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
First Book of Discipline Head 9. We think necessary that every Church have a Bible in English and that the People conveen to hear the Scriptures Read and Interpreted that by frequent Reading and Hearing the gross ignorance of the People may be removed And we judge it most expedient that the Scriptures be read in order that is that some one Book of the Old and New Testament be begun and followed forth to the end For a good many years after the Reformation there was ane order of men called Readers who supplyed the want of Ministers in many Parishes Their Office was to Read the Scriptures and the Common Prayers The Scriptures continued to be Read in Churches for more than eighty years after the Reformation In many Parishes the old Bibles are still extant from which the Scriptures were Read Even the Directory it self introduced not before the year 1645. appointed the Scriptures to be Read publickly in Churches one Chapter out of each Testament at least every Sunday before Sermon as being part of the publick worship of God and one meanâ— Sanctified by him for the Edifying of his People Yet now what a Scandal would it be to have the Scriptures Read in the Presbyterian Churches The last days Sermons taken from the mouth of the powerful Preacher by the inspired singers of Godly George or Gracious Barbara in some Churches of no mean Note have been Deem'd more Edifying than the Divine Oracles The Scriptures must not be touched but by the Man of God who can interpret them And he must Read no more than he is just then to interpret What shall I say Let Protestant Divines Cant as they please about the Perspicuity of the Scriptures 't is a dangerous thing to have them Read publickly without Orthodox Glosses to keep them close and true to the principles of the Godly And who knows but it might be expedient to wrap them up again in the unknown tongue But enough of this 2. As for Sermons c. The First Book of Discipline gives us the sentiment of our Reformers thus The Sunday in all Towns must precisely be observed before and after noon before noon the word must be Preached Sacraments Administred c. After noon the Catechism must be taught and the young Children examined thereupon in audience of all the People This continued the manner of the Church of Scotland for full twenty years after the Reformation For I find no mention of afternoons Sermons till the year 1580 that it was enacted by that same General Assembly which Condemned Episcopacy That all Pastors or Ministers should Diligently travel with their Flocks to conveen unto Sermon after noon on Sunday Both they that are in Landward and in Burgh as they will answer unto God The whole Kingdom knows Lectures before the forenoons Sermon were not introduced till the days of the Covenant and Directory Yet now a mighty stress is laid upon them and I my self have been told that they were one good Reason for forsaking the Episcopal Communion where they were not used and going over to the Presbyterians where they were to be had I am not to condemn a diligent instruction of the People But to speak freely I am very much perswaded the Method of our Reformers in having but one Sermon and Catechising after noon was every way as effectual for Instructing the People in the substantial knowledge of our Holy Religion and pressing the practice of it as any method has been in use since Much more might be said on this subject But from what I have said 't is plain there is a great Dissimilitude between our Modern Presbyterian and our Reformers even in this point and that is enough for my purpose 4. They have as little stuck by the Pattern of our Reformers in the Office of Praise Our Reformers beside the Psalms of David had and used several other Hymns in Metre They had the Ten Commandments the Lords Prayer the Creed Veni Creator the humble suit of a sinner the Lamentation of a sinner the Complaint of a sinner the Magnificat the Nunc Dimittis c. They never used to conclude their Psalms without some Christian Doxology The Gloria Patri was most generally used In the old Psalm Book it is turn'd into all the different kinds of Measures into which the Psalms of David are put that it might still succeed in the conclusion without changing the Tune It was so generally used that as Doctor Burnet in his Second Conference tells us even a Presbyterian General took it in very ill part when it begun to be disused Yet now nothing in use with our present Presbyterians but the Psalms of David and these too for the most part without Discrimination The Gloria Patri recovered from Desuetude at the last Restitution of Episcopacy and generally used in the Episcopal Assemblies these thirty years past was a Mighty Scandal to them So great that even such as came to Church hang'd their Heads and sate silent generally when it came to that part of the Office Having mentioned Doctor Burnet's Conferences I will transcribe his whole Period because some other things than the Gloria Patri are concerned in it When some Designers says he for popularity in the Western Parts of that Kirk did begin to disuse the Lord Prayer in worship and the singing the conclusion or Doxologie after the Psalm and the Ministers kneeling for Private Devotion when he entered the Pulpit the General Assembly took this in very ill part And in the Letter they wrote to the Presbyteries complained sadly of a Spirit of Innovation was beginning to get into the Kirk and to throw these Laudible practices out of it mentioning the three I named which are commanded still to be practiced and such as refused Obedience are appointed to be conferred with in order to the giving of them satisfaction And if they continued untractable the Presbyteries were to proceed against them as they should be answerable to the next General Assembly Thus he and this Letter he said he could produce Authentically Attested I doubt not he found it amongst his Uncle Waristown's Papers who was Scribe to the Rampant Assemblies from the year 1638 and downward I wish the Doctor had been at pains to have published more of them If he had imployed himself that way I am apt to think he had done his Native Countrey better service than he has done her Sister Kingdom by publishing Pastoral Letters to be used he knows how But even from what he has given us We may see how much the disusing of the Lords Prayer and the Doxologie is a late Innovation as well as a Recession from the Pattern of our Reformers And as for the decent and Laudable custom of kneeling for private Devotion used by the Minister when he entered the Pulpit It may be reckoned 5. Another Presbyterian late Recession It is certain it was used by our Reformers It is as certain it continued in use till
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
was such a Fool as to stumble upon the same Methods himself condemn'd most in his Adversaries when he had any Matter of Fact to Attest He was very careful as he tells frequently to have his particular informations from all Corners concerning all the Instances of Rabbling which were represented in the Prelatick Pamphlets But from whom had he these Informations mostly From the very Rabblers themselves It were both tedious and unprofitable to trace him through all instances One may be sufficient for ane example And I shall choose the very first that is to be found in his Book viz. That of Master Gabriel Russel Minister at Govean The Author of the Second Letter had given a brief and a just Account of the Treatment that poor Gentleman had met with And G. R. convels it thus To this I oppose says he The Truth of the Story as it is attested by the Subscriptions of Nine Persons who were present i. e. Nine of the Rabblers for so Mr. Russel himself assured me repeating over these very names which G. R. has in his Book And is not this a pleasant Attestation Is it not pleasant I say to rely upon the Testimony of such barbarous Villains and take their own word for their own Vindication Yet there 's one thing a great deal more pleasant yet in the Story The Author of the Second Letter had affirmed that Mr. Russel was beaten by the Rabble But they the nine whom he adduces utterly deny That any of them did beat him And 't is true indeed none of these nine did beat him but 't is as true that he was beaten And one Iames Colâ—uhoun was the person who did it and therefore his Name was concealed and not set down with the other nine And now I refer it to the Reader if it is not probable that he has got a parcel of sweet History from G. R. in his Second Vindication But I go on As he thus adduced the Rabble witnessing for themselves so when he was put to it he never stood on adducing the Testimonies of single Presbyterian Ministers witnessing for the Honesty and Integrity of the Rabblers or in opposition to the Prelatical Relations Thus In White 's Case p. 32. he adduces five Men testifying that the Accounts of White 's Sufferings were false c. And for the Honesty of these five he tells us They have all their Testimony from their Minister that they are credible and famous Witnesses And P. 105. He rejects Bullo's account who was Episcopal Minister at Stobo in one word thus In this Narrative are many Lies which is attested by Mr. William Russel Presbyterian Minister at Stobo But the best is After he had run down all the Prelatical Accounts by this Upright Dealing of his and concluded them all most horrid Liers and Calumniators and all their Relations most horrid Lies and Calumnies He tells you gravely in his Preface § 6. That the Truth of Matters of Fact asserted in his Book is not to be taken from him but from his Informers That he pretends to personal Knowledge of few of them That therefore not his Veracity but theirs is pledged for the Truth of the Accounts he has published That if they have deceived him or been deceived themselves he is not to Answer for it Let the World judge if this was not a sure foot for supporting such Superstructures as he rais'd upon it and if his Second Vindication is not a pleasant Book Was it possible for him to have Farced it with more bare-faced Iniquities What picqu'd the Man so at his own Book as to publish it with so many fair Evidences of Disingenuity Partiality Effrontery and Downright Ridiculousness about it What could move him to treat his own Brat with so little compassion Was not this even in a Literal sense Male Natum exponere foetum Or rather what meant he by treating himself so unmercifully For who sees not that all the Infamy terminates on the Author in the Rebound But perchance now that he is a profound Philosophick Head of a Colledge he may fall on a way to distinguish between his own and his Books Credit Perchance he may think his own Credit secure enough whatever hazard his Books may run Well! He may try it if he will but I would advise him not to be rash in falling out so with the Book For as sorry a Book as it is yet I perceive that with the assistance of a Neighbour Book it can serve him a Trick that may be sufficient to put even his impudent self a little out of Countenance I 'll be so kind to him as to let him see where the Danger lies He may remember That the Author of the Second Letter which by the most probable Calculation I can make was written in December 1689 or Ianuary 1690. endeavoured to make it appear as probable That the Leading Men in Government were then very much inclined to Iustify the Expulsion of the Clergy by the Rabble and sustain their Churches vacuated by that Expulsion and thereby cut off these poor Men from all hopes of being restored to their Churches or Livings tho they had neither been Convicted of any Crime nor Deprived by any Sentence Now There 's another Book called Ane Account of the Late Establishment of Presbyterian Government by the Parliament Anno 1690. which gives a full and fair Account how the thing was actually Done how the Expulsion of the Clergy by the Rabble was actually Iustified by that same Act of Parliament which established Presbyterian Government If G. R. has not seen that Book or is resolved to reject its Testimony because probably written by a Party I can refer him to the Universal Conviction of the whole Nation that such a thing was Done by that Act of Parliament Nay I can refer him to the Act of Parliament it self That Book tells also a shrewd story concerning a Presbyterian Minister called Mr. Gilbert Rule who preached a Sermon before the Parliament on the 25 of May being the Sunday before the Act was Voted in the House And before he published it wrote a Preface to it after the Act was Voted in which he thanked the House very heartily for Voting such ane Act And if G. R. distrusts that Book I refer him to Mr. Rule s printed Preface to his Sermon where I am confident he may find satisfaction Nay I dare appeal to G. R. himself if he knew not all these things to be true before he wrote one Syllable of his Second Vindication For these things were transacted every one of them before the middle of Iune 1690 and his Second Vindication came not abroad till more than a year after Well! But what of all this how can this assist G. R.'s Book against himself if it should be irritated to serve him a Trick Why turn over to p. 43 44 c. and consider how it discovers in him such a Brawny Impudence as never Ghost appearing in humane shape was guilty
of before him For Tho the Letter-man was fully justified by the Event tho what he said seem'd to be intended by the Government appear'd undeniably to have been intended by them in the Execution tho they Iustified the Expulsion of the Clergy by the Rabble as plainly and positively as ane Act of Parliament could do it So plainly and positively that the whole Nation was sensible of it and cried shame upon it That some Members in the very time resented it highly calling it ane indelible Reproach upon the Justice of the Nation That many Members to this very minute will frankly acknowledge there was never greater or more notorious iniquity established by a Law Tho G. R. knew it so well and was so much pleased with it that he thanked the Parliament with all his Soul for it telling them He and his Party were filled with Ioy while they beheld the Religious Regard which the High and Honourable Court of Parliament had shewed to the Mountain of the Lords House above other Mountains in the Great Step towards the Establishing thereof that they had made by their Vote Whereof that Justification of the Rabble was a great part Tho he prayed That the Lord would reward them for their good Deeds whereof this was one towards his House Tho all these things were and are clear as the Light and uncontroulable as Matter of Fact can be yet G. R. lasht the Letter-man till he had almost flea'd him made him a Railer one who Vnderstood no Logick a Strainer at Silly Quibbles one who had ane Extraordinary Dose of Brow and whose Wit was a Wool gathering c. And all this for telling this plain Truth That the Government had a design to Justify the Expulsion of the Clergy by the Rabble Thus I think I have made it appear how little tender G. R. was even of his own beloved self when he was straitned in his Argument I might have easily adduced more Instances but the Truth is I am now very weary of him and he himself has done himself the Justice to represent himself to any Mans Satisfaction who shall not be satisfied with the Representation I have given of him For he hath fairly own'd that he sets himself in opposition to those whom he acknowledges to be the Soberest and Wisest of his party I don't love to be unjust to him I 'le give it you in his own words as I find them 1 Vind. Ans. to Quest. 5. § 6. He was complaining of the Persecutions his Party had met with for keeping Conventicles c. And amongst other things he discourses thus There might have been some shadow for such severity against Meeting at Field-Conventicles with Arms tho even that was in some Cases necessary but that was always disallowed by the Soberest and Wisest Presbyterians Now t is plain there are here these two Affirmatives 1. That Meeting with Arms at Field Conventicles was in some Cases necessary This is our Authors sentiment 2. That Meeting with Arms at Field Conventicles was always disallowed by the Soberest and Wisest Presbyterians This I say he plainly affirms to have been always the sentiment of the Soberest and Wisest By Consequence are not both these Affirmatives joyned together Eâ—â—â—pollent to this Complexe Proposition Tho the Soberest and Wisest Presbyterians did always disallow of Meeting with Arms c. Yet in my Iudgment it was sometimes necessary And now have you not from his own Friendly self a Fair Demonstration of his own Folly and Futility For who but a Futile Fool would have said that he differed in his Sentiments from the Soberest and Wisest And now to bring all home to my Original purpose By this time I think I have given Reason enough for my refusing to accept of him for ane Answerer of my Book No Man on Earth I think would willingly enter the Lists with one who is so singular for four such Cardinal Talents Tho Incureable Ignorance and Incorrigible Nonsence may be something pitiable as being the Vices of Nature rather than Choice yet 't is no small Persecution for one to be obliged to grapple with them What must it be then to be committed with the other two Rank Ill-nature I mean and the most stubborn Impudence Some Ill Natures may be cured Men may be either cajol'd or cudgel'd out of them Agelastus himself laught once so did Duke D Alva But what hopes can there be of one whose Common Sense is so intrinsecally vitiated that he can avouch the coursest and most Scurrilous Scolding to be Excessive Civility But this is not the worst of it If there had been any thing Venust or Lepid any shadow of Concinnity or Festivity of Iollity or Good Humor any thing like Art or Life or Wit or Salt in any One of Fifty of his Excessive Civilities if they had had the least Tincture of the Satyre nay if their Mein had resembled so much as the Murgeons of ane Ape I could have pardonâ—d him and let his Talent pass for Tolerable There is something delightful in Marvelism in well humor'd wantonness in lively and judicious Drollery There may be some Enormous Strokes of Beauty in a surprizing Banter some irregular Sweetness in a well cook't Bitterness But who can think on drinking nothing but Corrupted Vinegar What humane patience can be hardy enough for entering the Lists with pure Barking and Whining with Original â—ullness who can think on Arming himself against the Horns of a Snaiâ— or setting a Match for Mewing with a Melancholy Cat But What can be said of his Impudence his Master-Talent Why to tell Truth of it I am not able to define it and so I must let it alone I know nothing in Nature like it 'T is too hard for all the Idea's or words I am Master of Were I to talk any more of it I should design it his Vndefineable Attribute And now I think our Author may be sensible that it is not a good thing to cast a bad Copy to the world lest some for Curiosity try if they can imitate it For my part I do acknowledge that I have crossed my temper to make an Experiment if it was possible to be Even with him To let him see that others as well as he if they set themselves for it may aim at least at Arguing the Case Cuttingly as he phrases it Pref. to 2 Vind. § 6. One thing I am sure of I have been faithful in my Citations from his Books And I am not conscious that I have so much as once forced ane Vnnatural sense on his words For this I am satisfied that what I have said be tried with the greatest and most impartial Accuracy But if he is such ane Author as I have truly represented him to be I hope the world will allow that I had and still have Reason to refuse to have any Dealing with him Nay farther I think 't is nothing for the Honour or Reputation of his Party that he was ever imployed to
Trusts and Offices as the Clergy did then and they are satisfied And now if these Reformers who thus petitioned and in their Petition thus reasoned and agreed to such a Rule of Reformation were for the divine institution of Parity and the sacred Rights of Presbytery nay if they were not not only for the Lawfulness but the Continuance of Prelacy I must confess my ignorance to be very gross and so I refuse not Correction For this Evidence as I said we are beholden to Knox and to Knox only 'T is true indeed Calderwood gives us the Abstract of this Petition but he conceals and suppresses the whole pith and marrow of this Article summing it up in these few ill-complexion'd words That the slanderous and detestable life of the Prelates and the State Ecclesiastical may be reformed which at first view one would imagin lookt kindly towards Presbytery but I am not surprized to find him thus at his Tricks 't is but according to his Custom To have set down the full Article or to have abridged it so as that its force and purpose might have been seen had been to disserve his Cause and do ane ill Office to his Idol Parity And Petrie as I have said was so wise as not to touch it at all lest it had burnt his Fingers but that Archbishop Spotswood should have overlookt it both in his History and in his Refutatio Libelli c. seems very strange For my part I should rather think we have not his History intire and as he design'd it for the Press for which I have heard other very pregnant presumptions than that so great a man was guilty of so great ane Oscitancy But whatever be of this Knox has it and that is enough and Calderwood has abridged it and that 's more than enough for my Presbyterian Brethren The Third Petition which I promised to adduce is that which was presented to the Parliament which established the Reformation Anno 1560. for which we are obliged to Knox alone also at least so far as the present Argument is concerned For tho both Spotswood and Petrie make mention of the Petition or Supplication yet neither of them has recorded that which I take notice of and Calderwood is so accurate ane Historian as to take no notice of the Petition That which I take notice of in it as it is in Knox is That when our Reformers came to crave the Reformation of the Ecclesiastical State they bespoke the Parliament thus And lest that your Honours should doubt in any of the premisses they had affirmed before That the Doctrine of the Roman Church contained many pestiferous errors that the Sacraments of Jesus Christ were most shamefully abused and profaned by the Roman Harlot that the true Discipline of the antient Church amongst that Sect was utterly extinguisht and that the Clergy of all men within the Realm were most corrupt in life and manners c. we offer our selves evidently to prove that in all the Rabble of the Clergy there is not one Lawful Minister IF GODS WORD THE PRACTICES OF THE APOSTLES THE SINCERITY OF THE PRIMITIVE CHVRCH AND THEIR OWN ANCIENT LAWS SHALL IVDGE OF THE ELECTION Here I say our Reformers insist on that same very Rule for finding if there be Corruptions in and by consequence for reforming of the Church on which they insisted in the aforementioned Petition from which 't is evident they persisted of the same sentiments and 't is easy to draw the same inferences Such were the sentiments of our Scottish Reformers before the Reformed Religion had the countenance of the Civil Government and Acts of Parliament on its side and was made the National Religion Let us try next what kind of Government they did establish when they had got Law for them Whither they established a Government that was to be managed by Ministers acting in Parity or in Imparity And here I think the Controversy might very soon be brought to a very fair issue The First Book of Discipline the Acts of many General Assemblies the Acts of many Parliaments Both without interruption the unanimous Consent of Historians and the uncontroverted Practice of the Church for many years all concurring to this Assertion That the first Establishment was of a Government which was to be managed by Superintendents and Parochial Ministers Elders and Deacons acting in Subordination not in a State of Parity with but in a State of inferiority in Power and Iurisdiction to these Superintendents This Establishment I say is so clear and undoubted from all these fountains That no more needed be said upon the whole Argument But because our Presbyterian Historians and Antiquaries tho they cannot deny the thing do yet endeavor with all their Might and Cunning to intricate it and obscure it I shall further undertake two things I. I shall give the world a fair prospect of the power of Superintendents as they were then established and of the Disparities betwixt them and Parish Ministers II. I shall endeavour to dissipate these Mists whereby our Presbyterian Brethren are so very earnest to involve and darken this Matter As for the I. The world may competently see that Superintendents as established in Scotland at the Reformation had a considerable stock of Prerogatives or Preheminencies call them as ye will which raised them far above other Churchmen far above the allowances of that Parity our Presbyterian Brethren contend for so eagerly from the following Enumeration 1. They had Districts or Diocesses of far larger extent than other Churchmen Private Ministers had only their private Parishes and might have been as many as there were Churches in the Kingdom But according to the Scheme laid down by our Reformers in the First Book of Discipline Head 5. only ten or twelve Superintendents were design'd to have the Chief Care as it is worded in the Prayer at the Admission of a Superintendent of all the Churches within the Kingdom Indeed ten are only there design'd but it was because of the scarcity of qualified men as we shall learn hereafter 2. As they had larger Districts than Parish Ministers so there were correspondent Specialities in their Election Parish Ministers were to enter to such Churches as had Benefices by presentation from the Patron and Collation from the Superintendent as is evident from Act 7. Parl. 1. Iam. 6. and many Acts of Assemblies as shall be fully proven afterward If they were to serve where the Benefice was actually possessed by a Papist they were to be chosen by the People of the Congregation by the appointment of the First Book of Discipline Head 4. But the Election of Superintendents was quite different they were to be nominated by the Council and elected by the Nobility and Gentry c. within their Dioceses as hath been already considered 3. There was as great a difference in the matter of Deposition if they deserved it Parish Ministers by the First Book of Discipline Head 8.
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
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
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
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
the late Revolution should be lookt upon as undone and that the settlement of the Church should again depend upon a new free unclogg'd unprelimited unover awed Meeting of Estates I am very much perswaded that a plain candid impartial and ingenuous Resolution of these few Questions might go very far in the Decision of this present Controversie And yet after all this labour spent about it I must confess I do not reckon it was in true value worth threeteen sentences As perchance may appear in part within a little And so I proceed to The Fifth Enquiry Whither supposing the Affirmatives in the proceeding Enquiries had been true they would have been of sufficient force to infer the Conclusion advanced in the Articles viz. that Prelacy c. ought to be Abolished THe Affirmatives are these two 1. That Prelacy was a great and Insupportable Grievance c. 2. That this Church was Reformed by Presbyters The purpose of this Enquiry is to try if these were good Reasons for the Abolition of Prelacy without further Address I think they were not Not the First viz. Prelacy's being a great and insupportable Grievance and Trouble to this Nation and contrary to the Inclinations of the Generality of the People Sure I am 1. Our Presbyterian Brethren had not this way of Reasoning from our Reformers For I remember Iohn Knox in his Letter to the Queen Regent of Scotland rejected it with sufficient appearances of Keenness and Contempt He called it a Fetch of the Devils to blind Peoples eyes with such a Sophism To make them look on that Religion as most perfect which the Multitude by wrong custom have embraced or to insinuate that it is impossible that that Religion should be false which so long time so many Councils and so great a Multitude of men have Authorized and confirmed c. For says he if the opinion of the Multitude ought always to be preferred then did God injury to the Original world For they were all of one mind to wit conjured against God except Noah and his family And I have shewed already that the Body of our Reformers in all their Petitions for Reformation made the word of God the Practices of the Apostles the Catholick Sentiments and Principles of the Primitive Church c. and not the inclinations of the People the Rule of Reformation Nay 2. G. R. himself is not pleased with this Standard He not only tells the world That Presbyterians wished and endeavoured that that Phrase might not have been used as it was But he ridicules it in his first Vindication in Answer to the tenth Question thoâ— he made himself ridiculous by doing it as he did it The Matter is this The Author of the ten Questions finding that this Topick of the inclinations of the People was insisted on in the Article as ane Argument for Abolishing Prelacy undertook to Demonstrate that tho' it were a good Argument it would not be found to conclude as the Formers of the Article intended Aiming unquestionably at no more than that it was not true that Prelacy was such a great and insupportable Grievance c. and to make good his undertaking He formed his Demonstration as I have already accounted Now hear G. R. It is a new Topick says he not often used before that such a way of Religion is best because c. This his Discourse will equally prove that Popery is preferable to Protestantism For in France Italy Spain c. not the Multitude only but all the Churchmen c. are of that way Thus I say G. R. ridiculed the Argument tho' he most ridiculously fancied he was ridiculing his Adversary who never dream'd that it was a good Argument But could have been as ready to ridicule it as another However I must confess G. R. did indeed treat the Argument justly For 3. Supposing the Argument good I cannot see how any Church could ever have Reformed from Popery For I think when Luther began in Germany or Mr. Patrick Hamilton in Scotland or Zuinglius or Oecolompadius or Calvin c. in their respective Countreys and Churches they had the inclinations of the People generally against them Nay if I mistake not our Saviour and his Apostles found it so too when they at first undertook to propagate our Holy Religion and perchance tho' the Christian Religion is now Generally Professed in most Nations in Europe some of them might be soon Rid of it if this Standard were allowed to take place I have heard of some who have not been well pleased with Saint Paul for having the word Bishop so frequently in his Language and I remember to have been told that one not ane Vnlearn'd one in a Conference being prest with a Testimony of Irenaeus's in his 3 Cap. 3 Lib. Adversus Her for ane uninterrupted Succession of Bishops in the Church of Rome from the Apostles times at first denyed confidently that any such thing was to be found in Irenaeus and when the Book was produced and he was convinced by ane ocular Demonstration that Irenaeus had the Testimony which was alleged he delivered himself to this purpose I see it is there Brother but would to God it had not been there Now had these People who were thus offended with St. Paul and Irenaeus been at the writing of their Books is it probable we should have had them with their Imprimatur as we have them Indeed for my part I shall never consent that the Bible especially the New Testament be Reformed according to some Peoples inclinations For if that should be allowed I should be very much affraid there would be strange cutting and carving I should be very much affraid that the Doctrine of self-preservation should justle out the Doctrine of the Cross That Might should find more favour than Right that the Force and Power should possess themselves of the places of the Faith and Patience of the Saints and that beside many other places we might soon see our last of at least the first seven verses of the 13 th Chapter to the Romans I shall only add one thing more which G. R.'s naming of France gave me occasion to think on It is that the French King and his Ministers as much as some People talk of their Abilities must for all that be but of the ordinary Size of Mankind For if they had been as wise and thinking men as some of their Neighbours they might have easily stopt all the mouths that were opened against them some years ago for their Persecuting the Protestants in that Kingdom For if they had but narrated in ane Edict that the Religion of the Hugonots was and had still been a great and insupportable Grievance and Trouble to their Nation and contrary to the Inclinations of the Generality of the People ever since it was Professed amongst them their work was done I believe G. R. himself would not have called the Truth of the Proposition in Question How easy were it to
Majesty to suppress such as fight against his Glory Albeit that both NATURE and GODS MOST PERFECT ORDINANCE REPUGNE to such Regiment More plainly to speak If Queen Elizabeth shall Confess that the EXTRAORDINARY DISPENSATION of Gods great Mercy makes that LAWFUL unto HER which both NATURE and GODS LAW do DENY unto all Women Then shall none in England be more willing to maintain her Lawful Authority than I shall be But if GODS WONDROUS WORK set aside She ground as God forbid the justness of her Title upon Consuetude Laws and Ordinances of Men then I am assured that as such foolish presumption doth highly offend Gods Supreme Majesty so I greatly fear that her Ingratitude shall not long lack punishment This was pretty fair but it was not enough He thought it proper to write to that Queen her self and give her a Dish of that same Doctrine His Letter is dated at Edenburg Iuly 29. 1559. In which having told her He never intended by his Book to assert any thing that might be prejudicial to her Iust Regiment providing she were no◠found Unfaithful to God he bespeaks her thus Ingrate you will be found in the presence of his Throne if you transfer the Glory of that Honour in which you now stand to any other thing than the DISPENSATION of his Mercy which ONLY maketh that Lawful to your Majesty which NATURE and LAW denyeth to all Women to command and bear Rule over Men In Conscience I am compelled to say that neither the consent of People the Process of time nor Multitude of Men can Establish a Law which God shall approve but whatsoever he approveth by his Eternal word that shall be approved and stay constantly firm And whatsoever he Condemneth shall be Condemned tho' all Men on Earth should travel for the justification of the same And therefore Madam The only way to retain and keep the Benefits of God abundantly of late days poured upon you and your Realm is unfeignedly to render unto God to his Mercy and undeserved Grace the whole Glory of all this your Exaltation Forget your BIRTH and all TITLE which thereupon doth hang It pertaineth to you to ground the JUSTICE of your Authority not on that LAW which from year to year doth change but upon the ETERNAL PROVIDENCE of him who CONTRARY to the ORDINARY course of NATURE and without your deserving hath exalted your Head If thus in Gods presence you humble your self I will with Tongue and Pen justify your Authority and Regiment as the Holy Ghost hath justified the same in Deborah that Blessed Mother in Israel But if you neglect as God forbid these things and shall begin to Brag of your Birth and to Build your Authority and your Regiment upon your own Law flatter you who so listeth your Felicity shall be short c. Let Contentious People put what Glosses they please on Bishop Overal's Convocation Book sure I am here is the Providential Right so plainly taught that no Glosses can obscure it Here it is maintain'd in plain terms and Resolutely in opposition to all the Laws not only of Men but of God and Nature Thus I have given a taste of such principles as the Prelatists in Scotland profess they disown tho' maintain'd by our Reformers It had been easy to have instanced in many more But these may be sufficient for my purpose which was not in the least to throw dirt on our Reformers to whom I am as willing as any man to pay a due reverence but to stop the mouth of impertinent clamour and 〈◊〉 the world have occasion to consider if it is such a scandalous thing to think otherwise than our Reformers thought as our Brethren endeavour on all occasions to perswade the populace For these principles of our Reformers which I have mentioned in Relation to Civil Governments are the principles in which we have most forsaken them And let the world judge which set of principles has most of Scandal in it Let the world judge I say whither their principles or ours participate most of the Faith the Patience the Self-denyal c. of Christians Whither principles have least of the love of the world and most of the image of Christ in them Whither principles have greatest affinity with the principles and practices of the Apostles and their immediate successors in the most afflicted and by consequence the most incorrupted times of Christianity Whither principles have a more natural tendency towards the security of Governments and the peace of Societies and seem most effectual for advancing the power of Godliness and propagating the Profession and the life of Christianity I further subjoyn these two things 1. I challenge our Presbyterian Brethren to convict us of the Scandal of receding from our Reformers in any one principle which they maintain'd in Common with the Primitive Church the Universal Church of Christ before she was tainted with the Corruptions of Popery And if we have not done it as I am Confident our Brethren shall never be able to prove we have our receding from our Reformers as I take it ought to be no prejudice against us I think the Authority of the Catholick Church in the days of her indisputed Purity and Orthodoxy ought in all Reason to be deem'd preferable to the Authority of our Reformers especially considering that they themselves professed to own the Sentiments of the Primitive Church as a part at least of the Complexe Rule of Reformation as I have already proved 2. I challenge our Presbyterian Brethren to instance in so much as one principle in which we have Deserted our Reformers wherein our Deserting them can by any Reasonable by any Colourable construction be interpreted ane approach towards Popery I think no Man who understands any thing of the Popish Controversies can readily allow himself the Impudence to say that to dislike Tumultuary Reformations and deposing Sovereign Princes and subverting Civil Governments c. upon the score of Religion is to be for Popery Or that the Doctrine of Submission to Civil Authority the Doctrine of Passive Obedience or Non-resistance or which I take to be much about one in the present case the Doctrine of the Cross are Popish Doctrines Or that to Condemn the Traiterous Distinction between the Person and the Authority of the Civil Magistrate as it is commonly made use of by some People and as it is Condemned by the Laws of both Kingdoms is to turn either Papistical or Iesuitical Let our Brethren if they can Purge their own Doctrines in these matters of all Consanguinity with Popery And now after all this 3. I would desire my Readers to remember that this Artifice of Prejudicating against principles because different from or inconsistent with the principles of our Reformers is none of our Contrivance Our Presbyterian Brethren not we were the First who set on foot this Popular tho' very pitiful way of Arguing By all the Analogies then of equitable and just Reasoning they ought to
They came not up it seems to the full Measures of Rigiditie which the Spirit of the Assembly required For whoso pleases to turn over in the Register to the 31 st of Ianuary 1648 9 shall find that the Commission of the Kirk the Authentick Vehicle of the publick Spirit of the Kirk during the Interval between Assemblies wrote a Letter to the Presbytery Requiring greater accuracy in the Tryal of Malignants and admitting People to the Renovation of the Covenant prohibiting Kirk-Sessions to meddle in such Matters and Ordering all to be done by the Presbyteries themselves Except very difficult Cases which were to be referr'd to the Commission of the Kirk And to secure this side also let him turn over to the Acts of the General Assembly Anno 1649 and he shall find First Act Intituled Approbation of the proceedings of the Commissioners of the General Assembly by which Act that Assembly Acted by that same Spirit with the former found that the Commissioners appointed Anno 1648. had been zealous diligent and faithful in the discharge of the trust committed to them and therefore did unanimously Approve and Ratify the whole Proceedings Acts and Conclusions of the said Commission Appointing Mr. John Bell Moderator pro tempore to return them hearty thanks in the name of the Assembly for their great pains travel and fidelity If it be said farther that our present Presbyterians require not now that condition of taking the Covenant of those they admit to the Sacrament I reply 1. do not the Cameronians who in all true Logick are to be reputed the Truest Presbyterians observe it punctually 2. How can our present Regnant Presbyterians justify their Omission of it By their own principles the Act binds them for it stands as yet unrepealed by any subsequent General Assembly By the common principles of Reason they are bound either to obey that Act or Reprobate the Assembly which made it This I am sure of they can neither plead the Dissuetude of that Act nor any Peculiarity in the Reason of it for their neglecting it more than many other Acts which they own still to be in vigour But I am affraid my Reader has too much of this Thus I have shewed in part how much our Presbyterian Brethren have Deserted the Rules and Rites of our Reformers about the Sacraments proceed we now to other Liturgical Offices 8. Then our Reformers not only appointed a form for the Celebration of Marriage to be seen in the Old Liturgy but in that Form some things agree word for word with the English Form Particularly the charge to the Persons to be Marryed to Declare if they know any impediment c. A Solemn Blessing was also appointed to be pronounced on the Married Persons and after that the 128 Psalm to be sung c. Besides it was expressly appointed by the First Book of Discipline that Marriages should be only Solemnized on Sunday in the forenoon after Sermon Cap. 9. And this was so Universally observed that the Introduction of Marrying on other days is remarkable For it was proposed to the General Assembly holden at Edenburg Iuly 7. Anno 1579 as a doubt whither it was Lawful to Marry on week days a sufficient number being present and joyning Preaching thereunto and the General Assembly Resolved It was Lawful But Our present Presbyterians if I mistake not make it rather a Doubt whither it be Lawful to Marry on Sunday Sure I am it is inconsistent with their principles to do it by a Form As sure I am tho' they were for a Form they could not well digest the Form of our Reformers which smell'd so rankly of the English Corruptions I know not if they use solemnly to Bless the Married Pair If they do it not I know they have Deserted their own Second Book of Discipline I think they will not deny but the singing of the 128 Psalm in the Church immediately after the Persons are Married is out of fashion with them 9. They have also forsaken our Reformers in the Burial of the Dead 'T is true indeed the First Book of Discipline seems to be against Funeral Sermons neither doth it frankly allow of Reading suitable portions of Scripture and singing Psalms at Burials Yet it was far from Condemning these Offices We are not so precise in this say the Compilers but that we are content that particular Churches with Consent of the Minister do that which they shall find most fitting as they will Answer to God and the Assembly of the Vniversal Church within this Realm But the Old Liturgy which was Authorized by two General Assemblies which the First Book of Discipline could never pretend to has not only a Form for visiting the Sick not observed I am sure by our present Presbyterians but expressly allows of Funeral Sermons These are its very words about Burial The Corps shall be Reverently brought to the Grave accompanyed with the Congregation without any further Ceremonies which being Buried the Minister if he be present and required goeth to the Church if it be not too far off and maketh some Comfortable Exhortation to the People touching Death and the Resurrection Then Blesseth the People and dismisseth them To our present Presbyterians Funeral Sermons are as the worshipping of Reliques They are every whit as ill as Praying for the Dead and the Doctrine of Purgatory One thing more I shall take notice of in the Old Liturgy It is 10. The Form and Order of the Election of the Superintendent which may serve in Election of all other Ministers I shall not repeat what I have already observed as to this point concerning our Presbyterians Condemning the Office of Superintendents and their forsaking our Reformers as to the Ceremony of imposition of hands in Ordinations a point wherein our Reformers I confess were somewhat unaccountable That which I take notice of now is that that Form continued at least for sixty years to be used in Ordinations Particularly it was in use even with the Parity men Anno 1618 as is evident from Calderwood and it was insisted on by them then as a Form which was to be reputed so venerable and of such weight that any Recession from it was ane intollerable innovation And yet I refer it to our present Presbyterians themselves if they can say that they have not intirely Deserted it Because the Designation of the Person to be Ordained is Prior in order of nature to his Ordination I shall add as ane Appendage to this Head the Discrepance between our Reformers and our present Presbyterians about Patronages and Popular Elections of Ministers Our present Presbyterians every body knows are zealous for the Divine Right of Popular Elections The Power of Choosing their own Ministers The Persons who are to have the charge of their Souls is a Priviledge which Christ by his Testament hath Bequeathed to his People It is his Legacy to them ane unalienable part of their Spiritual Property It cannot be
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
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
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
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
which is extant in Print before the Psalm Book i. e. the old Liturgy according to which as I have always done so now I Minister that Sacrament In short It continued to be in use even after the beginning of the Horrid Revolution in the days of King Charles the First and many old People yet alive remember well to have seen it used indifferently both by Presbyterians and Prelatists But it is not so now Our Modern Presbyterians do not only Condemn the Liturgie of the Church of England used as I say by our Reformers calling it a Dry lifeless service a spiritless powerless service ane unwarrantable service ane ill-mumbled mass a farce of Popish Dregs and Reliques a Rag of Romish Superstition and Idolatry and God knows how many ill things But they Generally Condemn all Liturgies all set-forms of publick worship and devotion They will admit of none All to them are alike odious and intolerable Herein I think there is a palpable Recession from the principles of our Reformers about the publick and solemn worship of the Church and that in a most weighty and material instance But this is not all They have not only deserted our Reformers and Condemn'd them as to Forms But they have made very considerable and important Recessions from them as to the matter both in the substance and circumstances of Liturgical Offices and here I must descend to particulars 1. Then our present Presbyterians observe no Forms in their publick Prayers either before or after Sermon For the most part they observe no Rules They Pray by no Standard Nay they do not stick by their own Directory All must be Extemporary work and the newer the odder the more surprizing both as to matter and manner the better If any Brother has not that fire in his temper that heat in his blood that warmth in his Animal-spirits that sprightlyness and fervour in his fancy or that readiness of elocution c. If he wants any one or two of these many Graces which must concur for accomplishing one with the ready Gift and shall adventure to digest his thought and provide himself with a Premeditated Form of his own making He shall be concerned likewise to be so wise and wary as to provide himself either with a variety of such Forms or many disguises for his one form or he shall run the hazard of the success of his Ministery and his Reputation to boot He is a Gone-man if the Zealots of the gang smell it out that he prayed by Premiditation Fore-thought Prayers are little less Criminal than fore-thought Felony He wants the spirit and deserves to be ranked amongst the Anti-Christian Crue of Formalists Nay so much are they against set-forms that 't is Popery for any thing I know to say the Lords Prayer Our Reformers never met for publick worship but they used it once or oftner And they used it as in obedience to our Saviours Commandment Take for a taste these instances which I have collected from the old Liturgy The Prayer for the whole Estate of Christs Church appointed to be said after Sermon is Concluded thus In whose name we make our humble petitions unto thee even as he hath taught us saying Our Father c. Another Prayer to be said after Sermon has the Lords Prayer in the very bosom of it The Prayer to be used when God threatens his Iudgements concludes thus Praying unto thee with all humility and submission of minds as we are taught and commanded to Pray saying Our Father c. The Prayer to be used in time of Affliction thus Our only Saviour and Mediator in whose name we Pray unto thee as we are taught saying Our Father c. The Prayer at the Admission of a Superintendent or a Minister thus Of whom the perpetual increase of thy Grace we crave as by thee our Lord King and only Bishop we are taught to Pray Our Father c. The Prayer for the Obstinate in the order for Excommunication thus These thy Graces O Heavenly Father and farther as thou knowest to be expedient for us and for thy Church Vniversal we call for unto thee even as we are taught by our Lord and Master Christ Iesus saying Our Father c. The last Prayer before Excommunication thus This we ask of thee O Heavenly Father in the boldness of our Head and Mediator Iesus Christ praying as he hath taught us Our Father c. The Confession of sins c. in time of publick Easts thus We flee to the obedience and perfect Iustice of Iesus Christ our only Mediator Praying as he hath taught us saying Our Father c. The Prayer of Consecration in Baptism thus May be brought as a lively Member of his Body unto the full fruition of thy joys in the Heavens where thy Son our Saviour Christ Reigneth world without end In whose name we Pray as he hath taught us saying Our Father c. So many of the Prayers used by our Reformers were concluded with the Lords Prayer And it is obvious to any body that sometimes 3 or 4 of them were to be said at one Assembly And still when the Lords Prayer is brought in you see 't is plainly in Obedience to our Saviours Command from which 't is clear our Reformers lookt on the using it as not only Lawful but Necessary Our present Presbyterians will not only not use it but they Condemn and writ against the using of it Indeed They have not retained so much as one Form except that of Blessed use by Saint Paul 2 Cor. 13.14 This indeed they commonly say tho' I am not sure they say it in the Form of a Blessing before the Dissolution of the Assembly But why they have kept this and rejected all other Forms or how they can reconcile the retaining of this with the rejection of all other Forms I confess I am not able to tell Let themselves answer for that as well as for retaining set-forms of Praise while they Condemn set forms of Prayer 2. Our Reformers in their publick Assemblies never omitted to make a solemn and publick Confession of their Faith by rehearsing that which is commonly called the Apostles Creed It was said after the Prayer for the whole Estate of Christs Chruch and it was introduced thus Almighty and Everliving God vouchsafe we beseech thee to grant us perfect continuance in thy lively Faith augmenting the same in us dayly till we grow to the full measure of our perfection in Christ whereof we make our Confession saying I believe in God the Father c. Herein they are intirely deserted by our present Presbyterians also 3. The Preaching of the word may be performed two ways By the publick Reading of the Scriptures and by Sermons c. founded on the Scriptures Our present Presbyterians in both these have Receded from our Reâ—â—â—mers 1. As for the Reading of the Scriptures our Reformers delivered themselves thus in the