solemn League and Covenant It was not turn'd Authoritatively I intend no more than the Equivocal Authority which Schismatical Assemblies pretend to into disuse till the General Assembly 1645. Even then it was not Condemned as either superstitious or indecent It was laid aside only in complyance with the English Presbyterians By that Assembly a Committee was appointed to give their opinion about keeping a greater Vniformity in this Kirk in the practice and observation of the Directory in some points of publick worship And the fourth Article to which they Agreed was this word for word It is also the Iudgment of the Committee that the Ministers bowing in the Pulpit tho' a Lawful Custome in this Kirk be hereafter laid aside for satisfaction of the desires of the Reverend Divines in the Synod of England and Vniformity with that Kirk so much endeared to us And then followeth the Assembly's approbation of all the Articles digested by the Committee Here 't is evident this Assembly own'd it to be a Lawful Custome A former Assembly called it Laudible And yet it is Scandalous if not Superstitions to our present Presbyterians Let me add as ane Appendage to this 6. Another in my opinion very decent and commendable Custome which obtain'd in Scotland generally till the latter times of Presbytery This when People entered the Church they commonly uncovered their Heads as entering into the House of God And generally they put up a short Prayer to God some kneeling some standing as their conveniency allowed them deeming it very becoming to do so when they came thus into the place of Gods special presence and his publick worship This custom was so universal that the vestiges of it may be even yet observed amongst old People educated before the Donatism of the Covenant who continue to retain it Now adays 't is plain Superstition to a Presbyterian not to enter the Church with his Head covered Mas Iohn himself doth it as mannerly as the coursest Cobbler in the Parish In he steps uncovers not till in the Pulpit claps streight on his Breech and within a little falls to work as the Spirit moves him All the Congregation must sit close in the time of Prayer Clap on their Bonnets in the time of Sermon c. This is the way and it brings me in mind of ane observe ane old Gentleman has frequently repeated to me which was that he found it impossible to perform Divine worship without Ceremonies For said he the Presbyterians themselves who pretend to be against all Ceremonies seem even to Superstition precise in observing the Ceremonies of the Breech c. But Thus I have represented in some instances how our Presbyterian Brethren have deserted our Reformers in the ordinary stated parts of publick worship I proceed now to the Sacraments 7. Then our Reformers had not only a set form for Administring the Sacrament of Baptism But beside the Father of the Child they allowed of Sureties or Sponsors This is plain from the conclusion of the discourse concerning the nature and necessity of Baptism in the Old Liturgy For the Minister there addressed to the Father and the Sponsors thus Finally to the intent that we may be assured that you the Father and the Sureties consent to the performance hereof of the conditions mentioned before Declare here before the Face of this Congregation the sum of the Faith wherein you believe and will instruct this Child After this there is this Rubrick Then the Father or in his absence the God-Father shall rehearse the Articles of his Faith which done the Minister expoundeth the same as followeth That which followeth is a large explanation of the Apostles Creed c. Thus it was appointed in the old Liturgie and thus it was practiced Universally for some scores of years But our Modern Presbyterians do not only abhor all Set-forms as I have said but to name Sponsors or Godfathers to them is to incur the Scandal of Popery The Apostles Creed is no agreeable Standard of the Christian Faith into which one is initiated by Baptism They cannot endure to hear of it in this Office Whoso presents a Child to them to be Baptized must promise to bring up the Child in the Faith as it is contained in the Westminster Confession and the larger and shorter Catechisms This they Require Generally Not a few Require that the Child be educated in the Faith of the Solemn League and Covenant 7. About the Sacrament of the Lords Supper I find many considerable alterations Take these for a Taste 1. It was Administred by our Reformers by a set-form contained in the Old Liturgie It continued to be so Administred for more than 60 years by Presbyterians themselves as I have observed already in the instance of Scrimgeour 2. As for the frequency of this most Christian Office The First Book of Discipline Head 9th Determined thus Four times in the year we think sufficient for Administration of the Lords Table Albeit we deny not but every Church for Reasonable causes may change the time and Minister the same oftner The General Assembly holden at Edenburgh Decemb. 25. 1562 Ordained the Communion to be Ministred four times in the year in Burghs and twice in Landward The First Rubrick in the Office for the Lords Supper in the Old Liturgy intimates it was oftner administred for thus it runs Vpon the day that the Lords Supper is Ministred which commonly is used once a Month or as often as the Congregation shall think expedient c. 3. Our Reformers had no preparation Sermons on the Saturndays immediately before the Adminstration of the Sacrament No vestige of any such Sermons in the Old Liturgy nor in the Acts of the Old Assemblies nor in any of our Histories It is plain such Sermons were not required by the Authority of any even Presbyterian Assembly till the year 1645. Then indeed amongst the Articles prepared by the Committee mentioned before I find this the seventh Branch of the Third Article which was about the Lords Supper That there be one Sermon of Preparation delivered in the ordinary place of publick worship upon the day immediately preceeding And it is clear from the stile of these Articles that this was new and had not been practiced at least generally before 4. Our Reformers thought as little on Thanksgiving Sermons on the immediately succeeding Moondays Indeed such were not required no not by that Innovating Assembly 1645. All it has about Thanksgiving Sermons is in the 8 th Branch of the aforesaid Article which is this That before the serving of the Tables there be only one Sermon delivered to those who are to Communicate and that in the Kirk where the service is to be performed And that in the same Kirk there be one Sermon of Thanksgiving after the Communion is ended 5. No Vestige of Assistant Ministers at the Administration of this Sacrament in the practice of
Assembly For to my skill which I confess is not very great it seems as we use to say to have both burnt and blown Patronages blown them by this Act and burnt them by Ratifying the Book which Condemn'd them But whatever is of this that which I observe 2. is far more considerable For tho' the Book Condemned Patronages yet our Presbyterian Brethren of the Modern Cut have no great advantage by it for it had nothing less in its prospect than to Condemn them for making way for Popular Elections Indeed it gave no countenance to such Elections far less did it suppose or assert them to be of Divine Right This is its Determination in the 9 th § of that 12. Cap. The Liberty of Electing Persons to Ecclesiastical Functions observed without interruptions so long as the Church was not corrupted by Anti-Christ we desire to be restored and retained within this Realm So as none be intruded upon any Congregation either by the Prince or any other inferior Person WITHOUT LAWFUL ELECTION and THE ASSENT OF THE PEOPLE over whom the Person is placed according to the Practice of the Apostolick and Primitive Church Now 1. considering that it was the common talk of the Presbyterians of these times that Antichristian Corruptions began to pester the Church so soon as Episcopacy was introduced It is clear that that which they call the Vninterrupted Practice of the Church must have descended according to themselves but for a very few years and I shall own my self their humble servant if our present Presbyterians shall prove that Popular Elections were in Vniversal uninterrupted Practice during that interval of their own making the interval I mean which they make between the Apostles times and the first Introduction of Episcopacy Indeed 2. the Book plainly distinguishes between LAWFUL ELECTION and THE ASSENT OF THE PEOPLE and all the world knows they are naturally distinguishable and whosoever knows any thing of the Monuments of these Primitive times knows they were actually distinguished and that all the Peoples Priviledge was to ASSENT not to ELECT They were not in use of Electing if I mistake not till towards the end of the third Century So that if we can believe the Compilers of the Book if they were for restoring the Primitive Practice 't is easy to understand that they meant no such thing as to restore Popular Elections Especially if 3. it be considered that we have one very Authentick Explication of this 9 th Article of the 12. Cap. of the Second Book of Discipline handed down to us by Calderwood himself The story is this King Iames the Sixth continually vext with the Turbulency of the Presbyterian temper caused publish 55 Questions and proposed them to be sifted thinking that clear and distinct Resolutions of them might contribute much for ending many Controversies agitated in those times between the Kirk and the Crown They were published in February or Ianuary 159◠They are to be seen both in Spotswoods and Calderwoods Histories I am only concerned at present for the third Question which was this Is not the Consent of the most part of the Flock and also of the Patrons necessary in the Election of Pastors Now Calderwood says that there were Brethren delegated from every Presbytery of Fife who met at St. Andrews upon the 21. of February and having tossed the Kings Questions sundrie days gave Answers to every one of them particularly to the third this was their Answer The Election of Pastors should be made by those who are Pastors and Doctors Lawfully called and who can try the Gifts necessarily belonging to Pastors by the word of God And to such as are so chosen the Flock and Patron should give their Consent and Protection Now this I say is a very Authentick Explication of the words of the Book for these Delegates Meeting at St. Andrews it is not to be doubted but Mr. Andrew Melvil at that time principal of the New College was with them probably they met in that City that he might be with them for sure I am it was not otherwise the most convenient place of the County for their Meeting And having him with them they had one than whom none on earth was capable of giving a more Authentick Sense of the words of the Book It were very easy to adduce more Acts of General Assemblies to this purpose But I am affraid I have insisted too much on this subject already In short then the Groundless Fancy of the Divine Right of Popular Elections is more properly ane Independent than a Presbyterian principle The English Presbyterians of the Provincial Assembly of London wrote zealously against it in their Ius Divinum Ministerii Evangelici It is truly inconsistent with the Old Presbyterian Scheme It obtain'd not generally amongst our Scottish Presbyterians till some years after 1638. It was not adopted into their Scheme till the General Assembly 1649. Patronages were never taken away by Act of Parliament till of late i. e in the year 1690. 'T is true G. R. in his True Rrepresentation of Presbyterian Government says they were taken away by Law meaning no doubt by the Act of the pretended Parliament Anno 1649. But he had just as much Reason for calling that Rout a Parliament or its Acts Laws as he had for making the suppressing of Popular Elections of Ministers a just Cause for separating from the Communion of a Church Thus I have insisted on the Recessions of our present Presbyterian Brethren from the sentiments of our Reformers about the publick worship of the Church and some of its Appendages Perchance I have done it too tediously if so I shall endeavour to dispatch what remains more curtly III. They have also Deserted our Reformers in the Discipline of the Church The particulars are too numerous to be insisted on Let any man compare the two Books of Discipline The First compiled by our Reformers Anno 1560 The Second by the Presbyterians of the first Edition and Ratified by Act of the General Assembly holden in April 1581 and he shall find no scarcity of differences He shall find Alterations Innovations Oppositions Contradictions c. Let him compare the Acts of Assemblies after the year 1580 with the Acts of Assemblies before and he shall find many more Indeed Our present Presbyterians have made not a few notorious Recessions from the Second The Presbyterian Book of Discipline To instance in a few The Third Chapter of the Second Book of Discipline is thus Intituled How the Persons that bear Ecclesiastical Function are admitted to their Offices This Chap. treats of such Persons in the general The particular Orders of Pastors Doctors Elders c. are particularly treated of in subsequent Chapter◠This Third Chapter treating thus of Ecclesiastical Officers in the general makes two things necessary to the outward call Election and Ordination § 6. It defines ordination to be the separation and sanctifying of the Person appointed by God and his
Church after that he is well tryed and found qualified It ennumerates Fasting Prayer and imposition of hands of the Eldership as the Ceremonies of Ordination § 11 12. Now the whole Nation knows no such thing as either Tryal Fasting or imposition of hands are used by our present Presbyterians in the Ordination of Ruling Elders The Sixth Chapter is particularly concerning Ruling Elders as contra-distinct from Pastors or Teaching Elders And it determines thus concerning them § 3. Elders once Lawfully called to the Office and having Gifts of God fit to exercise the same may not leave it again Yet nothing more ordinary with our present Presbyterians than laying aside Ruling Elders and reducing them to a state of Laicks So that Sure I am if ever they were Presbyters they come under Tertullians Censure De Praescrip Hodie Presbyter qui cras Laicus A Presbyter to day and a Porter to morrow By the 9 th § of that same Chapter It pertains to them these Ruling Elders to assist the Pastor in examining those that come to the Lords Table and in visiting the Sick This Canon is not much in use I think as to the last part of it as to the first it is intirely indesuetude Indeed some of them would be wondrously qualified for such ane Office The Seventh Chapter is about Elderships and Assemblies By § 2. Assemblies are of four sorts viz. either of a particular Congregation or of a Province or a whole Nation or all Christian Nations Now of all these indefinitely it is affirmed § 5. In all Assemblies a Moderator should be chosen by common consent of the whole Brethren conveened Yet no such thing observed in our Kirk-Sessions which are the Congregational Assemblies spoken of § 2. But Ma◠Iohn takes the Chair without Election and would not be a little grated if the best Laird in the Parish should be his Competitor Crawford himself the First Earl of the Kingdome had never the Honour to be Moderator in the Kirk Session of Ceres The 14 th Canon in the same 7 th Chapter is this When we speak of Elders of particular Congregations we mean not that every particular Parish Church can or MAY have their particular Elderships especially to Landward but we think three or four more or fewer particular Churches may have a common Eldership to them all to judge their Ecclesiastical Causes And Chapter 12. Canon 5. As to Elders there would be in every Congregation one or more appointed for censuring of manners but not ane Assembly of Elders except in Towns and Famous Places where men of Iudgement and Ability may be had And these to have a common Eldership placed amongst them to treat of all things that concern the Congregations of whom they have the Oversight But as the world goes now every Parish even in the Country must have its own Eldership and this Eldership must consist of such a number of the Sincerer sort as may be able to out-vote all the Malignant Heritors upon occasion as when a Minister is to be chosen c. So long as there is a precise Plough-man or a well-affected Webster or a covenanted Cobbler or so to be found in the Parish such a number must not be wanting The standing of the Sect is the Supreme Law The good cause must not suffer tho' all the Canons of the Kirk should be put to shift for themselves IV. The last thing I named as that wherein our present Presbyterians have forsaken the principles and sentiments of our Reformers was the Government of the Church But I have treated so fully of this already that 't is needless to pursue it any farther I shall only therefore as ane Appendage to this represent one very considerable Right of the Church adhered to by our Reformers but disclaim'd by our present Presbyterians It is her being the First of the three Estates of Parliament and having vote in that great Council of the Nation It is evident from the most Ancient Records and all the Authentick Monuments of the Nation That the Church made still the First of the Three Estates in Scottish Parliaments since there were Parliaments in Scotland This had obtained time out of mind and was lookt upon as Fundamental in the Constitution of Parliaments in the days of the Reformation Our Reformers never so much as once dream'd that this was a Popish Corruption What Sophistry can make it such They dream'd as little of its being unseemly or scandalous or incongruous or inconvenient or whatever now adays men are pleas'd to call it On the contrary they were clear for its continuance as a very important Right of the Church The First Book if Discipline Head 8 th allowed Clergy-men to Assist the Parliament when the same is called 'T is true Calderwood both Corrupts the Text here and gives it a false Gloss. Instead of these words when the same is called he puts these if he be called and his Gloss is Meaning with advice says he not by voice or sitting as a Member of that Court I say this is a false Gloss. Indeed it runs quite counter to all the principles and practices of these times For not only did the Ecclesiastical Estate sit actually in the Reforming Parliament Anno 1560 and all Parliaments thereafter for very many years But such stress in these times was laid on this Estate that it was generally thought that nothing of publick concern could be Legally done without it The Counsel of the Ecclesiastick Peers was judged necessary in all matters of National Importance Thus Anno 1567. when the Match was on foot between the Queen and Bothwell that it might seem to be concluded with the greater Authority pains were taken to get the consent of the principal Nobility by their susbcriptions But this was not all that all might be made as sure as could be All the Bishops who were in the City were also Convocated and their subscriptions required as Buchanan tells us And Anno 1568. when the Accusation was intented against the Queen of Scotland before the Queen of England's Arbitrators that it might be done with the greater appearance of the Consent of the Nation That it might have the greater semblance of a National Deed as being a matter wherein all Estates were concerned the Bishop of Orkney and the Abbot of Dunfermline were appointed to represent the Spiritual Estate Again Anno 1571. when the two Counter Parliaments were holden at Edenburg those of the Queens Faction as few as they were had the Votes of two Bishops in their Session holden Iuly 12 as is clear from Buchanan and Spotswood compared together In their next Session which was holden at Edenburg August 22 that same year tho' they were in all but five Members yet two of them were Bishops as Spotswood tells But Buchanan's account is more considerable For he says one of these two was there unwillingly so that it seems he was forced by the rest to be there out
in Scotland the Truth of Iesus Christ. Now consider if there are not Material Differences between these two Inscriptions By the Inscription as it is in Spotswood Petrie and the MS. the Dignity and Superiority of the Scottish Superintendenâ—s above the rest of the Clergy is clearly preserved By the other account it is sadly obscured and they are made at least very much to stand on a level with other Ministers c. By the Inscription as in Spotswood c. The Sentiments Our Scottish Clergy had then about the English Reformation and Constitution are very plain genuine and charitable They were satisfied that the Bishops and Pastors of the Church of England had Renounced the Roman Antichrist and that they professed the Lord Iesus in SINCERITY And they had for them suitably the Christian and Brotherly Charity which the Orthodox and Sincere Christians of one Church ought to have for the Orthodox and Sincere Christians of another Church They wished or desired to them The Increase of the Holy Spirit How highly this was agreeable to the sentiments of the then Protestants in Scotland I have made fully appear in the Discussion of my Second Enquiry But To the Pseudo-Knox it seems it lookt highly scandalous to own That the Bishops and Pastors of England had Renounced the Roman Antichrist or that they professed the Lord Jesus in sincerity How could these things be said so long as they retained Antichrists Hierarchy or had so many Romish Mixtures And therefore to wish them the increase of the Holy Spirit was too bold a prayer It was founded on a false hypothesis It supposed they had the Holy Spirit already How suitable is all this to the Presbyterian temper and principles And by consequence is it not evident that these alterations were not the effects of negligence or inadvertencie but of the true Spirit of the party But this is not all In the body of the Letter as recorded by the Pseudo Knox there are several other Corruptions I shall only point at one but it is a considerable one The General Assembly which sent the Letter after a Digression concerning the care that ought to be had of tender Consciences c. Resume their main purpose thus We return to our former humble supplication which is that our Brethren who amongst you refuse these Romish Rags may find of you who are the PRELATS such favour as our Head and Master commandeth every one of his members to shew to another So it is not only in the MS. Spotswood and Petrie word for word but also in a virulent Presbyterian Pamphlet called Scotidromus directed to all Noble Scots and kind Catholicks zealous for the Romish Religion written Anno 1638 to cast dirt at that time upon Episcopacy and render it odious to the People which Pamphlet I have by me in Manuscript But The Supposititious Knox has it thus Now again we return to our former Request which is that the Brethren among you who refuse the Romish Rags may find of you not the PRELATES but who VSE and VRGE them such favour c How unfit was it for the world to know that a Scottish General Assembly had own'd the Bishops of England as PRELATES It was scandalous no doubt to the Godly It was expedient therefore to falsify a little and foist in more useful Epithets to call them not PRELATES but USERS and URGERS of the Ceremonies I have insisted the longer on this Book because our Presbyterian Brethren are so earnest to have the world believe that it was written by Knox Particularly G. R. in his First Vindication c. in Answer to Quest. 1. § 8. where too observe by the way how extravagantly that Author blunders His words are Anno 1559. The Protestant Ministers and People held a General Assembly at St. Johnstown saith Knox Hist. Lib. 2. p. 137. Now there is not so much as one syllable of a General Assembly in the Text. Upon the Margin indeed there are these words The first Assembly at St. Johnstown But no Presbyterian I think unless he is one of G. R.'s kind will be so impudent as to say that all that 's on the Margin of that Book was written by Knox. And that Meeting which was then at Perth was nothing like that Court which we call a General Assembly But enough of this To conclude tho' I am firmly perswaded that Knox was not the Author of this History yet because it passes commonly under his name I have still cited it so on my Margin The Edition I have used is that in 4 to published at Edenburg Anno 1644. The other Treatises attributed to Knox and I know no Reason to doubt their being his from which I have cited any thing are in ane Appendix to the History I have not made it my work to cite Acts of Parliaments and represent the favourable countenance Episcopacy hath had from the State so much as to consider the sentiments of our Reformers and those who succeeded them in their Ecclesiastical capacity partly because the Acts of Parliament have been diligently collected before Particularly whoso pleases may see a goodly train of them from the year 1560 till the year 16â—7 in the Large Declaration pag. 333 c. Partly because our Presbyterian Brethren are in use to insist more on the Books of Discipline and the Acts of General Assemblies c. than on Acts of Parliaments One advantage amongst many disadvantages I think I have it is that the Authors I have most frequently cited were Presbyterians by consequence Authors whose Testimony 's can least be called in Question by my Presbyterian Brethren I do not pretend to have exhausted the subjects I have insisted on Any Reader may easily perceive I have been at a loss as to several things in History Perchance I have sometimes started some things New and which have not been observed before I wish I may have given occasion to those who are fitter and better furnished with helps for such Enquiries to consider if they can bring more light to our History In the mean time I think I have said enough to convince the Reader that our Presbyterian Brethren have not reason to be so confident as commonly they are for their side of the Controversies I have managed Yet after all this I am not secure but that they will endeavour to have my Book Answered for all Books most be Answered that militate against them and they can still find some G. R. or other who has zeal and confidence enough for such attempts Upon the supposition therefore that I must have ane answer I do for once become ane earnest suiter to my Presbyterian Brethren that they would imploy some Person of ordinary sense and discretion to Answer me and not their common Vindicator of their Kirk G. R. for I have got enough of him and I incline not to have any more meddling with him Whoso reads the following papers I think may find such a sample of him such a
Mers Winram for Fife the Laird of Dun for Angus and Merns Willock for Glasgow and Carsewell for Argyle and the Isles These are all who are reckoned up by Knox and Spotswood And Spotswood adds With this small Number was the Plantation of the Church at first undertaken And can we think tho all these had been Presbyters duly ordained That they were the only men who carried on the Scottish Reformation Farther yet 4. Petrie tells us that the First General Assembly which was holden in Dec. 1560 consisted of 44 persons and I find exactly 44 Names Recorded in my Mss. Extract of the Acts of the General Assembly's as the Names of the Members of that Assembly But of all these 44 there were not above Nine at most who were called Ministers so that at least more than Thirty were but Lay-Brethren according to the then way of Reckoning probably they were generally such if you speak in the Dialect and reckon by the Measures of the Catholick Church in all Ages In short 5. There is nothing more evident to any who considers the Histories of these times than that they were generally Laymen who promoted our Violent and Disordered Reformation as Spotswood justly calls it And 't is Reasonable to think the Sense of this was One Argument which prevailed with our Reformers to Declare against the Antient Catholick and Apostolick Ceremony of Imposition of Hands in Ordinations as is to be seen in the 4 th Head of the First Book of Discipline and as is generally acknowledged Thus I think I have sufficiently deduced Matters as to my First Enquiry It had been easy to have insisted longer on it but I had no inclination for it considering that there is a kind of Piety in Dispatch when the longer one insists on a subject of this Nature he must still the more Expose the Failures of our Reformation and the Weaknesses of our Reformers Proceed we now to The Second Enquiry Whether our Scottish Reformers whatever their Characters were were of the present Presbyterian principles Whether they were for the Divine Institution of Parity and the Vnlawfulness of Prelacy amongst the Pastors of the Church THis Enquiry if I mistake not is pretty far in the interests of the main Question For the Article as I am apt to take it aims at this That our Reformation was carried on with such a Dislike to Prelacy or the Superiority of any Office in the Church above Presbyters as made Prelacy or such a Superiority ever since a great and insupportable Grievance and Trouble to this Nation c. But if this is the Sense of the Article what else is it Than that our Reformers were Presbyterian But whether or not This was truly intended as 't is truly very hard to know what was intended in the Article This is Certain this Enquiry is material and pertinent And if it faces not the Article Directly Undoubâ—edly iâ— doth it by fair Consequence 'T is as certain our Presbyterian Brethren use with confidence enough to assert that our Reformers were of their Principles This is One of the Main Arguments by which they endeavour on all occasions to influence the Populace and Gain Proselytes to their Party And therefore I shall endeavour to go as near to the bottom of this Matter as I can and set it in its due Light And I hope It shall appear to be competently Done to all who shall attentively and impartially weigh the following Deduction And I. Let it be considered That while our Reformation was on the Wheel and for some years after its publick Establishment there was no such Controversy agitated in Europe as this concerning The Divine Institution of Parity or Imparity amongst the Pastors of the Church The Popes pretended universal Headship was Called in Question indeed And Called in Question it was run down with all imaginable Reason some years before the Settlement of our Reformation That Controversie was One of the First which were accurately ventilated by the Patrons of Reformation And it was very natural that it should have been so considering what stress was laid upon it by the Pontificians 'T is likewise true That the Corruptions of the Ecclesiastical Estate were Enquired into in most Provinces every where where the Truth began to Dawn and the Reformation was Encouraged And it was not to be imagined but in such Scrutinies Bishops would be taken notice of for their general Defection from the Antient Rules and Measures of the Episcopal Office and the vast Dissimilitude between them and those of the same Order in the primitive times both as to the Discharge of their Trust and their Way of Living And who doubts but in these things the Popish Bishops were too generally culpable 'T is farther true That some Countries when they reformed Religion and separated from the Church of Rome did set up New Models of Government in the Churches they erected as they thought their civil Constitutions could best bear them And having once set them up what wonder if they did what they could to justify them and maintain their Lawfulness Thus for instance Mr. Calvin erected a Model of the Democratical Size at Geneva because that State had then cast it self into a Democracy And the Protestants in France partly for Conveniency partly in imitation of Calvins Platform fell upon a method of governing their Churches without Bishops And so it fared with some other Churches as in Switzerland c. while in the mean time other Churches thought it enough for them to Reform the Doctrine and Worship without altering the Ancient form of Government But then 'T is as evident as any thing in History that all this while from the first Dawnings of the Reformation I mean till some years after the publick Establishment of our Reformation That there was no such Controversie insisted on by Protestants either in their Debates with the Papists or with one another as that about the Divine and Vnalterable Institution of parity or imparity amongst the Pastors of the Church And I dare confidently challenge my Presbyterian Brethren to produce any One Protestant Confession of Faith for their side of the Question Nay more I dare challenge them to instance in any One Protestant Divine of Note who in these times maintained their side of the Controversy who maintain'd the Vnlawfulness of Imparity amongst Christian Pastors before Theodore Beza did it if he did it Sure I am They cannot without the greatest impudence pretend that Mr. Calvin the only Transmarine Divine I can find consulted by our Reformers about matters relating to our Reformation was of their Principles For whoso shall be pleased to consuâ—t his Commentaries on the New Testament particularly on 1 Cor. 11.2 Or some Chapters in the beginning of his 4 th Book of Institutions Or his Book about the Necessity of Reforming the Church Or his Epistles particularly his Epistle directed to the Protector of England dated Octob. 22. 1548. Or to Cranmer Archbishop of
of England e. g. Friar Alexander Seaton when he was forced to flee in King Iames the 5th's time went to England and became the Duke of Suffolk's Chaplain and died in that service Alexander Aless was in great favour with King Henry and called the King's Schollar He was a Member of the English Convocation and disputed against Stokesly Bishop of London and maintain'd there were but two Sacraments Baptism and the Eucharist Anno 1536 or 37 And he it was that first turn'd the English Liturgy into Latin for Bucer's use Anno 1549 as both Heylin and Burnet in their Histories of the English Reformation tell us Iohn Fife and one M' Dowdal stayed as long in England as Aless did And 't is not to be doubted that they were of the same principles Iohn M' Bee during his abode in England was liberally entertained by Nicol. Saxton Bishop of Salisbury who made much account of him which is no argument I think that he was a Presbyterian Sir Iohn Borthwick was charged with Heresie Anno 1640 for maintaining That the Heresies commonly called the Heresies of England and their New Liturgy was Commendable and to be embraced of all Christians And That the Church of Scotland ought to be govern'd after the manner of the Church of England i. e. under the King and not the Pope as Supreme Governor Friar Thomas Guillam the first publick Preacher of the Reformed Religion in Scotland He by whose Sermons Iohn Knox got the first lively impressions of the Truth This Guillam I say after Arran the Regent Apostatized withdrew and went into England and we hear no more of him From which 't is reasonable to conclude That he kept the Common Course with the other Reformers there Iohn Rough was the Regents other Chaplain while he was Protestant He likewise fled to England tho sometime after Guillam He preached some years in the Towns of Carlisle Berwick and Newcastle and was afterwards provided to a Benefice by the Archbishop of York where he lived till the Death of King Edward When Mary's Persecution turn'd warm he fled and lived some time in Freesland He came to London about some business Anno 1557. was apprehended and brought before Bonner Questioned if he had preached any since he came to England Answered he had preached none But in some places where godly people were Assembled He had read the Prayers of the Communion Book set forth in the Reign of King Ed. VI. Question'd again what his Judgment was of that Book Answered He approved it as agreeing in all points with the word of God And so suffered Martyrdom I think this man was neither for Parity nor against Liturgies But to proceed The excellent Mr. Wishart as he had spent some time in England as was told before so it seems he returned to Scotland of English I am confident not of Presbyterian Principles For he was not only for the Lawfulness of Private Communion as appeared by his practice but Knox gives us fair intimations that he ministred it by a Set-form I know King Edward's Liturgy was not then composed But it is not to be imagined That the Reformers in England in Wishart's time administred the Sacrament without a Set-form The Extemporary Spirit was not then in vogue And why else could Sir Iohn Borthwick have been charged with the Great Heresy of Commending the English Liturgy However I shall not be peremptory because I have not the opportunity of enquiring at present what Forms the English Reformers had then All I shall say is if they had a Liturgy 't is very probable Wishart used it For as Knox tells us when he celebrated the Eucharist before his Execution After he had blessed the Bread and Wine he took the Bread and Brake it and gave to every one of it bidding each of them Remember that Christ had died for them and feed on it spiritually so taking the Cup he bade them Remember that Christs Blood was shed for them c. So Knox word for word which account I think seems fairly to intimate that Wishart used a Form but if he did what other could it be than such as he had learned in England I have accounted already how Iohn Willock and William Harlaw had served in the English Church before they came to Scotland I might perhaps make a fuller Collection But what needs more Even Knox himself lived in Communion with the Church of England all the time he was in that Kingdom He went not there to keep Conventicles to erect Altar against Altar to gather Churches out of the Church of England to set up separate and schismatical Churches as some of our present Parity-men have sometimes done No he preached in the publick Churches and in subordination to the Bishops and he preached before King Edward himself as he himself tell us in his Admonition to the Professors of the Truth in England which it is very improbable he would have been allowed to have done if he had Condemned the Communion of the Church of England as it was then established For who knows not that in King Edwards time all Schism and Non-Conformity were sufficiently discouraged And through that whole Admonition he still speaks of himself as One of the Ministers of the Church of England Nay If it be Reasonable to Collect mens Sentiments from their Reasonings I am sure in that same Admonition I have enough for my purpose For he reasons upon suppositions and from Principles which clearly condemned Separation from the Church of England as then established For when he gives his thoughts of that fatal Discord which happened between the two great men Somerset and the Admiral as I take it He discourses thus God compelled my tongue says he openly to declare That the Devil and his Ministers the Papists Intended only the Subversion of Gods true Religion by that Mortal Hatred amongst those who ought to have been most assuredly Knit together by Christian Charity And especially that the wicked and envious Papists by that ungodly Breach of Charity diligently minded the overthrow of him Somerset that to his own Destruction procured the Death of his innocent friend and Brother All this trouble was devised by the Devil and his instruments to stop and lett Christ's Disciples and their poor Boat i. e. the Church What can be more plain I say than that Knox here proceeds on suppositions and reasons from Principles which condemned Separation from the Church of England as then established Doth he not suppose that the Church of England as then established was Christ's Boat his Church And that the Sons of the Church of England were Christ's Disciples Doth he not suppose that these two Brothers as Sons of the Church of England ought to have been assuredly knit together by Christian Charity That the Breach between them was ane ungodly Breach of that Charity by which Members of that same Church ought to have been assuredly knit together And
dayly look for our final Deliverance by the coming again of our Lord Iesus c. Thus it was prayed I say in great Solemnity at that time and every Petition is a Confirmation of Buchanan's Fidelity and my Assertion Further yet 3. In the Old Scottish Liturgy compiled in these times and afterwards used publickly in all the Churches There is a Thanksgiving unto God after our Deliverance from the Tyranny of the Frenchmen with Prayers made for the Continuance of the Peace betwixt the Realms of Scotland and England wherein we have these Petitions offered Grant unto us O Lord that with such Reverence we may remember thy Benefits received that after this in our Default we never enter into Hostility against the Realm and Nation of England Suffer us never O Lord to fall to that Ingratitude and detestable Vnthankfulness that we should seek the Destruction and Death of those whom thou hast made instruments to Deliver us from the Tyranny of Merciless Strangers Dissipate thou the Counsels of such as Deceitfully travel to stir the hearts of the inhabitants of either Realm against the other Let their malicious practices be their own confusion and grant thou of thy Mercy that Love Concord and Tranquillity may continue and increase amongst the Inhabitants of this Isle even to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ by whose glorious Gospel thou of thy Mercy dost CALL US BOTH TO UNITY PEACE AND CHRISTIAN CONCORD the full PERFECTION whereof we shall possess in the fullness of thy Kingdom c. Here is a set of Demonstrations to the same purpose also And now let any man lay all these things together The Letter to Cecil The Confederacy betwixt Scotland and England Buchanan's Testimony and these Thanksgivings and Prayers and then let him judge impartially whither or not there is reason to believe that in those days there was a good Agreement between the Scottish and English Protestants as to Religion and Church Matters Thus I think I have sufficiently cleared that our Reformers Generally if not Vnanimously lookt upon the Church of England as so well constituted that they acknowledged her Communion to be a Lawful Communion But before I proceed to other things I must try if I can make any more advantage of what has been said And I reason thus Was there not here truely and really a Confederacy ane Oath A Solemn League and Covenant betwixt the Scottish and the English Protestants Were not these English Protestants then united in that Society which at that time was and ever since hath been called The Church of England And was not the Church of England of that same very constitution then that it was of in King Charles the First his time for example Anno 1642 But if so then I ask again was not this Solemn League and Covenant made thus by our Reformers with their Brethren in England as much designed for the Security the Defence the Maintainance of the Church of England as then by Law established as for the Establishment of our Reformation Did not our Reformers promise Mutual Faith to the English as well as the English promised to them Would it have been consistent with the mutual bonds and obligations of this Confederacy this Solemn League and Covenant for the Scottish Reformers to have raised ane Army at that time against Queen Elizabeth to invade her Dominions in order to ruine the Church of England I cannot imagine any sober person can grudge to grant me this much also But if this be granted then I ask in the third place Did not that Solemn League and Covenant made by our Reformers with those of the Church of England run in a direct opposition to the Solemn League and Covenant made by our Scottish Presbyterians with a Factious Party in England for destroying the Church of England in King Charles the First 's time Nay did not our Scottish Presbyterians in that King's time by entering into that Solemn League and Covenant directly and effrontedly break through the Charge and Commandment which our Reformers left to their Posterity That the Amity betwixt the Nations in God contracted and begun might by them be kept inviolate for ever Nay further yet did not our Reformers solemnly pray against those who made the Solemn League and Covenant in the days of King Charles the First Did they not address to God that he would dissipate their Counsels and let their Malicious Practices be their own Confusion And now let the world judge what rational pretences these Presbyterians in that Holy Martyrs time and by consequence our present Presbyterians can make for their being the only true and genuine Successors of our First Reformers Expecting solid and serious Answers to these Questions I shall now advance in the prosecution of my main undertaking on this Head which was to shew how our Reformers agreed with the Church of England in several momentous matters Relative to the Constitution and Communion the Government and Polity of the Church c. But because I have insisted so long on this general one which I have just now taken leave of I shall only instance in two or three more and dispatch them as speedily as I can 2. Then it is evident and undeniable that our Scottish Protestants for some years used the Liturgy of the Church of England in their publick Devotions Indeed The very first publick step towards our Reformation made by the Lords of the Congregation was to appoint this Liturgy to be used It was ordered upon the third day of December 1557. as both Knox and Calderwood have it Take the Ordinance in Knox his words The Lords and Barons professing Christ Iesus conveened frequently in Councel in the which these Heads were concluded First It is thought expedient advised and ordained That in all Parishes of this Realm the Common Prayer be read weekly on Sunday and other Festival days publickly in the Parish Churches with the Lessons of the Old and New Testament conformable to the Book of Common Prayers And if the Curates of the Parishes be qualified that they read the same And if they be not or if they refuse that the most qualified in the Parish use and read the same c. Spotswood and Petrie give the same account But such is the Genius of Mr. Calderwood that you are to expect few things which may make against the Presbyterian Interest candidly and sincerely represented by him For instance in his overly account of this matter he quite omits the mention of other Holy days besides Sundays These consistent Testimonies of all those four Historians are so full and plain a Demonstration of the Matter of Fact that I cannot foresee so much as one Objection that can be made or one Evasion that can be thought on unless it be That it is not said by any of them that it was the Book of the Common Prayers of the Church of England But this difficulty is soon removed For 1. It was either the Book
the Youth are instructed c. And further In these Visitations he had power particularly to take account of what Books every Minister had and how he profited from time to time by them By Act of Assem at Edenburgh Iune 29. 1562. So 't is in the Mss. 15. He had power to depose Ministers that deserved it as appears from the First Book of Discipline Head 8. already cited And by the Assem at Edenburgh March 6. 1573. It is statuted that if any Minister reside not at the Church where his Charge is he shall be summoned before his Superintendent or Commissioner of the Province to whom the Assembly gives power to depose him c. So the Mss. and Potrie 16. He had power to translate Ministers from one Church to another as appears from the Act already cited Num. 4. and by ane Act of the Assembly at Edenburgh Iune 25. 1564. It is concluded that a Minister being once placed may not leave that Congregation without the Knowledge of the Flock and Consent of the Superintendent or whole Church i. e. a General Assembly So the Mss. had so Pet. These are all powers methinks scarcely reconcileable with ane opinion of the Divine Right of Parity but there are more and perhaps more considerable as yet to follow For 17. He had power to nominate Ministers to be Members of the General Assembly This is clearly asserted by the Acts of two General Assemblies The first at Edenburgh in Iune 1562. where it was ordained That no Minister leave his Flock for coming to the Assembly except he have complaints to make or be complained of or at least be warned thereto by the Superintendent So 't is in the Mss. and Spotswood cites it in his Refutatio Libelli c. The other Act was made by the Assembly holden at Edenburgh Iuly 1. 1563. which I find thus worded in the Mss. fairly agreeing with Spotswood Anent the Order hereafter to be used in General Assemblies They all voted and concluded as followeth viz. That if the Order already received pleases not by reason of the Plurality of Voices it be reformed in this manner First That none have place to vote except Superintendents Commissioners appointed for visiting the Kirks and Ministers brought with them presented as persons able to reason and having knowledge to judge with the aforenamed shall be joyned Commissioners of Burghs and Shires together with Commissioners of Vniversities Secondly Ministers and Commissioners shall be chosen at the Synodal Convention of the Diocess by Consent of the rest of the Ministers and Gentlemen that shall conveen at the said Synodal Convention c. From which it is plain that the Superintendent or Commissioner who was a temporary Superintendent nominated the Ministers they brought with them to the Assembly and that the rest of the Ministers c. had only a power of consenting and so it was thereafter practised unquestionably And if there were need of more Light it might be copiously received from the Lord Glamis his Letter to Mr. Beza Anno 1576. wherein he tells him that it had been the Custom ever since the Reformation that the Superintendents or Bishops still nominated the Ministers who met in the General Assemblies than which nothing can be more distinct and plain And this Testimony is the more considerable that it was not Glamis his own private deed but that which was the Result of a considerable Consult as we shall learn hereafter This was such a Branch of Episcopal power as mightily offended our Presbyterian Historians it seems for they have endeavoured to obscure it as much as they could Neither Calderwood nor Petrie mentions the first of these two Acts they mention the second indeed but how Calderwood huddles it up thus It was thought meet for eschewing of Confusion that this Order be followed That none have place nor power to vote except Superintendents Commissioners appointed for visiting of Kirks Ministers Commissioners of Burghs and Shires together with the Commissioners of Vniversities Ministers and Commissioners of Shires shall be chosen at the Synodal Convention of the Diocesses with consent of the rest of the Ministers and Gentlemen c. Leaving out intirely these words brought with them i. e. with the Superintendents and Commissioners of Kirks presented as persons able to reason and having knowledge to judge whereby the power of the Superintendents and Commissioners for visiting of Kirks is quite stifled and the whole sense of the Act perverted for what sense is it I pray to say that the Ministers were to be chosen by consent of the rest of the Ministers when you tell not who was to choose or who they were to whose Choice or Nomination the rest of the Ministers were to give that consent But it is no strange thing with this Author to let sense shift for it self if the good Cause cannot be otherwise served Neither is Petrie less unfaithful for he not only draws the Curtain over the whole power of the Superintendent c. so that you cannot have the least Glimpse of it from his account But he intermixes lies to boot only he stumbles not on Nonsense He accounts thus Because heretofore all Ministers that would come were admitted to vote not one word of this in the Narrative of the Act as it is in the Mss. or any other Historian and it is directly contrary to the Act 1562. already mentioned so that 't is plain it is a figment of his own And now the Number is increased and Commissioners of Shires were chosen in the Sheriff Court no other Historian or Record I have seen has one syllable of this either tho 't is probable enough it was so This Assembly makes ane Act of three parts concerning the Admission of Members 1. That none shall have place to vote but Superintendents Commissioners for visiting Churches Ministers and Commissioners of Shires and Burghs chosen as follows together with Commissioners of Vniversities 2. Ministers and Commissioners of Shires shall be chosen at the Synod of the Bounds by the Ministers and Gentlemen conveening there c. Not with the consent of the rest of the Ministers c. you see as Calderwood ridiculously had it but chosen by the Ministers c. without the least syllable that might import the Superintendents having any and far less the principal power in that Election This is clean work of it Thus I say these two Historians of the Party treat this notable branch of the power which our Reformers thought reasonable to confer on Superintendents but we shall not want occasions enough for admiring their ingenuity Return we now to our task 18. They had power to hold Diocesan Synods Ordains further they are the words of ane Act of the Ass. holden in Decem. 1562. as 't is both in the Mss. and Pet. That the Superintendents appoint Synodal Conventions twice in the year viz. in the months of April and October on such days of the said
the Case of the Countess of Argyle Anno 1567. She had been guilty of a mighty scandal in being present at the Christening of the Prince afterwards Iames the Sixth which was performed after the Popish manner she behoved therefore to give satisfaction to the Church And was ordered to do it by the General Assembly in such manner and at such time as the Superintendent of Lothian within whose bounds the Scandal was committed should appoint So both Spot and Pet. 26. Another branch was to restore Criminals to the Exercises of their Offices if they had any dependance on the Church after they had performed their Pennance and received Absolution Thus Thomas Duncanson Reader at Sterling had fallen in the Sin of Fornication for this he was silenced He had performed his Pennance and was absolved Then the Question was put to the General Ass. met at Eden Decem. 25. 1563. Whither having made publick Repentance he might be restored to his Office And the Assembly determined He might not till the Church of Stirling should make Request to the Superintendent for him 27. To the Superintendents was reserved the power of Excommunication in Cases of Contumacy c. Thus it is statuted by the Gen. Ass. at Eden Iuly 1. 1562. That in Cases of Contumacy the Minister give notice to the Superintendent with whose advice Excommunication is to be pronounced So the Mss. and both the Mss. and Petrie have another long Act of the Assembly holden at Eden Sept. 25. 1565. to the same purpose 28. It belonged also to them to delate Atrocious Criminals to the Civil Magistrate that condign corporal punishments might be inflicted on them To this purpose I find it enacted by a Convention of the Kirk as it is called in the Mss. met at Eden Decem. 15. 1567. to wait on the motions of the Parliament That Ministers Elders and Deacons make search within their bounds if the crimes of Incest or Adultery were committed and to signify the same to the Superintendent that he may notifye it to the Civil Magistrate Such was the power of Superintendents in the Government of the Church and her Discipline But because several things may have relation to the Church tho not formally and directly yet reductively and by way of Analogical Subordination their power extended even to these things also I shall only instance in two 29. Then because Vniversities Colleges and Schools are the Seminaries of Learning and by consequence Nurseries for the Ministry the power of Superintendents over them was very considerable Thus by the First Book of Discipline Head 5. if e. g. The Principal or Head of any College within the University of St. Andrews died the Members of the College being sworn to follow their Consciences were to nominate three of the most sufficient men within the University This done the Superintendent of Pife by himself or his special Procurators with the Rector and the rest of the Principals were to choose one of these three and constitute him Principal And when the Rector was chosen he was to be confirmed by the Superintendent by that same Book And again by that same Book The Money collected in every College for upholding the Fabrick was to be counted and employed at the sight of the Superintendent Further the Gen. Ass. conveened at Eden Ian. 25. 1565. presented this Article in a Petition to the Queen That none might be permitted to have charge of Schools Colleges or Vniversities c. but such as should be tryed by the Superintendents So 't is in the Mss. 'T is true it was not granted at that time but it shews the inclinations of our Reformers as much as if it had been granted And because it was not granted then it was proposed again in the Ass. in Iuly 1567. and consented to by the Nobility and Gentry and ratified by the Eleventh Act of the First Parliament of King Iames the Sixth in December that same year And accordingly we find the Laird of Dun. Superintendent of Angus and Mearns in Iuly 1568. holding at Visitation of the University of Aberdeen and by formal sentence turning out all the Popish Members The very air and stile of the Sentence as Petrie hath it is a notable Evidence of the paramount power of Superintendents for thus it runs I John Areskin Superintendent of Angus and Mearns having Commission of the Church to visit the Sheriffdoms of Aberdeen and Bamf by the Advice Counsel and Consent of the Ministers Elders and Commissioners of the Church present decern conclude and for final Sentence pronounce That Master Alexander Anderson c. 30. Because bad Principles may be disseminated by bad Books and thereby both the Purity and Peace of the Church may be endangered the Revising and Licensing of Books was committed to the Care of the Superintendents by the General Ass. holden in Iune 1563. whereby it is ordained That No work be set forth in Print neither yet published in Writ touching Religion or Doctrine until such time as it shall be presented to the Superintendent of the Diocess and advised and approven by him or by such as he shall call of the most learned within his bounds c. Thus I have collected no fewer than Thirty Disparities betwixt Superintendents as they were established in Scotland by our Reformers and private Parish Ministers each of them a Demonstration of inequality either of power or figure perchance a more nice and accurate Enquirer may find out more But methinks these may be sufficient for my purpose which was to give the world a fair prospect of the Preheminence of Superintendents and of the Differences betwixt them and other Churchmen And having thus perform'd the first part of my Undertaking it is obvious to all who can pretend to be of the thinking part of mankind that the second part is needless For if these 30 Disparities amount not to ane invincible proof that our Church at the Reformation was not govern'd by Ministers acting in parity I may justly despair of ever proving any thing Yet because I know many simple and less thinking people are imposed on by the Noise and Dust our Presbyterian Brethren have raised about this matter I shall proceed to the next thing I undertook which was II. To dissipate these Mists wherewith our Parity-men are so very earnest to involve and darken this Prelatical power of Superintendents They may be reduced to these Three 1. The Establishments of Superintendents was only temporary and for the then Necessities of the Church Superintendency was not intended to be a perpetual standing Office 2. It was not the same with Episcopacy 3. It was never established by Act of Parliament 1. 'T is pleaded that Superintendency was only design'd to be a temporary not a perpetual standing Office in the Church Thus Calderwood speaking of the First Book of Discipline we may safely say says he the whole was recommended to be perpetually observed except some few things as the
Office of Superintendents whereunto they were forced as they thought by necessity c. And in his Breviate of the first book of Discipline he offers at a Reason why it was so They make a Difference at this time among Ministers some to be Superintendents some to be ordinary Ministers not because Superintendents were of divine institution as ane Order to be observed perpetually in the Kirk but because they were forced only AT THIS TIME to make the Difference lest if all Ministers should be appointed to make continual Residence in several places when there was so great Rarity of Preachers the greatest part of the Realm should be destitute of the preaching of the word And G. R. in his first Vindication of the Church of Scotland printed at Edenburgh 1691. in answer to the first of the ten Questions following Calderwood exactly as indeed he doth all alongst and it seems he has never read another of our Historians so that he had some reason to call him THE HISTORIAN ibid. delivers it thus 'T is true the Protestant Church of Scotland did set up Superintendents but this was truly and declared so to be from the Force of Necessity and design'd only for that present Exigency of the Church c. And more pointedly in his true Representation of Presbyterian Government printed at Edenburgh 1690. prop. 18. where he lays it down as ane undoubted truth That Superintendency was only established throught necessity when a qualified Minister could scarcely be had in a Province c. And Petrie seems to aim at the same way of Reasoning Now 1. Supposing all this true what ground have they gained by it Do they not fairly acknowledge that the Prelacy of Superintendents was established at the Reformation And is not that all I am concerned for For the Question is not whither Superintendency was design'd to be perpetual or temporary but whither it was a Prelacy And if it was a Prelacy the Church of Scotland was not then govern'd by Ministers acting in parity The Perpetuity or Temporariness of it doth not affect its nature If it was a Prelacy at all it was as really a Prelacy tho it had lasted but for a Day as it had been tho it had lasted till the Day of Iudgment Just as our Presbyterian Brethren were as really Addressers to K. I. by addressing once as they should have been tho they had continued addressing to him till this very minute This alone in all conscience might be enough for discussing this Plea Yet that I may not offend the Party by seeming to think so meanly of this mighty argument I shall insist a little longer and consider 2. If they have any sufficient Fund in the Records of these times for this pretence And 3. What Force or Solidity is in the reason insisted on to make this pretence seem plausible As to the first viz. Whither there is any sufficient Fund in the Records of these times for this pretence All I have observed insisted on for this is only one phrase in the fifth Head of the First Book of Discipline AT THIS TIME Take the whole period as it is in Petrie for he censures Spotswood for curtailing it As Petrie has it it runs thus If the Ministers whom God hath endued with his singular Graces among us should be appointed to several places there to make their continual Residence the greatest part of the Realm should be destitute of all Doctrine which should not only be the occasion of great Murmur but also dangerous to the Salvation of many and therefore we have thought it a thing expedient AT THIS TIME That from the whole number of Godly and Learned Men now presently in this Realm be selected Ten or Twelve for in so many Provinces we have divided the whole to whom Charge and Commandment should be given to plant and erect Kirks to set order and appoint Ministers to the Countries that shall be appointed to their care where none are now This is the whole foundation of the Plea for the Temporariness of Superintendency but if I mistake not the true Gloss of this period will amount to no more than this That because there were then so few men qualified for the Office of Superintendency tho Ten or Twelve were by far too small a number for the whole Kingdom yet at that time they thought it expedient to establish no more And tho when the Church should be sufficiently provided with Ministers it would be highly reasonable that the Superintendents should have places appointed them for their continual Residence yet in that juncture it was necessary that they should be constantly travelling thro their Districts to preach and plant Churches c. That the period will bear this Gloss is obvious to any who considers it impartially And that this and not the Presbyterian is the true Gloss I hope may competently appear if these things be considered 1. It is notorious that the Compilers of that First Book of Discipline were generally to their dying day of Prelatical Principles They were six as Knox tells us Mr. Iohn Winrame who died Superintendent of Strathern Iohn Spotswood who was many years a Superintendent and a constant Enemy to parity as appears from his Sons account of him Iohn Willock who died Superintendent of the West Iohn Dowglas who died Archbishop of St. Andrews Iohn Row who was one of the three that defended the Lawfulness of Episcopacy at the Conference appointed by the General Assembly 1575 and Iohn Knox of whom we have said enough already Now I ask is it credible that these men all so much for Prelacy all their Lives without any constraint on them As 't is certain there was none should while digesting a Model of Policy have been only for a Prelacy that was to be laid aside within God knows how short a time so soon as the Parish Churches could be planted with Ministers I know nothing can be said here unless it be that Knox was not so prelatical as the rest and he would have it so and the rest have yielded But there 's no ground for this For 2. Even Knox himself if he was the Author of the History which bears his Name amongst our Presbyterian Brethren assigns a quite other reason than the then Necessities of the Church for the Establishment of Superintendency Superintendents and Overseers were nominated says he that all things in the Church might be carried with order and well A Reason which as it held since the Apostles times will continue to hold so long as the Church continues And is it not told again in that same History That at the Admission of Spotswood to the Superintendency of Lothian Iohn Knox in his Sermon asserted the Necessity of Superintendents or Overseers as well as Ministers The Necessity I say and not the bare Expediency in that juncture Further now that I have Knox on the Stage I shall repeat over again a Testimony of his which I
Policy and Government Indeed to make Governours subject to the Censures and Sentences of their Subjects what is it else than to subvert Government to confound Relations to sap the Foundations of all Order and politick Establishment It is as King Iames the sixth has it in his Discourse about the true Law of Free Monarchies and I cannot give it better to invert the Order of all Law and Reason to make the commanded command the Commander the judged judge their Iudge and them who are governed to govern their time about their Lord and Governour In short to give a just account of such a Constitution it is very near of Kin to that bantering Question I have sometimes heard proposed to Children or Ideots If you were above me and I above you which of us should be uppermost I add further 2. That as I take it our Reformers put this in the Constitution that they might appear consequential to a principle then espoused and put in practice by them about Civil Government which was that the King was superior to his Subjects in their distributive but inferior to them in their collective Capacity This principle I say in those days was in great Credit Knox had learned it from the Democratians at Geneva his Authority was great and he was very fond of this principle and disseminated it with a singular zeal and confidence Besides our Reformers were then obnoxious to the civil Government the standing Laws were against them and the Soveraigns perswasion in matters of Religion jumpt with the Laws This Principle therefore had it been a good one came to them most seasonably and coming to them in such a nick and withal meeting in them with Scotch Mettal they put it in practice and being put in practice God suffered it to be successful and the success was a new Endearment and so it came to be a Principle of Credit and Reputation Indeed they had been very unthankful to it and inconsequential to boot if they had not adopted it into their Ecclesiastical as well as their Civil Systeme and the Superintendents having had a main hand in reducing it to practice against the Prince could not take it ill if it was made a Law to themselves it was but their own measure This I say I take to be the natural History of this part of the Constitution Nay 3. So fond it seems they were of this principle that they extended it further so far as even to make Ministers accountable to their own Elderships So 't is expresly established by the First Book of Discipline Head 8. The Elders ought also to take heed to the Life Manners Diligence and Study of their Minister And if he be worthy of Admonition they must admonish him if of Correction they must correct him and if he be worthy of Deposition they with the Consent of the Church and Superintendent may depose him Here was a pitch of Democracy which I think our Presbyterian Brethren themselves as self denied as they are would not take with so very kindly And yet I am apt to believe the Compilers of the Book never thought on putting these Elders in a state of parity with their Ministers tho this is a Demonstration that they have not been the greatest Masters at Drawing Schemes of Policy But to let this pass 4. Tho this unpolitical stroke to call it no worse was made part of the Constitution by that Book as I have granted yet I have no where found that ever it was put in practice I have no where found that De Facto a Superintendent was judged by his own Synod whether it was that they behaved so exactly as that they were never censureable or that their Synods had not the insolence to reduce a Constitution so very absurd and unreasonable to practice I shall not be anxious to determine But it seems probable it has been as much if not more upon the latter account than the former for I find Superintendents frequently tried and sometimes censured by General Assemblies and there was reason for it supposing that General Assemblies as then constituted were fit to be the supreme Judicatories of the National Church For there was no reason that Superintendents should have been Popes i. e. absolute and unaccountable so that if I am not mistaken our Brethren raise Dust to little purpose when they make so much noise about the Accountableness of Superintendents to General Assemblies as if that made a difference between them and Bishops For I know no man that makes Bishops unaccountable especially when they are confederated in a National Church But this by the way That which I take notice of is That seeing we find they were so frequently tried by General Assemblies without the least intimation of their being at any time tried by their own Synods it seems reasonable to conclude that it has been thought fit to let that unreasonable Stretch in the first Constitution fall into Dissuetude But however this was I have all safe enough For 5. Such a Constitution infers no such thing as parity amongst the Officers of the Church Those who maintain that the King is inferiour to his Subjects in their Collection are not yet so extravagant as to say he is not superior to every one of them in their Distribution They acknowledge he is Major Singulis and there 's not a person in the Kingdom who will be so unmannerly as to say that he stands upon the same Level with his Soveraign But what needs more These same very Presbyterian Authors who use this Argument even while they use it confess That Superintendents and ordinary Parish Ministers did not act in parity and because they cannot deny it but must confess it whether they will or not they cannot forbear raising all the Dust they can about it that unthinking People may not see clearly that they do confess it And had it not been for this reason I am apt to think the world had never been plagued with such pitiful jangle as such Arguments amount to Neither is the next any better which is 3. That Superintendency was never established by Act of Parliament This is G. R.'s Argument in his learned Answer to the first of the ten Questions for there he tells us That Superintendency was neither brought in nor cast out by Act of Parliament And what then Doth he love it the worse that it was established purely by Ecclesiastical Authority How long since he turn'd â—ond of Parliamentary Establishments I wonder he was not affraid of the Scandal of Erastianism But to the point 'T is true indeed it was not brought in by Act of Parliament but then I think he himself cannot deny that it was countenanced allowed and approven by more than half a Dozen of Acts of Parliaments which if our Author understands any thing either of Law or Logick he must allow to be at least equivalent to a Parliamentary In-bringing I have these Acts in readiness to produce when
I shall be put to it But I think his own Act which he cited tho most ridiculously as shall be made appear afterwards in the immediately preceeding paragraph may be good enough for him For He concludes it as evident that Episcopal Jurisdiction over the Protestants was condemned by Law in the Parliament 1567. because it is there statute and ordained that no other Iurisdiction Ecclesiastical be acknowledged within this Realm than that which is and shall be within this same Kirk established presently or which sloweth therefrom concerning preaching the Word correcting of Manners administration of Sacraments and Prelatical Jurisdiction was not then in Scotland So he reasons Now I dare adventure to refer it to his own judgment whither it will not by the same way of reasoning follow and be as evident that the Iurisdiction of Superintendents was allowed of by this same Act seeing he himself cannot have the Brow to deny that it was then in its vigor and daily exercised I think this is Argument good enough ad hominem But as I said we shall have more of this Act of Parliament hereafter Thus I have dispelled some of these clouds our Presbyterian Brethren use to raise about the Prelacy of Superintendents perhaps there may be more of them but considering the weakness of these which certainly are the strongest it is easy to conjecture what the rest may be if there are any more of them And thus I think I have fairly accounted for the Sentiments of our Reformers in relation to Parity or Imparity amongst the Governors of the Church during the First Scheme into which they cast the Government of the Church BEFORE I proceed to the next I must go back a little and give a brief Deduction of some things which may afford considerable Light both to what I am now to insist on and what I have insisted on already Tho I am most unwilling to rake into the Mistakes or Weaknesses of our Reformers yet I cannot but say that our Reformation was carried on and at first established upon some principles very disadvantageous to the Church both as to her Polity and Patrimony There were Mistakes in the Ministers on the one hand and sinister and worldly designs amongst the Laity on the other and both concurred unhappily to produce Great Evils in the Result There was a principle had then got too much sooting amongst some Protestant Divines viz. That the best way to reform a Church was to recede as far from the Papists as they could to have nothing in common with them but the Essentials the necessary and indispensable Articles and Parts of Christian Religion whatever was in its nature indifferent and not positively and expresly commanded in the Scriptures if it was in fashion in the Popish Churches was therefore to be laid aside and avoided as a Corruption as having been abused and made subservient to Superstition and Idolatry This principle Iohn Knox was fond of and maintained zealously and the rest of our reforming Preachers were much acted by his Influences In pursuance of this principle therefore when they compiled the First Book of Discipline they would not reform the Old Polity and purge it of such Corruptions as had crept into it keeping still by the main Draughts and Lineaments of it which undoubtedly had been the wiser the safer and every way the better course as they were then admonisht even by some of the Popish Clergy But they laid it quite aside and instead thereof hammered out a New Scheme keeping at as great a distance from the Old one as they could and as the Essentials of Polity would allow them establishing no such thing however as Parity as I have fully proven And no wonder for as Imparity has obviously more of Order Beauty and Vsefulness in iâ—â— Aspect so it had never so much as by Dreaming entered their Thoughts that it was a Limb of Antichrist or a Relique of Popery That our Reformers had the aforesaid principle in their view all alongst while they digested the First Book of Discipline is plain to every one that reads it Thus In the First Head they condemn Binding Men and Women to a several and disguised Apparel to the superstitious observing of Fasting Days Keeping of holy days of certain Saints commanded by Man such as be all these THE PAPISTS HAVE INVENTED as the Feasts of the Apostles Martyrs Christmas c. In the Second Head The Cross in Baptism and Kneeling at the Reception of the Symbols in the Eucharist In the Third Head they require not only Idolatry but all its Monuments and Places to be suppressed and amongst the rest Chappels Cathedral Churches and Colleges i. e. as I take it Collegiate Churches And many other such instances might be adduced particularly as to our present purpose They would not call those whom they truly and really stated in a Prelacy above their Brethren Prelates or Bishops but Superintendents They would not allow of Imposition of hands in Ordinations They made Superintendents subject to the Censures of their own Synods they changed the bounds of the Diocesses they would not allow the Superintendents the same Revenues which Prelates had had before They would not suffer Ecclesiastical Benefices to stand distinguished as they had been formerly but they were for casting them all for once into one heap and making a new Division of the Churches Patrimony and parcelling it out in Competencies as they thought it most expedient In short A notable instance of the prevalency of this principle we have even in the year 1572. after the Restauration of the Old Polity was agreed to For then by many in the General Assembly Exceptions were taken at the Titles of Archbishop Dean Arch-Deacon Chancellor Chapter c. as being Popish Titles and offensive to the Ears of good Christians As all Historians agree Buâ— then As they were for these and the like alterations in pursuance of this principle so they were zealous for and had no mind to part with the Patrimony of the Church Whatever had been dedicated to Religious Uses whatever under the notion of either Spirituality or Temporality had belonged to either Seculars or Regulars before they were positive should still continue in the Churches hands and be applied to her Maintainance and Advantages condemning all Dilapidations Alienations Impropriations and Laick Usurpations and Possessions of Church Revenues c. as is to be seen fully in the Sixth Head of the Book Thus I say our Reformers had digested a New Scheme of Polity in the First Book of Discipline laying aside the Old one because they thought it too much Popish And now that we have this Book under consideration it will not be unuseful nay it will be needful for a full understanding of what follows to fix the time when it was written Knox and Calderwood follows him says it was written after the Dissolution of the Parliament which sate in August 1560. and gave the legal Establishment to the
Reformation But Petrie says it is expresly affirmed in the beginning of the Book it self that the Commission was granted for compiling it on the 29th of April 1560. and that they brought it to a Conclusion as they could for the time before the 20th of May a short enough time I think for a work of such importance So Petrie affirms I say and it is apparent he is in the right for his account agrees exactly with the First Nomination of Superintendents which both Knox and Spotswood affirm to have been made in Iuly that year And besides it falls in naturally with the Series of the History for the Nobility and Gentry's having seen the Book and considered it before the Parliament sate according to this account makes it fairly intelligible how it was intirely neglected or rather rejected not only so far as that it was never allowed of nor approven by them as we shall learn by and by but so far that in that Parliament no provision at all was made for the Maintainance and Subsistence of the Reformed Ministers For understanding this more fully yet It is to be considered that there had been Disceptations and Controversies the year before viz. 1559. about the Disposal of the Patrimony of the Church This I learn from a Letter of Knox's to Calvin dated August 28. 1559. to be seen amongst Calvin's Epistles Col. 441. wherein he asks his sentiments about this question Whither the yearly Revenues might be payed to such as had been Monks and Popish Priests even tho they should confess their former errors considering that they neither served the Church nor were capable to do it And tells him frankly that he had maintained the negative for which he was called too severe not only by the Papists but even by many Protestants From which 't is plain not only that there were then Controversies about the Disposal of the Patrimony of the Church as I have said but also that Knox and by very probable consequence the Protestant Preachers generally was clear that the Ecclesiastical Revenues had been primarily destinated to the Church for the ends of Religion and therefore whatever person could not serve these ends could have no just Title to these Revenues By which way of reasoning not only ignorant Priests and Monks but all Lay men whatsoever were excluded from having any Title to the Patrimony of the Church Now While this Controversie was in agitation as to point of Right the Guise was going against Knox's side of it as to matter of Fact For in the mean time many Abbeys and Monasteries were thrown down and the Nobility and Gentry were daily possessing themselves of the Estates that had belonged to them and so before the First Book of Discipline which was Knox's performance and so no doubt contain'd his principle was compiled they were finding that there was something sweet in sacrilege and were by no means willing to part with what they had got so fortunately as they thought in their Fingers Besides They foresaw if Knox's project took place several other which they judged considerable inconvenients would follow If the Monks and Priests c. who acknowledged their former errors should be so treated what might they expect who persisted in their adherence to the Romish Faith and Interests Tho they were blinded with Superstition and Error yet they were Men they were Scottish men nay they were generally of their own Blood and their very near Kinsmen And would it not be very hard to deprive them intirely of their Livings and reduce them who had their Estates settled upon them by Law and had lived so plentifully and so hospitably to such ane Hopeless State of Misery and Arrant Beggary Further by this Scheme as they behoved to part with what they had already griped so their Hopes of ever having opportunity to profit themselves of the Revenues of the Church thereafter were more effectually discouraged than they had been even in the times of Popery The Popish Clergy by their Rules were bound to live single they could not marry nor by consequence have lawful Children to provide for The reformed as the law of God allowed them and their Inclinations prompted them indulged themselves the Solaces of Wedlock and begot Children and had Families to maintain and provide for there were no such Expectations therefore of easy Leases and rich Gifts and hidden Legacies c. from them as from the Popish Clergy Add to this the Popish Clergy foresaw the Ruine of the Romish Interests they saw no likelihood of Successors of their own Stamp and Principles They had a mighty spite at the Reformation It was not likely therefore that they would be anxious what became of the Patrimony of the Church after they were gone It was to be hoped they might squander it away dilapidate alienate c. without difficulty as indeed they did And who but themselves the Laity should have all this gain Upon these and the like Considerations I say the Nobility and Gentry had no liking to the First Book of Discipline And being once out of Love with it it was easy to get Arguments enough against it The Novelties and the numerous needless Recessions from the Old Polity which were in it furnished these both obviously and abundantly So it was not only not established but it seems the Nobility and Gentry who have ever the principal sway in Scottish Parliaments to let the Ministers find how much they had displeased them by such a Draught resolved to serve them a Trick Indeed they served them a monstrous one for tho in the Parliament 1560. they established the Reformation as to Doctrine and Worship c. and by a Legal Definition made the Protestant the National Church yet they settled not so much as a Groat of the Churches Revenues upon its Ministers but continued the Popish Clergy during their Lives in their possessions 'T is true indeed thro the importunity of I. Knox and some others of the Preachers some Noblemen and Gentlemen subscribed the Book in Ianuary 1560 1. But as they were not serious as Knox intimates so they did it with this express provision apparently levelled against one of the main designs of the Book That the Bishops Abbots Priors and other Prelates and Beneficed Men who had already joyned themselves to the Religion should enjoy the Rents of their Benefices during their Lives they sustaining the Ministers for their parts c. But it was never generally received on the contrary it was treated in Ridicule and called a DEVOVT IMAGINATION which offended Knox exceedingly Nay it seems the Ministers themselves were not generally pleased with it after second thoughts or The Laity have been more numerous in the General Assembly holden in December 1561. For as Knox himself tells us when it was moved there that the Book should be offered to the Queen and her Majesty should be supplicated to ratify it the Motion was rejected The Reformation thus established
Having thus removed this seeming difficulty I return to my purpose The Earl of Lennox was then Regent He was murthered in the time of the Parliament So at that time things were in confusion and these Commissioners from the General Assembly could do nothing in their business The Earl of Mar succeeded in the Regency Application was made to him It was agreed to between his Grace and the Clergy who applied to him that a Meeting should be kept between so many for the Church and so many for the State for adjusting matters For this end ane Assembly was kept at Leith on the 12 of Ianuary 1571 2. By this Assembly Six were delegated to meet with as many to be nominated by the Council to treat reason and conclude concerning the Settlement of the Polity of the Church After diverse Meetings and long Deliberation as Spotswood has it they came to an Agreement which was in effect That the Old Polity should revive and take place only with some little alterations which seemed necessary from the Change that had been made in Religion Whoso pleases may see it more largely in Calderwood who tells us that the whole Scheme is Registred in the Books of Council more briefly in Spotswood and Petrie In short It was a Constitution much the same with that which we have ever since had in the times of Episcopacy For by this Agreement those who were to have the Old Prelatical power were also to have the Old Prelatical Names and Titles of Archbishops and Bishops the Old Division of the Diocesses was to take place the Patrimony of the Church was to run much in the Old Channel particularly express provision was made concerning Chapters Abbots Priors c. That they should be continued and enjoy their Old Rights and Priviledges as Churchmen and generally things were put in a regular Course This was the Second Model not a new one of Polity established in the Church of Scotland after the Reformation at a pretty good distance I think from the Rules and Exigencies of Parity The truth is both Calderwood and Petrie acknowledge it was Imparity with a witness The thing was so manifest they had not the brow to deny it all their Endeavours are only to impugne the Authority of this Constitution or raise Clouds about it or find Weaknesses in it So far as I can collect no man ever affirmed that at this time the Government of the Church of Scotland was Presbyterian except G. R. who is truly singular for his skill in these matters But we shall have some time or other occasion to consider him In the mean time let us consider Calderwood's and Petrie's Pleas against this Establishment They may be reduced to these four 1. The Incompetency of the Authority of the Meeting at Leith in January 1571 2. 2. The Force which was at that time put upon the Ministers by the Court which would needs have that Establishment take place 3. The Limitedness of the power then granted to Bishops 4. The Reluctancies which the subsequent Assemblies discovered against that Establishment These are the most material Pleas they insist on and I shall consider how far they may hold The 1. Plea is the Incompetency of the Authority of the Meeting at Leith Ian. 12. 1571 2. which gave Commission to the Six for agreeing with the State to such ane Establishment It is not called ane Assembly but a Convention in the Register The ordinary Assembly was not appointed to be holden till the 6 th of March thereafter As it was only a Convention so it was in very great haste it seems and took not time to consider things of such importance so deliberately as they ought to have been considered It was a corrupt Convention for it allowed Master Robert Pont a Minister to be a Lord of the Session These are the Reasons they insist on to prove the Authority of that Meeting incompetent And now to examine them briefly When I consider these Arguments and for what end they are adduced I must declare I cannot but admire the Force of prejudice and partiality how much they blind mens Eyes and distort their Reasons and byass them to the most ridiculous Undertakings For What tho the next ordinary Assembly was not appointed to meet till March thereafter Do not even the Presbyterians themselves maintain the Lawfulness yea the Necessity of calling General Assemblies extraordinarily upon extraordinary occasions pro re nata as they call it How many such have been called since the Reformation How much did they insist on this pretence Anno 1638 And What tho the Register calls this Meeting a Convention was it therefore no Assembly Is there such an opposition between the words Convention and Assembly that both cannot possibly signify the same thing Doth not Calderwood acknowledge that they voted themselves ane Assembly in their second Session Doth he not acknowledge that all the ordinary Members were there which used to constitute Assemblies But what if it can be found that ane undoubted uncontroverted Assembly own'd it as ane Assembly and its Authority as the Authority of ane Assembly What is become of this fine Argument then But can this be done indeed Yes it can and these same very Authors have given it in these same very Histories in which they use this as ane Argument and not very far from the same very pages Both of them I say tell that the General Assembly holden at Perth in August immediately thereafter made ane Act which began thus Forasmuch as the Assembly holden in Leith in January last c. But if it was ane Assembly yet it was in too great haste it did not things deliberately Why so No Reason is adduced no Reason can be adduced for saying so The Subject they were to treat of was no new one it was a Subject that had imployed all their Heads for several months before Their great business at that time was to give a Commission to some Members to meet with the Delegates of the State to adjust matters about the Polity and Patrimony of the Church This Commission was not given till the Third Session as Calderwood himself acknowledges Where then was the great haste Lay it in doing a thing in their Third Session which might have been done in the First But were not these Commissioners in too great haste to come to ane Agreement when they met with the Delegates of the State Yes if we may believe Petrie for he says That the same day viz. January 16. the Commissioners conveened and conclued c. But he may say with that same integrity whatever he pleases For not to insist on Spotswood's account who says it was after diverse Meetings and long Deliberation that they came to their Conclusion not to insist on his authority I say because he may be suspected as partial doth not Calderwood expresly acknowledge that they began their Conference upon the
forced to return to England Mr. Henry Kellegrew succeeding in his stead in Scotland that this Killegrew at a private meeting told himself plainly that he was come to Scotland with a Commission contrary to his inclinations which was to encourage Faction c. Thus practiced Queen Elizabeth and such were her Arts and influences in Scotland before she had the opportunity of improving the Presbyterian humour to her purposes And can it be imagined she would not encourage it when once it got sooting Certainly she understood it better than so The Sect had set up a Presbytery at Wandsworth in Surrey in the year 1572 four years before Morton made this Proposition seven years before a Presbytery was so much as heard of in Scotland No doubt she knew the Spirit well enough and how apt and well suited it was for keeping a State in disorder and trouble Nay I have heard from knowing Persons that to this very day the Treasury Books of England if I remember right sure I am some English record or other bear the Names of such Scottish Noblemen and Ministers as were that Queens Pensioners and what allowances they got for their Services in fostering and cherishing seditions and confusions in their Native Countrey From this sample I think it is easy to collect at least that it is highly probable that Queen Elizabeth was very willing that the Presbyterian humour should be encouraged in Scotland Let us try 2. If Morton depended so much on her as may make it credible that he was subservient to her Designs in this Politick And here the work is easy For he was her very Creature he stood by her and he stood for her Randolf and he were still in one bottom The whole Countrey was abused by Randolf and Morton Morton and Randolf contrived the Parliament 1571. Mentioned before When Lennox the Regent was killed Randolf was earnest to have Morton succeed him Randolf had no Credit but with Morton Killegrew told Sir James Melvil at the Private Meeting mentioned before That the Queen of England and her Council built their course neither on the late Regent Lennox nor the present Mar but intirely on the Earl of Morton as only true to their interests Morton after Mar's death was made Regent England helping it with all their Might And again in that same page Sir Iames tells that those who were in the Castle of Edenburgh and stood for Queen Mary's Title were so sensible of all this that when Morton sent the same Sir Iames to propose ane accommodation to them He found it very hard to bring on ane Agreement between them and Morton for the evil opinion that was then conceived of him and the hurtful marks they supposed by proofs and appearances that he would shoot at being by Nature Covetous and too great with England And to make all this plainer yet Sir Iames tells us that Morton entertaind a Secret Grudge against his Pupil the Young King He was ever jealous that the King would be his Ruine And England gave greater Assistances to Morton than to any former Regents for they believed he aim'd at the same mark with themselves viz. to intricate the Kings affairs out of old jealousies between the Stuarts and the Douglases Now Let all these things be laid together and then let the judicious consider if it is not more than probable That as England had a main hand in the advancement of our Reformation so it was not wanting to contribute for the encouragement of Presbytery also and that Morton playing England's game which was so much interwâ—â—eâ— with his own made this ill favoured Proposition to this Gen. Ass. But however this was â—lâ—â—her he had such a Plot or not It is cleaâ— that his making this proposition had all the effects he could have projected by being on such a Plot. For No sooner had he made this Proposition than it was greedily entertain'd It Answered the Melvilian wishes and it was easy for them to find colourable Topicks for obtaining the consent of the rest of the Assembly For most part of them were ready to acknowledge that there were Defects and things to be mended in the Agreement at Leith And it had been received by the General Assembly in August 1572. for ane Interim only The revising of that Agreement might end some Controversies and the Regent having made this Proposition it was not to be doubted but he would Ratify what they should Unanimously agree to c. These and the like Arguments I say might 't is clear some Arguments did prevail with the Assembly to entertain the Proposition For A commission was forthwith drawn to nineteen or twenty Persons to Compose a Second Book of Discipline a step by which at that time the Presbyterian got a wonderful advantage over the other Party For not only were Melvil and Lawson the two first Rate Presbyterians nominated amongst these Commissioners But they had their business much prâ—meditated They had spent much thinking about it and it is not to be doubted they had Mr. Beza bespoken to provide them with all the Assistance he and his Colleagues at Geneva could afford them Whereas the rest were Generally very ignorant in Controversies of that Nature They had all alongst before that imployed themselves mainly in the Popish Controversies and had not troubled their heads much about the Niceties of Government They had taken the Ancient Government so far at least as it subsisted by imparity upon trust as they found it had been Practiced in all ages of the Church perceiving a great deal of Order and Beauty in it and nothing that naturally tended to have a bad influence on either the principles or the life of serious Christianity And with that they were satisfied Indeed even the best of them seem to have had very little skill in the true fountains whence the solid subsistence of the Episcopal Order was to be derived The Scriptures I mean not as Glossed by the Private Spirit of every Modern Novelist but as interpreted and understood by the First ages as sensed by the constant and universal practice of Genuine Primitive and Catholick Antiquity This charge of Ignorance in the Controversies about the Government of the Church which I have brought against the Scottish Clergy in these times will certainly leave a blot upon my self if I cannot prove it But if I can prove it it is clear it is of considerable importance in the present disquisition and helps much for coming by a just comprehension to understand how Presbytery was introduced into Scotland And therefore I must again beg my Readers patience till I adduce some evidences for it And First The truth of this charge may be obviously collected from the whole train of their proceedings and management about the Government of the Church from the very first Establishment of the Reformation For however they Established a Government which clearly subsisted by imparity as I
the Meeting of the Four Kings against the Five or of the Five against the Four mentioned in the 14 th Chapter of the Book of Genesis For the Meetings of these Kings were before our Presbyteries I think in order of time And these Meetings of these Kings were as much like our present Presbyteries as those Meetings were which were appointed at the Reformation for the inteâ—pretation of Scripture So that even Calderwood himself was but triâ—ling when he said so But triâ—ling is one thing and impudent founding of false History upon another Mans trifling is another But enough of this Author at present we shall have further occasions of meeting with him This Assembly was also earnest with the King that the Book of Policy might be farther considered and that farther Conference might be had about it That the Heads not agreed about might be compromised some way or other But the King it seems listned not For they were at it again in their next Assembly And now that I have so frequently mentioned this Second Book of Discipline and shall not have occasion to proceed much further in this wearisome Deduction Before I leave it I shall only say this much more about it As much stress as the Presbyterian party laid on it afterwards and continue still to lay on it as if it were so very exact a Systeme of Ecclesiastical Polity yet at the beginning the Compilers of it had no such Confident sentiments about it For if we may believe Spotswood and herein he is not contradicted by any Presbyterian Historian when Master David Lindesay Mr. Iames Lawson and Mr. Robert Pont were sent by the Assembly to present it to the Regent Morton in the end of the year 1577 They intreated his Grace to receive the Articles presented to him and if any of them did seem not agreeable to reason to vouchsafe Audience to the Brethren whom the Assembly had named to attend Not that they thought it a work complete to which nothing might be added or from which nothing might be diminished for as God should reveal further unto them they should be willing to help and renew the same Now upon this Testimony I found this Question Whither the Compilers of the Second Book of Discipline could in reason have been earnest that this Book which they acknowledged not to be a work so complete as that nothing could be added to it or taken from it should have been confirmed by ane Oath and sworn to as ane Vnalterable Rule of Policy Are they not injurious to them who make them capable of such a bare faced absurdity Indeed whatever our present Presbyterians say and with how great assurance soever they talk to this purpose this is a Demonstration that the compilers of it never intended nay could not intend that it should be sworn to in the Negative Confession That it was not sworn to in that Confession I think I could prove with as much evidence as the nature of the thing is capable of if it were needful to my present purpose But not being that I shall only give this further Demonstration which comes in here naturally enough now that we have mentioned this Book so often The Negative Confession was sworn to and subscribed by the King and his Council upon the 28. of Ianuary 1580 1. Upon the second of March thereafter the King gave out a Proclamation ordering all the subjects to subscribe it But the King had never approven never owned but on the contrary had constantly rejected the Second Book of Discipline Nay it was not Ratiâ—ied got not its finishing stroke from the General Assembly it self till towards the end of April in that year 1581. By necessary consequence I think it was not sworn to in the Negative Confession And thus I leave it Proceed we now to the next Assembly It met at Dundee upon the twelfth of Iuly 1580. full twenty years after the Reformation For the Parliament which Established the Reformation as the Presbyterian Historians are earnest to have it had its first Meeting on the tenth of Iuly 1560. This this was the Assembly which after so many fencings and strugglings gave the deadly Thrust to Episcopacy I shall transcribe its Act word for word from Calderwood who has exactly enough taken it from the MS. and both Spotswood and Petrie agree It is this Forasmuch as the Office of a Bishop as it is now used and commonly taken within this Realm hath no sure Warrant Authority nor good Ground out of the Book and Scriptures of God but is brought in by the Folly and Corruptions of mens invention to the great overthrow of the true Kirk of God The whole Assembly in one voice after Liberty given to all men to Reason in the matter none oppening themselves in defence of the said pretended Office Findeth and Declareth the same pretended Office Vsed and Termed as is abovesaid Vnlawful in the self as having neither Fundament Ground nor Warrant in the word of God And Ordaineth that all such Persons as brook or hereafter shall brook the said Office be charged simpliciter to dimit quite and leave off the Samine as ane Office whereunto they are not called by God and sicklike to desist and cease from preaching Ministration of the Sacraments or using any way the Office of Pastors while they receive de novo Admission from the General Assembly under the pain of Excommunication to be used against them Wherein if they be found Disobedient or Contraveen this Act in any point The sentence of Excommunication after due admonition to be execute against them This is the Act. Perhaps it were no very great difficulty to impugn the Infallibility of this true blue Assembly and to expose the boldness the folly the iniquity the preposterous zeal which are conspicious in this Act Nay yet after all this to shew that the Zealots for Parity had not arrived at that height of Effrontery as to Condemn Prelacy as simply and in it self Unlawful But by this time I think I have performed my promise and made it appear that it was no easy task to Abolish Episcopacy and Introduce Presbytery to turn down Prelacy and set up Parity in the Government of the Church when it was first attempted in Scotland And therefore I shall stop here and bring this long Disquisition upon the Second Enquiry to a Conclusion after I have Recapitulated and represented in one intire view what I have at so great length deduced I have made it appear I think That no such Article was believed professed or maintained by the body of any Reformed or Reforming Church or by any Eminent and Famous Divine in any Reformed or Reforming Church while our Church was a Reforming No such Article I say as that of the Divine and indispensible Institution of Parity and the Vnlawfulness of Prelacy or Imparity amongst the Governours of the Church I have made it appear that there is no reason to believe that our
have the clear and consentient Testimonies of Historians to this purpose Petrie delivers it thus Mercy and Truth Righteousness and Peace had never since Christs coming in the Flesh a more Glorious Meeting and Amiable Embracing on Earth Even so that the Church of Scotland justly obtain'd a Name amongst the Chief Churches and Kingdoms of the world The hottest Persecutions had not greater Purity The most Halcyon times had not more Prosperity and Peace The best Reformed Churches in other places scarcely Parallel'd their Liberty and Vnity Spotswood thus The Superintendents were in such Respect with all Men as notwithstanding the Dissensions that were in the Country no Exception was taken at their proceedings by any of the parties But all concurred in the Maintainance of Religion And in the Treaties of Peace made That was ever one of the Articles such a Reverence was in those times carried to the Church The very form of Government purchasing them Respect I might also cite Beza himself to this purpose in his Letter to Iohn Knox dated Geneva April 12. 1572 wherein he Congratulates heartily the happy and Vnited state of the Church of Scotland Perhaps it might be no difficult task to adduce more Testimonies But the truth is no man can Read the Histories and Monuments of these times without being convinced that this is true and that there cannot be a falser proposition than That Prelacy was such a Grievance then or so contrary to the Inclinations of the Generality of the People Further even in succeeding times even after it was Condemnd by that Assembly 1580 it cannot be proven that it was such a Grievance to the Nation 'T is true indeed some Hot-headed Presbyterian Preachers endeavoured all they could to possess the People with ane opinion of its Antichristianism forsooth and that it was a Brat of the Whore a Limb of Popery and what not But all this time no account of the Inclinations of the Generality of the People against it On the contrary nothing more evident in History even Calderwoods History than that there was no such thing Is it not obviously observable even in that History that after the Civil Government took some 12 or 14 of the most forward of these Brethren who kept the pretended Assembly at Aberdeen Anno 1605 a little Roundly to Task and some 6 or 8 more were called by the King to attend his will at London all things went very peaceably in Scotland Was not Episcopacy restored by the General Assembly at Glasgow Anno 1610 with very great Unanimity Of more than ane hundred and seventy voices there were only five Negative and seven Non liquet Nay Calderwood himself hath recorded that even these Ministers who went to London after their return submitted peaceably to the then Established Prelacy And there are few things more observable in his Book than his Grudge that there should have been such a General Defection from the good Cause Indeed I have not observed no not in his History that there were six in all the Kingdom who from the Establishment of Episcopacy Anno 1610. did not attend at Synods and submit to their Ordinaries I do not remember any except two Calderwood himself and one Iohnston at Ancrum and even these two pretended other Reasons than Scruple of Conscience for their withdrawing It is further observable that the Stirs which were made after the Assembly at Perth Anno 1618. were not pretended to be upon the account of Episcopacy Those of the Gang could not prevail it seems with the Generality of the People to tumultuate on that account All that was pretended were the Perth Articles Neither did the Humour against these Articles prevail much or far all the time King Iames lived nor for the first twelve years of King Charles his Son and Successor It fell asleep as it were till the Clamours against the Liturgy and Book of Canons awakened it Anno 1637 And all that time I mean from the year 1610 that Episcopacy was restored till the year 1637 that the Covenanting work was set on foot Prelacy was so far from being a great and insupportable Grievance and Trouble to this Nation and contrary to the Inclinations of the Generality of the People that on the contrary it was not only Generally submitted to but in very good esteem Indeed it is certain the Nation had never more Peace more concord more plenty more profound quiet and prosperity than in that Interval Let no man reckon of these things as naked Assertions I can prove them And hereby I undertake with Gods allowance and assistance to prove all I have said and more if I shall be put to it But I think my cause requires not that it should be done at present Nay further yet I don't think it were ane insuperable task if I should undertake to maintain that when the Covenanting Politick was set on foot Anno 1637. Prelacy was no such Grievance to the Nation This I am sure of it was not the Contrariety of the Generality of the Peoples Inclinations to Prelacy that first gave life and motion to that Monstrous Confederation Sure I am it was pretty far advanced before the Leading Confederates offered to fix on Prelacy as one of their Reasons for it So very sure that it is easy to make it appear that they were affraid of nothing more than that the Generality of the People should smell it out that they had designs to overturn Episcopacy How often did they Protest to the Marquis of Hamilton then the Kings Commissioner that their meaning was not to Abolish Episcopal Government How frank were they to tell those whom they were earnest to Cajole into their Covenant that they might very well swear it without prujudice to Episcopacy Nay how forward were the Presbyterian Ministers themselves to propagate this pretence When the Doctors of Aberdeen told the Three who were sent to that City to procure subscriptions that they could not swear the Covenant because Episcopacy was abjured in it Are not these Hendersons and Dicksons very words in their Answer to the fourth Reply You will have all the Covenanters against their intention and whither they will or not to disallow and condemn the Articles of Perth and Episcopal Government But it is known to many hundreds that the words were purposely conceived for satisfaction of such as were of your Iugment that we might all joyn in one Heart and Covenant Many more things might be readily adduced to prove this more fully But 't is needless for what can be more fairly colligible from any thing than it is from this Specimen that it was their fear that they might miss of their mark and not get the people to joyn with them in their Covenant if it should be so soon discovered that they aim'd at the overthrow of Episcopacy 'T is true indeed after they had by such disingenuous and Iesuitish Fetches gain'd numbers to their party and got many well-meaning Ministers and
of a sense they had of the Necessity of the Ecclesiastical Estate Now 't is to be Remembred that those who appeared for the Queen were Protestants as well as these who were for her Son No Man I think will deny but the subsistence of the Ecclesiastical Estate and their Vote in Parliament was confirmed and continued by the Agreement of Leith Anno 1572. Indeed When the Project for Parity amongst the Officers of the Church was set on Foot by Melvil Anno 1575 and some of the Clergy were gained to his side and they were using their utmost endeavours to have Episcopacy overturned it seems this was a main difficulty to them a difficulty which did very much entangle and retard their purpose This I say that the overturning Prelacy was the overturning one of the three Estates of Parliament This is evident not only from Boyd Arch Bishop of Glasgow his Discourse to the General Assembly Anno 1576. mentioned before but also from the two Letters I have often named which were written to Mr. Beza the one by the Lord Glamis Anno 1576 or 1577 the other by Mr. Melvil Anno 1579. Because they contribute so much light to the matter in hand I shall once more resume them Glamis was then Chancellor of Scotland It is manifest he wrote not indeliberately or without advice Undoubtedly he stated the Question according to the sense the Generality of People had then of it Now he states it thus Seeing every Church hath its own Pastor and the Power of Pastors in the Church of Christ seems to be equal The Question is whither the Office of Bishops be Necessary in the Church for convocating these Pastors when there is need for Ordaining Pastors and for Deposing them for just Causes Or whither it be better that the Pastors Acting in Parity and subject to no Superiour Bishop should choose Qualified Men for the Ministery with consent of the Patron and the People and Censure and Depose c. For Retaining Bishops we have these two Motives One is the stubbornenss and ungovernableness of the People which cannot possibly be kept within Bounds if they are not over-awed by the Authority of these Bishops in their visitations The other is that such is the constitution of the Monarchy which hath obtain'd time out of mind that as often as the Parliament meets for consulting about things pertaining to the safety of the Republick nothing can be determined without the Bishops who make the Third Estate of the Kingdom which to change or subvert would be extremely perilous to the Kingdom So he from which we may learn two things The First is a farther confirmation of what I have before asserted to have been the sentiment of these times concerning the Election of Pastors namely that it was that they should be Elected by the Clergy and that the People should have no other Power than that of Consenting The other is pat in Relation to our present business namely that the Ecclesiastical Estate was judged Necessary by the constitution of the Monarchy It could not be wanting in Parliaments It was to run the hazard of subverting the constitution to think of altering it or turning it out of doors And Melvil's Letter is clearly to the same purpose We have not ceased these five years to fight against Pseudepiscopacy many of the Nobility resisting us and to press the severity of Discipline We have presented unto his Royal Majesty and three Estates of the Realm both before and now in this Parliament the form of Discipline to be insert amongst the Acts and to be confirmed by publick Authority We have the Kings mind bended towards us too far said I am sure if we may take that Kings own word for it but many of the Peers against us For they alledge if Pseudepiscopacy be taken away one of the Estates is pulled down If Presbyteries be erected the Royal Majesty is diminished c. 'T is true Melvil himself here shews no great kindness for the third Estate But that 's no great matter It was his humor to be singular All I am concerned for is the publick sentiment of the Nation especially the Nobility which we have so plain for the Necessity of the Ecclesiastical Estate that nothing can be plainer Nay So indisputable was it then that this Ecclesiastical Estate was absolutely necessary by the constitution that the Presbyterians themselves never called it in Question never offered to advance such a Paradox as that it might be abolished After they had abolished Episcopacy by their Assembly 1580 the King sent several times to them telling them He could not want one of his three Estates How would they provide him with ane Ecclesiastical Estate now that they had abolished Bishops Whoso pleases to Read Calderwood himself shall find this point frequently insisted on What returns gave they Did they ever in the least offer to return that the having ane Ecclesiastical Estate in Parliament was a Popish Corruption That it was ane unwarrantable constitution That it was not Necessary Or that the constitution might be iâ—â—ire enough without it No such thing entered their thoughts On the contrary they were still clear for maintaining it They had no inclination to part with such a valuable Right of the Church Their Answer to the Kings Demands was still one and the same They were not against Churchmens having vote in Parliament But none ought to vote in name of the Church without Commission from the Church And this their sentiment they put in the very Second Book of Discipline for these are word for word the seventeenth and eighteenth Articles of the eleventh Chapter 17. We deny not in the mean time that Ministers MAY and SHOVLD assist their Princes when they are required in all things agreeable to the word of God whither it be in Council or Parliament or out of Council Providing always they neither neglect their own charges nor through slattery of Princes hurt the publick Estate of the Kirk 18. But generally we say that no Pastor under whatsoâ—ver Title of the Kirk and specially the abused Titles in Popery of Prelates Chapters and Convents ought to attempt any thing in the Churches name either in Parliament or out of Council without the Commission of the Reformed Kirk within this Realm And It was concluded in the Assembly holden at Dundee March 7. 1598. That it was NECESSARY and EXPEDIENT for the well of the Kirk that the Ministery as the third Estate of this Realm in name of the Church have vote in Parliament So indubitable was it in these times that the Ecclesiastical Estate was necessary and that it could not be wanting without the notorious subversion of the constitution of Parliaments Indeed it was not only the sentiment of General Assemblies whatever side whither the Prelatical or the Presbyterian prevailed but it was likewise the sentiment of all Parliaments It were easy to amass a great many Acts of a great many Parliaments to