under a kind of confinement severall numbers thereof at their returning to their own homes having nothing nor alleadging any thing to challenge them for but their carriage at the Assembly Answer I must profess ingenuously when at first I did read the Protestation I wondred much how men especially Ministers of the Gospell making so solemn and high profession and attestation as they do in this Protestation viz. That they made one of the grounds contained therein as being desirous to be faithful in the day of tentation and to exoner their consciences as in the sight of the LORD could alleadg this as ground to disclaim the late Assembly as not a free and lawful Assembly of this Kirk I confess my wondring is not a whit abated but increased by this second propounding Argumentation of it For first As to the proposal of it in the Protestation suppose that a good many Commissioners of Broughs and Presbyteries had been absent then this might have been alleadged with some appearance of reason to show that the Assembly was not so ful in partibus integralibus so numerous as could have been wished yet with no colour could it be alleadged that it was not free legal _____ essential requisit for the constitution therof unles it could be demonstrat either that their absence was for want of timous advertisment concerning the time and place of it which cannot be alleadged the time being known by the preceding Assembly and advertisment concerning the place having been given timously by the Commission or that there was some appearance that some in the Assembly might have been inclined to act favourably for the enemy or that the enemy might have some influence on the Assembly to corrupt or pervert it which I conceive the Protestors wil not say I know that the absence of many Commissioners is alleadged as one ground anulling this pretended Assembly condemned at Glasgow 38. but it is as wel known that the absence of Commissioners was caused by untimous indiction and advertisment or some other internal cause having influence upon the corruption of this Assembly 2. It had been requisit the Writer of the last Paper had condescended namely upon these 9. or 10. Presbyteries absent which had he done I doubt but it would have been found that some of them were absent because they had none to send or were not Presbyteries existing at all at that time as Orknay and Caithness 2. It should be found that some of these Commissioners of Presbyteries came within short space to the place where the Assembly was sitting and would not come forward to it as for instance these of Hambleton 3. Commissioners came to the Assembly between whom and the place of the Assembly the Armies were as interjacent as to those that came not for did not Commissioners from Presbyteries of Merâ—e and Tevidale Galloway Glasgow West Country yea the Commissioners of the Presbyteries of farthest parts off lying that way were present and that others came not it may seem to have proceeded out of negligence rather then from a necessity Why then should the Assembly be counted null for the absence of such it is known that Commissioners came not from Burghs and yet Ministers came out of these same Burghs So if because of the absence of some Commissioners for fear of the motions of the Enemy or because of lying of Armies through the Countrey the late Assembly be judged unfree and unlawfull Then by as good reason must the Assembly in the time of James Graham his reigning and raging through the Countrey be holden unfree for as many if not mâ—e Commissioners were upon that occasion absent from the same Assembly then see here again how good friends our Brethren proves to the former Assembly by devising arguments against the late Assembly wherby they plainly teach Malignants who were censured by this Assembly how to cast them as nul upon grounds of conscience Sixthly let the Rols of this Assembly be compared with the Rolls of former unquestioned Assemblies and it shall be found to have been more numerous and full then sundries of them yea we know that at the Assembly of Aberdeen 1650. there were but about twenty persons present which notwithstanding is owned by the Kirk of Scotland as a free and lawfull Generall Assembly and it cannot be said that any such excuse as this was made in that Assembly for the absence of any and granting that the motions of the Enemy had hindered some yet here being so inconsiderable a number in comparison of this Assembly these who were conveened should not nor could not lawfully be holden an Assembly and gone about their duties Seventhly as for what was said about the want of freedom of recess the first part is certain and clear in common sense that if any Assembly may sit or do sit out its time and conclude freely though there be danger to the Members in their recess this cannot in any way reflect upon the constitution of the Assembly how many Members of the Assembly in James Grahames time were there that had not safe recess to their own homes For the other part of these Members spoken of here had protested against and declined the Assembly and deserted which the Writer wisely passes in silence and saies only they were returning to their own homes as if for sooth the Assembly had been closed or that they had taken fair leave before the close And might not the King and the Committee do all this They say unto them until they had been informed upon what ground they had come away so untimously without any imputation to the freedom and lawfulness of the Assembly Did not the Commissioners of the States at the Assembly of Dort when the Remonstrants proceeded against and declined that Synod presently confined and charged them to bide within that City until they should answer unto the Assembly without any imputation to the freedom of that Assembly But again the truth is this upon the Protesters deserting of the Assembly and going through the Army towards the West the report was That they had made a broil in the Assembly and were come to trouble the Army and hinder the Levies appointed in the said places whither they were going hereupon the King and the Committee required some to keep their Chambers til their carriage in the Assembly might be known But so soon as the Assembly heard of this they dispatched unto the King who presently sent them all to their own homes excepting that they did require such of them as were cited to the Assembly to return to it and answer for themselvs which yet I cannot say was certainly done without one cross word given to them These things being considered impartial judicial Readers will acknowledge that there hath not bin much ingenuity or conscience either in alleadging this reason for annulling the late Assembly and cannot but think the alleadgers themselves wil blush that here have propounded it for justifying their own protesting and hold
it forth to others to induce them to joyn with them as a ground of conscience whereof they could not but exoner their conscience REVIEW THe Author ushers in and closes his Answer to this reason with a great deal of wondering and many exclamations against the want of ingenuity and conscience in the Protesters because of alleadging this reason against the freedome and lawfulnesse of the Assembly and he is so confident as to think when his Answers are considered not onely will his Readers be of one minde with him in this but that the Protesters themselves will blush that they have proponed it We have a proverb That great words flyeth bairns and so we may also say Great words perswades women and children but men of reason and understanding will ponder what is said Albeit the Protesters did not lay all nor most of the weight of their Protestation against the Assembly upon this yet they did ingenuously and conscientiously conceive that there was weight in it and do think so still notwithstanding of all the Authors great words I wish he had taken the Propositions of the Arguments as they lay and answered them severally and distinctly he doth not so far as my weak decerning can reach tell us his mind plainly and directly either of the first or second Proposition of the Argument but speaks directly onely to these things that are brought by the Writer for confirmation of the second Proposition and to that part of the first Proposition that relates to freedome of recesse I shall first speak a little to the first Proposition of the Argument and then to the application of it The medium is none of the Protesters inventing but hath been generally received and made use of by Divines to prove the unfreedome of Councels where there was truth in it as to the matter of fact as appears first from the learned Review of the Councell of Trent in which this Argument is cleared and confirmed at large Secondly In the Book intituled Adversus Synodi Tridentini restitutionem seu continuationem a Pio Quarto Pontifice indictam opposita gravamina quibus causae necessariae gravissimae exponuntur quare ea Electoribus caeterisque Imperii Principibus Ordinibus Augustanae Confessionis neque agnoscenda neque aâ—eunda fuerit Which Book I do the rather cite because it doth contain the joynt judgment of many choise and famous Divines and Lawyers of that time Whoso shall be pleased to look either upon the Review of the Councell of Trent or upon these gravamina as they are cleared and confirmed by these Divines and Lawyers shall find this Argument cleared and confirmed at large and so much said of it as would be tedious to transcribe Thirdly the Divines of Breme in the Councell of Dort answering to the Protestation of the Remonstrance think it not enough to say nullae hic vel insidiae struuntur vel ullum periculum intenditur but also adds Quinimo securitas publica omnibus ad accessum commorationem recessum prostatur As to the Assumption I shall onely adde to what is said in the Protestation and the other Paper for verifyâ—ng of it That severall Presbyteries because of the tumults of these times could not meet within their own bounds to choose Commissioners but made their Elections in places far remote as these of the Presbyteries of Edinburgh and Hadingtoun Secondly That many Ministers thought it not safe to stay with their own flocks and therefore retired Northwards some to one place some to another Thirdly None could at that time travell safely on the South-side of Forth without a Pass from the English which was not easie to be purchased and could not be taken without suspicion and therefore though sundry did hazard to steal through yet some were taken prisoners and sent back as sundry Ministers in the Presbyterie of Lithgow 4. To say nothing of these many reproches that were cast upon many threatnings that were used against sundry of the opposers of Publick Resolutions by the Souldiours in their journey to St. Andrews and in the place and in their returning from it all of them were before that time declared Enemies both to Church and Kingdome and Laws made by the Parliament and Acts issued by the Commission to proceed against them with punishments and censures and doth not the Author in this his Vindication tell us that therefore the Clerks Papers which he sent to the Assembly were not read least they should have inferred hazard and danger to him if then he had been there personally and spoken the same things in the Assembly that he wrote unto it which no doubt if he had been present he would have thought himself bound in Conscience to do he could not have done it with safety and yet these were things relating to the Publick Resolutions All these things being put together do make it to appear that accesse to the Assembly wes not safe but full of hazard and danger But I come to the Author his Answers and in order thereto desire it to be considered First That as the want of integrant parts sometimes may be so great that it doth destroy the very being of the body so when a considerable number of integrant parts are wanting it renders the body weak in its functions and operations and drawes along with it many other inconveniences I doubt not but the Author will grant that the number of Commissioners coming to an Assembly may be so few that they cannot make a lawfull and free Assembly as upon the other side I shall willingly yeeld that it is not every want of Members constituent that makes an unfree or unlawful Assembly if either the one or the other should be denied As two or three Commissioners might make an Assembly so the want of two or three might unmake it I think he will also grant that when many Commissioners are absent especially not negligently but upon relevant causes that it is not fit to adjourn it till another time then to proceed to constitute themselves or act as an Assembly So our VVorthy Reformers adjourned the Assembly 1568. from Decemb. 25. to Feb. 25. because many were absent by reason of the troubles of the time and upon the same ground the Assembly 1569. was adjourned from February to March from Sterling to Edenburgh And if the Meeting at S. Andrews had been pleased to read and condescend unto the Supplication that was offered to them under the Hands of many Brethren for an adjournment before their Constitution there had been no cause for these Debates 2. It seems to be yeelded by the Author that wher it can be demonstrated that a good many Commissioners are absent for want of timous advertisment concerning the time and place of the Assembly there is cause upon that ground to except against the Assembly as not free and lawful And the Assembly at Glasgow did put it above question for anulling the pretended Assemb at Lithgo 1606 that at Aberdeen
THE NULLITY OF THE PRETENDED-ASSEMBLY At Saint ANDREWS DVNDEE Wherein are contained The Representation for Adjournment the Protestation Reasons therof Together with A REVIEW and Examination of the VINDICATION of the said P. ASSEMBLY Hereunto is subjoyned the solemn Acknowledgment of Sins and Engagement to Duties made and taken by the Nobility Gentry Burroughs Ministry and Commonalty in the year 1648. when the COVENANT was Renewed With sundry other Papers related unto in the foresaid REVIEW Printed in the Yeer 1652. REader We have here observed some few Escapes of the Press some more gross Errors thou wilt find in the Vindication for which neither the Printer nor theje who gave him the Copy can be blamed for the truth is a Letter was written to the Moderator of the late p. Assembly at Edinburgh desiring a perfect Copy of the Vindication by which any Error in that Copy which had come to our hands might have been corrected And in that same Letter there was desired a copy of the Kings Letter to the p. Assembly at St. Andrews with the Commissioners speech seeing the Vindication doth refer to these although it hath been spread alone and these copies kept up but to neither of these desires was there any answer returned ERRATA PAge 4 for nonformists read nonconformists pag. 7. f. whom r. wherein f. tenents r. tenets pag. 8. f. too sharp-sighted r. to be c. pag. 15. f. may r. nay pag. 17. f. required r. being required pag. 30. l. 25. r. which seemeth pag. 37. l. 1. r. Gentleman pag. 58. r. as for and ibid. l. 29. r. no evil before them in pag. 59. l. 13. f. then r. when pag. 62. r. these after against ibid. f. accept r. except ibid. r. patiar f. patior ibid. r. defections f. desertions pag. 63. r. for after why pag. 67. r. Quaries f. Presbyteries r. Prelacies pag. 170. l. 8. r. men and this ibid. l. 9. r. as appears p. 171. l. 19. r. concession TO THE CHRISTIAN-READER Christian-Reader THat thou mayest with understanding read this Book and the Debates contained therein Thou art to take notice that in the year 1651. in the month of July many of the Commissioners from Presbyteries meeting at St. Andrews did proceed to constitute themselves into and to act as a General Assembly of the Kirk of Scotland against the constitution of which Assembly sundry of the Ministers who had formerly born testimony against the employing and intrusting of the Malignant party with the Cause and Kingdom did enter a publick Protestation in writing subscribed by their hands as not being a free and lawful General Assembly within a few weeks thereafter one as it seems of those Protesters did pen a Paper for strengthning and cleering the grounds of that Protestation and taking off such Objections as are usually made against the same In Answer to both these a Member as I take it of that Assembly at St. Andrews did within few months after write a Treatise intituled a Vindication of the freedom and lawfulness and so of the Authoritie of the General Assembly met at St. Andrews c. To which Treatise in the month of May last there was a Reply written bearing the name of the Nullity of the Assembly at St. Andrews or A Review of a Vindication c. which doth set down and make Answer unto that Vindication by Parcels and Sections All these four are now offered to Thee in this Book and in that order in which they were first penned to wit The Protestation against the Meeting at St. Andrews in the first place the Reasons for strengthening and cleering thereof in the second place the Vindication and the Review thereof together in last place There are also added some other Papers upon the by for clearing of some things in the debate The LORD give unto Thee a spirit of Judgment and understanding in reading that Thou mayest Judge true and righteous Judgment condemning the Guilty and absolving the Innocent UNTO THE MODERATOR BRETHREN Assembled at St. Andrews The humble Representation and Desire of the Ministers of the Gospel under subscribed AMongst the many sad tokens of the Lords indignation and wrath against this Church the present unhappy differrences of His Servants of the Ministry is looked upon by Us and We beleeve by all the Godly of the Land as one of the greatest And as We hold it a Duty lying upon Us to be deeply humbled before the Lord in the sence thereof and in our Stations and Callings to endeavor by all lawful and fair means the remedy and removal of the same so we acknowledge a free Gen. Assembly lawfully called and rightly constitute and meeting together in the Spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ and proceeding with Meekness and Love according to the Rule of His Word and Constitutions of this Church to be amongst the first and most effectual Remedies appointed of God for attaining of these ends Therefore considering that the Election of Commissioners for the Assembly hath been in many places limited and prejudiced in the due liberty and freedom thereof by the Letter and Act of the Commission of the last Gen. Assembly to Presbyteries appointing such as remain unsatisfied with and bear testimony against the Publick Resolutions to be cited to the General Assembly which upon the matter hath in many Presbyteries really obstructed the Electing of such though otherwise men of approven abilities and constant faithfulness and zeal for the Work of Reformation since the begining thereof and that many Elections are questionable some as containing persons not in a capacity to be chosen by the Acts of this Church and some as not being made in a due order and right way and that many Commissioners of Presbyteries and Burroughs are absent some of them wanting free access by reason of the English lying in the Country and some upon other impediments and occasions And remembring that such Reasons have formerly had weight in point of Discussion of the validity of some Assemblies and may still be looked upon as important and weighty by these who may happen not to be satisfied in their consciences with your proceedings We did with all humble earnestness and in the bowels of the Lord Jesus Christ desire and beseech you for Truth and Peace sake and that further mistakes and divisions may not be increased unto the prejudice of the Lords Work and rejoycing of Enemies and sadding the hearts of His People That the Diet of the Gen. Assembly may by the common consent and advice of the Brethren now met together be adjourned for some competent time and that by the same mutual advice and consent it may be declared That the Letter and Act of the Commission ought not to be any prejudice to these who remain unsatisfied with the Publick Resolutions why they may not be chosen Commissioners to the General Assembly And that such Presbyteries as shall think fit may make their Elections of new again especially these Presbyteries whose
their Records and good reason is there for such Protestations especially in Scotland because not only by Gods Word but also by our National Covenant solemn League and Covenant and solemn Acknowledgment all Interest of King or Parliament or Kingdom are subordinate to the Interest of Christ and all duties to men subordinate to our duty unto God In hoc foederato regno federati Dei according to the 2 Kings 11.17 and 2 Chron. 23.16 in both which the substance of that Covenant and our Covenant is that we should be Gods people and all other relations subserviant to that sit ergo gloria Christi salus Eclecsiae suprema Lex nostra and whensoever we see it in any hazard or contest and any thing in competition with it let us according to our calling at least protest that our Lord and our Mother may get right which will legaly preserve it to another Judgment and if they get wrong thereby they will have witness of it which is the least which we should do for Him though we suffer for it who hath done and suffered so much for us and who puts a great favor and honor upon any whom He calls to be witnesses to and for Him and where one hath a necessity to protest for his particular right or place in Parliament we see they do it ordinarily and in all Acts of Parliament the last is savo jure cujuslibet and why not far rather solvo jure Christi ac Ecclesiae Which Protestation by communicating of this Paper I do enter against the Ratification of the Paper given in by the Commission to the Parliament anent the confinement of the Ministers of Sterling for their preaching or of any other Paper of theirs prejudicial to the Covenant and Cause of Jesus Christ REASONS PROVING That the late Meeting at St. Andrews is not a Lawful Free GENERAL-ASSEMBLY Of the KIRK of SCOTLAND With ANSWERS to the OBjECTIONS on the contrary THat is not a lawfull free Generall Assembly the election of whose Commissioners is so prejudiced and pre-limited in the due liberty and freedom thereof that many Ministers of Presbyteries in a capacity of deserving to be chosen for their abilities and faithfulnesse are by the Presbyteries at the order and appointment of a superior Judicatory past by and set aside in the election and rendered incapable to be Members of the Assembly but the late meeting at St. Andrews was such Therefore c. The first Proposition albeit as we conceive unquestionable yet shall afterwards be alittle further spoken to The second is proved by Presbyteries proceeding according to the Letter and Act of the Commission of the former Assemblie sent unto them about the time of their choosing Commissioners appointing that such as after conference should remain unsatisfied with and continue to oppose the publick resolutions to be cited to the Generall Assembly which Act doth upon the matter include these Four things 1. A direction that Presbyteries should choose none to be Commissioners but such as did concur with the publick resolutions 2. An intimation of the Commissions mind that Dissenters from the publick resolutions were so farre from being in a capacity to be chosen Commissioners and to sit as Judges of the matter in the Gen. Assembly that they ought to be looked upon as guilty persons who were for their guiltinesse to be cited and judged 3. A Declaration that if they should be chosen they could not be admitted to sit upon the Bench as Judges but behoved to stand at the Barre and answer as rei 4. That if the Presbyteries should choose them they were to be esteemed disobedient and looked upon as persons having no respect to publick orders of the Kirk which things do cleerly enough prove that there was such a prelimiting of the election as is formerly spoken of Object The Commissioners of the General Assembly in the yeer 1648. did by a Letter written to the severall Presbyteries appoint such Ministers as refused to declare their judgement against the Engagement which was then carried on or did declare themselves satisfied there with to be refered by their severall Presbyteries to the General Assemblie which upon the matter is equivalent to a citation and yet was not that judged a pre-limitation of the freedom of the Assembly Answer To say nothing of the difference of a Reference and Citation neither yet of the difference of a Letter and an Act We desire these things to be considered in answer to what is objected 1. That in the yeer 1648. when a little before the election of Commissioners by the Presbyteries to the General Assembly it was moved by some in the Commission that some thing might be written to Presbyteries to chuse none but such as were against the engagement it was opposed as savouring away of pre-limitation and so only a Letter was written giving them an accompt of the Commissions proceeding and exhorting them to their duty and to chuse able and faithfull men 2. That that Letter which is mentioned in the objection was not written by the Commission as we remember untill most part if not all the elections in Presbyteries were past wil be cleered by the date thereof 3. That before the writing of that Letter the whole Kirks of Scotland almost in all the Presbyteries and Synods thereof had declared themselves unsatisfied in conscience with the Engaegment excepting a very few Ministers scatered here and there in Presbyteries which few were also known to have been either opposers of the work of God or neutrall and indefferent therein from the begining 4. That the resolutions of the Commission were then agreeable to the Covenant and Act and constitutions of former Generall Assemblies which things being put together make a vive difference betwixt that which was then done and that which the Commission hath now done because the Letter and Act of the Commission this year was previous to most part of the elections in Scotland and whilst many Presbytries were bearing testimony against their Resolutions and the most part of the godly of the Land remain unsatisfied therewith and many pâ—ecious able and faithful men in the Ministry who are known to have been straight and zealous in the work of God from the beginâ—ing were bearing record against it and whilst the Resolutions of the Commission were point-blank contrary to the Covenant and to the former Acts and Constitutions of this Kirk Objection It was not only in the power of the Commission to appoint those who did oppose thâ— publick Resolutions to be cited to the General Assembly but also to have Censured them because there is a Clause in their Commission which gives them power to Censure such as oppose them in their proceedings as if they opposed the Assembly it self and therefore seeing the Commission hath been so far from excluding that they have keeped themselves fair within the limits and bonds of that power given them by the Assembly it cannot be said That their Letter and Act doth
judgments then was there for most part either two Elections or else dissents from and Protestation against the Election of such as were unsatisfied with the Publick Resolutions or else both as in the Elections of Glasgow and Sterline of all which no Reason can be given except the Letter and Act of the Commission 2 The Presbytery of Dunkel having chosen their Commissioners to the Gen. Assembly and one of their number who was a member of the Commission having dissented from and protested against the Election because such as were chosen were unsatisfied with the Commissions proceedings the Synod of Perth meeting a little thereafter and receiving the Letter and Act of the Commission did thereupon sustain the Dissent and Protestation of that man of their number and appointed the Presbytery of Dunkel to chuse their Commissioners anew again As to the Fourth That none were denied a voice in the Assembly upon the accompt of their not being satisfied or being cited albeit that were true yet it doth not make void what is said for pre-limiting the Elections by the Letter and Act of the Commission because the Elections were primo instanti prejudged in Presbyteries by barring those from being chosen who otherwise were in a capacity and likelihood to have been chosen by which it having come to pass that few such were chosen Policy taught the Assembly not to deny such of them as were chosen a vote upon that accompt the votes of so few a number not being like to prove so great a disadvantage to their business as the profest denial of them a vote would have done But in order to this particular we do further offer these two things for one Answer 1 That the discussing and judging of the Commissions of these in the Presbytery of Glasgow who were unsatisfied with the Publick Resolutions was laid aside upon this consideration only because the Reason of Mr. Rob. Ramsay his Protestation against the Election taken from their dissatisfaction with the Publick Resolutions could not as was alleadged be discussed till these Resolutions were either condemned or approven which was in effect to exclude them from voting because of their not approving the Publick Resolutions And this is so much the stronger if we shall consider that it was refused to lay aside the Commissions of these who had carried on these Resolutions in the Commission of the Assembly until their proceedings should be tried and approven 2 It is to be considered that the Assembly did sustain and approve the Letter and Act of the Commission for citing such as were unsatisfied which was a real excluding of all these who were cited upon dissatisfaction at least from being made Judges in that particular Reas That cannot be or is not accompted a lawful free Gen. Assembly in which relevant Exceptions being timously propounded against many of the Members thereof and offered to be verified and instructed were refused to be taken in consideration but notwithstanding of the timous proponing of these Exceptions and offering to instruct the same these Members were allowed to sit and vote before these Exceptions were taken in consideration and discussed But the Meeting of St. Andrews was such because it being propounded and urged by sundry in that Meeting that such of the Commission as had hand in the Publick Resolutions should not be permitted to sit and vote in the Assembly they being under a scandal and guilty of the promoting a course of Defection which was offered to be instructed until such time as they should be tried yet it was refused to take any such Exception in consideration or to remove them till this should be tried and discussed Therefore c. For further clearing and confirming of this Argument it is needful to speak to these two things 1 To shew that it was incumbent in duty to the Assembly to have removed from their Meeting all persons under scandal the same being made known unto them until they were purged thereof 2 To shew that the persons objected against were under such scandals as is alleadged for the first albeit as we conceive no great controversie will be made about it yet we offer these things for proof of it 1 That the light of Nature and the Word of God speaks for it 2 That some clauses both of our National Covenant and Solemn League and Covenant and Eight Desires of the Commission in the year 1648. and of the solemn Engagement in the same year and all the Church Remonstrances for purging of Armies and Judicatories even the late Papers given in by the same Commissioners to the Parliament at Sterlinâ— about the Act of Classes for excluding of scandalous persons from being Members of our Judicatories 3 There is a Rule and Order set down in the Third Gen Assembly of this Kirk in July 1562. That at the entry of every Assembly the first work is to be anent trying and purging of the Members thereof where men are appointed to be charged in Gods behalf to declare their consciences toâ—ching their Doctrin Life and execution of their Office if therein they be scandalous like as it is appointed that any to whose charge any thing is laid ought to be removed out of the Assembly until his cause be tried and if he be convicted he can have no Voice until the Kirk receive satisfaction and in the common order of proceeding set down in subsequent Assemblies set down by the Assembly in March 1568. It is appointed that before any meddle with any business they shall fâ—ll unto the tryal of their Members The same is to be found in the Assembly 1578. August 6. at Edinburgh and in the Assembly 1580. and in the Assembly 1581. which two last Assemblies as the one of them condemned the Oâ—fice of Episcopacie and pâ—t out the Bishops and the other established Presbyteries and the Book of Policie and the short Confession of Faith or our National Covenant so were they so exact and diligent in this trying purging work of their Members that at their very entry they require all men as they render the Glory of God and the weale of this Kirk and as they shall be answerable to God upon their consciences that they delat and give in the Names and Faults of any of their number to the removing of the slander which arises to the whol Kirk by their admitting of such Members which custom and practice was exactly kept for above twenty Assemblies and twenty years together 4 All the Assemblies of this Kirk since the late Reformation in the year 16â—8 have upon the objection of scandal against any of their Members in the time of the Constitution of their Meeting removed these Members until the Exception were tried and discussed nay this same Meeting at St. Andrews upon like exception and objection that the scandal of the Laird of Blaketer and some others their accession to the unlawful Engagement was not yet sufficiently purged by notifying their repentance to the Assembly and approving the same
where they were removed from sitting as Members And we would have any man in the world to bring a reason why some Members upon Exceptions propounded should have been removed till these were tried and discussed and yet other Members admitted against them as relevant nay more relevant Exceptions were propounded before the trying and discussing of them For the Second That the persons objected against were under scandal of carrying on a course of Defection It is manifest not only from hear-say and common report the first whereof in the 13. of Deuteronomy and 12. Verse is made a ground for enquiring and making search and asking diligently after these who seduce to false-worship And the other ground of proceeding against the incestous person 1 Cor. 5.1 2 Thes 3.11 But also from these Four Particulars 1 The offence and stumbling and sad complaint of the plurality of the godly in the Land against their proceedings 2 The Testimony and Letters of many Presbyteries bearing their stumbling and dissatisfaction with such courses 3. The clear standing Acts Remonstrances and Declarations of former General Assemblies unto the which these proceedings were diametrally opposit 4 The Testimony of sundry Brethren of the Assembly offering to instruct what was alleadged Objection The Commissioners of former Assemblies have alwayes such of them as was chosen by Presbytries being admitted to be Members before the tryal and approbation of their proceedings Answer It is true That the Commissioners have been allowed to sit until their proceedings come to be tryed and judged but it is as true that such Exception and Objection being proponed was never rejected There was since the late Reformation no cause to propound any such thing the Commissioners till this year having alwayes carried themselves faithfully but upon supposal they had done otherwise it cannot in reason be denied but that there was reason both to propound it and take it in consideration In order to this particular it is to be remembred that upon occasion of the great Debate in the Assembly 1597. concerning the carriage and proceedings of the Commission of the Gen. Assembly who had led the Church into defection in the interval betwixt Assemblies by taking upon them to give in Petitions to the Parliament for Vote in Parliament to the Ministers that should be provided to Prelacies and representing the true Kirk of God and being the Third Estate of the Realm the next Assembly which sate in the year 1601 did make an Act appointing the Commissioners of the preceding Assembly to give an accompt of their whole proceedings in the beginning of the next before any other cause or matter be handled and their proceeedings be allowed or dissallowed as the Assembly shall think expedient which Act was renewed in the year 1648. and doth necessarily infer That they are not to be admitted to sit as Members of the Assembly though there be no scandal nor exception propounded therupon till their carriage be first tryed and approven muchless they are to be admitted when there is scandal and exception propounded thereupon Object It was sufficient to remove them when the Report of their proceedings come in to be judged or not to admit them as Judges of the things wherein they were to be tryed and as this was done in former Assemblies so it was also done in this Answ That was not sufficient because it being objected and offered to be instructed that they were under a scandal and that of a very high nature they ought not to have sitten as Members until they had first been purged thereof unless we may say that any scandalous man may judge in any thing except in the matter of his own scandal 2. There was a manifest prejudice to the judging of their own proceedings by their sitting because they had a hand in nominating and appointing men who did consider their proceedings and make Report thereof to the Assembly nay their Moderator and Clerk being Moderator and Clerk of the Assembly did nominate all these men and were so grosse therein that except one man they nominated none to be upon the Committee except such as were of their own judgment though some few dayes after they did adde some few others after it was taken notice of and regraited in private Conference with the Moderator Object If the propounding of one Exception was reason sufficient to have removed so many considerable Members of the Assembly then might the whole Members one after another have been removed by propounding Exceptions against them and so not only that Assembly but all Assemblies whatsoever might by any contentious of malevolous person be brought to nothing because they might propound Exceptions against each of the Members and alleadge That they could not sit until these were first tryed and discussed otherwise it were not a lawful free General Assembly Answ This Objection strikes against the propounding and hearing of any Exception whatsoever against any constituent Member of a Judicatory as well as against the present case and therefore if the makers of it admit Exceptions against constituent Members in any case they are bound no less then we are to frame an Answer thereto which answer in the present Case as in others they would not grant But to the thing it self we say That it is not sufficient for removing of Members of Judicatories simply to propound and offer Exceptions against them but these two things are requisite in the Exception propounded and offered 1. That for the matter it be such as prima fronte at least seems relevant in law 2. That for the truth of the fact in application to the persons against whom it is made there be a scandal or some presumptions or some offering to instruct and make it out now in the present case it is clear that the exceptions propounded was relevant in jure if there be any relevant why a man should not sit in the General Assembly this certainly is one that he hath betrayed his former Trust hath made defection from the covenant and cause and being instrumental to carry on a course of defection throughout the Kirk and Kingdom and as to the truth of the Fact in reference to these against whom the exception was made all these three did concur a flagrant scandal pregnant presumptions and persons in the Judicatory offering to instruct and verifie what was alleadged Object No Exception could be taken in consideration nor discussed until the Judicatories was first constituted and a Moderator chosen and therefore it is nothing against the freedom of the Meeting that the Assembly not yet being constitute and a Moderator not chosen that they did refuse to fall upon the tryal and discussing of that Exception against the Commissioners of the former Assembly Answ If the Assembly had immediatly upon the choice of the Moderator fallen upon the tryal and discussing of that Exception and removed these against whom it was made from sitting in the Assembly as Judges in any thing until that had been done though it
terms As to that in the year 1582. it is grosly mistaken because it is no waies anent declining of unlawful Assemblies but against appealing from lawful Assemblies to the Civil Magistrate in Ecclesiastick causes for stopping Ecclesiastick Discipline against the persons appealers as is further evident by the occasion thereof Mr. Robert Montgomery Bishop of Glasgow his producing Letters of Horning from the King Counsel charging the Assembly to desist from his Process and suspending their Sentence in the mean time till the King and Counsel consider the same against which the Kirk entred a Protestation From these things it may appear how unwarantably the Meeting at Dundee did upon alleadgance of this Act fall upon debate of the summar Excommunication of these who had protested A VINDICATION OF THE Freedom and Lawfulnesse and so of the Authority of the late GENERALL ASSEMBLY Begun at St. Andrews and continued at Dundee in Answer to the Reasons alleadged against the same in the Protestation and Declinator given in by some Brethren at St. Andrews and in another Paper lately contrived by some c. 1651. Together with a Review of the said Vindication plainly holding forth the Nullity and unlawfulnesse of that pretended Generall Assembly In which the aspersions cast upon the Protesters in that Vindication are taken off And the Answers brought unto the Reasons contained in the Protestation against the freedome and lawfulnesse of that Meeting and in the Paper afterwards penned for clearing and confirming thereof are discussed and the strength of these reasons established to be a Null Assembly By a Friend of the Protesters cause Gal 5.1 Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage 2. Cor. 10.8 Our authority which the Lord hath given us for edification and not for your destruction For we can do nothing against the truth but for the truth Printed Anno Dom. 1652. The Inscription of the Vindication A Vindication of the freedom and lawfulnesse and so of the authority of the late Generall Assembly begun at S. Andrews and continued at Dundee in Answer to the Reasons alleadged against the same in the Protestation and Declinator given in by some Brethren at S. Andrews and in another Paper lately contrived by some practizing to foment divisions and to fix a Schisme in this Kirk and for that effect spread abroad onely into the hands of such as they conceive wil be inclinable to follow their way but keeped up from all others The Review of the Inscription IN this Title some things are insinuated and others are asserted It is insinuated that the Protestation was given in but by a few for he calls them some Brethren I acknowledge that the multitude and greater number are upon the other side yet that is not a thing wherein they have cause to boast or the Protesters need to be ashamed it seldome falls out especially in declining times that the followers of the truth are the most numerous yet were these even for their number many moe then by the Law are accounted witnesses sufficient to attest a truth and many there be throughout the Land who put to their seal to their Testimony as true Ministers Elders and Professors yea the Generality of the Generation of the Righteous and such as know GOD and live godly in the Land It is asserted first That the other Paper was lately contrived that is a litle while before the writing of this Vindication But if the Vindication was not written many moneths before it came abroad the Author thereof is mistaken in this because this Paper was contrived within a very few weeks three or four at most after the Protestation it self it may be that it came but lately to his hand but it was abroad long before his Vindication was heard of 2. It is asserted that this Paper was contrived by some practizing to foment divisions and to fix a Schisme in this Kirk But their hearts bear them record that the fomenting or fixing of division or schisme justly so called as it never was nor is their purpose so hath it been far from their practice either in that or any other particular This indeed they do acknowledge that they are unwilling to suffer themselves to be divided from the truth formerly received and professed by the Church of Scotland and that they conceive themselves bound in their stations and Callings to bear testimony against the course of back-sliding carried on in the Land of which they judge the common Constitution and Acts of that Assembly to be no small part and though to foment divisions and fix a Schisme in the Church be a heavy imputation yet being conscious to themselves of their own innocencie they are not much moved with it remembring that it is the common Topick whence decliners in all the Ages of the Church have argued against these who would not be consenting unto or did testifie against their defection Peace and unity hath been their plea and sedition division and schisme their charge against their opposers upon this accompt doth the Lord Jesus and his Apostles by the Scribes and Pharisees and Elders of the Jewes Luther and Calvin and our first Reformers by the Pope and his Clergy Nonformists by the Prelats and their adherents stand recorded in the Catalogue of these who practized to foment divisions and fix a schisme in the Church 3. It is asserted That this Paper was spread abroad onely into the hands of such as they conceive will be inclineable to follow their way but keeped up from all others If they had directly sent Copies to these of a contrary judgment it might haply been thought a piece of vanity and presumption and if the Author of this Vindication thought such a thing incumbent to them why did he not send a Copy of his Answer to the contrivers of these Papers whom as he afterwards bears us in hand he doth very wel know or hath he spoken with or received evidence from all others who were not inclinable to follow that way that he doth so confidently assert that Paper to have been kept up from all of them I will assure him it was not so as he affirmes As the contrivers did not vainly nor boastingly spread it to the provoking of any so did they not purposely keep it up from any of whatsoever judgment but were willing and desirous that it should go abroad for edifying of as many as the Lord should be pleased to blesse it unto And therefore did they not onely give Copies to such as did desire them but also did use some means to have gotten it Printed and could get none to undertake it VINDICATION Before I fal upon the Examination of the Reasons brought against and the discovery of the false Aspersions cast upon the Assembly by these Papers mentioned I do obtest the Reader whosoever he be into whose hands this Vindication shall come in the fear of God and as thou
loves not to be led away with errour but to know debate and for thy edification decern on what side Truth and Justice is thou would take heed that thy Judgement be not either blindfolded or byassed and fixed in prejudice by somewhat which may have strong influence this way and that is meerly extrinsecall to the Cause as to truth or falshood justice or injustice There be three things one or moe have I doubt not had influence on the misleading of some already in this matter and may yet I suspect miscarry others and fix some that come to the reading of this Paper with a minde pre-occupyed with one of these Extrinsecall respects REVIEW I shall not contend with the Author about the truth of that General Assertion That things extrinsecal to a Cause may have influence upon mens judgements to byasse them against the weight of reason It doth indeed oft-times fall out so to be especially in things that relate to Religion neither shall I make any application to himself or to the owners and fallowers of the Cause which he defends I wish that all of us on all hands may from the reall sense of the great blindnesse that is in our understandings and many byasses that are in our hearts with much trembling and fear make humble serious and frequent addresses unto God that he would give us rightly to know and in singlenesse of heart to judge of the truth in these things without laying weight on any thing that will not bear weight in the ballance of the Sanctuary But haply indifferent men would have accounted it fairer dealing if not more prudence if he had left the Cause simply to be determined by the weight of his Answers and Reasons and had not so operously and industriously laboured to bring the Reader in dislike with the Protesters by charging some of them with high crimes and endeavouring to weaken the Reputation of all of them by a long deduction and many farre fetched Instances of things on the by If his Answers be strong enough for a batterie what needed these undermindings But it s fit to take some View of these misleading Principles wherewith he chargeth the Protesters and their adherents and of which he desires others to beware least they be thereby also insnared onely this advertisement I give that his charge in all these things runneth onely upon the Principles and Practises of some of the Protesters Now upon supposall that all his allegeance were true what a poor way of arguing would these that are for the Publick Resolutions and for the Assembly at St. Andrews and Dundee account it to tell them over some few of the many grosse Principles and Practices holden and acted by some of their party and from thence to conclude against their professions and to the prejudice of their Cause VINDICATION First selfish Interest it is far from my thoughts to charge this upon all who have concurred in Protesting against and declining this Assembly as the motive that led them thereupon I am perswaded of many of them that they followed that course in the simplicity of their hearts yet I leave it to all judicious indifferent men to consider give their judgment if it be not very apparent that somewhat of this kind was the spring that moved some the prime contrivers and sticklers in this businesse who having adventured upon such high courses and attempts tending to the violation of the Nationall Faith renting and ruining the Kingdom trampling upon Authority and carrying with them tenents contrary to the minde and Practice of all Orthodox Kirks and to the Faith and not being able to abide triall in these things by an Assembly who in themselves was not able to bear the sway and carry things to their minde and finding others in simplicity of heart with them disliking some Publick Resolutions and Actings and so apt to be led on with them upon any course that could be presented with the colour of a Testimony against these Resolutions and Actings found it safest for they rather altogether do disclaim the authority of the Assembly then to hazard upon a fair and orderly tryall of their matters yea have we not seen some already ship in and land out of and ship in again in that Protestation according as they conceived the winde of affairs then in the time to blow with or against it to credit or discredit advantage or disadvantage conscientious men would beware now that this same motive or interest do not prevail over them to neglect due Examination of the grounds of that Protestation or to close their eye against such light as might haply be holden forth in this matter to the discovery of the lightnesse and non-relevancy of these grounds and reasons Therefore put reputation and dis-reputation in the estimation of men advantage or dis-advantage worldly to thee and thy condition put off thy sight for a while untill thou hast pondered and compared reason with reason REVIEW In the Application of this Principle of selfish interest the Author assoils some conceiving them to be led on in the simplicity of their hearts by the subtilty and misguiding of others whom he charges with adventuring on high courses and attempts tending to the violation of the Nationall Oath renting and ruining the Kingdom trampling on Authority and carrying with them tenets contrary to the minde and practice of all Orthodox Churches and to the Faith c What is all this but the way if not very near the words of the Prelaticall and Malignant party against the Instruments of the Work of Reformation Anno 1638 and thereafter who because the Integrity of some of these Instruments was above exception they did cast the appearing of these in that Work upon their simplicity and did charge others with falling on a course of rebellion as not being able to endure triall in the high crimes whereof as they said they were guilty but the Lord ere long did make their righteousnes break forth as the morning and their clearing as the noon day and I trust that he who knowes the Innocency of these Protesters upon whom the like things are charged shall also shew them the like mercy in Vindicating them from all the reproach that hath been unjustly cast upon them But to the point if these prime Contrivers and sticklers in the businesse had before that time adventured on such high courses and were guilty of such grievous crimes as the Author chargeth them with then surely these simple ones of whom he speaks were simple exceedingly who could see nor discern none of these things that were so obvious to the view of others but notwithstanding of what he sayes they are known to sharp sighted decerning men and for learning circumspection judgement prudence and experience in the things of God and the Affairs of his house to be far beyond these whom he takes for the prime contrivers and sticklers in the businesse and to be inferior to none of their opposers yea if
there be any who deserve the name of the prime contrivers and sticklers in the matter of the Protestation it is some of these who had no hand in these high courses which he mentions and who upon his accompt are among the simple ones These crimes which he doth so positively and without hesitation charge upon some especially being so hainous and great It would seem that both charity and and justice would have required that he had brought some good evidence of them least haply his Reader trust not his naked Assertion in that which doth not onely reach the reputation but also the life and being of others And if he would have men to believe their tenets to be contrary to the minde and practice of all Orthodox Churches and to the Faith he would do well to prove them to be so untill he do it he will I hope allow charity to these who deny it Some of the greatest Divines of this Church and of this age whose praise is in all the Reformed Churches do affirm and have proved the contrary and if the Authors Assertion be true I fear not to say that the minde and practice of this Church these years past hath not been Orthodox nor agreeable to the faith in order to these tenets because they have been clearly taught and practised by this Church these years past and a man but slenderly seen in the Doctrine thereof may bring forth these tenets asserted by this Church in the same letters and sillabes and may give clear instances of her practices a-agreeing with the same It hath been done already by some in a more convincing way then the sharpest opposers of these tenets have as yet satisfyingly answered I would fain know what ground the Author had to say that the prime contrivers and sticklers found it safest for them rather altogether to disclaim the Authority of the Assembly then to hazard upon a fair and orderly trial of their matters Their consciences do bear them record that it was not upon any jealousie or suspition they had of their Cause as not being able to endure the light reason may perswade indifferent men to think that they did not look upon protesting against the Assembly as the safest course otherwise then in order to their duty for if we take safety as it might concern their persons they could hardly have done any thing that could have more endangered these It was a speedy way to expose them to the censures both of Church and State as did appear in the sequel some of them because of their Protesting being deposed by that Assembly and others of them confined by the civil Magistrate and there is ground to presume that they would have been proceeded against with further censures both civil and Ecclesiastick if the Lord had not stopt the current of these things If this was their safest way why do men of his own judgment so frequently say that if the Protestation had been forborn the Assembly would not have censured any no not in the case of their adhering to their judgment and dissenting from the judgment of the Assembly in the matters of the Publick Resolutions If we shal take safety in order to the cause they could not be so dull as to think that their Protesting against the Assembly would keep the Assembly from trying and judging of their cause or other indifferent men from searching into the same and if before the Protestation it could not abide the triall it did but put them in a much worse condition to Protest upon an unwarrantable ground it being worse to defend two evill causes then one And therefore it doth not appear from these things that self-interest was the spring from whence these Actings did flow yea the contrary if any thing is manifest because by such a way they could expect nothing but the hightning of all former reproaches cast on them the exposing of themselvs to the censures both of Church and State if men that in all their precious interests must be sufferers because of their doing of such things be led to act therein upon a principle of selfish interest we leave it to judicious and indifferent men to consider and give their judgement whether it be very apparent yea or not It is true that some two or three did partly by the perswasion and partly by the threatning of some at Dundee resile a little from the Testimony which they had given at St Andrews in the matter of the Protestation which within a short time thereafter they did repent of and again adhered to their former Testimony not upon any selfish-interest or eye to credite or advantage as the Author affirmes there being no appearance first or last that by adhering to the Protestation they could gain any of these things but on the checks of their own consciences and the voice they heard behind them saying this is the way walk ye in it when they had turned aside some of them are since that time taken out of the land of the living and I trust are now in glory and I can assure the Author and all others and if it be doubted I wil get it attested under the hands of famous witnesses that after their resiling from that testimony they had no peace nor quietnes in their spirits for a long time but went down mourning to their graves because they had so done and upon their death beds did often and sadly bemoan it that they had missed the opportunity to give some publick Testimony and Declaration with others of their sorrow for the same and of their purpose and resolution to adhere to the Protestation It had been no losse to the Author nor his cause to have spared such sharp let me not say bitter and personal reflections upon conscientious and godly men as he many times needlesly useth he and all others whose eyes God hath opened to see their way cannot but be conscious to themselves of their own wandrings and how much they owe to the exceeding riches of the mercy and free grace of God that hath recovered them out of snares VINDICATION SEcondly estimation of the persons the Authors or Abbettors of this Protestation God forbid I should think say or advise any thing to the prejudice or disadvantage of godlinesse or godly persons neither shall I question their godlinesse my judgement concerning some yea many of them is very positive having by experience and acquaintance seen I must say much of the image of JESUS CHRIST in them as for others what ever they have been every whit I take not on me to judge them nor yet think I it pertinent or fit so to do That there are godly men not a few on the other side too is manifest some that were in Christ before them and men that hath suffered for the Truth and Cause of God when others had not the honor to be doers for it and are ready to suffer if he shal call them to it though some uncharitably
and rashly to say to the best of it spares not to traduce them as Apostates and backsliders but this is it I would say that men should take heed that they make not a snare of their opinion yea or the reall conviction of the godlinesse they have of any persons by approving taking up or following their sayings opinions or practices without due examination and triall upon this accompt because they are godly persons from whom such things proceeds It is well and expedient for such as would in this dangerous time walk circumspectly and shun snares to remember as to this present caution two things 1. That true godlinesse is not of such perfection in any on this side of eternity as doth exempt them from all erring whether in judgement or practice nor yet from stiffe maintaining mistakes when once they have turned aside unto them Luther was a godly man and had much of CHRIST in him I think none of them interessed in the present businesse will compare with him yet who knoweth not what great errouns he held in the matters of God and maintained not only stiffely but violently to the great prejudice of Religion and obstruction of the work of Reformation under which the Reformed Kirks do groan yet unto this day 2. How wofull a snare this I mean not godlinesse but the overweighing conceit of persons reputed to be godly hath proved in the neighbour Nation and Kirk Hath not this been one of the chiefest stratagems and engines whereby Satan hath prevailed to mar the fair work of Reformation so happily and hopefully once begun there and silled that Land with unparalelled confusions under which now it groans Foelix quem faciunt aliena pericula cautum It were good for us to learn wisedome by other mens dangers and to be warned by the beacons which others shipwrack hath set up to us lest we also make shipwrack upon the the same schelves and then say but too late non putavimus proverb still Scottish men wise behinde the hand prove all things from whatsoever hand they come and hold fast that which is good REVIEW I do indeed believe that the Author doth not intend to say or advise any thing to the prejudice or disadvantage of godlines or godly men yet do I desire him seriously and in sobernesse of minde as before the Lord to consider whether there hath been something in the late Publick Resolutions and in the proceedings and Acts of the late Assembly at Dundee to both which if I mistake not he had a great accession that is prejudiciall to godliness and to godly men Respect to these did exceedingly abate with the Publick Resolutions yea enimity against these did exceedingly grow with these resolutions a thing so manifest that they who did run could not but read it and did not the Acts at Dundee wherein besides the censures that were inflicted on some all whether Ministers Elders Expectants Schoolmasters Students or Professors of whatsoever sort who shall not acquiesce to the Acts and Conclusions of that Assembly and who after conference for their satisfaction oppose the same are appointed to be censured do not I say these Acts import a prejudice to godliness and godly men if prosecuted and executed they would at last non-Office and non-Church many Godly Church-Officers and godly Church-Members yea I fear the greatest part of the Godly in the Land His testimony concerning the godliness of many of the Authors and Abettors of this Protestation I do willingly accept as savouring of ingenuity and having truth in it I wish he had been as plain and positive in giving his judgment concerning others Whilest he differences them from these to whose godliness he bears testimony and saith that what ever they have been every whit he will not take upon him to judge it seems that he would render them suspected if not have them taken for persons naughty or little worth what ever be his meaning in it or his judgment of these others I shal not stand to enquire into it there be none of the Authors or Abettors of that Protestation to whom many of the godly in Scotland will not give an honest testimony neither will any thing that any of them have been contradict the same if at any time they have been in a wrong way yet have they through grace repented of and forsaken the same And it concerns the Author who hath been a sharer of the like precious mercy not to upbraid them but to acknowledge the goodness of the Lord both to them and to himself I deny not that there are godly men on the other side and such as suffered for the Truth and Cause of God but why he should say that some of them were in Christ before the Protesters and that they were sufferers for the truth when others had not the honour to be deors for it I do not well understand sundry of the Protesters for their being in Christ and suffering for the Truth and Cause of God are through grace of a very old and longstanding and famous honorable in all this Church I cannot reckon the moneths or years since the one or the other did begin to be in Christ and had the honour to suffer for the truth neither do I desire to insist on the comparison blessed be the Lord for all that are in Christ and for all who suffers for his Cause I wish and pray that all of them may conquer and overcome and if any of them be turned out of the way the Lord may again recover them and make their last dayes better then their first It is true some of the Protesters had not the honour to be doers for the Cause yea were opposers of it when some of the other side were suffering for it but what if they have obtained mercy because they did it ignorantly through unbelief if not to be a doer for the Cause yea if to be bearers down and opposers of the Cause when others were suffering for it be a good plea against any of the Protesters I fear most part of the late Assembly must leave their Benches and go to the Bar. I know none that traduces these godly men as Apostates yea I know and am perswaded that the Protesters have an high and honourable estimation of them for their piety and parts and for the great things whereof the Lord hath made sundry of them instrumentall in his House and though they cannot but testifie unlesse they would be unfaithfull that the course which these men have followed this while past in the matter of the Publick Resolutions is a course of defection and back-sliding yet do they not use to call them back-sliders much lesse Apostates and if any others do it they are not therein approven or allowed by them I joyn with the Author in his advice that men should take heed that they make not a snare of the opinion yea or the reall conviction of the godlinesse they have of any persons by approving taking
oâ— the Causes of the Lords controversie and offer and advise the â—ame to be made use of by all the Lords people in this Land Was it a fault in our non-conforming fore-fathers to bear a testimony and give their judgment against the six corrupt Assemblies and to reckon these Assemblies among the sins and guiltinesse of the Land and to desire the Land to be humbled for them If any of the Presbyteries of these times did passe a Presbyteriall judgment and sentence upon the nullity of any of those Assemblies and the iniquity of their Acts did they wrong in so doing and was this more then any power on earth could do that is inferiour to another Generall Assembly If it be thus the Church is like to be in an ill case if a Generall Assembly once go wrong I know that Inferiour Judicatories have not power over the Superior as a Commission or Presbytery over a Generall Assembly but this hinders not if any assume to themselvs the name and power of the Superior to whom they do not belong and by the pretended authority thereof make unjust Acts but the Inferiour may from the Word of God and from the Acts and Constitutions of the Church declare the nullity of these powers and the iniquity of these Acts. The Author hath taught us that an Assembly both wrong constitute and erring or only wrong constitute is no other wayes an Assembly then a painted Man is a Man and it can be no great fault for any living Man to discover the deceit of an Image that others be not deceived thereby He insinuates that he could adde mo instances not a few It is like that he hath brought forth these in which he conceived the greatest weight to lye and if these being weighed in the baâ—lance be found light we need not be afraid of what is yet in his treasure He saith true that the instances which he hath brought doth not belong formally and directly to the matter in question but he hath fetched a great compass to get them in supposing by these things to reach sore blowes to the Professions of the Protesters and to discover the hypocrisie thereof but how he hath proven his alleadgeance I leave it to indifferent men to judge who may also give sentence of their carriage to the Generall Assembly after the perusall of his Vindication and this Review VINDICATION THeir next pretention or profession is that they look upon the present differences of the Lords servants of the Ministery as one of the greatest tokens of the Lord his indignation against this Kirk and that they hold it their duty to be humbled before the Lord in the sense thereof and by all lawful and sure means within the compass of their power and station to endeavour the remedy Verily these differences are so to be looked upon because of the anger of the Lord this Land is darkened a man spareth not his brother Ephraim is against Manasseh and Manasseh against Ephraim and both against Judah And as all the Lords People and servants in the Land have cause to be humbled before the Lord in the sense thereof so some of these Brethren in a speciall way as being the main Authors and promoters of these rents and divisions Let impartiall men look back and consider the beginning and progresse and every step of the present divisions in this Kirk and Kingdom since the defeat at Dunbar and see who have been the prime Agents thereof I shall but point at some particulars who were they who after the defeat at Dunbar divided one part of the remnant of the Army from the other which was the first appearing step of our divisions and would never suffer them to joyn and unite together again was not the contriving of the Western Remonstrance the next step of our division and of it self a most divisive course as containing positive determinations of matters of publick and high concernment condâ—mning approven publick Acts not only of the State but also of the Gen. Assembly by private men without any advice had or sought from the Publick Judicatories either of Kirk or State yea containing also in the close thereof a band engaging themselves to prosecute the matters of that Remonstrance according to their power a thing judged always in this Kirk a most divisive thing for any privat men to do by themselves Was it not some of these Brethren who when the Conference was at Pearth upon the Remonstrance opposed by all means conjunction with the distracted Forces of the Kingdom and when it was proponed in the Conference if they injoying their own judgement concerning the dis-owning of the Kings Interest yet upon other grounds of the quarrel wherein they agreed with the rest of the Kingdom would joyn with the rest of the Forces for defence against the common Enemy did not some publickly and plainly professe that they could not and they would not joyn Are not these Brethren the men that because the sense given upon the Western Remonstrance though the most moderate and with much tendernesse and respect of the persons having hand in it with-drew themselves in a most tumultuous and disorderly way never daigning themselves to come to the Meeting thereafter which was the next step of our divisions Was it not a divisive course when the Resolutions were given to the Parliaments Quare concerning persons for to be employed in the defence of their Countrey presently to emit and spread Papers through the Countrey under pretence of writing them onely as Letters to the Commission expressing their scruples condemning the said Resolutions as a defection from the Covenant and former principles suppose they thought in their Consciences these Resolutions to be such yea suppose that really they had contained some matter of that kind that their Commission had erred as humanum est labi yet they shall never be able to clear themselves before indifferent Judges and impartiall of divisive walking in disdaining to come and propone their doubts and reasons against that Resolution in an amicable and modest way in the Commission it self and taking such a way of writing and sending abroad testimonies as they called them amongst themselves peremptorily condemning traducing and tending to the rendring odions honest faithful and godly Brethren and agenting as diligently as they could to induce others through the Countrey to do the like Many other instances or divers motions may be given but by this much let any man judge if they have not cause to be deeply humbled for the divisions in the Land amongst the Lords servants REVIEW I Shall not deny but some of these Brethren have in a speciall way reason to be humbled for the divisions of the Land as they are the righteous judgments of the Lord upon their sins which have been greater then the sins of many neither am I so zealous of their credit as to say that no circumstance of their carriage in these things could have been better ordered they are but
prejudice to the Assembly in judging of these resolutions at last the result was this that such of the Assembly as they desired to confer with might speak with them but that no particular person should be nominated nor any thing written thereof in the minutes of the Assembly In prosecution of this desire some of the unsatisfied Brethren did meet with the Moderator of that Assembly and some other eminent men members of the Commission at Mr. Robert Blair his chamber two several diets and after some conference to and fro did earnestly beseech and presse upon them some with tears that they would be pleased to be instrumental in adjourning the Assembly and in delaying to ratifie the Publick Resolutions but they were not pleased to condescend so much as to undertake to be assisting to these brethren in obtaining their desire that night in which the Meeting was adjourned from St. Andrews to Dundee the dis-satisfied Brethren did again publickly presse that the Assembly migh be adjourned till some considerable time till pains might be taken in an amicable way for composing of differences which being refused they were necessitated to Protest as seing no other remedy against the current of backsliding notwithstanding of this Protestation the Meeting at Dundee went on not onely to the ratifying of the publick resolutions but to the condemning of the Protestation censuring of some of the Protesters and making of Acts declaring all of these censurable who shall not acknowledge their constitution and submit to their Acts and appointing Presbyteries and Synods in their respective bounds to proceed to the execution thereof and giving power to their Commission for that effect where Presbyteries were negligent What length their Commission was gone and what they had in consideration against the Protesters when they were interrupted and broken off by the surprizall at Eliot themselves best know After that time the Lord was pleased to exercise the Land with so sad dispensations as for a good while made all Publick Meetings of Ministers very difficult and dangerous untill the Country being somewhat quieted about the midst of October these who had Protested against the Meeting at St. Andrews and Dundee as not being a lawfull and free Generall Assembly with many other Ministers and Elders from severall parts of the Country did meet at Edinburgh where after some dayes spent together in Prayer and supplication and in confessing of their sins to God and one to annother they did in the next place after conference and mutuall communication of Light one with another set down their thoughts concerning the Causes of the Lords wrath against the Land that in that time of darknesse there might be some light and directory in these things to such as were willing to receive and make use thereof amongst these causes of wrath they did condescend upon and reckon the Publick Resolutions of Church and State for bringing the Malignant party first to the Army and then to the Judicatories and the actuall intrusting of them with the power of the Kingdom both Military and Civil and the prelimiting and corrupting of the Generall Assembly in the free and lawfull constitution thereof and its ratifying of the Publick Resolutions which did involve a defection from the Cause and laying a foundation for censuring of all such who did not approve of the constitution of that Assembly and submit to the Acts there of and finding themselves more and more convinced of the nullity of that Assembly at Dundee and how needfull it was to preserve the Church of Scotland in the possession of her due priviledges and to keep together a remnant who might be as a branch of hope if so be the Lord would be favourable to them and take pleasure in them for repairing of the breach such of them as were Members of the Commission of the Gen. Assembly did find themselves warranted and called of God to take possession of the power and trust committed unto them by the Assembly 1650. yet so as they did not authoritatively impose or require obedience to any of their Emissions concerning the causes of the Lords wrath which was the only thing they medled with but having agreed upon these Causes with the advice of diverse Brethren from severall parts of the Kingdom did offer and advise the same to be made use of by all the Lords people in the Land leaving place to adde as the Lord should make further discoveries thereafter At the same time all the Brethren who were met did write Letters to sundry reverend and godly men in the Ministery of a different judgment desiring an amicable Conference with them and conceiving that they could not well be brought together to one place in such a season of the year and when travelling was so difficult they did appoint some of their number to wait upon some of them at St. Andrews and upon others of them at Glasgow who might hold forth unto them what in their judgments was the most conducible means for union and peace both with God and among our selves and to hear what should be offered unto them by these Brethren what passed in these Conferences I leave it to these who were present to relate hoping that none who were present will say that the desires and endeavors of union did break off upon our side those of our number not only professing themselvs willing to confer hear what should be offred unto them but to attend at any other diet that should be appointed and to endeavour if it were desired a more numerous and frequent meeting of Brethren of both sides From all which it doth appear that the Protesters all along have been pursuers of peace and not promoters and fosterers of division The Author propounds the question If it had not been a more probable and Christian like mean for remedying the divisions to have dealt for a meeting of judicious and godly men on both sides and for an amicable and brotherly Conference on equal tearms about the differences then that the Protesters being but the one side should have taken upon themselves the authority of a Publick Judicatory and by themselvs straightway to condemne the other side as guilty In answer to which beside what is already said I would first ask the Author Whether it be fair dealing that these at St. Andrews after they were earnestly entreated of their Brethren to adjourn and delay the ratifying of the Publick Resolutions shall first take upon them the Authority of a Generall Assembly to ratifie the Publick Resolutions condemne their Brethren who protest against them censure some of them with Suspension and others of them with Deposition for that very thing and lay a foundation for censuring all of them and all others in the Church of Scotland who should continue to differ from them and oppose them in these things and then afterwards cry out upon their Brethren who hold forth the sin and iniquity of such proceedings as upon men who are not for peace
length to condemn these things and for the manner of their Actings they acknowledge themselves to be men subject to the like passions with others but knowes no cause why for these the trading of Prelaticall steâ—s should be changed rather upon them thâ—n upon others some in the following of their duty are more emiss and others more forward but as long as they do straitly and honestly own their duty it is hard either because of the one or of the other to charge them with so heavy impuâ—ations VINDICATION WE shall now weigh these reasons whereupon the Protestation is built and which have been added lately as batterages to hold it up surely the grounds whereupon men would adventure on such an Act or others would joyn in approving of it had need to be weighty in themselves and relevant and also clear in mens Consciences To Protest against â—â—r dissent from some particular acts and constitutions of a Gen. Assembly is a thing which may be done without schisme and derogation to the Authority and being of Government but when a Gen. Aâ—sembly it self is protested against and declined as unlawfull and having no authority at all who sees not how sad the consequences must readily be in hat Kirk hardly can it be by any outward means but turne to a fixed schisme which thing how have godly orthodox christian in all ages of the Kirk detested and abhorred choosing rather ever to tollerate great offences which they did see but could not mend rather then to aâ—vide the Kirk of Christ and then it would be seriously considered if the reasons and grounds of such an Act be not clear and relevant how high an attempt it against the Kingly Office of Christ to trample under foot his Supream externall Court in a Nationall Kirk Come we then and ponder the Reasons alleaged for this Protestation and declinature whether they be found weighty or light vincat veritas REVIEW I Shall not stand to discuse the relevancy of all that is asserted in this generall discourse but returns this answer thereunto It seems the Author doth not deny that it is lawful and in some cases necessary to Protest against and decline some Gen. Assemblies and that it would be so in our Hypothesis if the grounds were clear and relevant whatsoever will plead for a Protestation against particular Acts that are wrongthe same greater reason will plead for a Protestation against a wrong constitution because the errour of a wrong constitution is of greater consequence as importing more prejudice to the work and People of God and being a higher attempt against the Kingly Office of Jesus Christ then many wrong acts are and therefore there is the greater reason to prevent the same in Jure where it cannot be done in facto even as men by such like Protestations preserve their Rights jure when by the spate of a declining Judicatory they are like to be oppressed de facto and therefore have Orthodox Christians in all ages born Testimony and Protested against corrupt councels as wel as corrupt acts we shal not go far back to seek instances It is known what the Protestant Church did against the Councel of Trent and how often faithfull men in the Church since the Reformation from Popery have born Testimony and protested against unlawfull Assemblies as well as against unwarrantable acts neither doth it cause schisme in the Church or derogate any thing from the Authority and being of Government to Protest against usurpers corrupters or perverters of it in a false court but it is the lawfull and hath been the usuall mean in this Church blessed unto her of the Lord to prevent and remead schisme and to preserve the Authority and being of Government with the purity and Liberty of all the Ordinances and whatsoever sad consequences can be imagined to follow upon it do lye at the doors of these who by declining from their Principles carries on and cleaves to a corrupt constitution of an Assembly and not on these who adhering to sound Principles do from the conscience of their duty bear Testimony against the same It hath been often and truly said that the side wall which fals and not the gevill which stands is to blame for the rent and ruine of the House I do willingly acknowledge that it is an high attempt against the Kingly Office of Jesus Christ to trample under foot his Supream externall Court in a Nationall Church but as the Protesters are guilty of this high attempt if they have Protested against the Meeting at St. Andrews and Dundee without a cause and upon grounds that are not relevant so if the Authors and abettors of the Publick Resolutions have corrupted this Court in the free and lawfull constitution thereof and have taken upon themselves to be an Assembly whâ—lest they were none then wil they and not the other be found guilty of this high attempt Let us therefore come to the discussing and clearing of the reasons that the Protesters plead for themselves VINDICATION THeir first reason for unfreenesse and unlawfulnesse of the Assembly that the Election of Commissioners to the same was prelimited and prejudged in the due liberty thereof by an Act Letter of their Commission of the last Assembly sent to Presbyteries appointing such Brethren as after Conference remained unsatisfied with and continued to oppose Publick Resolutions to be cited to the Gen. Assembly Thus it is briefly proponed in the Protestation In the late larger paper emitted and spread abroad since wherein as may be conceived are mustered all the Forces that could be gathered together against that Assembly and many heads have been imployed in that one every man that readeth it decerneth whose Pen hath given the forme and frame to it and any decerning man also may perceive in it something of School and something of Law and registers which the former behoved to have from these quarriers It is put in a Sy logistick form thus That it is no free Generall Assembly the Election of whose Commissioners is so prejudged and pre-limited in the due freedom and liberty thereof that many Ministers of Presbyteries in a capacity to be chosen for their ability and faithfulnesse are by the Presbyteries at the order of the Supream Judicatory past by and set aside in the Election and rendred uncapable to be members thereof But the late Meeting is such Therefore c. We wil not follow out foot for foot the tract of many objections which the contrivers of this Paper have either found some way made by others or have formed themselves at their own pleasure against this and other following reasons and their replyes thereunto But shall propone such reasens as we conceive discovers the nullity of these and other reasons not omitting the consideration of any thing contained in this Paper which shall seem to meet with what we shall bring as occasion shall be offered without tying our selves to the order of this Paper For answer then to this
first ground 1. As it lyeth in the Protestation it could have no force to prove any illegality or nullity of the Assembly at the time of the Protestation suppose that the Commissioners Act Letter sent to Presbyteries and indeed contained under Prelimitation because this fault of the Commission could not be imputed to the Assembly to nullifie it while as yet it was to the knowledge of the Assembly but an aliedgance not proven that such under pre-limitation had been used in the election of Commissioners and that they had not as yet determined nor approven the deed of the Commission nor deed of Presbyteries done thereupon in elections at the giving in of this Protestation the Assembly had not as yet considered the Commissioners Proceedings neither indeed was it in their power to cognosce upon exceptions against the Commission without change of the Order of proceeding that had been used constantly in all bygone time and upon a great debate with the Parliament it self in the Assembly 1648. had been established by a formall act as the Protesters themselves well understood and acknowledged and therefore it was that upon this they offered to the Assembly before the choosing of a Moderator a Paper pressing the changing and reform the order of proceeding in the Generall Assembly which before had alwayes been in use as if some of themselves had not been the main maintainers and procurers of the establishment of that order before when it made for them And as the Assembly as yet but in heap of the matter and not constitute into a Judicatory could have taken into consideration and have altered the practice and constitution of former Assemblies The Assembly therefore did offer to call in this exception and to give unto it all due considerations as soon as possibly they could win at it REVIEW WHat needs all this wast of words concerning the gathering and mustering of forces and the imploying of many heads and the pen that gave the forme and some thing of School and something of Law and Registers which the former behoved to have from these Qâ—aerees The truth is that if it were a purpose to tell it there were very few heads imployed in that businesse haply as few as about the Vindication and there was little gathering of forces for it the difficulty of correspondence and shortnesse of time wherein it was penned admitting of very little communication of thoughts and the Author is mistaken when he speaks of two Quaeres one of School another of Registers and of Law out of which the former behoved to have his materials and haply also concerning the pen that gave it the frame as some others have been before him but what though all these things were true which he alleadgeth Is it any fault in weak Souldiers to call in their fellows to their help and to strengthen one another in maintaining of their ground against many and strong Adversaries or doth he hunt after commendation and applause by setting forth the preparations and multitude and strength of his opposites whom yet he by himself alone supposeth to have defeat It was free for the Author in answering the reasons contained in the Protestation and the other Paper relating to it to choose such a method as seemed best to him though it would have seemed to be more easie for his readers if he had followed foot for foot what is contained in these Papers I do more wonder that he hath left many things of importance unanswered not so much as once touching them But let us come to the answers which he gives which I shall take as they ly in the Vindication upon supposal that the Letter and act sent by the Commission to Presbyteries did contain an under-prelimitation the first ground as it lyeth in the Protestation hath force to prove the illegality or nudity in the Assembly notwithstanding of any thing the Author saith to the contrary First he seems to lay this ground that nothing can be of force to prove the illegality or nullity of the Assembly but that which can be imputed to the Assembly it self but I fear that this ground which is here hinted at by him and much made use of by some others in this particular shall fail all who lean thereupon I suppose that by a Letter and Act of the Commission and a deed of the Presbyteries done thereupon elections had been so pre-limited that alâ— Ruling Elders had been excluded and Ministers onely chosen or the one half of the Ministers excluded without a just cause from having voice in the elections or from being chosen Commissioners would not these pre-limitations have force to prove a nul Assembly the same being proponed and rejected as not relevant exceptions when the Commissioners did meet to constitute themselves into an Assembly it seems by the Authors ground they could not because they are but alledgeances not yet proven and they have not determined therein no approven thereof because it is not in their power to cognosce upon exceptions against the Commission without change of the order of Proceedings to the Ass which had been constantly used in all time by gone there may be many things done in Commissions Presbyteries in prelimiting and perverting the elections that cannot be imputed yea which the Assembly may condemn that may make an illegall and null Assembly and therefore upon supposall that the Letter and Act sent to Presbyteries did contain an under-pre-limitation it might have force at the time of the Protestation to prove a null Assembly though it could not be imputed to the Assembly it self But how doth he prove that it could not be imputed to the Assembly first it was saith he to the knowledge of the Assembly but an alledgeance not proven it seems the Author doth not question the relevancie of it in Jure if the truth of the fact had been proven but it being relevant in Jure as upon his supposall it needs must and offered to be proven in facto yea the matter of fact as to the presumption of it being manifest to the consciences of many of the Assembly ought they not before constituting themselvs in an Assembly either to have tryed and discussed the same or else to have laid aside the persons against whom it was propounded from sitting as Members in the Assembly untill it might have been gotten tryed and discussed but they did neither of these and was not this to be imputed to the Assembly Next he sayeth that the Assembly had not yet determined in nor approven the deed of the Commission nor the deed of Presbyteries done thereupon in Elections at the giving in of the Protestation Bâ—t in this he is much mistaken because the Assembly by admitting the Commissioners from Presbyteries so elected did as really approve these limited Elections and so the deed of the Commission and Presbyteries done thereupon as ever any preceeding Assem used to approve the most free Elections to wit onely by admitting the Commissioners yea
the Assemb rejecting of the exceptions and allowing the Commissioners against whom it was propounded to sit notwithstanding the propounding thereof was a real approving of the Commission and of what the Presbyteries did thereupon as we shal afterwards Godwilling clearly shew Thirdly he sayeth that the Assembly had not yet considered the proceedings of the Commission neither was it in their power to cognosce upon exceptions against the Commission without change of the order of proceedings which had been used constantly in all time by-gone This is a pretty fancie to defend an ill cause the Church of Scotland have found it necessary in the intervall betwixt Generall Assemblies to have her Commission whose trust should be to preserve the Liberties of the Church and to take care of some things of more General concernment committed unto them and that in all these things they should keep themselves within the bounds of their Commission and proceeding according to the standing Acts of former Generall Assemblies and that in the next ensuing Assembly they shall give an accompt of their proceedings during the whole time of their Commission in the beginning of the Assembly before any other Cause or matter be handled and their proceedings to be allowed or dis-allowed as the Assembly shall think expedient Now saith the Author this matter of pre-limitation being an exception against the Commission could not be taken in consideration without the change of this order I shall not say that it might have been done without any shadow of change of order But I desire to be considered that it never was the intention nor did it ever come into the mind of any free lawfull Generall Assembly of the Church of Scotland to give power to their Commissioners to give Lawes concerning the constitutng of an Assembly these are clearly set down in the Policy and Acts of the Church according to which the Commission ought to walk in all things committed to their trust not medling with any thing not committed unto them much less medling with it in a way contrary to that Policy these Acts and therefore did they appoint the proceedings of these Commissioners to be tryed and allowed or dis-allowed in the next Assembly before the doing of any thing else Now a Commission contrary to their trust doth meddle with the Constitution of an Assembly and by their Letter and Act and the deed of Presbyteries thereupon the elections are prelimited as the Author is content to suppose and when the Assembly meets and this is proponed as an exception to be taken in consideration against such Members of the Ass as was Members of that Commission he tels us it cannot be considered without change of order being an exception against the Commissioners proceedings What a sad case the Church is brought to by this means that â—s to suffer the constitution of her Assemblies to be corrupted by her own Commission and that without remedy or why it must as to the Constitution of the Assemb be taken in consideration before the admitting of these Commissioners to fit as Members or else not at all because if if the Commissioners be once received the Members admitted and the Assemb constituted hoc ipso that these things are done that prelimitation is approven or why the Assem hath already constituted found themselvs a lawful Assem with these Commissioners inclusive notwithstanding of that exception That the matter may be yet further cleared it would be considered that against the constitution of Judicatories in their Members there may be exceptions of severall sorts some that are more personall or particular relating to one or two or some few upon personall scandals and miscarriages Some more common and universall that concerns all or many a Judicatory may proceed to constitute it self and act as a Judicatory before discussing â—xceptions of the first sort having laid aside the Members against whom these exceptions are propounded till conveniently they may be gotten tryed and discussed because there is no exception but against a few and upon particular and personall sâ—andals the far greater part being Members uncontrolable and rightly qualified but they cannot proceed to constitute themselves and act as a Judicatory before discussing of exceptions of the second sort unlesse we would suppose that after constituting themselves into a Judicatory or finding themselvs to be a Judicatory they might again find themselvs to be no Judicatory Exceptions of a more common and universal influence against causa causae of the Constitution of an Assembly to wit against Elections which is the ground of the Commissions as the Commissions are of the constitution of the Assembly ought to be considered before constitution be declared for unfree Elections make null Commissions and all or a great many null Commissions make a null Assembly From these things I trust it is manifest that the exceptions against the freedome of Election because of the Act and Letters of the Commission and the deed of the Presbyteries following thereupon ought to have been taken in consideration before the Meeting did constitute themselves in an Assembly and that the Commissioners whom that exception did concern ought not to have been admitted to sit as Members before the trying and discussing thereof as to that of the change of the order of proceeding which had been used constantly upon which the Author seems to lay so much weight besides what is answered already I say there needed no change in that Order in discussing of any thing that was intrusted to the Commission for this was not within the compassâ— of their power and trust but diametrally opposite to the same and therefore the Commission having so far exceeded their bounds as to meddle with Constitutions of the Assembly by prelimiting of the Elections this did unavoidably necessitate the cognition and consideration of that part of thâ— Commissions proceeding so far as it did relate to the Constitution of the Assembly though not formally as it did concern their carriage I know not to what purpose the Author alleadges that that order was on a debate wâ—th the Parliament it self in the year 1648. established by a former Act as the Protesters themselves well understood would he by this insinuate that there was a debate betwixt the Parliament and the Assembly concerning the Commissions pre-limiting of Elections and that the Parl. desired this to be considered of before the Assemblies constituting themselves into a Judicatory and that the Assembly did refuse it and afterwards established the Act which he speaks of Oâ— that the Parliament did desire the Commissioners of the former Assembly should be removed from sitting as Members in the Assembly 1648. untill the Exceptions propounded against them by them should be taken in consideration and discussed If he mean any of these he is much mistaken because there was no such debate betwixt the Parliament and the Assembly nor betwixt the Assembly and any persons whatsoever in the year 1648. as we shall afterwards convincingly clear And
provocations which are great and many they would by this also have been accessory to what the Nation smarts under this day as the righteous reward of such revolting from God and therefore if ye have no more to instance but this it doth not prove but that they may all of them be still called faithfull and honest men Secondly he sayeth Be it so that some were wont to be chosen Commissioners who were not now chosen yet this is litle to the point that Elections was carryed by influence of the Commissions Letter and Act. But granting that Presbyteries did upon that Letter and Act leave their wonted way these years past in thâ—ir Election it is to the point in hand because it is praesumptio juris de jure that this change flowed from the influence that the Letter and Act had upon them the Author seeing somewhat of this intimates another cause that moved that change to wit that the whole Kirk was growing sensible of this thing as dangerous whereby the whole power of Publick Government was near become settled in the persons of some particular men and these but a few as constant Commissioners in which he thinks there will be need to pre-limite Presbyteries that they make not an use of it If the Lord shall be pleased again to grant the Liberty of an Assembly But to say nothing that this was the language which was wont to be spoken by dis-affected men these years past especially dis-affected Ministers who fell under the censures of the Church whose pretences and alleadgeances in this particular have strength added unto them by the Authors asserting the same thing It is non causa pro causa as will appear by these two things First there were a good many of these who were for the Publick Resolutions who had wont to be Commissioners these years past and who had a great some of them a greater swey in Government than the other and yet most if not all of these were chosen also the last year Now if that was the cause which the Author speaks of why did it not bring forth the like effect in regard of both seeing both were alike lyable to that exception Next if the whole Church was so grown in the sense of that evill why did they not provide the remedy at the last Assembly it being in their power so to have done and the Commissioners as the Authors assertion will import having such an impression of the same upon their spirits If the Author will speak his Conscience I think he will not deny but if these men whom he saith to have been excluded upon that ground have been for the Publick Resolutions even these amongst them whom that ground might have been conceived to reach most would have been chosen and admâ—tted Commissioners as well as others If the whole Church was growing sensible of this thing surely the Meeting at St. Andrews did litle regard or expresse it when they choosed one to be their Moderator who not onely had been Moderator of the former Commission whose proceedings were then in question and to be examined but also in many preceding Commissions and Aâ—len biâ—es and who had been a chief Aâ—tor all that while in all these things that concern Publick Government which I speak not to bear any paâ—ticular blame upon him or upon his carriage but to let see that either the whole Church was not growing sensible of this as the Author insinuates or else that hâ—r sense of it in her Representative was let out or holden in upon men according to their judgment and carriage in the Publick Resolutions and so was not the cause of the Presbyteries not choosing such as they were wont to choose Thirdly Thaâ— few opposers were chosen he thinks it is no wonder because they are but few in comparison of the rest of the Ministery of the Land How few soever they were in comparison of thâ— rest of the Ministery in the Land yet these of them who were formerly wont to be chosen Commissioners were not few in respect of the rest of the Commissioners neither yet were they so few as the Author reckons them when he sayeth that four parts of five of the Presbyteries had in them at that time no opposers to the Publick Resolutions nay they were and are still a very considerable number and whensoever an exact calculation shall be made by a particular list of the whole Ministery in the Land and of these who were against the Publick Resolutions at the time of the Elections and of the whole Commissioners of the Assembly at S. Andrews and Dundee I believe it shall be found that the number of Commissioners who were chosen from among these who were against the Publick Resolutions waâ— no way in proportion answerable to the number of the other That some unsatisfied were chosen without another Election and without Protestation even when neither whole Societies were unanimous against the Resolutions not yet the plurality were opposers he doth affirm it but doth not prove it for the instances which he gives of the Commissioners both of the Presbyteâ—y and University of Aberdeen prove nothing lesse For the University the Letter and Act came not to it at least were not read in it and the plurality there were opposers of the Publick Resolutions And for the Presbytery by his own grant there was a Protestation against the opposing Brother who was chosen which was taken up again with much difficulty and by earnest dealing of some of the Brethren opposite to the Publick Resolutions whose desire was condescended unto with condition that their should be a third Commissioner it being in the mean while suggested in private that he who had first appeared in the Protestation against the opposers might be the man which I relate not upon hear-say but upon the subscribed testimony of these who were witnesses to the matter of fact So I hope that nothing against the truth hath been asserted by the Writer in this part of his Answer The Author sayeth in a Parenthesis that dissenting in the enumeration is idlely reckoned up Why he should say so I do not conjecture unlesse that it be he thinks dissenting and protesting the same thing which they are not as appears clearly from an Act of the Assembly 1644. concerning dissent and Protestations in Presbyteries He seems unsatisfied with the Writer that whilst he makes enumeration of elections of Presbyteries divided in judgment some doubted some dissented from or protested against some both wayes that he gives no particular instances of all these sorts but only two and he tells his Reader that he suspects he can give no more or very few But he is suspicious without cause moe can be given and are given by the Writer in that very Paper that the Author is replying to and moe then all these can yet be given if need be And though they were but few this is no great wonder because there was but few Presbyteries did choose
because such as were chosen were unsatisfied with the Commissions proceedings The Synod of Pearth meeting a little after and receiving the Act and Letter of the Commission did thereupon sustain the dissent and Protestation of that man in their number and did appoint the Presbytery of Dunkel to choose the Commissioners new again Ans This is the onely Instance alleadged with some colour to evidence some influence of the Commissions Letter and Act but yet when it is discussed there will be litle to the purpose found in it but let it be so that the Synod sustained the Protestation on that ground and appointed a new Election yet it is known that the Presbytery in the second Election still did choose Brethren dis-satisfied with the Resolutions and as I believe these same whom they had chosen before who were admitted in the Assembly without any question and reasoned and voted therein according to their minde without any restraint or hindrance so that if there was any fault here it might be well in the Synods Act but not in the Presbytery which was the onely Act about this businesse capable of chargeable with the fault of pre-limitation but this was done with freedom This much to the one part of the Assumption wherby it may appear that whatever prelimitations were or might be in the Commissions Act or Letter yet the Elections were free because Presbyteries therein were not passively pre-limited but choosed freely according to their own minde Were there no more to be said this much may make the Protesters bethink themselves better in their second thoughts of their rash adventuring upon so high an Act as a Protestation and Declinature of a Generall Assembly as unfree and unlawful and may make others advise better ere they adjoyn themselves to it by approbation REVIEW ALbeit this Instance seem to the Author to be alleadged with some colour to evidence some influence of the Commissions Letter and Act yet he thinks when it is discussed there will be found litle to the purpose in it and his reason is because it is known that the Presbytery at the second Election still did choose Brethren dis-satisfied with the Resolutions and as he believes these same whom they had chosen before c. But notwithstanding of all the Author says there is very much to the purpose in it First there is this in it to the purpose that the judgments and voices of some of the Members of the Presbytery viz. of these who did dissent from the first election were pre-limited by the Letter and Act of the Commission they giving these onely for the reason of their dissent Secondly there is this in it to the purpose that the judgment of the whole Synod which doth include five Presbyteries except a few who did dissent from and Protest against the Synod sustaining the dissent of these in Dunkel from the Election upon that ground was by the same Letter and Act pre-limited to the declaring of that Election void and null meerly upon this reason that they had procâ—eded contrary to the Letter and Act of the Commission Thirdly there is this to the purpose in it that the whole Presbyterie was so pre-limited by an Act of the Synod founded on the other Act and Letter as to be necessitate to passe from the first Election which was lawfully made and against which no exception was made but the Letter and Act and to make a new Election that they did again choose persons opposite to the Publick Resolutions was from the over-bearing Conscience of their duty That they were admitted in the Assembly without any question is not true their admittence was questioned by a Member of the Commission then a Member of the Assembly a man zealous for the Publick Resolutions and the Moderator perceiving that others opposite to the Publick Resolutions were like to take advantage by it he did handsomely wave it Now these things being examined which the Author sayeth to the first part of the Assumption I leave it to be judged whether he had cause to say that whatever pre-limitations were in the Commissions Act and Letter yet the Elections were free because Presbyteries therein were not passively pre-limited but chosen freely according to their own minde and whether he had cause to draw so strong insulting lines as he subjoyns thereto If there be no more to say then he hath yet said I professe ingenuously I see no cause why the Protesters should bethink themselves better in their second thoughts of their adventuring on such a high Act as to protest against and decline from that Meeting at St. Andrews and Dundee as not being a lawfull free Generall Assembly or why others should have advised better ere they had joyned themselves to 〈◊〉 by approbation it seems a little beyond the bounds of modesty for men to drive and vent such conclusions upon their own reasonings though haply they might bear them It being fit to leave these things to the judicious and unbyassed Readers to give judgement as they find cause VINDICATION IT is true that for proof of the unlawfulness of these pretended Assemblies condemned by the Assembly at Glasgow 38. amongst other reasons the want of freedome in the matter of election of Commissioners is alleadged as a main and principal one but there the matter was not meerly alledged but clearly evidenced that the Commissioners sent to these Meetings were not indeed elected by Presbyteries but nominated by the Kings Letters See Session 12. Reas against the pretended Assembly at Lithgow 1606. and at Glasgow 1610. REVIEW THe Author for taking off of this prejudice and reason which stood in the way of the Assembly at Glasgow 38. who prove the unlawfulnesse of these pretended Assemblies by the want of freedome in the matter of election of Commissioners saith that their matter was not meerly alleadged but clearly evidenced that the Commissioners sent to these Meetings were not indeed elected by Presbyteries but nominate by the Kings Letters if he mean that they were not freely elected by Presbyteries proceeding meerly ex proprio motu It is true because the King and the Bishops Letters had influence upon them to pre-limite their elections but if he mean that they were not all elected by Presbyteries nor had any Commission from them but came meerly upon the Kings Letters it is not true because albeit the reason against the pretended Assembly at Lithgow 1606. seems to favour this yet that against the pretended Assembly at Glasgow 1610. intimateteth that they were chosen and had Commissions because it saith First that the elections were not free an election then there was but not a free election if there had been no election the Assembly 38. would no question have so expressed it as importing a reason of nullity more clear and strong Next that the Bishop of St. Andrews required them to send such Commissioners as the King had nominate assuring them that no other would be accepted If the Presbyteries did send them
case in the year 48. the elections being past in most places before it was done and might be justly presumed to have been past in all as shall afterwards be more fully cleared but it was not so in the 51. what was then done being previous to the elections Next I give clear answer by denying the minor because the Commission did not require such a thing the most that they did was to recommend it which is far from requiring and therefore by the writers grounds the Author hath proven nothing at all To the second consideration that the Letter and Act of the Commission 48. was not writen untill most part or all elections in Presbyteries was past he makes answer that so were many of the elections of Presbyteries before the Letter and Act of the Commission 51. came unto them But that is not true if we take the Authors own ground to wit that few Presbyteries except it be such as are farthest distant chooseth their Commissioners 20. or 25. dayes before the Assembly and allowing 8. dayes for dispatch to Presbyteries and take withall the date of the Letter and Act of the Commission 1651. which is the 28. day of May and compare it with the day of the down sitting of the Assembly which was the 16. day of July the untruth of this will appear because between the date of the Act and the diet of the Assembly are 48. dayes of which deducing 8. for the dispatch there do remain 40. dayes till the Assembly which do far exceed the time spoken of by the Author for the other part of it that most part of the elections 48. were past before the Letter and Act of the Commission came unto them I do appeal to the Presbytery Books There is little or no weight in the presumptions that the Author gives to the contrary 1. He takes upon him to prove that some Presbyteries did upon that Letter and Act refer and cite some of their members to the Generall Assembly some Presbytery dayes before they began to think upon the election of Commissioners but he hath named none and comprises them under the word some haply lest it should be known how few there were probably but one that is St. Andrews in the matter of one of their university men who was also a Minister Next he makes a supputation but of 8. dayes for the dispatch of the Letter to Presbyteries and that to the most part of Presbyteries it might have soon come and but of 20. or 25. dayes interveening betwixt the diet of the Assembly and the elections in most parts of Presbyteries If the custome of dispatch had been by pasts hired and dispatched to severall parts immediatly after the writing of the Letter and making of the Act it might have come to the most part of Presbyteries in 8. dayes but so it was not neither in the 48. nor 51. but by occasionall bearers and therefore would take more time and I think it is said gratis that few Presbyteries do make their elections 20. or 25. dayes before the Assembly but there is no sure way of determining these differences about circumstances of time when neither the one nor the other Letter came to Presbyteries but from the Presbytery books and therefore to these I do appeal to stand or fal in this matter at their sentence only remembering this that it is clear that the date of the Letter and Act of the Commission 48. is but five weeks before the Assembly whereas the date of the other is 7. weeks before the Assembly VINDICATION THe third Consideration presented by the writer of this Paper is that before the writing of that Letter by the Commission 48. the whole Kirk of Scotland almost in all the Presbyteries and Synods thereof had declared themselvs in conscience unsatisfied with the engagement excepting a very few Ministers scattered here and there in Presbyteries which few were also known to be opposites to the work of God or neutralls and indifferent therein from the beginning Answer 1. If by the Kirk of Scotland be here understood the collective Kirk I cannot see how it is true that is said here that the whole Kirk of Scotland for the most part except a few Ministers had declared themselves unsatisfied with the engagement certain it is and too certain that very many in the Kirk of Scotland in this sense of all ranks in all quarters almost were too evidently too active for it as the censure civill and Ecclesiasticall which thereupon followed do witnesse if the Ministeriall Kirk be understood it is true that the far greater part were dis-satisfied but yet they were not so few Ministers that were of a contrary minde they were too many and in some places the greater part of whole Presbyteries It may well be remembred what a summe they were like to have accompted to at the time of the Generall Assembly and it seems to me too much that all of them were either opposers of the work whether hereby be understood the outward work of Reformation or the power of Religion or neutrals or indifferent from the beginning the contrary is known of some of them and I would not say so much of all them that were censured though I acknowledge their censure was just 2. A great part of the Kirk of Scotland before the writing of the late Commissions Letter had declared themselves satisfied with the Commissions Resolutions and dissatisfied with the course of the opposers thereof and count when the writer will he shall find that the dissenters from the Commission 48. were not fewer yea not so few as the dissenters from the Commission 51. we know that the number of these amounted to at their greatest Meeting at _____ of late and howsoever moe of these then of the first be godly men and had been more faithfull in the Cause formerly yet their present course at that time being not faithfulnes to the Cause but prejudiciall to it and the whole Kirk and Country both they might justly have been referred and called before the Gen. Assembly to give an accompt of their way as wel as the former were though they be more tenderly dealt with as to themselves was evidently seen in the whole progress with them and was also really apparent in the very Act and Letter of the Commission REVIEW I Think the Author did well enough know that in setting down of the third Difference the Writer did not mean of the Collective but of the Ministeriall Church of which not only the greater part but almost all had declared themselves unsatisfied in Conscience with the Engagement excepting a few Ministers scattered here and there in Presbyteries who were known either to be opposers of the Work of God or neutrall and indifferent therein from the beginning it is true they were too many in regard of the evill course they were engaged into yet were they but few in number who did not at that time in some outward way at least give some
testimony against that Engagement though alas some of these in these late Resolutions have now dissembled it in their words and moe have betrayed it in their actions that what they then did in condemning the Engagement and afterwards approving the solemn Publick Confession of sins and engagement to duties was against their hearts when the Author hath streatched their number to the utmost the most he dare say of it is the great part of whole Presbyteries in some places But these some places that he speaks of were so few that it will be found they will come to a very poor accompt when they shall be named they were so far from being like to amount to any number at the Generall Assembly If he mean of these who were Members of the Assembly that there were few if any at all who did not joyn in approving the Declaration of the Assembly against the Engagement If he mean of these who subscribed the divisive Supplication these were so few that they did not all of them being put together amount to the twentieth part of the Ministery of Scotland and sundry even of these did before the Elections joyn with their Presbyteries and Synods in bearing testimony against the Engagement I will not blame him for his charity to some of these men The Writer did not say that all of them were known to be opposers or neutrall or indifferent in the Work of God from the beginning but spoke indefinitly meaning as I take it of the bulk and generality of them and I believe the Author himself being judge but few instances to the contrary can be given It is true that a great part of the Church of Scotland before the writing of the late Commissions Letter had declared themselves satisfied with the Commissions Resolutions and dissatisfied with the course of the opposers thereof But it is also true that there was a great part of the Church of Scotland who had not declared themselves satisfied with these Resolutions yea a great part who had declared themselves dis-satisfied therewith and it is a wonder to me that the Author should say that count when the Writer will he shall find that the dissenters from the Commission 1648. were not fewer yea not so few as dissenters from the Commission 1651. I hope he is speaking of the Ministeriall Church in regard of both the question now being of pre-limiting the elections and it being to no purpose to speak of any other in regard of these let him name if he can any Synod Presbytery or Kirk-Session in Scotland that did give any testimony or evidence of their dissent from the proceedings of the Commission against the engagement 1648. If he will believe the testimony of the Generall Assembly 1650. the whole Ministery and body of the People in the Land did joyn in their Prayers and Supplications in private and in Publick against the engagement and the Ministers every where in their Sermons did bear clear testimony against it and all the Church Judicatories Synods Presbyteries and Sessions did petition the Parliament against it and another declaration of the same Assembly within a few dayes thereafter in answer to a passage of the Declaration of the English Army tels him somewhat to the same purpose we do not remember say they that any of the Ministers did preach and cry up a war against England and as we know that the body of the Ministery were unanimous and zealous in bearing a joynt testimony both in their Sermons and otherwise against that war so these few that were silent have been censured for their silence and the Committee of Estates at the same time in their Declaration testifie thus Did not all the Judicatories of the Kirk unanimously oppose and declare against it Did not the Ministers faithfully Preach and Pray against it and generally all that feared God in the Land Petition against it and many such Passages are to be found in our Publick Papers from the time of carrying on the engagement yet the Author is so zealous to weaken every thing that the writer saith for differencing that which was done by the Commission 1648. and the Commission 1651. that he had rather retrench upon that which hath been often and truly declared by this Church of their being free of any accession to the unlawfull engagement then not to do it this deserves his second thoughts but upon the other hand beside the generality of these in the land who are of known approven godlinesse and piety and are dis-satisfied with the Publick Resolutions as will I trust be acknowledged by godly men of a contrary mind speaking soberly and without the heat of dispute It is easie to give him some instances of some Synods and of many Prerbyteries besides many particular members in Presbyteries throughout all the corners of the Counrry who were not onely silent in speaking for the Publick Resolutions but who did bear testimony and speak openly against them A thing so wel known that I need not stay to name the particulars but they must stil be few in his catologue we know saith he what the number of these amounted to at their greatest Meeting at Edinburgh of late If he mean that all the Ministers of the Land who are of that judgement were at that Meeting he is much mistaken and if not so it is not much to the purpose there are many Ministers in the Land of that judgement who were not at that Meeting and yet there were very near a hundred Ministers at that Meeting who are approven in the Consciences of the godly throughout the Land He acknowledges that many more of these then of the first were godly men and had been faithfull formerly but their present course at that time being not faithfulnes to the Cause but prejudicial to it and the whole Kirk and Countrey as he thinks they might justly be referred and called before the Assembly as wel as the other It is well that they were godly and such as had been formerly faithfull as for their unfaithfulnesse at that time it is the point in question betwixt them and the Authors and abbettots of the Publick Resolutions they are perswaded in their Consciences and have clearly holden forth the same unto others that they were keeping the ground on which the Church of Scotland did run these many years past for defending the Country and Cause against the enemies thereof and if others did forsake their ground they were not to be esteemed unfaithfull nor to be charged with that crime because they would not leave their Masters Colours I shal not insist upon what he speaks of the tender dealing which they met with because there may be opportunity to speak to this afterwards what is apparent in the Letter and Act of the Commission is already spoken unto VINDICATION THe fourth consideration proponed by the Writer is that the Resolutions then viz. 48 were agreeable to the Covenant Acts and Constitution of former Generall Assemblies whereas the
constitution of Judicatories but so far as common sense and reason can lead me It seems to me a strange assertion that some few persons having opposed themselves to a course taken by a Judicatory intrusted with the Publick affairs of the Kirk consisting of men to that time judged faithfull and still professing faithfulness therein as in the sight of God and accusing this Judicatory for that course they have taken as guilty of defection and destroyers of the Cause of Religion if I say these few men being cited to be tryed by a Generall Assembly and consequently excluded from judging in that particular matter which is in controversie the Assembly is in this to be judged pre-limited in that matter although there be besides these excluded a competent number of members lawfully authorized For such we may suppose all the rest to be for any thing that is said in this particular that we are upon the answer of to make up a competent Judicatory to cognosce and judge upon the matter in controversie according to the rule of Gods Word and the Constitutions of the Kirk which they are bound by their Commissions and oaths to judge by I desire no proof of this for it is principall clear and evident exterminis and the Writers assertion is no warr and to receive it for an unquestionable truth I doubt not but if the Writer shall assay to prove this that he shall fall upon that same exception which the Remonstrants made against the Synod of Dort that the most part of the Synod were their adverse party having declared their judgement contrary to their doctrine which was rejected as a null exception by all Orthodox Divines in that Synod REVIEW BEfore the Author come directly to speak to what is alleadged by the Writer he seems first to answer by denying that there was any pre-limitation of the Assembly even upon supposall that these men were by that Citation excluded from sitting Members thereof But let us consider the Reasons of his denyall The first is that there were but some few persons opposing themselves to a course taken by a Judicatory intrusted with the Publick Affairs of the Church consisting of men till that time judged faithfull and still professing faithfulnesse therein as in the sight of God and accusing that Judicatory for that course they had taken as guilty of defection c. although they had been but few yet their Testimony against the proceedings of that Judicatory as against the course of defection notwithstanding of any thing that that Judicatory had formerly been and was then professing being true and clearly consonant to the doctrine and determinations of this Church it was a pre-limitation of the Assembly because of that Testimony to exclude them But I have often told him and made it to appear that they were not few but many It is true that the Commission till that time had been judged faithfull but it is also true that a great part of these to whom that Testimony was due did with-draw from the Commission upon occasion of that defection and gave open testimony against the same And though some eminent men did abide with them yet the plurality were such who had not been much conversant in nor well acquainted with the Publick Affairs of the Church The other part of his Answer is that there were besides these excluded a competent number of Members lawfully authorized for such as he supposeth the rest to be for any thing that is said in this particular that he is now upon the answer of to make up a competent Judicatory to cognosce and judge upon that matter and controversie according to the rule of Gods Word and the Constitution of the Kirk which they are bound by their Commissions and oath to judge by Yeelding all this yet may there still be a pre-limitation incase others no lesse in capacity to be chosen to sit as Judges be excluded If the Presbyteries by order of the Commission shall exclude a great many of their Members in a capacity to be chosen from being Commissioners though they send a competent number of others is not the Assembly pre-limited in the election of its constituent Members even as if the Barrons and Burghs should exclude from their Elections many of their number in a capacity of being chosen Commissioners to the Parliament and yet send the ordinary number of Commissioners would not the Parliament because of this thing be pre-limited in the election of its constituent Members But in order to that which he saith of a competent Judicatory to cognosce and judge upon the matter according to the rules of Gods Word and Constitutions of the Kirk and of the exceptions of the Remonstrants made against the Synod of Dort I desire him to consider first of that which is said of Mr. David Catherwood a witness that deserved well of the Kirk of Scotland and whom I believe he will not except in this matter on his nullities against Pearth Assembly and in his Tractate against confused Communions concerning competent Judges in a time of defection and of what is said of the same purpose by the reforming Party in their Publick Papers in the year 1637. 1638. to whose judgments I believe the Protesters will submit in the matter of a competent Judge Secondly that if the exception of the Remonstrants of the Synod of Dort had been this that the Members constituent of that Synod had declared their judgments not onely contrary to the doctrine of the Remonstrants but contrary to the Word of God and to the clear doctrine and constitution of the Belgick Churches it would in jure have been a relevant exception and being true in facto had sustained as well against that Synod as the like exception against the Councell of Trent which is to this day counted valid by all the Protestant Divines Thirdly let us suppose hâc eadem viâ ac modo methodo that the Commission had brought in the Prelaticall or Popish Party as they did the Malignant Party and had by-Presbyteries obeying their order there anent excluded all such from being Members of the Assembly as did bear testimony against them whose number we shall also suppose to be as few as the opposers of Publick Resolutions and the number of the other as many as these who are for them whether would this have been a pre-limited Assembly yea or not and a Competent Judicatory to judge that matter according to the Word of God and Constitutions of the Church All these things being put together make it to appear that the Writer hath brought in no such straits in the busines as the Author supposeth VINDICATION SEcondly To the former part of the Reply I confesse that it is probable that a man being cited to the Generall Assembly upon a scandall in doctrine and manners where the scandall is uncontroverted and already particularly determined quoad jus or in point of Law and the question is only about the fact ought not to
Presbytery giving his judgment anent the listing of another but when it is all granted it yeelds a great part of the cause to wit That these persons could not sit in the Assembly as Judges in that particular And if I be not mistaken in my conjecture about the persons I think I may say if that judicious and pious man who rejected that motion had been in any fear that these persons would be chosen belike he would have holden his peace and sufferred the motion to passe uncontrolled But the Author if this please not the writer desires him to answer what he will for clearing of the Order of the Commission 48. and it will serve aswell the Order of the Commission 51. as to any illegality relating to the Constitution of the Assembly because saith he upon the form both clearly were alike excepting what will make for the advantage of the latter and as for the matter in both it was alike as to the General Assemblies Judgment at the time of the Protestation and also in reipsa as he takes upon him to make good It seems that it doth not please the Author himself very wel and I think it wil please the Writer much worse because of the things which I have mentioned and other things as weighty which may occur to him as to that of the 48. I have already given clear answers for the writer or rather vindicated his own that there was a vast difference both in the form as also in the matter and that both as the Assemblies judgement at the time of the Protestation unless they were not to admit the judgment of former Assemblies in these particulars as also in reipsa and he shall but lose his labor and not be able to make good what he undertakes VINDICATION THat which may seem to say somewhat against the other Particular viz. That no mans Commission was rejected nor any man chosen to be a Commissioner was refused to have vote in the Assembly upon that accompt that he was unsatisfied with the Resolutions is in the Answer to the 3. Objection Branch 4. First beside somthing that hath been answered already he saith Policie taught the Assembly so to do The votes of so few a number not being likely to prove so great disadvantage to the businesse as the professed denying to them a vote would have done Answer If the Writer had used so much modesty and respect to the Assembly as to have said That possibly Policy might have taught them to do this or it may be probably thought it was thus it had been somewhat tolerable But I must say it is too much boldnesse thus to have said positively That Policy did teach them it Good Sir did you see into the hearts of men in the Assembly to see this political design moving them to do this Or can you bring a demonstration from any evidence without that their doing of it did arise from no other principle or motive but this But if it be so that they did it upon a political motive and end yet if it was so really as none was rejected or refused to have vote upon the accompt of dissatisfaction that exception is to no purpose to the point We are upon the freedom of the Assembly which is to be measured by the acts done about the Constitution and managing of it considered according to the Matter of them and not according to the Intentions and Moral Motives whereupon men does them But the Writer does add two things further for Answer 1. That the discussing and judging of the Commissions of these in Glasgow and Sterling who were unsatisfied with the publick resolutions were laid aside because Mr. Rob Ramsay his Protestation against the Election taken from their Dissatisfaction could not be discussed until these Resolutions were either condemned or approven which was in effect to exclude them from voting because of not approving the Publick Resolutions and this is so much the stronger considering that it was refused to lay aside the Commissions of these that carried on the Resolutions until their proceedings should be tryed and approven Answ 1. Besides that Mr. R. Ramsay his Protestation was not against these of Sterling at all so that it is impertinent to say that their Commission was laid aside becaus of that Protestation And besides that the Commissions of others controverting with them and pretending by as probable reasons their Commission as these was laid aside also It followeth not hence that they were simply excluded from voting but suspended from voting for a time and had not vote in that particular which might well had been without imputation of pre-limitation on the Assembly as hath been shewen before 2. The Consideration added for confirmation is very inconsiderable because the Commissions of these of Glasgow and Sterling were controverted in the very Election and therfore their Commission could not but be laid aside untill the grounds of the Controversie should be discussed that it might be seen whether they were orderly elected or not but these others had their Commission by Elections orderly and uncontroverted in the Presbyteries that sent them yet neither were they to have vote in the matter of the Resolutions What is said from the Exception made against their Admission to vote at all given in to the Assembly shall be answered afterwards Secondly saith he it is to be considered That the Assembly did sustain approve the Letter and Act of the Commission for citing such as were unsatisfied which was a real excluding of all these upon their dissatisfaction at least from being Judges in that particular Answ 1. The Writer doth here as all along this Paper bear his Reader in hand that the Commission hath given order for citing such as were unsatisfied indefinitly which is contrary to the truth for only such as all means used do continue in opposing were to be cited as is evident by the Act and Letter 2 It is true after tryal and examination of the Commissions proceedings they did approve that Act and Letter But did not the Assembly 48. do the same in relation to the Letter and Act of the then Commission of the like nature But yet further Did not all Commissioners from Presbyteries who were unsatisfied excepting such only whose Commissions were controverted in the very Election were yet undiscussed and were pleased to stay in the Assembly sit and vote in that same very particular I mean the Resolutions of the Commission how then could they be really excluded from being Judges in that particular wherein they really did sit Judges or were any of them excluded after the Act and Letter was approven If it be said That the approving of that Act and Letter did import that they ought in the judgment of the Assembly to have been excluded I answer 1. Yet though this may say somewhat that the Assemblies determination in this point de jure did not agree wel with that pre-ceding fact in admitting such Members to judge in
admitted to sit in all other particulars except in the trying and judging of these and he who opposes them shall be suspended from sitting in any particular til these be tryed and Judged On what he saith to the second particular I offer â— That the Writer doth not all along this Paper bear his Reader in hand as the Author alleadges that the Commission had given order for citing such as were unsatisfied indefinitly because the very first time that he mentions the Letter and Act of the Commission he saith That it was a Letter and Act appointing That such as after conference should remain unsatisfied with and continue to oppose the Publick Resolutions should be cited and having thus once set down the true nature and extent of it it was needless as often as he spake of it to repeat the same words and was enough qualicunque modo to circumscribe it therefore the Author doth more harm to himself then the Writer when he taxeth him as speaking contrary to the truth in this 2. That it helps him not to say That as the Assembly 51. did ratify the Letter and Act of the Commission so also did the Assembly 48. because of the many differences already established betwixt the one and the other To which I shall now add this as to the point of Ratification That the Act and Letter 48. was not controverted by any nor any Elections because of it nor any Exception proponed thereupon against the freedom of the Assembly nor indeed well could be it being clothed with such circumstances as we have formerly spoken of which needs not now to be repeated but in 51. it was controverted and Elections therupon were questioned and Exceptions thereupon proponed against the freedom of the General Assembly which were rejected notwithstanding of contrary circumstances wherewith the Letter and Act were clothed 3. That the Author by yeelding that the Assemblies approving of the Letter and Act of the Commission which he is necessitate to yeeld because it was so doth import that notwithstanding Opposers did sitâ— yet they ought in the Judgment of the Assembly to have been excluded puts himself to the disadvantage many waies 1. Because the Assemblies approving simul semel all the Acts Warnings Declarations and Remonstrances of the Commission against Opposers of the Publick Resolutions did not only judge that such by that Letter and Act ought ab initio to have been debarred from sittâ—ng in the Assembly in that particular but also in all other particulars yea not at all to have been chosen 2. This goes far to nullify the Assembly another way because it acknowledges that de facto they allowed many scandalous men to sit as Members therof who de Jure and by a Law approven of themselves ought to have been removed 3. It holds forth a grosse contradiction betwixt the Assemblies Principle and their Practice and so makes more then probable what the Writer said for admitting some to sit upon Policy and designs 4. It holds forth a great solicism in the matter of Justice that is Socij criminis to sit as Judges to give sentence on their complices to wit other opposers of the Publick Resolutions who were cited and now standing as rei before the General Assembly All these things which the Author hath brought in Answer to the first Reason against the late Assembly and what is set down for confirming and upholding of it in the other Paper being now fully discussed I leave it to the Reader to judge whether that Reason of the Protestation doth not still stand strong against the freedom and lawfulness of that Assembly and how little cause he hath to say That if it have any force Malignants may think themselves obliged to the Protesters for teaching them if ever they shall have power again how to call in question and condemn the Assembly 1648. yea and if they find it move for their purpose even other Assembles too even that solemn Assembly 1638. as unfree and unlawful because of the pre-limitation of Election of Commissioners thereto The Malignants are in themselves prone enough to evil inventions though they be not taught them by others but I beleeve themselves being Judges they had rather as to the matter of constitution of Assemblies and the interpretation of their Acts be Disciples to the Authors and Abetters of the Publick Resolutions then to the Protesters for they have there in a little time learned the way how notwithstanding of all former Acts excluding them to be admitted to all the priviledges of the Church and to be imployed both in the Army and Judicatories and by complying with the Commission to get an Assembly after their own mind for ratifying and approving all these things which would never have been taught unto them by the Protesters who studies to hold fast the Acts of Assemblies in reference to Malignants in the genuine and litteral sense and meaning thereof and to prevent and oppose all corrupt constitutions of Assemblies and that they may be composed of such as do adhere to former Principles which being attained there is no cause to fear that Malignants shall easily ranverse either the Assembly 48. or the Assembly 38. or any other lawful free General Assembly of this Church I shal close this whol busines annent the pre limiting of the Elections and the excluding of those who opposed the Publick Resolutions with one sentence of the Britane Divines in the Synod of Dort who in answer to the Protestation of the Remonstrants speak thus Quae ratio reddi potest cur suffragiorum Jure priventur omnes illi Pastores qui ex officio receptam Ecclesiae Doctrinam propugnantes secus docentibus adversati sunt si hoc obtinere nova dogmata spargentibus nemo obsisteret ne ipso facto jus omne post modum de illis controversiis judicandi amitteret VINDICATION WE go on now to the second in order of the Protestation which is this Because of the absence of Commissioners of many Burghs as wanting free accesse because of the motions of the Enemy in the order of the late Paper wherein other reasons are added to these in the Protestation this is set down in the 5. place and is cast in _____ with some addition to the matter because as first proponed it hath not seemed fast enough thus That cannot be a free Assembly to which there is no free access and recess but there was no free accesse to the Assembly by reason of two Armies interjacent between the place of the meeting and the dwelling of many of the Commissioners and being pursuing one another very hotely having their parties comming abroad every where at the time they should had come to the Assembly and therefore many were absent about the one halfe of the Burghs many Presbyteries to the number of 9. or 10. neither was there free recess from it not onely because of the former reason but because the King and Committee of Estates did detain and keep
1616. And is it not equivalent to this if by reason of external force Presbyteries after advertisment given unto them cannot meet and choos their Commissioners or if those who are chosen cannot come because of force keeping them back VVhat is the cause why undue advertisment of many Presbyteries and Buâ—ges makes a nul Assembly Is it not because many of these who are in a capacity to send Commissioners are by an invincible impediment kept back from doing of it and hath not this also place in the other case If Presbyteries neglect to chuse Commissioners or if they being chosen shall neglect to come that alters the case and puts the fault wholly upon them who neglect their duty but if they be kâ—pt back by violence from without â—t is equal to their not being advertised at all or their not being timously advertised or if they cannot chuse or being chosen cannot come to what purpose is the advertisment or how can it put them in a worse case then if they had not been advertised or not timously advertised Though the Presbyteries of Orknay and Caithness be deduced and others too which are wanting and have no Commissioners to send yet if the Author shal be pleased to consult the Rolls of the Assembly it haply may be still found that nine or ten Presbyteries were absent and thirty Burroughs if not above for these of Hamelton who came afterwards to the place where the Assembly was siting and would not come forward as they came thither with hazard and difficulty so did they not think it a duty to come forward being convinced of the nullity of the Assembly which made them send their testimony against it It is true that Commissioners came to the Assembly betwixt whom and the place of the Assembly the Armies were interjacent and from severall parts besouth Forth but it is as true that some comming from these places were taken prisoners and that others offered not to come from home as being hopelesse to passe thorough the danger bring so apparent and reall which it seems the Author hath been somewhat convinced of when he speaks so mincingly as to say that it might have seemed to have proceeded of negligence rather then of any necessity He tels us that Commissioners came not from Burghes and yet Ministers came from the same Burghs but that proves not that there was free accesse to the Commissioners of Burghs who stayed away to say nothing that there was few Burghs whose Commissioners were absent whose Ministers were Commissioners and came to the Assembly I know not any Assembly so impeded and indangered in Ja. Grahams time there was no Assembly that sate from the time of his invading the Land by the Irishes till the time of his defeat except one and that sate in Jan. at which time he was not reigning or raging thorough much of the Country but was forced to keep himself in the Highlands and in the places of the Country lesse inhabited whence few Commissioners were come If the Author prove it by bringing forth the Rolls ot both Assemblies that as many were absent from that Assembly if not more then it shall appear that he had just cause so to assert but until that time he will give us leave to suspend our assent to the truth of this He will stil have the Protesters to be unfriends to former Assemblies and to be teachers of Malignants how to cast them as null upon grounds of Conscience but the Protesters do disclaim them for Scollers and so do they the Protesters for masters or teachers and as there is nothing taught by the Protesters that can give them any just ground upon which to quarrell or cast the censures of that Assembly so were it superfluous for them now to be at the pains to learn it seeing the Authors and abbettors of the Publick Resolutions hath eased them of the pain of this censure already albeit the Rolls of this Assembly were more numerous then the Roll of some unquestionable Assemblies that would not much help him because absents from this Assembly in many was not voluntary but by want of free accesse but so doth it not appear to have been in other Assemblies and whatever the Author talks of the Roll of this Assembly yet I believe before they come to the ratifying of the Publick Resolutions which was their great businesse they were but a thin Meeting many of their number having left them some out of discontent and dissatisfaction with their proceedings and others fearing to be surprized by parties of the English As to the Assembly at Aberdeen in which there was but twenty persons present which notwithstanding is owned by the Church of Scotland as a free and lawfull Generall Assembly it is so owned as that these who met being lawfully Commissionated from their Presbyteries and having met at the time and place appointed for holding the Assembly are accounted sufficient to adjourn the Assembly and to preserve and Vindicate the Liberties of the Church against the encroachments that then were made upon them by the King and his Commissioners So I believe the Author will not say that these twenty could have proceeded to make Acts of Generall concernment to the whole Church of Scotland or that if they had so done these acts would have been authoritative binding What the Writer speaks of want of freedome in regard of recesse is not upon any emergent after the down-sitting or close of the Assembly but uppon causes known at the time when the Commissioners should have come from home and therefore he doth not urge it as a relevant Argument apart by it self but joynes it with the want of freedome of accesse and it is very agreeable to common sense for men to think that Assembly not free to which there is no freedome in comming to exoner their Consciences nor any freedom in going after they have done it He justifies the confinement of the Ministers of Sterline In this particular at Sterline 1. He challengeth the Writers passing in silence these Ministers Protesting against the Assembly but though the Author think this wisdome yet I hardly believe that the Writer did it upon deliberation the thing being so manifestly known there was no need to mention it The Author asks the question whether the King might not have confined these men without any imputation to the freedome of the Assembly untill he had been informed upon what ground they came away so untimeously It seems that as the case was circumstantiat it could not well be done without an imputation of the freedome of the Assembly may the King and Committee confine every one who comes away untimeously untill they be informed upon what ground they come away illud possumus quod Jure possumus But where is there such law for censuring these by confinement that come away untimeously from the Assembly but it seems they were informed of the cause of their comming away otherwise his instance of the Commissioners
that there was no just cause of proponing that exception against the Commission 48 and we affirm that the Commission 51 carryed themselves faithfully and that there was no just cause of proponing that exception against them which the Protesters made but whether it was so or otherwayes in reipsâ in the very deed it self since both exceptions at the time they were made were alike to the Assembly and therefore to borrow the word of the Writer we desire any man in the world to bring a reason why the one Assembly should be condemned for rejecting such an exception before the proceeding of the persons excepted against were tryed and judged when as the other Assembly which rejected the like exception is maintained But good Reader look forward upon the Writers following of his Answer to the Objection mentioned and see a mystery and judge thou if it be not of iniquity against all the late Generall Assemblyes of this Kirk he tells us of an Act made anno 1601 and renewed 1648 and sayeth that it doth necessarily infer that the Commissioners of a former Assembly should not be admitted as Members in the succeeding Assembly although there be no scandall or exception proponed upon their proceedings untill they be tryed much lesse when a scandall or exception is proponed This is a fair blow by one strâ—ak given to the late Constitutions of all the Assemblies of this Kirk posterior to that Assembly at Glasgow without exception and most of all to the Assembly 48 for in all of them Commissioners of the preceeding Assemblies respective have been admitted to sit as Members before their proceedings were tryed and judged and in that Assembly 48 they were admitted to sit notwithstanding exception being made against their sitting by the supream Civill Power of the Land This is remarkable that the Writer to the effect he might pull down the late Assembly 51 he would put down all the rest with it But the truth is the Writer is somewhat rash in his assertion concerning the consequences of that Act mentioned look the tenor of it as it is extant in the Assembly 48 Sess 6. It sayth only this much That the Commissioners of former Assemblies shall give an accompt of their proceedings in the beginning of the Assembly before any other matter or cause be handled and their proceedings to be allowed or dis-allowed c. from which I confesse this much may be inferred by one sticking precisely to the letter of the word that after the Assembly is constitute the handling of all other matters should be suspended untill the Commissioners proceedings should be tryed and put to a point during which tryal the Commissioners that are members vi materiae must be removed because the same persons cannot try their own proceedings but that they may not be admitted in any wayes to be Members of the Assembly not so much as to vote in the Election of a Moderator which was the thing required by the Protesters cannot be inferred from thence if it were other wayes it seems strange to me that that same Assembly 48 which did renew that Act did at the same very time admit the Commissioners of the preceding Assembly sundry of the present Protesters and amongst the rest none more then the Writer of this Paper and the suggester to him of this consideration being chief actors in the busines to sit as Members of the Astembly before their proceedings were tryed yea and to vote in sundry other matters during the time of their tryall and that whenas there was exception made against them but beside this retortion of the Argument which the Protesters are obliged to answer REVIEW ALbeit the Author is pleased to say That the Writer shall never be able to make good that the Publick Resolutions were diametrally opposite to clear standing Acts Remonstrances and Declarations of former Assemblies yet he or some others in his room hath often made this good out of these Acts Remonstrances Declarations c. wherein the very contradictory of the Publick Resolutions is clearly set down upon the very circumstantiat case of defending the Cause and Countrey against forraign Invasion and therfore though there were no more to uphold the Argument but this the conclusion thereof may safely be assented to without any new Edition of the Writers in following his Argument I am glad that the Author is brought to acknowledg that all hangs upon this and doubts that some of his friends who quarrell at sundry former Acts Remonstrances and Declarations as not knowing how to reconcile them with Publick Resolutions approve him in this He would remember others would be informed that in the beginning of the Meeting at St. Andrews this point was offered to be instantly verified out of the Records of the Church under the Clerks hand who is generalâ—y acknowledged to know them best of aâ—y and was bound by his place and particular Acts of Assemblies to offer them unto them and yet they could not be heard and the exception being relevant in it self as is acknowledged by the Author and rejected when offered to be instructed as to the matter of fact it is alike as if it had been proven for it stands for proven in Law as to the Judge who refuses to admit probation to be instantly produced ex actis suis To his first particular answer I reply First That no like accusation nor exception came into the Assembly 1648 from the very Parliament or any other against the Members of the Commission who were Commissioners to the Assembly neither after a long and serious debate was it found either by our present Protesters or any others and concluded that none of them could be removed from sitting in the Assembly and voting in other matters until their proceedings were first heard and tryed There was in the Assembly 1648. no such accusation nor exception nor debate nor conclusion which is a short and clear answer for justifying that Assembly and for vindicating the truth of that which is alleadged by the Writer in answer to the first Objection to wit That such exceptions being propounded were never rejected and doth withal give a clear reason why the one Assembly should be condemned though the other be justified because the one Assembly rejected so releuant an exception which the other did not it being never propounded unto them In all this business the Author is greatly mistaken and whether through mis-information or how I know not doth assert that for a truth which never had a being and therefore all his defences built upon it do at one instant fall to the ground The story which as it seems he hints at in the 48. was briefly this In the year 1648. the Assembly being met and constituted without any exception propounded or mentioned by any person or party whatsoever against these who had been Members of the former Commission and were now Members of the Assembly after they had sitten five or six dayes as is evident from comparing the
perhaps he saw some disadvantage in that be it so That that inference cannot be made from thence yet may this inference well be made from thence That after the chusing of the Moderater they cannot be admitted to sit and vote in any business in the Assembly before their proceedings be allowed or disallowed and that if they be admitted before that time these Acts of the Assembly are clearly crossed and contradicted which being done by all these Assemblies since 38. they are to be pulled down as null When the Author shal extricate himself and his Readers out of this Mystery of Iniquity he shall also help the Writer how to clear himself of the other The truth is though there hath been some crossing between these Assemblies and the practice of the Assembly since the 38. both the one way and the other by the sitting of the Commissioners of the former Assembly not only till the Assembly was constitute and in the choice of a Moderator but also afterwards in the debating and voting of other business before the allowing or disallowing of their proceedings yet doth not this reach any blow to the constitutions of these Assmblies because the Act of the Assembly 1601. till the year 1648. was almost inter non cognita non apparentia yea there was no cause to urge it the Commissioners of all these Assemblies carrying themselves faithfully and not being under any scandal or any exception therupon proponed against them And albeit things belonging to former order being propounded and urged especially in cases of consequence upon the matter cannot be past by unless they be formally repealed yet if through inadvertency or custom they come to be omitted there being no particular emergent giving occasion to urge them yet doth not this give any blow to the Judicatory wherein these forms should be used neither doth he who saith that their own Laws prescribes such a form prove guilty of any Mystery or Iniquity But the Author insists That the Assembly 48. which did renew that Act did at the very same time admit the Commissioners of the preceding Assembly sundry of the present Protesters and amongst the rest none more then the Writer of this Paper and the Suggester to him of this Consideration being chief actors in the business to sit as Members of the Assembly before their proceedings were tryed yea and to vote in sundry other maters during the time of their tryal and that whereas there was exception made against them I pass his rubbing upon the Writer of the Paper and I know not that Suggester to him of that consideration as being a thing ordinary to him in all this Debate yet little either for his own honor or for the edification of others I think these now are not ashamed to give their mutual help and asistance one to another either by suggesting or digesting as God hath gifted them what may contribute for the defence of the Truth But sure I am though he may speak his fansie and vent his reflecting conjectures that he neither knows who writ the Paper or if any or who suggested that consideration to him or what their acting was in that business in the Assembly 48. If he shall take into consideration the circumstances of proceedings in the Assembly 48. which revived the act of the Assembly 1601. he will not need to think it strange that they did admit the Commissioners of the former Assembly to sit vote in other matters before their proceedings were tryed and judged because the motion of reviving that act was not made till a very little time before the report of their proceedings by the Committee of the Assembly to whom the inspection of the Commission-Book was committed any who looks upon the acts of the Assembly will find that the act 1601. was revived and the Commissions proceedings approven both in one day the one in the fore-noon and the other in the after-noon and I beleeve that he shall not find that in the interval betwixt these two Acts any thing was voted in the Assembly He insinuates as if at that time there had been a debate about the removing of the Commissioners upon exception made against them but in this he is mistaken still There was no exception made against them nor any debate thereupon as we have already cleared If it be asked what then was the reason of reviving the Act 1601. the reason was because the Committee of Estates did the day before the report made of the proceedings of the Commission desire that the Assembly would not proceed to the approbation of these proceedings before they might be heard in these things that did relate to the Engagement as we have already shown And the Assembly knowing that this was but a shift to gain time and to devide the Assembly as they thought fit to call the Committee if they had any new Objections against the proceedings of the Commission or only the same Objections made by the Parliament or their Committees before and upon the Reply of the Committee of Estates that they had just and material Exceptions besides any formerly made to continue til the next day at 10. hours and to appoint that time for hearing these Exceptions so for preventing of the like inconveniences for time to come they thought fit to renew the Act 1601. But it wonders me that in all the Authors Answer to this point he doth not so much as once touch upon the parity of the reason brought by the Writer for making of the Act in the Assembly 1601. and urging it in the Assembly 1651. there being in both these Assemblies a scandal of defection upon the Commissioners of the Kirk upon the first for taking upon them to give in Petitions to the Parl. for votes in Parlament to the Ministers that should be provided to Presbyteries as representing the true Church of God and being the Third Estate of the Realm upon the latter for taking upon them to bring in the Malignant party which did not fal out nor the like in any of the Assemblies since the 38. and therefore there is no reason to question the Constitution of these Assemblies for not proceeding according to that Rule it neither being urged nor there being any cause to urge the same VINDICATION IN the next place to come to a more direct Answer It is certain That every propounding of Exceptions or Alleadgance of scandals against persons and offering to prove them is not sufficient to deprive them from being Members of or sitting in the General Assembly for were it so perverse and bold men might return and disappoint the Church of all Gen. Assemblies for ever this the Writer of the late Paper acknowledges in answer to Objection 3. against the present Argument and therfore he proceeds to qualifie the Exception which may be sufficient for that effect by setting down three Conditions requisit in it wherein â—e speaks not altogether amiss of which we shall make our use we hope for
That this consequence will follow especially where the exceptions do concern many and leading menare is of a more common and universall influence appears because if these persons be admitted to sit as members after the proponing of these exceptions before tryall of them there can be no regress to the removing of them afterwards upon that ground unless we say that the Assembly may afterwards undoe that which formerly they did approve in forâ— contradictorio and that those that were once found members notwithstanding of these exceptions yet afterwards by the same exceptions may be found no members that the one consequence doth more probably follow then the other appears not onely from this that it is not ordinary for men of common sense and reason not almost for the most perverse and irrationall men to offer that to a Judicatory against their constituent members which they have no probable hope to verifie but also from the doolfull experience of this Church When did it ever fall out in the Church of Scotland that a Generall Assembly was disappointed by perverse and bold men offering to prove exceptions relevant in Law but fals in fact against the constituent members thereof who can give any instance thereof unless men will bring the Assembly 51. which is to bring the thing in question for an instance But upon the other hand the admitting of men to sit against whom such exceptions were or might have been proponed hath been one of the main causes of corruptions of Assemblies and defection in this Church as is known in the time of the Prelates and it is the duty of wise men to provide most against that which ut plurimum is their danger But as I do not see how the last consequence by the Authors way can be prevented so I do not see how the first consequence doth follow because these perverse bold persons who propones the exceptions offers to verifie them instantly doth not suppose that all the Meeting to whom they offer the exceptions are guilty for if they did suppose that they could not propone any exceptions to be tryed by them but behoved primo instanti to decline them all as judges reserving the verification of their alleadgances to a judge competent Now if they do thus the Assembly is not disappointed by perverse and bold persons offering to verifie exceptions because in this case they do not make any offer of verification of any exception before that Meeting upon the other hand if they do acknowledge a part of them as persons competent and fitly qualified to try and discuss these exceptions which they offer to verifie then the persons against whom they except being removed and the exceptions taken in and cognosced upon according to the verification offered they are found either true or false if they be found false the Assembly is not disappointed but may proceed to its Constitution having found their members blamelesse and having stopped these mens mouths If the exceptions be found true of such a number without whom the rest cannot make an Assembly there is a great advantage in stead of a feared disadvantage that is the prevention of a corrupt Meeting constituting themselves in an Assembly if but a fewer number the corrupt are removed and the blamelesse are admitted and the Assembly goes on Besides all this it may by way of Commission without any disadvantage to the Protesters cause be yeelded to the Author that it is to be looked to that the Persons offering to verifie these exceptions be not perverse persons but men of a good report and such as are known to walk honestly and not to act upon a Principle of malice or il-will against the persons whom the exceptions do concern all which was true in the Protesters casâ— they being sundry of them members of that Meeting to whom it was incumbent ex officio to propone any exception consisting in their knowledge and allowed to sit as Members of the Assembly a priviledge not belonging to pervers men and all of them men of good report of a blameless conversation and such as are known to be so far from malinging the Commissioners against whom they did except that they then had and stil have them in estimation and do love them as brethren The Author yeelds that the Assembly being constitute the exception and grounds thereof are to be tryed with all convenient diligence and expedition and alleadges that this was offered to the Protesters in the present case and debate That such an offer was made I shall not contradict I believe it was so but to pass by that even this which he himself thinks reasonable though offered yet was not well performed because most of the time that the Assembly sate was past before that exception and the grounds thereof were tryed these men all the while and for a good many dayes sitting and voycing in all things that past in the Assembly even in these things that did concern the proponers of the exception The Protesters could not accept of this offer not onely because it did suppose their sitting in the Assembly as members before the trying of the exception but also because the exception was not an exception against one or some few particular persons in the case of some particular or personal scandals but an exception of common concernment to many in things relating to the discharge of their trust in the Cause VINDICATION BVt saith the writer in hand both these were clear in the present case to wit the exception made against the late Commissioners it was relevant in jure if there be any relevancie why a man should not sit in the Generall Assembly this certainly is one that he hath betrayed his former trust hath made defection from the Covenant and Cause and being instrumentall to carry on a course of defection throughout the Kirk and Kingdom and as to the truth of the fact in reference against whom the exception was made all these did concur a flagrant scandall pregnant presumptions and persons in the Judicatory offering to instruct and verifie what was alleadged by this the Writer believes that he hath cleared as with a Sun beam and gained his point but we hope it shall be made to appear that he hath left the matter yet in the mist and gained never a white It s true indeed that for Commissioners to betray their trust to make defection from the Covenant and Cause c. is in jure a relevant cause to exclude any man from sitting in the Generall Assembly as a member and deserves more as I doubt not but the Writer and some others intended the challenge of it against the Commissioners for more but that the Commissioners for the matter of fact had betrayed their trust c. There might have been and was indeed by some spread a flagrant scandall but there was no flagrant scandall these same who afterwards accused them in the Assembly I mean presumptions objective by any thing they did
though there was presumptions enough in some men against them and as for some persons offering to instruct it that is to little purpose to argue them scandallous but the great sophism in this whole discourse whereinto I will not determine whether out of inanimadvertency or willingly the Writer hath run lyeth in this that the main and principal question de jure which should have been cleared to the effect that scandall might been justly charged upon the Commissioners was not the Generall or thesis whether betraying of trust or making defection from the Covenant and Cause if it be such a fault as deserveth exclusion from sitting as a Member in a General Assembly but this particular hypothesis whether the resolving that all persons in the land excepting such as are notoriously c. maybe admitted to joyn in Arms for just necessary defence of the Kingdom when otherwayes there cannot be Forces had otherways in warrantable prudence for defence of it item resolving that the time of civill censures inflicted by the Parliament upon persons accessory to former malignant courses as the sinfull Engagement might be dispensed with and taken off by the Parliament with this provision that none should be admitted to places of power and trust but such as are qualified positively according to the rules of the Word of God in that case held in our Solemn Engagement item ordaining Presbyteries to proceed with persons formerly guilty of malignant courses for admission of them unto publick repentance in a way conform to the rules set down by the Generall Assembly for admitting of such upon testimonials from Presbyteries bearing satisfaction given by them conform to these rules whether these things I say contains defection from the Covenant Cause consequently doth import betraying of trust in a Commission intrusted with the care of preserving the Covenant and Cause this is a question in jure that the Writer should have alleadged to have been clear I mean in the affirmative of it ere he alleadged that there was upon the late Commissioners a scandall of some presumptions that they had betrayed their trust made defection from the Covenant and Cause but the Writer passeth by this in silence Now though we might say and are able in the Lords strength to make it good that these things contained not any defection from the Covenant and Cause yet now we shall say but this that this was not at the time of the Protestation clear to the Assembly because as yet there was not any particular determination thereanent in former Generall Assemblies wherefore for further clearing of this matter that we are upon the excluding the persons chosen by their Presbyteries without contradiction to be Commissioners from sitting as Members in the Assembly upon alledgance of scandal against them it should be observed by all honest and ingenuous Readers that when the imputation of scandal upon them depends upon a particular hypothesis which at least is questionable and the very point of controversie betwixt them and their accusers is against all reason and equity that they should be holden to be under a presumption of scandall untill that hypothesis should be discussed and cleared and therefore untill that be done the Adversaries alleadgeance of scandall against them is to be held but a meer alleadgeance which by the Writers own confession is not a sufficient ground whereupon to exclude persons from being admitted to sit as Members in a Generall Assembly untill their cause be tryed and judged REVIEW I Shal pass the Authors interludes of the Writers believing that he hath cleared as with a Sun beam and gained his point and of that he doubts not but that the Writer and some others did intend to challenge for more and that there was a flagrant slander spread by some and that there was presumption enough in some men and come unto the discussing of that Sophisme as he is pleased to call it whereinto he will not determine whether out of inanimadvertencie or willingly the Writer as he alleadges hath run But let us hear what this Sophisme is The main and principal question de jure which should have been cleared saith he to the effect that scandal might have been justly charged upon the Commissioners was not the Generall or Thesis whether betraying of trust and making defection from the Covenant c. be such a fault as deserves exclusion from sitting as a Member in a Generall Assembly but this particular Hypothesis whether the resolving that all persons excepting such as are notoriously prophane c. may be admitted to joyn in Arms for just and necessary defence of the Kingdom when otherwise there cannot be Forces had in warrantable prudence sufficient for the defence of it c. If the right stating of the Hypothesis were the thing now directly in question it were needfull to consider more largely of the Authors stating of it but because it comes in on the by I shall onely desire these few things to be taken notice of in the state of the question which he gives first That it doth suppose something untrue to wit That Forces in warrantable prudence sufficient for defence of the Kingdom could not otherwise be had unlesse all persons in the Land excepting these included in the exceptions set down in the answer to the Quaere were brought forth If we may suppose that Forces equall in number to those who were invading the Land were Forces sufficient in warrantable prudence to defend the Land that number yea the double of it were to be found be North Forth to speak nothing of other parts in the Land out of which there were also Leavies made both of Horse and Foot though all the persons in question for their Malignancie and dis-affection to the Cause had been laid aside The Forces which by these Resolutions was leavied were by the acknowledgment of all who knew both the Armies as numerous if not more numerous than the Forces of the Adversaries and yet the Leavies in many places was but the fourth Fensible man and in few or no places beyond the third whence it will follow that either the two part of the persons in these places where the Leavies were made were such as did fall within the exceptions contained in the Commissions Answer to the Quaere or else that there was no such necessity of an universall coming forth as was allowed in that Answer and that therefore the necessity that was alleadged for imploying of these men who were formerly excluded was but meerly pretended Secondly That there were no such Items as he adds in the Commissions answer to the Quaere which was the foundation of the Publick Resolutions and the main thing in debate betwixt the Commission and the opposites of these Publick Resolutions The first Item resolving that the time of Civill censures inflicted by the Parliament upon persons accessorie to former Malignant courses as the sinfull Engagement might be dispensed with and taken off by the Parliament with this
provision That none should be admitted to places of power and trust but such as are qualified positively according to the rule of the Word of God in that case holden forth in our Solemn Engagement To passe by the way of carrying of it which was palpable and obvious to the whole Land was not added until the Forces were almost compleatly leavied and the bulk of the Malignant Party brought into employment and places of power and trust in the Army The second Item ordaining Presbyteries to proceed with persons formerly guilty of malignant courses for admission of them into Publick repentance in a way conform to the rules set down by the Generall Assembly for admitting such upon testimonies from Presbyteries bearing satisfaction given by then conform to these rules was not at all included in the Commissions answer neither was there so much of it as one word in that large Warning of the 7. of Jan. 1651. emitted by the Commission for strengthening of that Answer and when anything of that kind in latter Warnings Acts and Letters came to be added was alwayes holden forth but as expedient in order to the employing of these men but never was pressed in any of these Papers as a necessary duty to exclude all these from being employed for defence of the Cause and Kingdom who did not give evidence of their repentance according to the Acts of the Generall Assembly nay it could not be so pressed unlesse they had destroyed the foundation which they had laid in their answer to the Quaere and in that Warning The truth is what was done in the matter of repentance in order to the employing these men was upon the stumbling and out-crying of many against the Publick Resolutions as they came first forth and yet so as the first ground was alwayes holden fast as to the matter of judgment and for practice the businesse was hereby rather made worse before the Lord and to the point of guiltinesse then it was before The Commission not only ranversing former Acts made by themselves for excluding these from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper who were in the rebellion after Dumbar till the next Generall Assembly and making new Acts for receiving of them but receiving promiscuously such as came unto them and by their example teaching Presbyteries to do the like by which was produced a fearfull mocking of the Ordinance of God in publick Repentance which no doubt hath been one of the provoking causes of the Lords wrath to draw on these dreadfull stroaks wherewith he hath again smitten our Armies and our whole Land But to the hypothesis it self granting to the Author that which he alleadges that this hypothesis was not clear at the time of the Protestation because as yet there was not any particular determination thereanent in former Generall Assemblies First I doubt of that assertion of his That when an imputation of scandall depends upon a particular hypothesis which at least is questionable and the very point in controversie betwixt them and their accusers it is against all reason and equity that they should be holden to be under a presumption of scandall untill that particular hypothesis be discussed and cleared and therefore untill that be done the adversaries alleadgeance against them is to be held but as a meer alleadgeance upon which they are not to be excluded from sitting as Members in the Assembly until their cause be judged and tryed I suppose that some Commissioners to the Assembly should object against other Commissioners that had comitted murder and should offer instantly to verifie the same and desire that the persons against whom it is propounded should be removed from sitting as Members until it migbt be tryed and they in the mean time should say that it was true they had taken the life of such persons but in their own just and necessary defence and therefore they could not be holden under a scandal of murder nor be thereupon removed from sitting in the Assembly till that particular Hypothesis were first determined Would the Author think it a wrong done to these persons or rather a duty in reference to the constitution of the Assembly to remove them tâ—â—l the matter should be cognosced upon 2. I do affirm That not only former Assemblies but the Assembly 1651. did remove Commissioners upon Exceptions propounded against them the grounds wherof was not yet clearly determined in Law for instance The Commissioners of the first Election of the Presbyterie of GLASGOVV who were laid aside as for other Reasons so also for this as one in foro controdictorio sustained to be relevant because of the Exception of the opposing of Publick Resolutions propounded against them Next Mr. Robert Cauden Commissioner from the Presbytery of Dunce was removed upon the propounding of this exception that there were but three or four Ministers in that Presbyterie to chuse Commissioners all the rest of the Churches thereof being vacant and can any Determination of this Kirk be produced that three or four Ministers in a Presbytery where the rest of the Churches of that Presbytery are vacant cannot chuse Commissioners to the General Assembly 3. I do upon the ground which the Author himself laies down prove the carriage of the Commissioners to have been scandalous and such as did minister just ground of excepting against them why they should not sit as Members in the Generall Assembly till their carriage should be first tried my Argument is this Whosoever Commissioners of the General Assembly being in their trust and carriage in the Publick Affairs of the Kirk limited and tyed to proceed according to Acts of former General Assemblies does upon the accompt of the discharge of their trust declare many godly Ministers in the Church of Scotland till then of unquestionable integrity and faithfulness in the work of GOD to be Malignants and unfaithful in the cause c. and requires Presbyteries to censure them and to refer and cite them to the General Assembly because of their opposing of Resolutions taken and issued by them concerning which there is no particular Determination in any former Assembly They give scandal and offence in the discharge of their trust and may justly because thereof be excepted against as not fit to sit in the General Assembly as Members thereof before their carriage be tryed But the Commissioners of the Assembly 1651. who were Members of the Commission were such Ergo c. The assumption is clear the matters of fact contained therein being evident from their own Papers and that they were not warranted by any Act of the Assembly so to do is the Authors own ground The first Proposition I prove thus Whosoever so far transgresses the bounds of their Commission as upon the accompt thereof to declare many formerly faithful to be Malignants unfaithful and ordains them to be censured and cited when they have no warrant thereby so to do gives scandal and offence in the discharge of their trust But the Commissioners by
so doing did so far transgress the bounds of their Commission c. Ergo what the Author will here answer I do not well know But I would faine have him to tel a reason why the Commission dealt so sharply with many godly men as to issue such Declarations and Warnings against them and to appoint them to be censured and cited and to stir up the Civil Magistrate against them because of their opposing of Publick Resolutions whilest by his own acknowledgment there was as yet no determination of the Church in favours of these Resolutions or against the opposers of them I thought it had been his mind that the Commission could not censure any or ordain any to be censured for opposing Resolutions of their own not yet determined nor approven in a General Assembly and I would have him to give a reason why he accompts it against all equity that when the imputation of scandal against the Commissioners depends upon a particular hypothesis which at least is questionable and the very point of controversie betwixt them and their accusers as he calls them though unjustly because they as Members of the Assemblie were doing of that duty which is common and competent to every Member of the Assembly that is to object what they know of scandal against any other Member that the Assembly might be constituted of persons rightly qualified they should be holden to be under a presumption of scandal until that hypothesis be discussed and cleared and why it should be agreeable to equity and reason that upon such a particular hypothesis which at the least is questionable and the very point in controversie betwixt the Commission and many faithful men and some Synods and not a few Presbyteries in the Land should be holden not only to be under a presumption of scandal but also such as did deserve to be publickly declared against as Malignant and unfaithful and appointed to be censured and cited It seems that whilst the Author reasons thus about his hypothesis that what he gains one way he loseth another I see not how by his questionable hypothesis he can defend the equity of the Commissions proceedings in their Warnings Remonstrances and Acts against these who were unsatisfied with and did oppose the Publick Resolutions and when he shall do it I hope his own grounds shall help the Protesters to prove the equity and reason of removing Commissioners even upon supposal that it was but a questionable hypothesis 4. I desire to know of the Author by what power or in what capacity the Commission did look upon them to determine this questionable hypothesis as a Commission they could not do it because there is no clause in their Commission that gives them power or warrant to determine any point of Doctrine not formerly determined by the Church of Scotland but their Commission ties them in all things to walk according to former Determinations Acts and Constitutions of General Assemblies and I think he will not say that by vertue of any other power or capacity they either did it or could do it The Author hath by his own confession and ground brought the Commission a greater length in the exercise of their power then ever the Gen. Assembly did give to them or for any thing I know did mean to give unto them that is To determine points of Doctrine of great importance and consequence as to the security of Religion and of the Cause and Covenant not formerly determined by this Church in any of her Gen. Assemblies upon these Determinations to declare such as are unsatisfied with and do oppose the same not only to be censurable but also appoint them to be censured I thought if any thing had been the proper work of a Gen. Assembly this had been it But more directly to the point I do affirm that this Hypothesis the Publick Resolutions determined by the Commission of the General Assembly 1650. and issued to this Kirk in their Publick Warnings Letters Remonstrances c. do contain and involve a course of defection was at the time of the Protestation clearly determined in former General Assemblies because the General Assemblies of this Kirk had often before that time determined an association in Councel and Armes with the Malignant partie even in the caâ—e of the defence of the Kingdom against forraign invasion to be sinful and unlawful as will appear to any who shall be pleased to read the Declarations Warnings and causes of Humiliations and Publick Papers of this Church these years past and particularly the Solemn Publick Confession of Sins and Engagement to Duties and the Declarations and Warnings issued by the General Assembly 1650 upon the English invading of this Land But these Resolution did involve such a Conjunction because they did involve a Conjunction with all the Subjects in the Land excepting these few included in the Exceptions contained in the Answer to the Quaere but amongst these was the very body and bulk of the Malignant party who are by these Resolutions allowed to be taken in and employed in the defence of the Kingdom without any repentance or forsaking of their malignant waies as a thing necessarily previous to the employing of them and without which they could not be employed These were the things which the Protesters alleadged and offered to verifie not only the general that the Commissioners had made defection from the Cause and Covenant but that these particular Resolutions concluded and carried on by them did involve a defection from the Cause and Covenant this I say they offered to instruct from former Acts of Assemblies speaking clearly and positively there anent which yet were refused to be heard by the Meeting until they first should constitute themselves in an Assembly including these Members against which the Exception was propounded a greater imputation upon their freedom then they will easily wipe off VINDICATION IT is known that the Belgick Remonstrance in the Protestation against the Synod of Dort alleadged a matter of Scandal against the most part of the Members thereof viz. That they had made a Schism and were Schismatick The point de jure in thesi That Schism was a foul scandal and such as made them unfit to sit in that Judicatory as Members I suppose was cleer and the Remonstrants brought many plausible Presumptions that they were guilty of it more plausible a great deal then this Writer alleadges against the late Commissioners they bring Particular instances of Facts as keeping separated Congregations and Presbyteries from the Remonstrant refusing to joyn in Prayers or Sacraments with them whereas our Writer alleadges nothing but Generals offence of many godly pregnant presumptions men undertaking to instruct c. But here was a Question in Hypothesi Whether it be a schism to keep separated Congregations and Presbytries from and to refuse to joyn in Prayers and Sacraments with men that had departed in their doctrin from such and such Articles of the Doctrin of that Reformed Kirk
tryed this being the very way established and constantly followed in all the free and lawfull Assemblies of this Kirk for keeping of her Assemblies pure If the Author will not admit of the removing of any till he be convict and will have those Divines at Dort so to be exponed then let him tell us how he will reconcile them and our Church in this particular But it is easie by the answer which we have given so to do yea it is manifest from the whole scope of the business at Dort that these Divines speak in order to a totall removall which was never desired by the Protesters in reference to the Commissioners But let us turn the Schene a little and suppose that the Belgick Churches had chosen and sent to the Synod of Dort the Remonstrants as their Commissioners and that the Anti-Remonstrants had been cited before the Synod and had proponed as an exception against the Remonstrants sitting in the Synod that they were under a scandall of erroneous and corrupt doctrine which they did offer instanily to prove by comparing their Doctrine with the Doctrine of the Belgick and Reformed Churches in their Confessions and Catechismes and thereupon desired that they might be removed from sitting as Members in the Synod untill this exception were tryed Doth the Author think that the rest of the Synod would or could in reason have refused to grant this desire From all these things I hope it doth appear that notwithstanding of any thing answered by the Author it is a relevant exception against the freedome and right constitution of the Assembly that they did before trying of the Commissioners proceedings admit them to sit as Members of the Assembly notwithstanding of the exception of scandall upon them timeously proponed and offered to be instructed As for that which the Author saith of the Protesters suffering Mr. Andrew Cant with good liking of all of them so far as could be perceived to put Mr. Robert Blair and Mr. William Reate upon the List to be Moderator and that sundry of them gave their vote to Mr. Robert Blair to be Moderator let be to sit as an ordinary Member of the Assembly I answer There were many of the Protesters who had no place to speak in making of the Lâ—st as not being Members of the Meeting and I believe that these did give no token either of their good or ill liking of what Mr. Andrew Cant did in that particular These who voted though they would not refuse to vote in the election of a Moderator as they did afterwards for some time in other particulars not yet despairing of some reasonable satisfaction to their desire of adjourning the Assembly and that they voted to Mr. Rob. Blair as one of the most pious prudent peaceable of that way there being none else upon the List yet did they vote with a Protestation and though they had made no Protestation the most that it would prove were this that from loathnesse to be heard and hopes of satisfaction in a peaceable way they went further with the Assembly then adhering strictly to their right they should have done and I believe a passionate desire of peace did also move Mr. Andrew Cant to put these men upon the List though afterwards when it could not be obtained without prejudice to the truth he saw good cause to Protest against the Assembly as not free and as unlawfull VINDICATION AS for the particulars contained in the Writers large prosecution of this Argument we shall not need to insist much upon them nor yet will we follow him in Answers to his Objections onely somwhat briefly to some particulars and first what is alleadged from the Assembly 1562 80 81. First it had been good the Writer had set down the very Acts related in their full and formar words that we might have seen for every one of us are not keepers of the Registers nor have Copies of them beside us whether they meaned all persons against whom any scandal was alleadged should be removed even before the Assembly be constitute into a Judicatory which was the thing pretended by the Protesters and because not done was the ground of the quarrell for we see not this by any thing that is brought here Secondly we suppose it could not be the minde of these Assemblies that alleadgeance of scandals against persons should be a cause to remove them from sitting in that Assembly as Members altogether unlesse the scandall were clear and unquestionable for the point de jure and so their appointment comes not home to our present case Next for the grounds brought to prove that the Commissioners were under scandall of defection first we grant that hearing of a common report may be a ground of enquiry concerning a matter of scandall but this was not refused about the present case in question Secondly As for that cited from the 1. Cor. 5 1. that proceeding ordered there was an order to present câ—nsure so we may see that the Brother that writeth this is of that minde that the Commissioners upon that common report which he alleadgeth to have been passing upon them should have been without more ado sentenced to censure Good Sir hold your hand for my part I cannot wonder enough that he should have alleadged from the Apostles words so generally without any qualification that common report may be a ground of present sentence against persons as he doth here certainly this ought to have been wel qualified and limited otherwayes a wide door is opened to injustice and undoing the innocent and guiltless men for cannot one or two or some few ill tongues spread an ill report of very honest men and how easily shall that report become common if that of the Poet be true as it is most certainly Fama malum quo non aliud velociùs ullum Mobilitate viget vâ—resque acquirit eundo Therefore a common report that may be ground of so short and summary proceeding must be such as first is of a matter that in point de jure is clear and unquestionably a scandall Secondly For the fact in a manner universall uncontrolled either by the party or any that hath best and nearest notice of his actions both were in that matter of the Corinthian the matter was in jure clearly a hainous cryme Incest viz. having his fathers wife and for the fact the Report that had come to Paul was such as we have said omnino anditur as the Arab interpreter marked by Beza hath it passim in tota achaia and another interpreter on the same place in Marlorat q.d. Sine negatione sine tergiversatione non dubius est rumor sed res manifesta passim cum magno offendiculo publicata In the present case in hand both conditions were wanting the matter was not clear de jure in the main question of it its report was not so common as the contradiction thereof 3. the offence and stumbling of the godly at the Proceeding of the
Commissioners might have been and was indeed not given by these Proceedings of themselves but caused and born upon them by the information and mis-representation of them by some of the same persons who are the alleadgers and accusers and will be made good before any impartiall judge in the world by a right information and discovery of the Proceedings themselves and of the practisings of the accusers against them and therefore this can be no argument of the Commissiones being under scandal 4. There were more testimonies by very far from Presbyteries and Synods for them then against them and these testimonies given against them were really and in themselves scandals tending most evidently to the exposing of the Kingdom and Cause to the power of the invaders whereof the invaders themselves were very sensible and for that cause were some of the testimonies sooner put in their hands then communicate to the Commissioners and they in thankfulnesse was very carefull to cause Print them The third particular is a poor mans argument the begging of the very principal Question and this very begged Question is the onely main sum of this whole Paper repeated over and over again this the Assembly was to try and examine and till it was tryed a nay-say was good enough answer to this Affirmative 6. The Brethren who in the Assembly offered to prove the alleadgance were some of the same who had been chief in spreading the testimonies and bearing the offence upon the godly and had defamed the Commissioners and were interessed to have had them noted as under scandall it s against all equity that for the accusation of such they should have been reputed scandalous It was a word of Justice uttered by Haman otherwise wicked Julian the Appostate Quis innocens esse poterit si accusare sufficat REVIEW THe Author doth handsomely wave many things in the Writers Paper that are of importance and I think his Readers will do him no wrong to take for granted in that Paper what he doth not answer nor contradict What is there set down clearly and at large by the writer out of the Acts of the Gen. Assembly he turns off with a few words 1. He tels us it had been good that the writer had set down the very Acts which are cited in their full and formall words because every one are not keepers of the Registers nor have not Coppies of them beside them that it might have been seen whether they mean that all persons against whom any scandall is alleadged should be removed even before the Assembly be Constitute into a Judicatory To which I Reply that these Acts even in the full and formall words thereof were offered unto him others at the Meeting at S. Andrews under the Clerks hand and they would not do so much as daigne themselves to hear them or to read them or to collation them with the Principle Registers which they then had in their power but are now delivered into the hands of the English or dispersed I know not whether But are not the citations for the matter clear and home to the point If the Author think there is wrong done in any of them I believe if he will call to the Clerk of the Assembly he may yet find the means to get him the double of the very words of the Acts asserted under his hand It is true that every one is not a keeper of the Registers nor hath Copies of them besides us But shall they not therefore be trusted who are keepers of them or have Copies It had been belike good for the Church of Scotland that the Author some others who have been so actively instrumental for the Publick Resolutions had been keepers of the Regiâ—ters or haâ— had Copies of them beside them then haply knowing these things more perfectly they should not have walked so crosse therto in their late Proceedings nor have questioned them when they are cited It is certainly a thing blame worthy in not a few Ministers of the Kirk of Scotland that they are too great strangeâ—s to the Acts of Assemblies of the Kirk which is a fault so much the greater because there was no lack of opportunities these 14. years to have acquainted themselves therewith and to have had Copies of them besides them The Acts are vailed with no such mist as the Author would cast upon them either in the first particular which he mentions whether they mean all persons against whom any scandall is alleadged should be removed even before the Assembly be constitute or in the second that it cannot be meaned by them that alleadgance of scandals against persons should be cause to remove unlesse the scandall were clear and unquestionable for the point de jure they speak clear home that at the entry of every Assembly their first work shal be the trying and purging of all their Members and men are appointed to be charged in Gods behalf to declare their Conscience tonthing their Doctrine life and execution of then Officers if therein they be scandalous and that any to whose charge any thing is laid ought to be removed out of the Assembly tiâ—l this cause be tryed and that if he be convict he may have no voice untill the Kirk receive satisfaction Here is no distinction of questionable hypothesis nor allowance to him to sit before the tryall of his cause but when any other of the Commissioners to the Assembly charges him with any thing in his Doctrine life or execution of his Office he is to be removed till it be tryed But saith the Author it is not clear that this is to be done before the Assembly be constitute into a Judicatory which was the thing pretended by the Protesters and because not done was the cause of this quarrell This is clear that they are to be removed immediatly after they are charged with any thing untill they be tryed which was the thing refused by the Assembly and therefore if the objection be moved before the constitution they are to remove before the constitution of the Assembly 2. It is clear that this is appointed to be their first work at the entry of every Assembly and if any would say That the Assembly must first enter by being constitute I give these two things for clearing that it is meaned before the constitution First because this Act and practice which concerns the purging of the Assembly from scandalous persons is previous in time to the Act and practice of choosing a Moderator as will be obvious to any who looks upon the Records 2. Because it hath been the constant practice in all the Assemblies of this Kirk from the very first Reformation to propone exceptions of scandall and to remove persons upon proponing thereof before the choice of a Moderator as also obvious in the mindâ—s almost of every Assembly and cannot but be known to the Author and all such as have been frequenting our Assemblies and observing the order thereof and
therefore the Author doth but seek out inventions to darken clear and manifest truths To the answer which he brings to the grounds of proof brought by the Writer as to the matter of scandall I return these replyes That by granting that the hearing of a common report may be a ground of enquiry if he deal candidly therein according to the meaning of the place cited by the Author Deut. 13.14 It must be of diligent enquiry for so it is expressed there Chapter 17. v. 4. and 19.18 which imports that it should be an enquiry without delay but this was refused about the present case in question and notwithstanding of this common report and objecting the scandall thereof in the Assembly the enquiry was delayed untill the Assembly was constitute and no more diligence was used in it then if there had been no such report at all he doth injury to the Writer by labouring to bear upon him and upon others that he is of that minde that the Commission upon that common report which he alleadges to have been passing upon them should have been without more adoe sentenced to censure The utmost that the Writer all along hath pleaded in this hath been that the Commissioners ought to have been removed till their carriage were tryed But two grounds he layes to prove this to have been the Writers minde 1. That the Proceeding ordered 1 Cor. 5. 5. was in order to present censure 2. That he alleadgeth the Apostles words so generall without any qualification I shall not stand upon the first but the Writer not being upon the handling of that point what common report or how qualified was needfull to be a ground of sentence but onely shewing that sometimes common report may be so he thought it enough to cite the Apostles words without qualifying of them and if the Author will make this a ground of challenge against the Writer he may make it against the Apostle himself for he sets down the words generally without any such qualification and the Writer doth not extend them to any other case then that of which the Apostle is treating He only saith that common report is made a ground of proceeding against the incestuous Corinthian without making any application of it to the Commissions case or saying that it should also be a ground of proceeding against them if it be asked to what purpose then it was cited the answer is very obvious and clear from the whole drift of the Writers discourse which is to shew that the persons objected against were under a scandall and this he doth 1. By shewing that there was a hear-say and common report of it upon which the Scriptures layes so much weight as sometimes to make it a ground of tryall As Deut. 13. Sometimes a ground of proceeding as 1 Cor. 5. It is true that the Scriptures doth not make every hear-say and common report a ground to accompt men under a scandall or to proceed against them otherwise honest men indeed might be in an ill condition but the qualification of these things are to be drawn from the circumstances of the facts whereunto they are applyed and of these we have spoken in the fact of the Commissioners and therefore the Author in this particular doth but trouble himself and others without cause yet must I say that though for any thing I know or can be collected from the writers words the utmost that he pleads for being a delay of their admission to be members of the Assembly which could not be accompted a sentence against them more than against others who were delayed upon exceptions to be admitted that his meaning was not That the common report that past upon the Commissioners was sufficient to be a ground of present sentence against them yet when the Author hath streached himself to the utmost hâ— haâ—h proven no good advocate for the Commissioners to exeem them from present censures He tels us that a common report that may be a ground of so short and summary proceeding must be such as first is of a matter that â—n point de jure is cleaâ—y and unquestionably a scandall 2. For the fact in a manner universalâ—y uncontrolled eâ—â—her by the pâ—â—ty or any that hath best or nearest notice of his actions in the present case saith he both â—hese cases were wanting the matter was not clear de jure in the main question of it its report was not so common as the contradiction of it But I say the matter was clear de jure in the main question of it determined verbatim in former Acts of Assemblies and the fact was not at all controverted or controlled by any but taken with both by the party and known and acknowledged by these that had best and nearest notice of their actions The quality of the fact might be controverted whether right or wrong which is a point belonging to the jus of it but the fact it self was not contradicted either by the Commissioners or any other and his omnino auditur and passim in tota achaia c. and res manifesta passim cum magno offenaiculo publicata as to the matter of fact was true of that which the Commissioneâ—s had done the offence and stumbling of the godly was not causeless born upon them by the mis-information and mis-representation of the Commissioners proceedings by some of the same persons who are the alleadgers the Author there doth a double wrong to the godly in Scotland 1. That he makes them to have stumbled without a cause whereas there was very reall causes of stumbling given unto them both in regard of that which was done and for the maner of doing That which was done was employing of the whole Body of the Land promiscuously a very few persons being excepted amongst whom were many Malignant and dis-affected men who had been formerly excluded and with whom the Lords people in the Land had learned from the Word of God and from the constant tenour of the doctrine of all the faithfull Ministers of this Church to keep a distance as to imploying them in the defence of the Cause and Kingdom As this was a main occasion of contriving the League and Covenant so is there a speciall Article therein relating thereto the breach whereof was one of the speciall and main sins confest in the Solemn acknowledgment of 〈◊〉 and the contrary duty one of the main things to which we engage our selvs in our solemn Engagement It is true that the Commission having done this finding many to stumble did afterwards finde out some evasions and distinctions to save their own credit but the contradiction between their resolutions and former principles proceedings was primâ fronte so palpable and obvious that men of all sorts both well-affected and ill-affected did see it so as the one did rejoyce and the other mourn the Godly did not more stumble then the Malignant and prophane were glad and both the one and the other as
it was that put them into their hands that these men might have been noted known I doubt not but if he could have done it he would have done it seeing he spares not to put Imputations upon men by Name and Sirname when he conceives himself to have any ground for it and that it will bring any advantage to his cause But whilest he would fain render some of the opposers of the Publick Resolutions odious and yet hath not ground upon which he can confidently do it He speaks so indefinitly some of the Testimonies were put c. neither telling us what Testimonies nor by whom they were put in their hands that if he be challenged for it he may have a shift to make his retreit But I doubt that this way of defaming his neighbors will be found straight before God If I may conjecture of what Testimonies he speaks it seems to be the Letter of the Presbytery of Sterling for that so far as I know was the only Testimony printed by the English and if he mean of that he speaks untruly when he saith that it was sooner put into their hands then sent unto the Commissioners I can confidently assure him and all others that it was sent unto the Commissioners before any copy of it was given or sent to any who were not Members of the Presbytery and I can as confidently say That none of these had any hand directly or indirectly in conveying that Letter to the English The man amongst them who was most slandered hath given me warrant to say and I trust that he will abide by it That his conscience doth bear him record that he was inocent of that as of all things of that kind and that to this day he knows not how that Letter was put into their hands unless it was by occasion of intercepting the Copie thereof by the English with Mr. Andrew Ker the Clerk of the Commission his Servant who was sent over the Water to some of his friends unto Edinburgh from Perth immediately after that Meeting of the Commission to which the Letter of the Presbytery of Sterling was sent That the English did print these Testimonies is no great wonder it is very like that they would print any thing that did hold forth our defection and owning of the Malignant Interest The Third Particular is in the Authors Judgment a poor mans Argument But poor men through mercy oft-times obtains more sollid discoveries of Divine Truths in a day of tentation then the Learned and the Rich do Neither is it yet a begging of the principal Question because what was offerred in this was offered to be instructed out of the Registers and they who made the offer were Members of the Assembly who in conscience and duty and by the Acts of the Assembly which relate to the Constitution thereof as we have already shown were bound to declare their conscience touching others who were called to be Constituent Members thereof in their Doctrine Life and execution of their Office and for the point of that Interest it is the same thing that was objected by the Remonstrants against the Anti-remonstrants at the Synod of Dort and by the Prelats in their Declinator 1638. To which we return no other Answer but that of the Brittane Divines at Dort Veritas communis Ecclesiae Thesaurus est nec potest ullo pacto fieri peculium singularum personarum Dei Ecclesiae Publica causa est non sua cujusque quae in Synodis agitur In the close of this discourse as all along he speaks of these who moved this Exception as of the Commissioners Accusers and cites that of Julian Si accusasse sufficiat quis inocens erit But that they weee not Accusers neither yet to be called so I have already shewed Why should they be esteemed or called Accusers more then others propounding Exceptions against Constituent Members of the Assembly neither was it ever desired that the propounding of the Exception should be taken for a verification of it or to speak in the Authors language That the accusing of them should be the holding of them for guilty but only that the Commissioners should be removed from sitting as Members in the Assembly till the Exception were tried and therfore that of Julian can have no place in this case VINDICATION IT is alleadged by the Writer That the same Assembly at St. Andrews upon the like exception and objection others were removed from sitting as Members as Blacketer and others because the scandal of their accession to the unlawful Engagement was not sufficiently purged c. and he would have any man in the world give a reason why these were excluded and not others against whom were as relevant yea more revelant exception Answer I think any man in the world that hath common sense informed of both Cases may give a reason and may perceive that the Writer hath been rash when he hath wrote these words upon the like Exception and as relevant yea more relevant Exception For Blacketer and others 1. Their scandal was cleer in the Law 2. They had been convicted of the fact yea 3. They had been actually censured and were yet lying under the Censure 4. A part of their censure was exclusion from being members of Kirk Judicatories 5. There was one expresse Act of a Gen. Assembly That they should not be liberat from that censure nor be capable to be members of any inferior Kirk-Judicature until their satisfaction should be first notified unto and approven by a Gen. Assembly Now let any man in the world tell me if the exception against the one and the other was alike or if there was more relevancy in the exception against the Commissioners then in the exception against these for their Exclusion from being Members the matter of Exception might haply considered in abstracto be of greater importance but we speak now of the exception in relation to Persons and Circumstances as it is to have effect or not to have effect upon the Judge for Censuring and Noting or not Censuring and Noting the Persons REVIEW THe Author in Answering the Instance concerning Blacketer seems to himself to have gotten a great advantage of the Writer his rashness but though his advantage were as great as he takes it to be in that particular it would not better his Cause because multitudes of Instances can be given from time to time in the Gen. Assembly of this Church of removing persons upon exceptions of scandal before any conviction of the Fact or censure for the same yea in the same Assembly 1651 several persons were laid aside upon exceptions before any legal conviction or sentence past upon the Fact as the Commissioners of some Presbyteries who were protested against because of opposing publick Resolutions And the Commissioners of the presbytery of Dunse whose Case was not cleer in Law neither yet legally found true as to the matter of Fact But let us see what it is that he hath
exception for their removal from being members before the tryal of their proceedings and consequently the refusing to admit it as an Exception to that effect a non-relevant ground of Protesting against the Assembly and yet haply afterwards their proceedings might be judged to be such indeed as they were alleadged to be without any crossing and contradiction between the one Act and the other REVIEW THE Author studies in this place to take off some things alleadged by the Writer in order to the proceedings of the Assembly but let us see how he doth it 1. It is yeelded that notwithstanding of the Exception proponed against the Commissioners they were not only admitted to sit and Vote in the choice of a Moderator but also afterwards in every thing that came before the Assembly for many dayes together before the trying of their proceedings yea that before that tryal they sate as Judges to give vote and sentence upon the Protestation one Reason whereof was the Assemblies refusing to remove them till the Exception proponed against them should be discussed for the defence whereof he alleadges 1 That the Assembly immediatly after the choice of the Moderator did fall upon the tryal of that Exception but as that was not enough because by the Acts of the Assembly already cited and constant practise of Assemblies in the matter of Exceptions Persons excepted against are immediatly to be laid aside till the matter be tryed So was it also defective in this That during the time of the tryal the Commissioners did sit and Vote in the Assembly 2 He saies That the Assembly could not adjourn and be idle all the time that the Committee was to be on that business but could not the Assembly have sitten and be imployed about business unless these who were Members of the Commission did sit and vote in such business as came before them were they Members sine quibus non 3. He alleadges That it had been the practise of the preceding Assemblies since 38. But neither doth that loose the difficulty because in none of these Assemblies was there any Exception proponed against the Commissioners nor was there cause for it He is mistaken in his Instance in the Assembly 48 as we have already cleered and therefore he must seek for another Defence But in that which follows he plaies the acurate Logician and finds the Writer in a gross Paralogism which he thinks can beguile none but these who are too simple and too willing to be beguiled I would not willingly be beguiled yet I must profess my self so simple that when I have put on the Authors Spectacles and looked throw them as attentively as I can I cannot discover the Paralogism nor the Sophistry thereof but to me it still seems to be a plain and convincing Argument The Writer alleadges That the Members of the Commission sate as Judges to give Vote and Sentence upon the Exception proponed against themselves before the Assembly did judge of their proceedings and he brings this for proof of his alleadgance That before any Judgment given anent their proceedings they sate as Judges upon the Protestation whereof the rejecting of that Exception was a special Reason To this the Author Answers That it is a Paralogism because the thing which was judged was not the truth or falshood of the thing contained in it to wit Whether the Commissioners proceedings were right or wrong but only whether the Assembly refusing to remove the Commissioners when this Exception was alleadged against them in the way that it was alleadged and before the alleadgance was tryed did any thing contrary to the freedom and duty of the Assembly or if the Protesters did wrong the Assembly in declining it upon that ground I shall not now trouble my self to prove that by judging of that Reason of the Protestation they did judge of the proceedings of the Commissioners right or wrong because this will fall in afterwards more directly in the last Argument but taking what the Author grants I Reason thus Who so judges of the relevancy or non-relevancy of one Exception in order to their own sitting or not sitting Judges of one Exception against themselves But the Commissioners before the approving of their proceedings did judge of the relevancy or c. Ergo the First Proposition is cleer and may be illustrated by Instances I suppose the Author in one assembly should object against some men that they cannot sit as Members till they be tryed because they are Papists or Murderers or Adulterers which he offereth to instruct and when the Assembly comes to judge upon the point exception relevant or not relevant to remove these men if these men themselves should sit and Vote in this question were not this to admit them to be Judges of one Exception proponed against themselves The Second Proposition is the Authors own grant for besides other things to that purpose he saith The Commissioners sitting and Voting as Judges in this matter was no irregularity or else the Assembly 48 was also irregular wherein the Protesters may well remember the Commissioners voted as well as other Members upon the relevancy of the Exception given in by the Parliament against themselves Well then the Commissioners in the Assembly 51. did Vote upon the relevancy of the Exception given in against themselves If any would deny it it is easie to prove it thus Who so were admitted to judge of the relevancy or non-relevancy of the grounds of the Protestation were admitted to judge of the relevancy or non-relevancy of that Exception because it was one of the main grounds of the Protestation But the Members of the Commission c. Ergo. The Author or some others wil haply think What need all this it is granted that it was so and the thing that is denied is That they did not sit as Judges to give sentence of the right or wrong of their own proceedings Perhaps ere all be done we shall also find them doing that but if it be granted That they did judge of the relevancy of that Exception all is granted that was alleadged by the Writer to wit That they sate as Judges to give Vote and Sentence upon the very Exception proponed against themselves and so he hath committed no Paralogism but by the Authors own concession which he cannot get avoided It is proved that the writer did alleadge which was not that they did judge of the right or wrong contained in the exception though that also might have been alleadged but that they did judge of the Exception proponed against themselves before any judgment given by the Assembly upon their proceedings and now it s granted that they did judge of the relevancy thereof as to their sitting or not sitting and was not this to be both Judge and Party who then is guilty of the Paralogism the Writer or the Author The Writer saith They were admitted to judge of the Exception proponed against themselves and this by the Authors grant hath a
real truth in it because they were admitted to judge the relevancy or irrelevancy of it as to their sitting or not sitting yea the Commissioners did oftner then once judge this before their proceedings were judged by the Assembly First They judged it at the first proponing and rejecting thereof by the Assembly before the choice of the Moderator for none of them were then removed neither was less weight laid upon what was spoken by them as to the rejecting of that Exception then upon what was spoken by any other Member of the Assembly who was not questioned 2 They judged it in judging of the Protestaion at which time they did approve of what the Assembly had formerly done in rejecting of it and did condemn the Proposers of it as doing wrong to urge it and to decline the Assembly thereupon The Author saith They were not admitted to sit as Judges in that Exception because they did not judg of the right or wrong of the things contained therein and this is a non-sequitur because they were admitted to judge of the relevancy thereof which did as well concern them the exception being proponed against themselves as the right or wrong of the things contained therein But he alledgeth 1 That this was no irregularity or else the Assembly 48. was as irregular He doth often make his retreat upon that Assembly when he is straited but it wil allow him no help in this particular because there was no such exception proponed nor judged in that Assembly 2 He alleadges That their Voting in that matter of the Protestation being no other thing then that which he hath said was no prejudice or advantage in the matter of their proceedings because the alleadgance of their carrying on in their proceedings a course of defection at the time and in the manner that it was alleadged might have been found one un-relevant exception for their removal from being Members before the tryal of their proceedings and consequently the refusing to admit it as one exception to that effect an un-relevant ground of Exception against the Assembly and yet haply afterwards their proceedings might have been judged to be such as they were alleadged to be without any Crossing or Contradiction betwixt the one Act and the other I suppose that all were true which is here spoken of yet what is this to prove that they did not at all judge of the exceptions proponed against themselves It is already yeelded That they did judge of it as to the irrelevancy of it for removing of them before trial But that the determining of the one did prejudice the determination of the other Yea go far to determine it I prove First thus If so be the exception as to the relevancy thereof did include many Points de Jure the cleering and discussing whereof did belong most intimately and essentially to the verifying or falsifying of the exception upon the matter itself then did the determining of the one bring a prejudice to the determination of the other if not go far to determine But the First is true and agreeable to the Authors own words in the next Page of his Vindication Ergo also the last The Conexion seems cleer because the determining of the relevancy or irrelevancy of the exception did also determine these pointâ— de Jure which did belong most intimatly and essentially to the verifying or falsifying of the exception upon the matter as for Instance the Assemblies determining that the Protesters objecting against the Commissioners that their Resolutions did involve a course of defection was not a relevant exception whereupon to remove them was also a determining of this Point de jure that these Resolutions did not involve a course of defection this did indeed belong most intimately and essentially to the falsifying of the exception upon the matter and so to the prejudging of the determination yea to the determining of the other question Or more cleerly thus If so be the exception could not be determined as relevant or irrelevant till the questionable hypothesis of the publick Resolutions was first determined then did the determining of the relevancy or irrelevancy of the exception involve a determination of the right or wrong of their Resolutions But the First is manifest from the Authors own words where he saith That the main and principal question de jure which should have been cleered that that scandal might have been charged upon the Commissioners was the particular hypothesis if this scandal could not be charged upon the Commissioners but by clearing of this hypothesis How could the Commissioners be cleered of that scandal and found such as were fit to sit in the Assembly notwithstanding of the exception thereof proponed against them without cleering that hypothesis In these things I deal fairly and candidly so far as my light reaches without detaining the truth in unrighteousness or seeking to darken or pervert the same so far as my understanding doth reach and I think I may refer it to the Consciences of these who Condemn the Protestation and that exception as irrelevant if they would have so done but upon perswasion that the Commissioners proceedings were right and if after the Vote of Condemning the Protestation they could notwithstanding therof have also condemned their Proceedings VINDICATION THirdly Howsoever it be true that the thing which was desired by the Protesters in the entry of the Assembly before the choice of the Moderator was not expresly and formally the trial and discussion of the Exception given against the Commissioners as to the truth alleadged therin 1. Whether the Commissioners indeed had carried on a course of defection from the Covenant and Cause but that the Commissioners should have been laid aside until the Assembly had been constituted to take that into consideration yet certain it is that they having been chosen to have been Commissioners unquestionably by the Society they came from and that some of them by the express vote consent of some of the Protesters themselves as Mr. Robert Blaire in the Presbytery and Mr. James Wood in the Vniversity of St. Andrews by Mr. Samuel Rutherford and having a formal Commission and so the Exception being personal as in relation to that Assembly and not propounded against their being Commissioners But now in the Assembly conveened of necessity the Exception behoved to have been tryed and discussed and judged as to the relevancy of it for their present removing and laid aside until it should be tried and discussed as to the truth of the thing contained in it for the Writer himself confesses that every Exception upon alleadgance of Scandal is not a sufficient and relevant ground to that effect Now there was a great Question about that Exception namely concerning a Question de jure belonging to it as we have before cleared Now tell me if the Assembly before the Election of the Moderator and before it was constitute into a Judicatory could try discuss and judge that Question which of necessity it
chosen by express vote and consent of some of the Protesters themselves as Mr. Robert Blaire in the Presbytery of St. Andrews Mr. James Wood in the University of St. Andrews by Mr. Sam. Rutherford it may be true Mr. Sam. Rutherford his desire of Peace and testifying of respect to these men being such as it is together with the hopes that he had of their being instrumental to accommodate things in a right way at the Assembly but that hinders not why the Protesters might not warrantably propound the Exception at the Assembly Another branch is That the Assembly had not as yet chosen their Moderator and was not yet constitute and therefore could not discuss that question c. But not to repeat that they did discuss the relevancy of other Exceptions yea of that same that was propounded against the Commissioners as to their sitting or not sitting till the matter should be further tried It is to be considered that if controverted Commissions and Members upon Exceptions propounded against them be laid aside till trial which hath alwaies been the custom of the Assemblies of this Church It is not so very material whether the ful discussing of the Exception be before the chusing of the Moderator or after it there are practises and instances of both wayes some Assemblies first discussing the controverted Commissions and Members and then chusing the Moderator others laying aside these things til the Moderator be first chosen and then immediatly before the doing of any thing else falling upon the discussing of them though it seems the most regular way that the controverted Commissions and Members be laid aside the uncontroverted ones being a competent number should proceed to the choice of a Moderator and thereafter before the doing of any thing else put that to a point which concerns the rest of their constituent Members In the case now in question both were desired either to discuss the Exception as to the truth or falshood of the alleadgance before the chusing of a Moderator or else to lay aside the Commissioners and to do it immediatly thereafter but both were refused which was the more considerable because the Exception propounded against them was but meerly personal or upon personal or particular scandals but of more common concernment and in things relating to the Cause as breach of Publick Trust defection from the Cause and Covenant which did require consideration before the admitting these persons I would ask the Author this one Question Upon supposal that the Assembly after the Commissioners sitting and voting therein many dayes yea even in the condemning of the Protestation and citing of the Protesters should have found their proceedings to involve a course of defection from the Cause and Covenant and therupon have removed and censured them Could Beholders have looked upon this as a handsom way of proceeding that they would not take into consideration an Exception deserving such things when it was first propounded unto them and offered to be instructed but would judge the Exception irrelevant censure others for protesting because of refusing to accept of it admit the Cōmissioners to be fellow-Judges in condemning that Protestation after al this find these Cōmissioners guilty of the thing alleadged in that same very Exception when ffrst proponed remove censure them upon it Are things handsom or do they wel cohere or can a tender eye look upon them without offence How much fairer had it been first to remove them and presently or immediately after the choice of the Moderator to discuss the Exception There is more danger to the Cause offence to God his People in rash admiting such as are guilty then in cautious delaying even of innocent persons when legally challenged If innocent they may afterwards be admitted with more honour and respect but if guilty either they shal be continued Members with much detriment to the cause or else shal be casten out with more shame both to themselvs and to the Assembly who at first refused to lay them aside till they were tryed Because the Author saw that an objection might be moved against what he hath said from the Assemblies removing of other Members who were excepted against before the choice of the Moderator therefore for preventing of it he tells us that there was a wide difference because the exceptions against them were as to their relevancie for their removing in cases every way clear and determined before in so far as was requisite for that to wit Protestations in Presbyteries against their election standing censures excluding them from all Church-Judicatories unrepealed To which I return these particulars First Some even before the choice of the Moderator were removed upon exceptions against whose elections there was no Protestation and who were under no standing censure either of one kinde or another to wit Mr. Robert Canden Commissioner from the Presbytery of Dunce who was removed upon this exception that that Presbytery could not choose Commissioners being so few in number as they were here was no Protestation the man under no censure yea nor the ground of the exception clear and unquestionable in Law as to any act of any former Assembly onely primâ fronte it seemed relevant that two or three could not choose therefore was be thereupon removed though afterwards if my information hold he was again as seems upon not finding the exception not relevant admitted Secondly Neither was a Protestation against the election sufficient to make it clear upon the Authors grounds I suppose that it had been alleadged that the ground of the Protestation was not clear but questionable as to the relevancy of it by his ground such a Protestation against the election would not have been enough to lay the Commissioners aside till the matter had been tryed To come nearer the case let us suppose that some of the opposers of Publick Resolutions had in the Presbyterie or in the Universite of St. Andrews protested against the election of the Commissioners there upon this ground that these who were elected were instrumentall in the Publick Resolutions will the Author say this had been sufficient to lay these Commissioners aside from sitting as Members of the Assembly till the matter had been tryed If so why then was not the proponing of that exception in the Assembly against all these who were Members of the Commission and had hand in these Resolutions sufficient to lay them aside Os if that be denyed I would desire to know a reason of the difference if it be said that all the Commissions which were laid aside because of Protestations against them were such as were protested against upon clear unquestionable grounds I answer that it was not so as appears by the instance already given to which I adde another to let see what partiality of proceeding there was in these things even upon the Authors own grounds Did not the Assembly lay aside the Commission of these who were first chosen by the Presbytery of
cite not a few of their number who were present and did direct Summons to others who were absent the Presbytry of Jeaburgh did cite three of their number sundry also in the Presbytery of Glasgow Chyrnside and else-where were cited He repeats again his distinction of such as differed from Publick Resolutions and such as continued to oppose them the last whereof only as he insinuates were cited But to pass by the distinction it self which seems to teach men a way that doth not seem well to become the Ministers of the Gospel h. e. to differ in such things as concerns the judgement and practice of the people committed to their charge in matters of special interest to the cause of God and yet to be silent and cease to give testimony thereof either for their own exoneration or information of their People which was one of the desires and overtures prest upon the Ministers of Sterling at St. Andrews Who so will look upon the Commissions Paper March 20. will find that in reference to censure it takes in not only such as continue to oppose and move contrarily but also such as move not at all or move slowly as well these who are indifferent and neutral as these who oppose see Pag. 2. 5. therof That some of them were chosen to the Assembly we have already cleared how it was done as also that which was done in the year 48. betwixt which and that which was done in the year 51. there are many real and important differences formerly spoken of and cleared and therefore doth the Writer use no double weights VINDICATION TO the Third Particular concerning the Kings Letter and the Commissioners Speech to the Assembly there was not one word in them more or less for Punishing or Censuring any that Differed from the publick Resolutions but if any thing of that kind was desired it was for opposing weakning of the hands of the kingdom and strengthning the hands of the Enemy joyned with expressions of earnest desire to endeavour by all fair means to gain all that differed to unity did this take away the freedom and liberty of voycing especially considering this which was desired was proponed by way of meer desire without any threatning or alurement to be byassed by mens voting but that the honest Reader may be able the better to give his Judgment of this matter he may reade the Commissioners Speech the Coppie of the Kings Letter I have not but both were to one purpose on the matter set down at the end of this Paper faithfully as it was delivered alwayes whatever was in the Letter I dare affirm that in that Assembly there was as great freedom and liberty in Speaking and Voting about these Resolutions in debate as well as in any other as well contra as pro as was in any Assembly these years by-past yea more then was in some of them wherein it was well known that oftentimes to the grief of men in the Kirk most eminent for Grace Gifts Gravity and Experience some who now unadvisedly accuses this Assembly of want of freedom and liberty have endeavoured to carry matters with a strong hand cutting down with sharp reflections and flouting such as any wayes dared to speak and vote in a different way from them which if report may be beleeved some of them hath acknowledged in their late Confessions The Writer after the propounding of the Argument meets with one Objection against it We shall not stand upon the discussing of his Reply as it relates unto that Objection but shall speak one word to that which he chargeth upon the Kings Letter as inorderly and irregular viz. That when as the Assembly had not yet medled with the publick Resolutions to condemn and reprove them he should have stirred up the Assembly to Censure such as differed from them Answ Besides that as hath been already said the Assembly was not desired to Censure any for differing from the publick Resolutions simply First It was not desired that the Assembly should censure them without any trying or approving of their resolutions nor was it desired that the Assembly should approve without due tryal but the King supposing them to be right and just in themselves and that the Assembly upon due tryal finds them to be such desired that such as had opposed them howbeit it could not be but to the prejudice of the defence of the Cause and Kingdom might be dealt with to be reclaimed or if that could not be obtained Censured Secondly Consider what a case he was in then he was obleidged by Treaty to follow the Advice of the Commission of the Kirk in the intervals of Assemblies in matters Ecclesiastick he had sought and gotten then Advice in these matters questioned and no men in Scotland were more earnest to have that Condition in the Articles of the Treaty then they who accuses him here But it may be he should have used his judgment of discretion upon any resolutions given by the Commission I confess that is true yet any man may perceave that the words in that Article of the Treaty are very peremtory and general in the later for no more is said but that he should follow the Advice of the Commission and it was well known when it was mentioned that it should be expresly added Agreeable to the Word of God and Doctrine and Constitutions of this Kirk The Motion was opposed and stopped by some of the Accusers This I speak not to say that he was bound to give blind obedience but to shew that he was in a right ticklish case here But leaving this the civil Magistrate being convinced in his Conscience upon good true and solid grounds of the Errour of some Doctrine or Practice of some Ministers which hath not been particularly determined in hypothesi by the constitution of the Kirk and of evil that they have done to the Publick in following it may he not exhort one general Assembly being conveened even in the entry thereof to Censure such without praelimitation or encroching upon the liberty and freedom of the Assembly in judging and voting upon it I doubt if he may not but suppose he cannot without encroaching and praelimitation active upon his part yet sure these can not prove the Assembly not free in Voting and Judging unless there can be some evidence given of the impression and effect of it on the Members in their Voting and Judging A Judge may be tempted and sollicited and yet may be unquestionable uncorrupted and free in his judging REVIEW THe Author doth not deny and I beleeve he cannot but that the Kings Letter and the Commissioners Speech did contain somewhat relating to Punishment and Censure but seeks a shift by telling us That if any thing of that kind was it was for Opposing the Leavies and weakning the hands of the Kingdom and strengthning the hands of the Enemy If either the Letter or the Speech had been exhibited they had spoken best for themselves
none of them is subjoyned to that Coppy of his Vindication which is come to my hands But upon supposal that it was as he saith of which yet he seems not to be very confident and therefore afterwards helps himself with his wonted word That it was not for differing from the publick resolutions simply or meerly what better is it then it was Did not all the Assembly to whom that Letter was written and that Speech spoken know that the opposing of Leavies and weakning the hands of the Kingdom and strengthning the hands of the Enemy which was meant of was Preaching and bearing Testimony against the publick Resolutions neither doth it take off the difficulty That it was joyned with expressions of earnest desire to endeavour by all fair means to gain them These desires could very well stand with incitations to Censures and that whatever was the way of proponing whether by way of meer desire as the Author alleadges or otherwayes yet was it not without threatning speeches upon the matter of which I am content that Judgment may be given by the Letter and Speech themselves He dare affirm That in Speaking Voting about these Resolutions there was as great Freedom and Liberty as was in Assemblies these years past yea more then was in some of them but in this he is too daring Was there any Assembly these years past that had so many bonds and restraints upon them as we have already instanced all that he instances is That some of these who accuses this Assembly of the want of Freedom and Liberty have in other Assemblies endeavoured to carry matters with strong hand calling down with sharp reflections and flouting such as any way dared to speak and vote in a different way from them For proof of this he gives us It is well known and the acknowledgment of some of themselves in their late Confessions I think indeed that it is wel known that too often in most of our Kirk Judicatories there was in most men that sate therein too much of a carnal Spirit and too little of the sober holy grave spiritual meek way of the holy Ghost And some of these men have as to their own carriage in Judicatories acknowledged this and are indeed convinced of it before the Lord desiring mercy in his sight and grace That if ever it shall be again allowed them to sit in Judicatories there may be more of the beauty and image of the Lord upon them and their way But that they cryed down such with sharp reflections and flouting as dared to speak or vote otherwayes then they did is that which no man is able to make good which I tâ—ow their own consciences doth not accuse them of haply some would have expected that the Author would have spared to have reflected upon these persons in their confessions seeing he is a man subject to the like Passions that others be and I doubt not to the same convictions and confessions upon them His defence of the Kings Letter is such that I fear shall satisfie few 1. He repeats that it was not therin desired to censure any for differing from the publick resolutions simply to what I have spoken already Next it is but a subterfuge which he saith That it was not desired that the Assembly should censure them without trying or approving their resolutions but the King supposing them to be right and just in themselves and after the Assembly should after due triall finde them to be such desired that such as had opposed them howbeit it could not be but to the prejudice of the defence of the Cause and Kingdom might be dealt with to be reclaimed or if that could not be obtained censured There is nothing here for answering what is alleadged by the Writer to wit that the Assembly whilest they had not yet medled with the publick resolutions and had not found them right were stirred up to censure these that could not be reclaimed from them and taking it as the Author doth alleadge That the King did suppose them to be right and withall that he spake nothing to the Assembly to allow a fair hearing to these of a contrary minde or to search whither they were right or wrong It saith that the Kings Letter did contain a clear intimation of his minde to the Assembly not only in order to these who should continue to oppose or could not be reclaimed but also in order to these who should vote pro or contra in the Assembly that Letter and that Speech were but an expresse of the Commissions Warnings and Acts and Acts of Parliament made there anent in order to the furthering the execution thereof by getting them backed with a new Act of the Assembly to the same purpose as afterwards they were I cannot well decern whither the parenthesis cast in by the Author in these words howbeit it could not be but to the prejudice of the defence of the Cause and Kingdom be cited by him as the Kings words or interlined as his own and therefore shall not give judgement of them 2. His next defence That the King was bound by the Treaty to follow the advice of the Commission of the Kirk in matters Ecclesiastick in intervalls of Assemblies which he looseth himself by acknowledging that he should have used his judgement of discretion upon any resolutions given him by the Commission but because the Author interlaces in order to this severall particulars therefore in answer to what he saith in this part of his defence I offer these things First That there is nothing here spoken by the Author that makes for the vindication of the Kings Letter It speaks indeed to the vindicating at least to the excusing of the King himself in writing such a Letter because he was advised by the Commissions as to the publick Resolutions but that doth not say that the Letter did not contain such things as were apt to hinder liberty of voting in the Assembly Secondly I acknowledge that the King was indeed in a right ticklish condition But who had put him in that condition but the Authors and Abettors of the Publick Resolutions who after an expresse Article of the Treaty for removing of Malignants from him and expresse desires from the Generall Assembly and their Commission renewed again and again and expresse Answers to the Quaere proponed by himself of bringing in the Malignant Party In the negative did advise him to imploy and bring in that Party for his own defence and the defence of the Cause and Kingdom Thirdly As to the peremptorinesse of some to have in that condition in the Articles of the Treaty I know it not but though it was so it was no more then his Predecessors was used to be tyed unto before the Reformation in the old Oath of Coronation and which his own Father had condescended unto in the Treaty at the Bricks as appears in the Acts of the Assemblies and the Acts of Parliament 1639 and 1640. Forthly
made thereupon in the Assembly But upon supposall that it was friendship and tender respect of some which yet upon the former considerations may be justly doubted of at least it was all or their most weighty reason to the Lord Wariston yet to say nothing of their being more moved with the fear of his danger then the prejudice of the publick Cause which could not but suffer two ways by smothering of the Letters and Papers therewith sent both by the want of the light held forth therein and by the imputation of smothering of it I wonder that the Assembly should have been so easily moved with these alleadgances which he speaks of to wit that the Assemblies precious time whereof they knew not how short liberty they might have should be spent in reading a particular mans Letter whereas the Committees were not yet nominate nor the Commissions Proceedings which is the first businesse that ought to be tryed yet looked upon and that the Papers offered to be read did amount to a volume which would have taken up all the Assemblies time though there had been no other businesse they being of a hundreth Sheets and the Letter being of four or five sheets of thick Write There was more time spent upon the debate of reading of the Letter then it would have been read in to it being not above the halfe of these sheets which the Author speaks of if his testimony who wrote it may be believed neither was the Assembly so much straitned with time else they were no good husbands of it because the first day they refused to read the Letter they spent a great part of a Session more then would have served for reading of the Letter debating about a Ministers mans and his gleeb as many honest witnesses can testifie and the Letter was urged and pressed to be read not only before but also after the nominating setling all the Committees both that which concerned the proceedings of the Commission and all others It was not a particular mans Letter if by a particular man he mean a private person writing of businesses of his own but it was the Letter of a publick servant of the Assembly writing of the publick businesses of the Assembly I mean the Clerk who was by his place bound to offer unto the Assemb from their Acts Records what he knew to be contributive for clearing of their proceedings especially in businesses of common concernment of the Church and this Letter did contain only purpose and businesse of that nature and nothing at all of private or personall concernments Amongst other things there was therewith sent an Extract of many Acts of former Assemblies extracted out of the Registers of the Kirk contradicting the Publick Resolutions For the length of the other Papers they were not so long but they might have been read in a day or two at most or if the Assembly would not have read them they might have committed them to some of their number to take inspection if there was any thing therein that might contribut to give light to the Assembly in the matter of the Publick Resolutions It is somewhat strange that the Assembly being upon the consideration and debate of these Resolutions whether they were agreeable to the Word of God the solemn League and Covenant the solemn engagement to Duties and other Acts and Constitutions of the Kirk that they should have refused to take in consideration or to read what was timeously offered to them in the contrary by their own Clerk and it is more strange that notwithstanding of this they will in the Act wherein they approve these Resolutions Preface thus after due examination long and much debate and mature deliberation but must it saith the Author be such a crime for which the Assembly must be judged null that such a motion was referred and delayed to a more convenient time It was not a delay to a more convenient time but a delay altogether let the Author tell us if he can when that convenient time came or whether the Letter was not wholly laid aside though not by a positive and formall resolution yet waved from Diet to Diet and never read which is the more considerable that the reading of it before the Protestation being so much urged and the Protestation containing reasons against the unlawfulnesse of the Assembly because of the want of freedome yet even after that the Assembly went on and approved the Commissioners Proceedings without reading of that Letter whatever the Author make of it I doubt all circumstances being considered if such an instance can be given in any free Assembly the refusing to read former Acts and constitutions of Assemblies and other things timeously offered unto them from the word of God and the Covenant and Publick Papers of the Kirk by their own Clerk out of their own Registers for clearing of the Commissions proceedings which were now in debate and if the term of refusall please not the Author the Assemblies proceeding to ratifie the procedings of the Commission without reading or taking in consideration these things offered unto them by their own Clerk out of the Word of God and their own Registers for clearing of these proceedings notwithstanding that the same was timeously offered and earnestly pressed by many members of the Assembly and promised by the Moderator to be read I believe common reason teaches and these who treat of the nullity of Judicatories and sentences tel us that it is a relevant groud of a declinator or appeal if the judge give sentence without hearing what is timeously offered unto him out of his own Acts and the Laws by which he is bound to judge for clearing of the cause As to that instance given by the Author of a Paper laid aside in the Assembly 48. or 49. The Writer saith that he is so far from remembring it well that he doth not remember it at all neither yet doth others whose memories are better then his Its strange that the Author should know it for certain and yet should neither know what Assembly it was not what the businesse was nor who the persons were yet because he affirms it for certain I shal not deny it nor say that it is untrue but till he tell us the particular circumstantiat case and make it to appear that it is a paralel of the case now in question I think he wil alow us not to lay weight upon it Before he close his Answer to this Argument he labours to Vindicate the Commissioners from being Authors of smothering a Paper of Sir Archibald Jonstons because of a Protestation therein contained against a Paper of theirs approving what was done by the King and Committee or Estates against the Ministers of Sterline and tells if the Writer meant so it is a wrongfull slandering of them The Writer hath said nothing that may import that which the Author cals a slander He thinks that it is insinuate but I think he hath more
of the Assembly without satisfaction in which they could not acknowledge the Assembly And the reason why they did sit and vote till the day of Inerkeithing was that which I have told already because they were loath to use the last remedy till there was no hope That any other could be effectual to bring things to any tolerable condition the Author cannot but remember that there was Conference both upon the Thursday and upon the Friday betwixt some of the Commissioners and some of the Protesters in order to a good understanding and some right way of composing Differences and preventing of further Divisions and of a wider breach and how much and how earnestly some did with tears press the Commissioners that they would be instrumental to get the Assembly adjourned and how peremptorily they did refuse so much as once to speak in it Their salvo in the Assembly was also salvo enough for them to be in Committees and for their voting in the adjournment I have told upon what ground they did it it doth but at the utmost say that they did strain themselves to the utmost and further then otherwise could have been convenient untill necessity forced them to use the last remedy of Protesting From all which it may appear notwithstanding of any thing said by the Author to the contrary That it was the conscience of the weight of the grounds whereupon it was built and not that which alleadged by the Author that moved these men to protest against the Assembly The Author is a very bold and uncharitable Censurer of the Protesters not only as to the matter of their actions but as to the motives and inducements of their actings In the beginning of his Vindication he hath holden forth some of them as acting upon Byassed and Self-interst and as belying all their great Profession of respect to the Government of this Kirk by their Actions Now in the close of it he holdeth forth all of them as men void of conscience in this particular and acting upon other grounds notwithstanding of their pretending to Conscience I thought that whatever had been his Opinion of some of them yet that he had had a better and more Honorable estimation of others of them VINDICATION I Shall in the next place speak a word to one or two passages contained in the general Objections because in the one the Writer pretends to hold forth a new argument against the lawfulnesse of the Assembly in the other through the sides of it he strikes at the Assembly of Glasgow 38. it self The former in the answer to the second Objection is this Albeit there were nothing relating to the point of forme viz. to the Constitution and manner of proceder of the Assembly yet some conceive and with much appearance of reason that an Assembly proceeding wrong upon matters is null because Kirk Judicatories have no power to destruction but all their power is to Edification and all power Commissioners of a Generall Assembly have it is by Commissions from Presbyteries which Commission limiteth them to the Word of God the Covenant and Acts of former Assemblies and therefore in so far as they do any thing contrary to these in so far they may be declined as having no power for doing any such thing which furnisheth a new argument not before alleadged for declining the Assembly because in the most of all the materials of their proceedings they proceed contrary to the trust committed to them by Presbyteries Answer We are not now disputing about the right or wrong of particular Acts and Constitutions of the Assemblie the Writer doth but affirm they are wrong and this saying is not to be holden for sententia lâ—ta nor is it an Oracle but to the present matter 1. Supposing as the Writer doth and we conceive we have in what goes before made a more clear supposition nothing could be alleadged in the point of forme that which indeed here maketh nothing for justifying the deed of the Protesters who Protested against the lawfulnesse of the Assembly when as it had not come to any of these Proceedings which the VVriter alleadgeth to be wrong in the matter this sure I am cannot be justifiable But secondly if the Writer by these some who conceive as he saith meaneth any some Orthodox Writers it had been fit he had named them and cited their words and Writings wherein they express that conception that we might have had consideration of them If he mean some of themselves their Authority cannot have weight in this matter being but a party without authority speaking in their own cause and for their own advantage but for the thing it self which is asserted here that an Assembly against which nothing can be alleadged in the point of forme to wit in the Constitution of it for its manner of Proceeding is a null Assembly 1. According to the state of the question in hand a not having the being of an Assembly but to be holden a meer meeting destitute of Authority because proceeding wrong in the matter id est making some wrong Acts is in my weak judgement a most dangerous and irrationall conception I confess indeed that a Gen. Assembly is not a Judicatory absolutly soveraign whose Constitution is to be imbraced upon its bare and naked authority as Papists make their Councels to be but Ministerial subordinate unto and limited by a rule and not unfallible and therefore that inferior Judicatories and private Christians also must make use of the judgement of discretion to compare the Constitutions with the rule and are not oblieged to receive them if they be contrary to or dissentient from the rule but to say that notwithstanding it be constitute so as nothing is wanting or amiss as to the point of forme requisite in such a Judicatory yet if it make wrong constitutions upon the matter that it is to be holden no Asembly at all that is to open a gape to confusion inferring that absurd consequence that that Assembly is not compleatly constitute in the being of an Assembly untill all the Acts of it be concluded and ended and that untill it be concluded no man can acknowledge nor submit to it but with a reserve and if it shall be so I see not how it can be avoided by the like reason that acts wrong upon the matter must make a Presbytery not a Presbytery yea and a Minister a non-Minister which no man will not see to be most contrary to the practise of CHRIST and his Appostles in relation to the Priests and Kirk Judicatories among the Jews while they were a Kirk it is also remarkable that that solemn Assembly of Glasgow in declaring the nullity of the six preceding Assemblies doth never take an argument to prove the nullity of any of them from the matter of the Acts made in them while yet there was very fair occasion to have done if that Assembly had been of the Writers minde The second grounds upon which the Writer
notice of that which he saith that supposing as the Writer doth that nothing was wrong in the point of forme that there is nothing in the matter that will justifie the deed of the Protesters because they protested against the lawfulnesse of the Assembly when as it had not come to any of these Proceedings which the Writer alleadgeth to be wrong on the matter in this the Author is mistaken because the rejecting of relevant exceptions proponed against sundry of the Commissioners both before and after the chosing of the Moderator was wrong on the matter being prejudiciall to the right Constitution of the Assembly and a preparative to the justifying of the Commissioners Proceedings Thirdly I would have him to know that the Writer by these some whom he speaks of doth not mean any of the Protesters themselves though the Authority of some of them be of as great weight in the Protestant Churches as any of the Divines of this age and being prior to the Protestation needs not nor ought not to be looked upon as the testimony of a party but he means som Orthodox Writers and these of chief not in the Protestant Churches whom as I conceive he thought he needed not to name as having no great purpose to insist much upon the businesse But for the Authors satisfaction and the satisfaction of others I shall name some First Calvin writing upon the 23. of the Acts hath these words Nascitur quaestio si honore non est privandus qui malè officio fungitur peccavit Paulus Pontificem honore spolians Responsio Inter Magistratus Civiles Ecclesiae Praesules aliquid est discriminis quamvis enim Civilis Imperii confusa sit perversaque administratio Dominus tamen vult subjectionem salvam munere sed ubi spirituale regimen degenerat solvuntur piorum conscientiae ne injustae dominationi pareant praesertim si impii Sacerdotii titulum falso ad evertendam salutis doctrinam praetexant sibique dominationem arrogant qua ipse Deus in ordinem cogitur And Paraeus upon the same place moves the same Question and gives Answer to it in these words Non sequitur à Magistratu Politico ad Ecclesiasticum quia magna est dissimilitudo magistratus politicus potest esse magistratus quamvis sit impius ideoque ei obtemperandum quoad non praecipit quid impium sed Ministri Ecclesiae deficientes à puritate doctrinae spargentet falsa dogmata jam non amplius sunt Ministri Christi Paulus Magistratum quamvis impium agnoscit pro Magistratu Impium vero pontificem non agnoscit pro pontifice He will also finde moe writing upon that place speaking to the same purpose as also upon the 2. Cor. 10.8 and 13.8 and 10. It is not now my purpose to fall upon the consideration of the extent of the meaning of those Divines in these places it is enough that I give him their testimonies speaking as much clearly as the Writer said they did 4. I doubt if for any thing that is said by the Author this exception will be found so dangerous and 〈…〉 First He thinks that it is to open a wide gap to confusion inferring that absurd consequence that that Assembly is not compleatly constitute in the being of an Assembly till all the Acts of it be concluded and ended and that till it be concluded no man can acknowledge nor submit to it but with a reserve The reason of this consequence must be because haply in the close they may make an Act wrong upon the matter which one Act nullifies the Assembly though they had done all other things well but so said not the Writer neither can any such thing rationally be gathered from his words the most that he insinuates iâ— that an Assembly proceeding wholly wrong upon the matter or in the most substantiall and materiall things or in the rules of its constitutions of greatest concernment or as that so far as an Assembly proceeds wrong upon the matter it is so far without authority as appears from his own words in the inference which he makes from the power which the Commissioners have committed unto them by their Presbyteries and from the Conclusion that he makes in order to the Assembly now in question to wit That they having in most of all and the most material of their proceeding proceeded contrary to the trust committed unto them by Presbyteries It furnisheth another considerable reason for declining of them Secondly He thinks that it will also infer the nullity of Presbyteries and make Ministers no Ministers if they shall proceed wrong upon the matter which no man will not see to be contrary to the practice of Christ and his Apostles in relation to the Priests and Church-Judicatories among the Jewes whilst they were a Church But to say nothing of the difference between Ministers Parliaments and Assemblies the one being ordinary and fixed the other not so the most that it would infer would be this That in so far as they proceed wrong or that if in the most substantiall and materiall parts of their duty they proceed wrong upon the matter their authority is not to be acknowledged and this seems not a very dangerous consequence Thirdly He thinks this contrary to the judgment of the Assembly of Glasgow concerning which he thinks it remarkable that in declaring the nullity of some preceding Assemblies they do never take an Argument from the matter to prove the nullity of them whilst yet saith he there was very fair occasion to have done it if that the Assembly had been in the Writers mind The Writer hath not yet positively declared his mind in this matter But the Author upon second thoughts will find his remark concerning the Assembly of Glasgow not well grounded because that Assembly in proving the nullity of some preceding Assemblies do reason not only from the form but also from the matter or grounds of their proceeding in their Acts as appears in the last reason brought for nullifying the Assembly at Pearth which is this That the ground of their proceeding was not the Word of God the Confession of Faith and Acts of former Generall Assemblies but the Kings Commandment onely For the question was thus stated whether the Five Articles in respect of his Majesties Commandment should pass in Act or not as the Records of that pretended Assembly bear where it is declared That for the reverence and respect which they bear to his Majesties Royal Command they do agree to the foresaid Articles And that the Church of Scotland had respect to the matter as well as to the form in annulling these Assemblies is manifest from that notable Act at Edinburgh in the year 1639. concerning the causes and remedies of the bygone evils of this Kirk in which the fifth Cause is declared to be the keeping and authorizing corrupt Assemblies at Lithgow 1606 and 16â—8 at Glasgow 1610 at Aberdeen 1616 at St. Andrews 2617 at Pearth 1618 which Assemblies are declared
Commission that the Writer layes weight The Authors similitude of the Parl. and Ass is answered already and shewn what maybe conceived by some why the paralel holds noâ— though as to this point the difference betwixt him and the Writer seems not to be so wide as he would give out His conclusion is That he hopes that by what hath been said that it is sufficiently evidenced that the Writer hath brought no considerable reason for the nullity of the late Assembly even supposing sundry of the Acts and Constitutions thereof were wrong upon the matter he should have said supposing the most of all its Acts and the most materiall of them to be wrong upon the matter for so it was supposed and affirmed by the Writer and upon the supposall the Author should have told his judgment upon the point The reason may be considerable enough and such as brings no disadvantage ether to the Writer or to the Protestation for any thing that is yet said by him for infringing thereof yea I wil assure him that it is most considerable weighty in the hearts of most part of the godly in the Land who do not stand so much to dispute and debate Legal forms as they do look to Acts of the Assembly and to what good or what ill is done by them for promoving or hindering the Kingdome of Jesus Christ and the good of souls where they see not godlinesse advanced and the hands of the godly strengthened and their hearts made glad but a wound given to Piety and the hands of the wicked strengthened and their hearts made glad it is not externa species autoritatis to use the words cited before nor any thing that is in that or can be said for it that will conciliat respect and authority to Assemblies in mens consciences and if there were no more in the late Assembly at S. Andrews and Dundee but the loosing of authority in the consciences of the godly in the Land by thâ—iâ— wrong Acts it is that which concerns the Author and others who had hand in these Acts exceedingly to think upon VINDICATION THe other passage we would speak a word to is his Answer to the last Objection He saith To make an Act appointing such as decline a Generall Assembly to be summarly excommunicate were either to suppose that a Generall Assembly could not be wrong constitute or could not erre in their proceedings or else suppose they should be wrong constitute and erre yet they ought not to be declined and proteâ—ted against both of which are equally absurd There he saith That the Act of the Assembly 1582. alleadged for that purpose is grosly mistaken it being nothing against declining unlawful Assemblies he is as grosly mistaken while he insinuateth that such as speak for the late Assembly do mean that such an Act should be against declining any Assembly lawfull or unlawfull 〈◊〉 but against appealing from a lawfull Assembly to the Civill Magistrate and then closeth that from these things it may appear how unwarrantable the Meeting at Dundee it must be still for ought he hath alleadged the General Assembly at Dundee did upon alleadgiance of this Act fall in debate of the summary excommunication of these who had protested Any debate that was in the Assembly was no great or long debate upon that matter and it was not so much out of any purpose or desire to do it as to finde out what they might have done by the Constitutions of this Kirk if they would have minded severity of censure neither was it that Act of Assembly 1582. so much that they looked to as the Authority of the solemn Assembly of Glasgow 1638. which in the sentence of Excommunication against the pretended Bishops and making there protesting and declining of that Assembly one of the causes of their excommunication which by the acts of Assembly is censurable with summary excommunication whether it doth mean that act 1582 or some others could not be gotten tryed at Dundee for want of the Registers then in the Basse but such respect was had to the authority of that grave Assembly that the truth of the relation made by it was not questioned so that all the absurdities alleadged here by the Writter strikes as wel against that Assembly as against any man that alleadgeth such an act and the Assembly at Dundee supposing themselves to be a free lawfull Generall Assembly alleadged no other ground in falling upon debate of that matter then which the Assembly of Glasgow alledged and the Assembly of Glasgow saith there hath been such an act made by a Dilemma he is in a great mistake himself for considering that the act appointing such to be summarily excommunicate who c. is intended onely against protesting against and declining of a General Assembly not in any particular act or acts thereof which we confess may be protested against but against the very being of it as null in it self and having no authority there is no necessity either of the one supposition or of the other following upon it not of the later for the act we speak of saith that decliners of a Generall Assembly should be excommunicate but an Assembly wrong constitute and erring both or only wrong constitute is no otherwise an Assembly then a painted man is a man nor yet the former for I shal give you a third it supposeth a Generall Assembly rightly constitute and not erring de facto though not altogether infallible in it self or rightly constitute in all things belonging to the being of a free and lawfull Assembly though it may be erring in some particular Acts and ordains excommunication to be the censure of these that declineth and protesteth against such an Assembly I mean as to the very being of it Truly this dilemmatick argument of the Writers have been made aswell against that Act made by Jesus Christ Math. 18.17 He that neglecteth to hear the Church let him be as an heathen or publican id est Excommunicate For I suppose this canon comprehends not onely such persons as having offended against particular Brethren comes by degrees of processe before the Church but also such as should offend onely immediatly against that Church it self 2. It is propounded in generall termes without any express distinction or limitation he that neglects to hear the Church let him be excommunicate Just as this he that declines a Gen. Assemgly let him be excommunicate Might not then those that heard that canon first propounded reason it just as the Writer doth here if his argument were good to make such an one as that is unreasonable For it were to suppose either that a Church cannot be corruptly constitute and did erre yet that it ought not to be disobeyed or declined but the argument had been a Cavillation for neither did follow necessarily to be supposed there was a third a Church univocally so called id est a Church right constitute and doing dutie though not unerrable in it self REVIEW THe
summarily excommunicated denyes that ever the Church in any of her Assemblies made any such act in so generall and unlimited termes and he gives this for a reason of his denyall that from hence it will follow either that they thought that an Assembly could not be wrong in its constitutions and could not erre or else that though wrong in constitution or erring that they could not be protested against both which he saith is absurd To this the Author answers that considering that the act appointing such to be summarily excommunicated is intended only against protesting against and declining of a Generall Assembly not in any particular acts or act thereof which he confesses may be Protested against but against the very being of it as null in it self and having no authority there is no necessity either of the one supposition or of the other following upon it not of the latter c. But first to passe by that he seemeth in all this debate to suppose that there is such an act in so generall and unlimited termes which I believe shall not be found nor doth the words of the act of the Assembly 38. say or suppose any such thing It deserves consideration which he saith that that act concerning the excommunicating such as protest against or decline an Assembly is intended onely against those who protest against the being of an Assembly and not in any particular act or acts thereof because as the Writer told him the act 1582. which is the onely act relating to that businesse so far as I know or can be informed by these who take most pains in the Records of the Assemblies is not anent declining Assemblies in their being and constitution but against appealing from lawfull acts of lawful Assemblies to the Civill Magistrate in Ecclesiastick causes for stoping of Ecclesiastick Discipline Secondly though an Assembly wrong constitute and erring both or onely wrong constitute be no otherwayes an Assembly then a painted man is a man that it is not really or truly but seemingly only yet it being seemingly an Assembly it gets ordinarily and in common expression that denomination and as a painted man drawen by the hand of a cunning Painter may deceive these who have not discerning eyes and be taken for a true man so an Assembly wrong in the constitution and acts or in the constitution onely may by the vermilion of fair pretext put upon it passe with many for a true Assembly yea in ordinary way of expression an Assembly which hath any thing of the colour or shadow of the being of a lawfull and right proceeding Assembly is called an Assembly though wrong in its constitution or also erring in its acts and therefore to have said simply in an act that decliners of a Generall Assembly without any qualification lawfull or unlawfull erring or unerring or any thing in the act insinuating or expressing the same should be excommunicated it would follow that though an Assembly should be wrong constitute and erre in its Proceedings yet it could not be declined As to the third to passe by that the Generall Assembly at St. Andrews and Dundee is none of these Assemblies but an Assembly wrong both in its constitutions and in its acts The Act if it were so generall as that cited and answered by the VVriter it would suppose more then any of these to wit a Generall Assembly which is onely such nomine tenus and secundum apparentiam in regard of its constitution and a Generall Assembly right upon the constitution and erring wholly even in the thing of greatest consequence upon the matter as to this simile of his brought from the words of Christ Math. 18. It doth not hold because Christ never maintained it to be unlawfull to decline any Church true or false as these whom the VVriter speaks of in his objection The truth is that the VVriter meant of propounding and answering that objection to remove a gross mistake that hath been ordinary in the mouths of many that a Generall Assembly could not be declined nor protested against because of an act of an Assembly appointing such to be summarily excommunicate which in the common construction that past upon it was so expounded that whosoever upon whatsoever ground did protest against a Generall Assembly of this Church or any of the acts thereof right or wrong were by the acts of the Assembly summarily to be excommunicated which mistake the VVriter studieth to take off by holding torch the absurd consequences that would have followed upon such an act as that thereby to make it appear that there is no such act in so absolute and il-limited termes as will reach these who protest against Assemblies wrong in their constitution or also erring in their acts and this being gained he hath all that he did intend to prove and hold forth in this particular Conclusion of the VINDICATION HEre I leave the Writer with these additionall reasons and leaves all that hath been said hither til to be impartially pondered by the Christian Reader and accordingly judged of The Father of Lights give unto thee and all his servants and people in the Land Wisdome even that which is from above pure and peaceable REVIEW THe Author hath been pleased to leave the VVriter here with his additionall reasons and other things contained in his answers to Objections but if some of good judgment be not mistaken he hath done it to the disadvantage of his cause because he hath left him with many things that were brought by him in that Paper of additionall reasons unanswered I shall not say what some have said that if the things in that Paper which the Author hath not answered hold relevant and true they would go far to justifie the Protestation and annull the Assembly albeit all his answers to the things which he hath taken notice of had not been satisfyingly taken off but I confess that I do somewhat wonder that the Author having taken so much pains to contend with no small earnestness and at length about many things that are in the by and things that are of no such consequence in the cause should yet passe in silence not a few things of importance contained in that Paper which did more concern him to have answered I shal say no more but wishes the Lord graciously to appear in the convincing and comfortable determination of this question to all his servants and people in this poor desolate and distracted Church that our bruise which is sore and our wound which is incurable may be bound up and healed by his hand who hath smiten us in his wrath because of the multitude of our iniquities To the praise and glory of his free Grace in all the Churches AMEN FINIS INSTANCES of the Influence that the Letter and Act of the Commission of the Gen. Assembly 1650. had upon several Presbyteries and Synods and upon several persons therein in the Election of Commissioners to the Assembly 1651. and in the Citing of
Committee of Estates The Assembly continues until the morn at ten hours that Examination of the Proceedings of the Commission of the late Assembly and do appoint that time for Hearing any New Exceptions the Committee of Estates hath to give in against the Proceedings of the said Commission PAPER sent into the ASSEMBLY WHereas it hath been the constant Care and Endeavor of the Parliament and Committee of Estates To use all means for removing and setling the Differences betwixt the Church and the State and in pursuance of that good way The Committee did yesterday give in some new Desires and Offers to the Gen. Assembly That some might be appointed to meet and confer with such as should be appointed by the Committee therupon But since instead of imbracing and laying hold of this opportunity of composing Differences The Gen. Assembly doth proceed toward an approbation of the proceedings of the Commissioners of the Assembly wherby we conceive all hopes of making up the Breaches will be removed and the prejudices will be great that will thereby ensue to this cause and Kingdom For preventing whereof we hold our selves obliged again to desire you as you tender the furtherance of the work of Reformation the Good Peace union of the Kingdoms and the composing of all Differences and Jealousies that you would apply your selves to these our Desires and appoint some of your Number to confer with us therupon for the Exceptions we have against the proceedings of the Commissioners of the Gen. Assembly We have confidence a Conference may preveen the same and are more willing not to give them in at all or at least only to give them in to those you shall appoint to confer with us that if it be possible Differences may yet be removed Then that we be necessitate to appear in publick amongst them And that this and our former Paper may remain as a testimony of our Desires for Unitie and Peace we desire that they may be Recorded in the Books of the General Assembly The Assembly do give this humble return to the Papers sent this day from the Hon. Committee of Estates That they are most willing to appoint a conference with any of their Lordsh number but that according to the Order and Acts of former Gen. Asemblies they conceive themselves obliged first to examine the proceedings of the Commission of the late Gen. Assembly and thereafter shall be willing to confer being also now ready as of before to hear Exceptions if there be any against the proceedings of the said Commission Subscrib A. Ker. The Committee of Estates understanding that the Gen. Assembly is to proceed to the examination of the proceedings of the Commissioners of the late Gen. Assembly in order to an approbation before they agree to a Conference and the Committee being to give in their just exceptions against the proceedings of the said Commissioners do desire the Gen. Assembly to allow some few dayes delay to the Committee to prepare their Exceptions before the Assembly proceed in the Business The Assembly continues the examination of the Proceedings of the late Gen. Assembly until four afternoon and appoints that time for Hearing any new Exceptions the Honorable Committee of Estates have to give in against the Proceedings of the said Commission Subscrib A. Ker. The Committee of Estates finding it impossible in so short a time to prepare their Objections against such of the proceedings of the Commissioners of the General Assembly as relates to their Engagement and yet being most willing to essay all fair means for procuring an happy Understanding betwixt Kirk and State are content to appoint some of their Number to meet with such as shall be appointed by the General Assembly for Composing of Differences betwixt the Church and State without prejudice to them to use all their just Objections against the proceedings of the Commissioners of the late General Assembly if the Conference shall not produce these happy Effects they earnestly wish The General Assembly unto the Motion sent this afternoon from the Honorable Committee of Estates Do return humbly this Answer That they yeeld to their Lordships Desires of a Conference and for this end appoints M rs David Calderwood David Dickson Robert Douglass Andrew Cant John Moncreif John Smith and John Mac Clelland Ministers and the Earl of Cassilles the Earl of Louthian Lord Balmernio the Lairds of Moncreif and Freeland with the Moderator to confer with any appointed by the Honorable Committee of Estates at such time and place as shall be appointed by their Lordships upon the present Dangers to Religion and the cause of God the great prejudices done to the Liberties of the Kirk and the best remedies thereof And to Report the Result of their Conference from time to time And they have also Power to receive any Offers or Papers from the Honorable Committee of Estates and to present the same to the Assembly Declaring that the proceedings of the Commission of the late Assembly being new exactly tryed and unanimously approven there is no place left for any Objections against the same Subscrib A. Ker. Reasons why these who dis-approved the Publick Resolutions and Acts at Dundee Ratifying the same and ordaining censures to passe upon the opposers and unsatisfied cannot keep the Assembly now indicted nor be consenting unto the Election of Commissioners for that effect THe chief cause of many evils which have befallen this Church in time of defection under Prelacie being clearly determined by the Gen Assembly at Edinburgh 1639. to have been the keeping and authorizing corrupt Generall Assemblies it is of high concernment that we take heed that we be not consenting nor concurring to the keeping and authorizing such Assemblies in this declining time amongst which the Assembly indicted by the Commissioners of the pretended Assembly at St. Andrews and Dundee is to be reckoned and consequently ought not to be keeped by any who have protested against or are in their consciences unsatisfied with the Publick resolutions and Acts of the Assembly at Dundee establishing the same as involving defection and backsliding from the Cause of God and Covenant To speak nothing of the indiction of the ensuing Assembly which can neither be acknowledged by any who have protested against or by any who doubts of the freedomâ— lawfulness and constitution of the Assembly at Dundee but allanerly of the constitution thereof in so far as it depends upon the Acts of that Assembly These reasons seem to warrand and require the forbearance and non-concurrence of all these who disallow of the Acts of the pretended Assembly at Dundee in the election of Commissioners unto a keeping the diet of the Assembly now indicted 1. No man ought to be consenting unto the authorizing of Commissioners to keep an Assembly which is constitute by a corrupt rule But in the judgment of such as approve not the Acts of the Assembly of Dundee the ensuing Assembly is constitute by a corrupt rule Ergo The major
Proposition is unquestionable the minor is proved thus It is to be constituted by the Acts of the pretended Assembly of Dundee as by a rule Ergo By a corrupt rule the antecedent is manifest because all the unrepealed Acts of former Assemblyes that do determine the qualification of Commissioners are especially the Acts of the Assem immediatly preceding are the rule by which the Assem is to be constituted as is manifest from the Acts of the Assem themselvs old and late and from the constant practice of this Kirk in all her Assemblies and that the Acts of Dundee include a corrupt rule as to the judgements and consciences of those who condemn these Acts as involving a course of defection is manifest because they appoint all those who do not acquiesce and is obedient to the Acts and Constitutions of that Assembly to be proceeded against with the censures of the Kirk and so to be excluded from being capable of being elected as Commissioners for sitting in the Assembly as Members rightly qualified 2. No man ought to concur in any Election of Commissioners when the Election is not free but ought rather to give testimony against the same But the Election of Commissioners to the Assembly indicted by the pretended authority of the Commissioners of the Assembly at Dundee cannot be free in the judgement of these who do not approve of the Acts of Dundee Ergo Nothing here needs confirmation but the Assumption which may be proved thus That Election which is limited and restricted unto such only as are involved in a course of defection and back-sliding and is exclusive of all other who have not been involved in the foresaid course cannot be a free election but the election of the Commissioners of the ensuing Assembly is such in the judgement of these who do not approve the Acts of Dundee Ergo The reason of the assumption is because illud possumus quod jure possumus Now no Presbyterie Session or person acknowledging the constitution and authority of the Assem of Dundee and yet testifying against the Acts thereof relating to the approbation of Publick resolutions and to the censuring of the opposers and such as do not acquiesce and give obedience thereto can legally choose Commissioners contrary to a standing unrepealed Act of an Assembly Therefore the election of Commissioners to the ensuing Assembly must be limited and unfree in the judgments of these who protest against it in their consciences or dis-approve the Acts of the Assembly of Dundee as involving the approbation of the course of defection 3. No man ought concur in the election of Commissioners to an Assembly unto which none are to be admitted Members but such as are involved in a course of defection and back sliding from the Cause of God and from the Covenant but the ensuing Assembly is to be such in the judgements of these who dis-approve the Acts of Dundee Ergo the Proposition is granted on all hands even the Assembly of Dundee and the asserters of the authority thereof grant the Nullity of an Assembly when the authors and abettors of a course of defection are admitted to be constituent members The assumption is proved to wit That Assembly now indicted is to be such an Assembly that Assembly unto which none can be admitted Members but such as approve the Publick Resolutions and the Acts of Dundee ratifying the same is in the judgment of these who dis-approve the Acts but not the authority of the Assembly of Dundee an Assembly unto which none can be admitted Members but such as are involved in a course of defection But unto the ensuing Assembly none can be admitted Members but such as approve the Acts ratifying the Publick Resolutions None but these can be admitted because none can be admitted contrary to a standing unrepealed Law and yet these are involved in a defection in the judgment of them who dis-approve the Acts at Dundee 4. No man ought to concur in keeping an Assembly from which many faithfull and godly Ministers and Ruling Elders be excluded for no other cause but for their being faithful in witnessing against the back-sliding of the Land But from this Assembly many such are excluded by the Acts of Dundee and that for no other cause but for testifying against the defection of the Land according to the judgment of these who condemn these Acts and therefore these cannot concur in keeping this ensuing Assembly 5. No man ought to concur in keeping an Assembly wherein the constituent Members are for the most part such as are either authors or approvers of the enacting a persecution of many godly men but the ensuing Assembly is to be such in the judgment of these who dis-approve the Acts of the Assembly at Dundee Ergo the Proposition will be granted by every man the assumption is abundantly proved by the clearing of these things 1. That enacting the drawing forth of censures of the Church against godly man to speak nothing of that which is already executed for that which is no fault in them is the enacting of a persecution of godly men cannot be denyed by any 2. That the enacting to draw forth all the censures of the Kirk against these who do not approve the Acts and Constitutions of the Assembly of Dundee to the enacting of drawing forth censures against godly men for that which is no fault in them but duty is unquestionable in the judgment of these who dis-approve these Acts. 3. That the Assembly now indicted is to be made up of such is cleare from what is before spoken and shall be further cleared immediatly Ob. How doth it appear that the Assembly now indicted is to be constituted as all these reasons do import can we judge of the constitution of it before we see how it is constituted Ans 1. It must be constituted according to the acts and rules constituting which are not yet repealed and therefore according to rules of the Assembly at Dundee in the judgment of these who acknowledge the authority of that Assembly and these acts cannot be repealed before the constitution of another Assembly 2. That it must be so constitute may appear from the tenaciousness of Synods and Presbyteries to maintain the authority and acts of that pretended Assembly who being involved in the approbation of the same have given good evidence that the ensuing Assembly must be so constitute if it be urged as for instance the Letter of the instant Commissioners which doth appoint the place of meeting of the future Assembly do desire Presbyteries to choose Commissioners according to the known and ordinary rules of election but these know and ordinary rules cannot be supposed to include the acts of the Assembly at Dundee 1. Because these acts are not known the same not being published yea not extant neither can they be called ordinary being once onely done and being questioned much by many it is answered These are poor shifts 1. Because these acts were formally
him by breaking the Oath and Covenant which we have made with him and that we may be humbled before him by confessing our sin and forsaking the evil of our way Therefore being pressed with so great necessities and straits and warranted by the word of God and having the example of Gods people of old who in the time of their troubls and when they were to seek delivery and a right way for themselvs that the Lord might be with them to prosper them did humble themselves before him and make a free and particular confession of the sins of their Princes their Rulers their Captains their Priests and their People and did engage themselves to do no more so but to reform their wayes and be stedfast in his Covenant and remembring the practise of our Predecessors in the year 1596. wherein the Gen. Assembly and all the Kirk Judicatories with the concurrence of many of the Nobility Gentry Burgesses did with many tears acknowledge before God the breach of the National Covenant engaged themselves to a reformation even as our Predecessors and theirs had before done in the Gen. Assembly and convention of Estates in the year 1567. And perceiving that this Duty when gone about out of conscience and in sincerity hath alwaies been attended with a reviving out of troubles and with a blessing and success from Heaven We do humbly and sincerely as in his sight who is the searcher of hearts acknowledge the many sins and great transgressions of the Land We have done wickedly our Kings our Princes our Nobles our Judges our Officers our Teachers and our People Albeit the Lord hath long and clearly-spoken unto us we have not hearkened to his voice albeit he hath followed us with tender mercies we have not been allured to wait upon him and walk in his way and though he hath striken us yet we have not grieved nay though he hath consumed us we have refused to receive correction We have not remembered to render unto the Lord according to his goodness and according to our own vowes and promises but have gone away backward by a continued course of back-sliding and have broken all the Articles of that solemn League and Covenant which we swore before God Angels and Men. Albeit there be in the Land many of all ranks who be for a Testimony unto the truth for a name of joy praise unto the Lord by living godly studying to keep their garments pure and being stedfast in the Covenant and Cause of God yet we have reason to acknowledge that most of us have not endeavored with that reality sincerity and constancy that did become us to preserve the work of Reformation in the Kirk of Scotland many have satisfied themselves with the purity of the Ordinances neglecting the power therof yea some have turned aside to crooked wayes destructive to both The prophane loose and insolent carriage of many in our Armies who went to the Assistance of our Brethren in England and the tamperings and unstraight dealing of some of our Commissioners and others of our Nation in London the Isle of Wight and other places of that Kingdom have proved great lets to the work of Reformation and setling of Kirk government there wherby Error and Schism in that Land have been encreased and Sectaries hardened in their way We have been so far from endeavoring the extirpation of Prophaness and what is contrary to the power of godliness that prophanity hath been much winked at and prophane persons much countenanced and many times imployed untill iniquity and ungodliness hath gone over the face of the Land as a flood nay sufficient care hath not been had to separate betwixt the precious and the vile by debarring from the Sacrament all ignorant and scandalous persons according to the Ordinances of this Kirk Neither have the Priviledges of the Parliaments and Liberties of the Subject been dâ—ly tendered but some amongst our selves have labored to put into the hands of our King an arbitrary and unlimited power destructive to both and many of us have been accessory of late to those means and wayes whereby the freedom and priviledges of Parliaments have been encroached upon and the Subjects oppressed in their Consciences Persons and Estates Neither hath it been our care to avoid these things which might harden the King in his evil way but upon the contrary he hath not only been permitted but many of us have been instrumental to make him exercise his power in many things tending to the prejudice of Religion and of the Covenant and of the Peace and safety of these Kingdoms which is so far from the right way of preserving his Majesties Person and Authority that it cannot but provoke the Lord against him unto the hazard of both nay under a pretence of relieving and doing for the King whilst he refuses to do what was necessary for the House of God some have ranversed and violated most of all the Articles of the Covenant Our own consciences within and Gods judgments upon us without do convince us of the manifold wilful renewed breaches of that Article which concerneth the discovery and punishment of Malignants whose crimes have not only been connived at but dispensed with and pardoned and themselves received unto intimate fellowship with our selves and entrusted with our Counsels admitted unto our Parliaments and put in places of Power and Authority for managing the publick Affairs of the Kingdom whereby in Gods justice they got at last into their hands the whole power and strength of the Kingdom both in Judicatories and Armies and did imploy the same unto the enacting and prosecuting an unlawful Engagement in War against the Kingdom of England notwithstanding of the dissent of many considerable members of Parliament who had given constant proof of their integrity in the Cause from the beginning of many faithful testimonies and free warnings of the servants of God of the supplications of many Synods Presbyteries and Shyâ—es and of the Declarations of the Gen. Assembly and their Commissioners to the contrary Which engagement as it hath been the cause of much sin so also of much misery and calamity unto this Land and holds forth to us the grievousness of our sin of complying with Malignants in the greatness of our judgment that we may be taught never to split again upon the same Rock upon which the Lord hath set so remarkable a Beacon And after all that is come to pass unto us because of this our trespass and after that grace hath been shewed unto us from the Lord our God by breaking these mens yoke from off our necks and putting us again into a capacity to act for the good of Religion our own safety and the Peace and safety of this Kingdom should we again break his Commandment and Covenant by joyning once more with the people of these abominations and taking into out bosome those Serpents which had formerly stung us almost unto death This as it would argue great
of the Estates at the Assembly of Dort their confining of the Remonstrants and charging them to bide within the City till they should answer to the Assembly after they had Protested against and declined the same will not make much to the purpose to justifie the confinement at Sterline because that at Dort was not but upon certain knowledge and information of the fact and if the King or Committee did know that these Ministers had Protested how doth the Author insinuate that it was done untill they should learn upon what ground these Ministers came away or whence had they their information he tels us the truth is this Upon the Protesters deserting the Assembly and going thorough the Army towards the West the report was that they had made a brâ—â—l in the Assembly and were come to trouble the Army and hinder the Leavy in these places whether they were going But to say nothing that he either wisely or carelesly passes over this that they were going to their own homes they having their charges and stations in the West will he be answerable to his Readers that what he hath told in this is truth and nackedly told I doubt he can and that it be but a devised fancy the very tearmes whereof seems to discover he vanity of it and that he had told more of the truth if he had said the information came from the place where the Assembly sate and from persons who had an oversweying hand in it I shal not contradict in what he saith That so soon as the Assembly heard of this they dispatched to the King who presently sent them to their own homes excepting that they had required such of them as had deserted the Assembly to return to it and answer for themselves which yet he cannot say was certainly done till he may inform himself about it I wil tell him somewhat in this particular that was certainly done that I doubt he will be able to Vindicate from being some imputation upon the freedome of the Assembly to wit that whilest these Ministers were thus confined at Sterline the Assemb did cite several of them to compear before them at Dundee and that notwithstanding that their confinment was not taken off til the very day of their appearance and that there was 40. miles distance between the place of their confinement and the place where the Assembly sate yet that same day did the Assembly to whom by the Authors own confession their confinement was known proceed against them and sentence them some with deposition and others with suspension from their Ministery he may remember that they were cited to the _____ day of _____ being Tuesday the same day did the King and his Army depart from Sterline and not till a litle before his departure did he take off that confinement as can be testified by many witnesses as to the Authors instance of the Commissioners of the Estates confining the Remonstrants at Dort it doth not meet with the present case First because to say nothing that the Remonstrants of Dort had Protested against and declined a lawfull Assembly which the Protesters at St. Andrews had not done neither yet to say any thing that I can finde no such confinement in charge as the Author speaks of put upon the Remonstrants in the Printed Records of that Synod these Commissioners had certain knowledge and information of the matter of fact but so had not the King and Committee of Estates Secondly because the Protestation and declinature at Dort was now judged and found ir-relevant and the Commissioners themselves being present but not so in the other VINDICATION THe third Reason according to the order of the Protestation and secondly in the order of the late Paper is this in summe that the late Assembly cannot be counted a free lawfull Generall Assembly because relevant exceptions being timeously proponed and offered to be instructed and verified against many of the members thereof viz. Such of the late Commission as had hand in the Publick Resolutions that they should not be permitted to sit and Vote in the Assembly as being under a scandall and guilty of promoting a course of defection and untill such time as they should be tryed yet it was refused to take any such exceptions into consideration until they should be tryed and discussed For clearing confirming this argument the Writer undertaks upon him to show 2. things 1. That it was a thing incumbent in duty to the Assembly to have removed from their Meeting all persons under scandall though some being known to them untill they were purged thereof 2. That the persons objected against were under such scandal as is alleadged for the former he alleadgeth first That it is without controversie and next he brings four things for the proof of it 1. The light of nature and the Word of God but names not one passage of it 2. Some clauses of both Covenants the desires of the Commission 48 of the solemn engagment that same year all the Remonstrances for purging of the Armies and Judicatories even the late Papers given by this same Commission to the Parliament at Sterline about the Act of Classes for removing of scandalous persons from being members of the Judicatories It is good that the Writer yet even in this heat against the Commission finds something right in their Papers but he tels not all the truth that he might have done here in their Papers they held forth not onely scandalous but positively all such as were not qualified should be debarred from being members of Judicatories 3. A rule and order set down in the Assembly 1562. to be found also in the Assembly 1575. 1580. 1581. and exactly keeped for above 20. Assemblies and 20. years to order viz. at the entry of every Assembly The first work is to be about purging the members thereof and other men appointed be charged to declare their consciences touching their Doctrine and life and execution of their Office if therein they be scandalous and it is appointed that any to whose charge any thing is said ought to be removed out of the Assembly untill his cauâ—e be tryed and if he be convict he can have no vote untill the Kirk find satisfaction 4. That all the Assemblies since the late Reformation began 38. have upon the objection of scandal against any of the members in the time of the constitution of the Meeeing removed these members untill it was tryed and discussed yet in this samâ— Meeting at St. Andrews upon the objection that the scandal of Blaketers and others accessions to the unlawful engagement was not sufficiently purged by notification and approbation of their repentante in the Assembly they were removed from being members and the Writer magno hâ—atu bids any man in the world bring a reason why some upon such exceptions have been removed and others against whom were as relevant exceptions admitted for the other particular that the persons objected against were under a