he a giving up all to the Magistrate That is a wonderful amplification There is no mention made of the Magistrate in that sentence at all nor any giving of any thing to him there but an acknowledgment that they had received their Ministry from Christ and yet he will conclude that by this all was given up to the Magistrate What was nothing given to Christ from whom they acknowledge they had received their Ministry expresly and all given to the Magistrate whom they do not so much as mention there But he will prove that they gave up all to the Magistrate For saith he hereby they declared that in their judgment they had their Ministry from others as well as from Christ Here he eats in again somewhat he had said for even now all was given to the Magistrate but here he leaves something at least to Christ but takes in others with him but who are these others That is saith he the Magistrate as well as from Christ What was there no others but the Magistrate that they might have their Ministry from I think he might rather have supposed that it was the Father and the Holy Ghost than the Magistrate especially when he is speaking of an equality for it was an abominable alledgance of Blasphemy to say that they declared in their judgment that they had their Ministry from the Magistrate as well as from Christ and that in an Equality and Co-ordination Or else saith he that they had it not from Christ immediately but from men from the Magistrate in subordination to Christ But were there no other men beside the Magistrate if he would have dealt candidly he might have supposed that Presbyterians meaned rather the Presbytery than the Magistrate and therefore saith he when they kept out the word only they did plainly declare that they held their Ministry partly of the Magistrate quod erat demonstrandum He is not sure if this word was desired to be put in he knows not whether it was kept out upon design he knows not upon what design it was kept out suppose it had been designedly kept out and how then can he conclude from this That these Ministers declared and that they plainly declared that they held their Ministry of the Magistrate he may conclude any thing he pleases at this rate of reasoning yet I perceive he hath forgotten himself as very ordinarily men who pass the bounds of truth do except they have very good memories for a little before he alledged all was given up to the Magistrate but here he hath reduced him to a part what is cited from pag. 71. relates to the instructions which will come in afterwards That the want of this only was a personal fault or was an encroachment upon Christ or did affect the Indulgence as he speaks he must prove he would make it a fault affecting the Indulgence because it was at that occasion when the King and Council were thankfully acknowledged for the granting of the Indulgence and because it was spoken with understanding but this hath no shew of Reason if it be considered what it was they thankfully acknowledged the freeing of them from the restraint which was upon the publick exercise of their Ministry any who are not blinded with prejudice may see that this was the design of these Presbyterian Ministers to shew that though they acknowledged the Magistrates taking off that restraint yet they did not look on themselves as the Magistrates Ministers but as the Ministers of Jesus Christ who had received their Ministry from him But the thing that he says must be granted whether there be reason or no and so he proceeds in his Amplifications and out of the want of this only he forms a Charrang and Discourse and puts it in these Ministers mouths and so if ye will believe him their Discourse was to this purpose in effect We declare that we hold not our Ministry of Christ alone but of Christ and the Magistrate and therefore do accept of this Indulgence without scruple But which is more strange he will not only have them to say as he says but also believe as he alledges upom them he will not only impose Charrangs upon them but he will impose a Creed upon them For saith he this Discourse of theirs saith That if they had not believed that they held their Ministry not of Christ alone but of others also they could not have accepted of the Indulgence I am sure no judicious person who reads these things will think that they deserve any refutation and I am very apprehensive such will alledge that I had little to do who transcribed them When I was writing this and reflecting upon the wild conceits that the Author hath fallen into upon this supposition that only was purposely kept out and that his amplifications grow still the more remote from truth it put me in mind of a censure which an English man passed upon a Scottish Gentleman with whom he was acquainted this Gentleman told him strange things which the English man could not believe they were so leasing-like This English man having occasion to speak of this Gentleman said of him He is said he a very pretty Gentleman but he amplifies mightily This Author hath amplified mightily upon the word only and if he had been professedly making Romances it had been more tolerable but in a matter of so great importance to give his fancy leave to rove so as to condemn a Scripture-expression made use of by the Indulged Ministers and to draw Treason against Christ and a betraying of the Cause out of a Scripture sentence uttered by the Apostle Paul speaking by the Inspiration of the Spirit and not only to condemn them for using the words that the Holy Ghost useth but to impose words of his own and a Creed of his own devising upon them and then condemn them because of that Faith and Profession is very intollerable insolency His Argument if reduced to a form must be to this purpose Whosoever designedly and deliberately declares that they have received their Ministry from the Lord Jesus and says not that they have not received their Ministry from Jesus Christ only they deny Christ to be alone head of his Church and are guilty of High Treason against the King of kings and betrayers of the Cause and they set the Magistrate in Christs Throne and hold their Ministry of the Magistrate c. but so is it the Indulged have designedly and deliberately declared c. and therefore c. Ans He is not sure of the truth of the matter for he brings in the Story pag. 24. with that doubtful Parenthesis if I be not misinformed many say that it was the Authors mshap that he was many times misinformed and it s like this may be a piece of his bad intelligence it 's doubtful if it was refused by any of the Indulged Ministers to say they received their Ministry from Christ only The Author doubts of the truth of
compendious way if I be not mistaken to meet with any thing he says is to consider what is in his Arguments against the Indulgence for he resumes there what he had remarked on the Kings Letter and what he hath in his Vindication is taken out of these Arguments In these Reasons against the Indulgence he saith the Reader may see at one view what was scattered up and down the foregoing Relation so here we will find all his forces united and drawn up in order Pag. 85. 1. He promises to shew in how many particulars Injury was done by the Indulgence as accepted unto our Lord Jesus Christ the only Head and King of his Church Ans That which the Indulged Ministers accepted was a freedom from or a relaxation of that civil restraint which had hindered the peaceable exercise of their Ministry as was cleared before If he alledge that they accepted of the Instructions c. This is an acceptation of his own making and he may make any thing if he pleases for the Indulged Ministers cannot hinder any body to fight against their own fancies having premised this I come to the particulars of his charge against them 1. Saith he in that hereby they declared they did not hold their Ministry wholly and solely of Christ Jesus How proves he this We saith he saw above how the Indulged did plainly and positively refuse to say that they held their Ministry of Jesus Christ alone where ex professo the word alone was left out See what is remarked on Mr. Hutchesons Speech and what was said in answer to the Informer whâ— was dissatisfied with M. Blair whereby an injury of a very high nature was done unto our Lord Jesus That which is remarked on Mr. Hutchesons Speech is in pag. 24. 9. they say That they received their Ministry from Jesus Christ Buâ— why was it not said as some of them if I am nâ— misinformed desired only from Jesus Christ wheâ— this was designedly and deliberately left out leâ— all the World judge whether in this they carried a faithful Ministers of the Gospel or not For mâ— part I cannot but judge that this was a manifest betraying of the Cause and a giving up of all iâ— the Magistrate for hereby they declared that eitheâ— in their judgment they had their Ministry from others as well as from Christ that is from the Magistrate as well as from Christ and that in an equality and Co-ordination or else that they had it nâ— from Christ immediately but from men from thâ— Magistrate in subordination to Christ And then he reasons against both these and concludes that therefore when they kept out the Word only they did plainly declare that they held their Ministry partly of the Magistrate And after he hath started another Objection about holding the peaceable exercise of the Ministry from the Magistrate he concludes So that use what devices men can to cover this matter a manifest betraying of the Cause will break through and a receding from received and sworn Principles will be visible In the answer to the Informer to which also he refers he saith pag. 71. Ministers receiving instructions for regulating them in the exercise of their Ministry from Magistrates acting like themselves Magisterially and Architectonically do if not formally yet at least virtually deny Christ to be the only Head and Lawgiver of his Church But again pag. 85. he objects That this fault was but personal and accidental to the Indulgence and so cannot effect the same or make it an encroachment upon Christ of so high a nature He answers That being spoken at that occasion when the King and Council were acknowledged thankfully for granting of the Indulgence and being spâ—ken with understanding it must be granted that it had reference to the Indulgence it self and so saith he their discourse was to this purpose in effect We declare that we hold not our Ministry of Christ alone but of Christ and of the Magistrate and therefore do accept of this Indulgence without scruple He adds afterward Further this Discourse of theirs so worded purposely and deliberately saith That if they had not believed that they held their Ministry not of Christ alone but of others also they could not have accepted of the Indulgence Ans This is the Authors great Gun with which he thought fit to begin the battel if this misgive and do no skaith there is no less reason to fear his lesser Ordnance It 's strange that he should have begun with a piece of Ordnance which he knows not whether it be fixed or not he is not sure whether the word only was by some of the Indulged Ministers desired to be added for when he says it he casts in this doubtful Parenthesis If I be not misinformed He got many wrong Informations and this may be one among the rest I do not remember of any such thing and if he be misinformed his first Argument hath neither matter nor form I have heard it alledged that some people by telling uncertainties yea falshoods come themselves to believe them and confidently to add to them I find something like this in this Author 1. We see he speaks doubtfully if I be not misinformed but the oftener he repeats it he grows the more positive and confident for we never hear more of any doubt of his Inforformation yea in repeating he wonderfully amplifies the matter and makes the not saying of this only to say many things For saith he hereby they declared that they did not hold their Ministry wholly and solely of Christ He might have easily perceived that a positive Declaration that they did not hold their Ministry from Christ only is more than a not-saying that they had it from him only A man may truly say I had this gift from my Father though he add not the exclusive word only Who yet cannot positively declare that he had not the gift only from his Faâ—her because he as I suppose received it from â—is Father and not from any other Again he granted that some of the Indulged desired that the word only might be put in sure â—hese did not positively and plainly refuse to say That they held their Ministry from Christ alone and yet here he charges it upon the Indulged generally that they refused to say so This is another of his Amplifications Then he judgeth that this was a manifest betraying of the Cause and refers it to the judgment of the world if they carried as faithful Ministers What shall Ministers be condemned â—as not faithful because they spoke of their Ministry in the words that the Holy Ghost taught Paul to speak Acts 20.24 Shall the using of the Words of God be judged a betraying of the cause of God Suppose that that word was designedly and deliberately left out this might have been the reason that they durst not adventure to add a word to the words of the Apostle who spoke by the Inspiration of God He amplifies yet further This was saith
Speeches are Persecutions Matth. 5.11 Jer. 18.18 they incite one another to devise devices against Jeremiah and to smite him with the Tongue I remember not of any thing in the Letters which I have missed except his Predictions for the Historian is a sort of a Prophet he hath a faculty of foretelling things to come I know not how he hath fallen upon it or whether it be be ill come or not he very confidently affirmed in the year 1677. That if Mr. John Welsh had hearkened to the desire of drawing near to the shelter of an house for meeting with the people but for one Sabbath though that might have contributed for taking off all Sentences against himself and others and to an Universal Liberty for all outed Ministers to preach without Molestation that then he would have forefaulted all the protection and countenance he had singularly enjoyed before that time This was far said No sober judicious Person will think that it could be unlawful in such Circumstances at least to preach at a house but though there had been somewhat wrong in it how comes he to know that for that failing Mr. Welsh would have lost the Protection and Countenance which he had formerly enjoyed it was presumptuous boldness for him to take upon him to determine so peremptorily concerning the forefaulting of the Protection and Countenance of God who hath mercy on whom he will have mercy and does for his names sake even when his peoples sins testifie against them and remembers his Covenant and Mercy for his People Another of his Predictions is That all indifferent Spectators will judge as he says and that Posterity will see and say as he says whether the indulged men will or not But I think they are over-credulous who will believe that he had the foreknowledge what way the Judgments of men present and of the Generations to come would incline and determine There is yet a third Prediction of another Author which is That the Indulgence should become as odious and detestable to all the godly in the Land as ever Prelacy was To this Prophecy the Author of the History and Letters makes an Addition while he says in one of his Letters That what that person was perswaded of will quickly appear the first had only said it would be but he says it will quickly appear augur augurem but these Prophets were so fearfully mistaken in seeing things that were that there is very good reason to doubt of their foresight of things to come yet there is more Art in this inartificial Argument founded upon the Authority of a man who hath but confidence to say boldly what he says concerning things to come than in many artificial Arguments and these Predictions will go further with weak credulous people than very solid reasons for people of that sort especially if they be curious think more of a man who will take upon him to tell but some things that will be though the event be of small consequence than they will think of a solid judicious man who can tell them from the word of God what they should do that they may glorifie and enjoy God and therefore there is such flocking of people to Fortune-tellers Speamen Dummeos Wizzards and Southsayers Now if curious people have such a conceit of those who foretel though they be suspected to have their Knowledge from the Devil they will think much more of men who are in reputation for Religion if they take on them to foretel things to come they will readily be very desirous that such Predictions may not fail I know one who pressed some of his acquaintaince to get weapons for fighting in such a year upon this ground That if there were not Blood that year then such a person who had foretold that there would be Blood would prove a false Prophet These Predictions are very taking when they suit with peoples Inclinations and when the fulfilling of these Predictions contribute to their honour and when they who are not active in fulfilling them are casten as ungodly and despicable and therefore these Predictions of Ministers which did foretel That the Indulgence would become despicable could not but be very taking with people who were inclined to despise it and this could not but be very effectual to press them to despise it that if they did it not then they would be known to be none of the godly and this would press others to despise it that they might not be ranked among the ungodly I have observed that several have an Art of bringing about several things by foretelling them some make people offend at these things which they would never have offended at by foretelling that the people will be offended So Satan hath brought about many mischiefs by foretelling them and the Actors of them this was a very effectual trick to render the Indulgence despicable to foretel that it would become odious and detestable to all the godly for they who believe these Predictions would reason them If we do not detest and hate the Indulgence we cannot list our selves among the godly and then if the Indulged Ministers did not relinquish the Indulgence and hate it that they could not be reckoned among the godly and if they did not make haste to hate it and detest it very shortly that then they could not be accounted godly because this Prediction was to be quickly accomplished It was no great matter to foretell that the Indulgence and indulged Ministers would become odious when there was so many Letters and Copies of printed Books full of odious reproaches cast at the Indulgence and Indulged Ministers when such causes were working and such Fire-balls cast and the people were so prepared to take fire it was an easie thing without any Spirit of Prophesie to foretel a Fire when such trains were laid and kindled Again when a poor Church is going to ruin the ordinary Forerunner of that ruin is the contempt of the Ministers 2 Chron. last They mocked the Messengers of God and despised his words and misused his Prophets until the wrath of the Lord rose against his people till there was no remedy O Jerusalem Jerusalem thou who killest the Prophets read Matth. 23. ver 34. to the end so that if these two Ministers had spoken a little more indefinitely they might have passed for pretty good Guessors if they had said only that the Indulgence would be detestable to the godly but taking on them to foretel that it would be detestable to all the godly and that quickly hath quite broken their credit as Prophets for there are many of the godly who have always been far from detesting the Indulgence and they are much further from detesting it now than before And the Authors of these Predictions have by these Predictions and some other Practices of that nature much wronged their own Reputation This is ordinary when a Church is going to ruin the Despisers of the Lords Servants go before this contempt uses