untill the year 1590. towit ten years after the setting down and swearing of this Abjuration And therefore this power and preheminence which is the point in controversie cannot be understood to have been then condemned in the Abjuration 1580. 1581. for otherwise the Church should have condemned that which in the mean time they did approve and practise Thirdly notwithstanding that Act 1580. condemning Episcopacie as it was then used in Scotland yet these points of the power and preheminence of one Pastor over others and charge over moe particular flocks was not condemned but expresly acknowledged to be lawfull by that whole Assembly wherein Episcopacie was called in Question Anno 1575. 1576. as shall be evidently cleared when we shall come to discusse the Acts of those Assemblies Fourthly those points of Papistrie in generall and the particular heads damned and confuted by Gods Word and Kirk of Scotland were only such as were opposite to the doctrine contained in the principall Confession of the Church of Scotland then of a long time professed by the Kings Majestie and whole body of the Kingdome as it is expresly set down in the same place of the Covenant But so it is that there was no Doctrine contained either in the Confession of Faith or professed now for a long time by the King and whole body of the Kingdome contrary to these points of power and preheminence of one Pastor over other Brethren or moe particular flocks therefore these are not points of Papistrie abjured by the Covenant as being damned then by Gods Word or the Church of Scotland and so this passage doth not more serve to prove their purpose than the former CHAP. IX Containing an Answer to the third Passage THe third Passage is in those words We detest the Roman Antichrist his worldly Monarchie and wicked Hierarchie In this passage indeed there is no false citation as in the former two yet is there as great impertinencie in applying it to their purpose for I cannot see what they can assume upon this proposition to conclude the point in Controversie except they would say that all power and preheminence of one Pastor over his Brethren or over more particular flocks is an Antichristian worldly Monarchie and all degrees of Ecclesiasticall persons is an Antichristian wicked Hierarchie and therefore detested and abjured But if this Assumption were true then the high priest in Ierusalem constituted by God himself had been an Antichristian Monarch and the divers degrees of Ecclesiasticall persons distinguished by God himself had been an Antichristian wicked Hierarchie for it is most certaine that the High priest had power and preheminencie over his Brethren and charge over all the particular flocks in Iudea The Apostles likewise in the Christian Church and their fellow-labourers Titâ—u Timothie and others had been Antichristian wordly Monarchs for it is most certaine that they had power and preheâ—ninence over their Brethren and charge over moe particular flocks as Bishops have now which may be qualified by the writings of the Apostles and the testimony of all the Venerable Fathers of the Primitive Church who lived either in the dayes of the Apostles or neer to them So likewise those Reverend â—â—thers themselves as Polycarpus Ignatius Cyprian Austin Ambrose Chrysostome c. should be esteemed no better yea likewise our Superintendents or Comâ—issioners of Provinces should have been Antichristian worldly Monarchs So that the worthy Instruments of God in the reformation of the Church of Scotland must be thought to have instead of a laudable reformation brought in an Antichristian worldly Monarchy in the Church of Scotland But the principall words which they doe most urge is the last câ—â—â—se of this passage His wicked Hierarchie by which words it was made cleer as they alleage in the Assembly that Episcopacie was abjured what was made cleer in the Assembly we know not but we shall make it cleer God willing to 〈◊〉 whose eyes are not blinded with partiall affection that those reasons produced in the Act in the end thereof at length which doubtlesse were the most weighty they could bring are foolish childish and ridiculous unworthy of such men as they would be accounted amongst the people But before we enter to discusse their reasons we must first explaine the word Hierarchie and shew what Hierarchie is here condemned first the word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} amongst the ancient Grocians was used to signifie a certaine Magistracie the charge whereof was to have a 〈◊〉 of Sacred and Holy things as of Temples Altars and Sacrifices and from thence was translated by anâ—ient Christian writers to signifie the sacred orders of Rulers in the Church Now that there is an holy order of Rulers in the Church I think no man can deny even in Presbyteriall Government there are three orders of Ecclesiasticall persons who bear rule in the Church and have charge of sacred things of distinct power and authoritie towit Pastors Elders and Deacons and so those orders may be â—afely called an Ecclesiasticall Hierarchie they who understand the Greek word knowes perfectly that it signifies no other thing but 〈◊〉 of sacred things or a holy Government they cannot deny but these Ecclesiasticall functions have every one their own point of Government and that about sacred and holy things why then should they abhorre the word since they acknowledge the thing signified thereby to be competent to their Ecclesiasticall functions Is it because the word is borrowed from Ethnicks It should not be abhorred for this cause more than the words Episcopus Presbyter and Pastor which did signifie also amongst the Ethnicks certaine offices or magistracies as is well known to those who are versed in their writings Or is it because it hath been abused by the Papists neither can it for this cause be rejected taken in a right sense and separating Papisticall corruptions from it more then the other titles given to Ecclesiasticall officers which all have been abused in the Popish Church and that this word Hierarchy may be used to signifie the orders of Ecclesiasticall rulers in the Christian Church I will bring no other testimony than that of Calvin who was the first Author of Presbyteriall Government he in his Treatise De Nâ—cessitatâ— refâ—rmanda Ecclesia speaking of the Popish Hierarchy saith If they will set us down such an Hierarchie wherein Bishops have so preheminence that they refuse not to be subject to Christ depending from him as from their head and referring all to him wherein they doe so entertaine Societie amoâ—gst themselves that they be no otherwise bound but by his truth Then I must acknowledge that thâ—se are worthy to be called exâ—crable who will not reverence such an Hierarchie and with all humble obedience receive the same Where we see that Calvin doth acknowledge that there may be a lawfull Hierarchie neither wicked nor Antichristian and such was this Hierarchie in the Church of Scotland consisting of Bishops Presbyters and Deacons wherein Bishops
the inferior members to correct the head it is true indeed that Bishops ought to be subject to the censures of Generall or Nationall Councels and none of them will think themselves exeemed from such a one as is lawfully constituted Albeit the Bishops did decline upon many just reasons this Assembly of Covenanters which are at length expressed in their declinature yet if that the Assemblie had been constituted according to the present established order of the Church they would never have declined from the same The last corruptions they remark in the Bishops as they were then in Scotland is that they did not instruct their people in Gods Word which is a corruption indeed but not essentiall to the office of a Bishop or allowed by a Law if any omit that dutie let them be censured for their personall fault it is great iniquitie to condemn the whole office as unlawfull in it self for the personall fault of one or two But I perceive that the chief thing which was then condemned in Episcopacie is that they did not receive their Commission to exercise their charge from the Church or that every Minister had not his voyce in the Nomination or Election of Bishops but that they were nominated and presented by the King elected by those of the Chapton only and consecrated by other Bishops and this was the thing which moved them â—o despitefully to condemn that estate in the constitution whereof every one of them had not a hand and in all their proceedings both in the book of Discipline and Acts of Assemblies it appeares that this was the chief thing they required that if they had had their Commission only from the Church or generall Assemblie they would have condescended to all other points of their function 1. In the second book of Discipline Cap. 11. they confess that albeit Pastors as pastors have not power over moe â—locks than one yet if it be given them by the Church they may exercise it lawfully 2. In the Assemblie 1575. it is agreed by both parties as we have declared that amongst the pastors one may be chosen by the Church to visite certaine bounds comprehending many particular parishes and therein to plant Ministers to suspend and depose them for reasonable causes 3. In the Assemblie at Edinburgh 1578. one of the principall petitions they make to the Regent was that none should be admitted to vote in Parliament in name of the Church excepâ— such as have Commission from the Church 4. In the second book of Discipline Cap. 11. It is said that no person under whatsoever title ought to attempt any Act in name of the Church either in Councell or Parliament having no Commission from the Church so that if that had been done we see that they acknowledge both their power and preheminence over other Pastors their charge over moe particular flocks their sitting in Councell and voting in Parliament to have been lawfull which are the principall points both of the Spirituall and temporall function of Bishops which they challenge in this Assemblie to be unlawfull If then we can shew that the Bishops have received from the Church such a Commission to exercise all these points of their office how can it be denied but they may exercise them lawfully since this is the only exception against them in these things Therefore we shall make it appear that Bishops have received from the Church this Commission 1. Christ himself who is the head of the Church having all power gave to the Apostles this Commission to exercise power and preheminence in all Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall matters over all both Pastors and people throughout the whole world 2. The Apostles who were at the beginning the representative Church gave the like Commission to Bishops over certaine bounds over the which they received Iurisdiction as Paul gave to Timothy in Ephesus and the bounds of Asia minor thereabout Commission to plant Churches to ordaine Presbyters and Deacons to have Iurisdiction and Rule over them being ordained to receive or repell accusations given in against them and by consequent to judge and correct or censure them the same Commission received Titus in the Kingdome of Creta neither can it be doubted but the rest of the Apostles gave the like Commission unto others in these Nations where they travelled to preach the Gospel who were to succeed them in the rule and Government of the Churches wherin they had not only the Name but also the office and that power of Bishops which is here called in Controversie as none can deny except those who will impudently deny all tâ—rue records of Antiquitie since all the oâ—thodox Fathers who succeeded the Apostles and lived in the same age with them doe with unanimous consent testifie the same The which Commission was derived from the Primitive Church who received it from the Apostles to those of succeeding ages confirmed by continuall practice uncontrouled for the space of fifteen hundred years by any Orthodox writers untill this last age that some of the Church of Geneva began to call it in question 3. The Commission to vote in Parliament they could not have at the beginning when there was no Christian Magistrates or Common-wealths yet so soone as Kingdomes and Common-wealths received the publik exercise of Christian Religion authorized by Laws then the Church considering that many of the Civill Laws did either directly or indirectly reflect upon Ecclesiasticall matters and Religion and that it was very expedient that Ecclesiasticall Constitutions for better obedience thereto should be strengthened by the Laws of the Kingdome they did earnestly supplicate Emperors Kings and Magistrates that some Commissioners from the Church might have place in their Soveraign Courts whereby Laws were established to further therein the cause of God and the Church and to take heed Nè Ecclesia aliquid detrimenti capiat the which supplications Christian Emperors Kings and Magistrates out of a pious zeal did grant And therefore did authorize the Bishops and Prelates to sit in their Soveraigne Courts in name of the Church this priviledge many godly and learned Prelates did injoy to the unspeakable good of the Church and advancement of Christian Religion so that it is no lesse but rather a great deal moâ—e wicked Sacriledge to rob the Church of this so profitable a priviledge than to rob her of her patrimonie and therefore no marvell though these who make no scruple in Conscience to be sacrilegious in the one be also sacrilegious in the other 4. To come neerer to our Church of Scotland it is evident by all histories that since there were Christian Princes therein the reverend Bishops did not onely rule the Ecclesiastick affaires but also had a great hand in the affaires of the Civill estate and did much good by their wise Counsell to the King the Church and whole Kingdome before Popish tyrannie had place therein and that since there were any formall Parliament in Scotland the Prelats made up the third
place according to his degree with such gravitie modestie and decencie as did become Reverend Fathers distinguished one from another by their habits appointed by the Canons of the Church making it appear to the beholders a Venerable Assemblie 3. In their proceedings were appointed the wisest of the Bishops and most learned amongst the Doctors to frame the Articles and being framed were particularly one by one discussed by weighty reasons maturely in severall dayes and diets all doubts particularly moved and Objections solidly answered according to their grounds using not onely the testimony of former approved Councels Fathers and learned Schoolemen but also very frequently the Authority of Sacred Scriptures So that if in their conclusions they had pondered well the reasons alleaged and had concluded according to the same and not according to the Popes sole Authoritie that Councell might have had a more happy event for the weell and peace of the Christian Church But in this Assemblie at Glasgow was not observed that forme order or decencie which did become a venerable Ecclesiastick meeting for first these who were ever esteemed the Principall members of all generall or Nationall Councels to wit the Reverend Bishops of the Church were excluded a company of Lay-men Earles Lords Gentlemen and Burgesses without warrant Authoritie or example of the ancient Church were thrust in their roomes bearing chiefe Sway in the Assembie carrying all matters violently for their own ends so that it was remarked by wise and grave men that one Earle and one Lord made more speech in the Assemblie than all the Clergie except the Moderator 2. In their Sessions no order or decencie observed all sitting pel-mell without distinction of Degrees save onely that Lay-Noblemen and Gentlemen occupied the chiefest roomes with their swords and pistolls by their sides The Ministers mixt amongst Burgesses Merchants and Noblemens servants hardly to be discerned from them by their Habite or Carriage Many of the Ministers in coloured clothes all in short cloakes except the Ministers of Glasgow who had their Gownes so that unlesse one had known their persons before they should scarcely have discerned the Ministers from the Merchant or Taylor 3. The Ministers were not there by the approbation of their Bishops according to the custome of the Primitive Church and Acts of the generall Assemblies of Scotland long after the Reformation as for instance in that Assemblie at Edinburgh Iuly 1568. It was expresly ordained that no Minister should leave his Flock except such as were chosen by their Superintendants but by Commissions from their new invented form of Presbyteries wherein Lay-men had the greatest rule or rather from the Tables of the Covenant who did not choose the most wise modest and learned Brethren but the most turbulent seditious and bold to oppose Authoritie fit members indeed of such an Assemblie 4. In discussing of the matters which were concluded no reasoning but superficiall no carefull pondering of the Reasons but all taken Implicit fide which had any shew no exact distinguishing of the Articles but many matters of different nature were hâ—dled up together confusedly and with great precipitation were voyced and concluded The Assembly continued onely a moneth and a great part of that time to wit from the 21. of November to the 4. of December was consumed in circumstantiall points concerning the persons to be admitted to have voice in receiving and discussing their Commissions in Contestations betwixt the Commissioner and the Covenanters in excluding some of his Majesties Counsellors authorized by him to have voyce in the Assemblie contrary to the Practice of all Ancient approved Councels either Generall or Nationall in rejecting most just protestations of divers Presbyteries against this Assemblie as that of the Presbyteries of Glasgow of Pâ—ables of Aberdeine of the Channonry of Rosse in refusing to heare read the most just declinature and protestations of the Bishops And finally in declaring certaine books of the former Assemblies to be Authentick registers At last the fourth of December they enter to the principall matters for which this Assembly was required beginning at the condemnation of the six last generall Assemblies conveened continued and concluded by the Kings Majesties Authoritie and full consent of the Church and ratified by the whole bodie of the Kingdome in Parliament which they did in shorter space then could suffice to reade them over so precipitate were they in condemning absolutely so many grave Assemblies with such unanimous consent as never one was called but without reason or judgement condemned them all in one word by implicite faith given to some few neither of the most wise or learned of the company who had a Committee to invent some apparant reasons to anull the same and that is most certaine that the two part of those who voyced against them had never seen the Acts and the proceedings of these Assemblies or at least had never read nor perused them But out of a blind zeal and Iesuiticall obedience did it only because they were so directed by the Tables of the Covenant and their rebellious Leaders In another Session they deposed and excommunicated summarily fourteen Bishops upon a pretended false Libell produced before the Presbytery of Edinburgh against them which by no law or reason could be competent Iudges to their processe without lawfull citation contrary to the Acts of many generall Assemblies the Books of Discipline and perpetuall practice of the Church For the Church of Scotland was never accustomed no not in the most strict times of Presbyteriall government to proceed so summarily to the sentence of excommunication against most notorious offenders without mature deliberation and long space granted to the Accused either to justifie himself or declare his repentance 1. There was used three private personall Citations to appear before the Presbytery next if those were not obeyed three publik Citations one three severall Sabbaths 3. Followed three publik prayers for their conversion and if at any of these times they did appear either to purge themselves of the crime imputed to them or submitting themselves to the censure of the Church The sentence of excommunication was not pronounced against them In another Session they condemned with one voyce the Book of Common Prayer the Book of Canons the Book of Ordination of Ministers and Consecration of Bishops together with the Court of the High Commission which space was not sufficient to have read over all those books muchlesse to peruse them throughly and discusse the controverted points therein which was necessarily requisit to be done before they had been absolutely rejected But this is strange that the principall and most weighty point for the which chiefly they did procure this Assembly should have been so slightly with such precipitation handled to wit whether Bishops should be reteined or removed forth of the Church of Scotland A Doctrine so universally approven by the whole Christian Church even in her purest time since the Apostles dayes and allowed in Substance by
have so preheminence over others as they refuse not to be subject to Christ and depend upon him as from their head and not from the Pope of Rome c. And therefore in the judgement of Calvin those who will not reverence such an Hierarchie are worthy to be accounted execrable and accursed and since our Covenanters professe that they reverence the judgement of Calvin more than all Antiquitie I marvell how they can blesse themselves in this wherein he accounteth them accursed To the same purpose likewise speaketh Beza the chief promoter of Presbyteriall government in his Answer to Saravia De divers grad. Minist. cap. 21. Albeit he doth not name Hierarchie yet speaking of the Orders in the Roman Church whereof the Hierarchie doth consist he concludeth in these words Neither doe we accuse of this Tyrannie all those who are called Archbishops or Bishops for what Arrogancie were this yea we doe acknowledge all those who are so called as faithfull Pastors of the Christian Church providing they imitate the example of those holy Bishops in reforming the house of God so miserably deformed according to the rule of Gods Word and obey them and with all reverence receive them so farre are we from that whereof some do most impudently accuse us that we should prescribe to any our particular example to be followed like to those impertinent men who esteeme nothing well done except that which they doe themselves c. By the judgement then of these two learned men whose judgements they can hardly contemne all Hierarchie is not condemned nor all Episcopacie under the name of Hierarchie is to be abjured but only in so farre as it is Antichristian and wicked that is to say the manifold corruptions and abuses in the orders of Ecclesiasticall rulers brought in by the Pope to fortifie his usurped Tyrannie Those with you we also abjure and detest from our very heart But so it is that one Pastor to have power and preheminence over others is not to be reckoned amongst these corruptions which were brought in by the Pope or Antichrist but was appointed by God himself and practised in the Church by those whom Beza doth acknowledge to have been faithfull Pastors of the Christian Church Now to come to the reasons which they set down at length in the end of the Act the first reason whereby they presse to prove that the order of Government under Bishops having power and preheminence over other Pastors as Presbyters and Deacons is the Pâ—pish Hierarchy is in these words The Popisâ— Hierarchie doth consist of Bishops Presbyters and Deacons that is Baptizing and Preaching Deacons which they prove first by a Canon of the Councell of Trent 2. By a testimony of Bellarmine 3. By a Censure of the Vniversitie of Paris of certaine Articles sent out of Ireland which tedious probation was needlesse for we doe not deny their proposition but grant that the Popish Hierarchie doth consist of Bishops Presbyters and Deacons But what then they suppresse the Assumption and Conclusion yet according to Logicall Rules we may finde them out their Conclusion is known towit that Episcopall Government is the Antichristian wicked Hierarchie So to inferre this Conclusion upon their proposition as it is set down nothing can be assumed for the minor but that Episcopall Government consisteth of Bishops Presbyters and Deacons So the whole Syllogisme must be The Popish Hierarchie doth consist of Bishops Presbyters and Deacons But Episcopall Government consisteth of Bishops Presbyters and Deacons Ergo Episcopall government is the Popish wicked Hierarchie But by their leave this is a Syllogisme Ex omnibus particularibus affirmantibus in secundà figurâ which concludeth not as they who have learned the first rudiment of Logick knows such as that Asinus habet aures tu habes aures ergò tu es Asinus I confesse that this may be reduced to a syllogisme in primâ figurâ by converting the termes of the proposition and making it universall as Quic quid habet aures est Asinus tu habes aures Ergo c. But thus the Major is evidently false and so likewise their Syllogisme may be deduced in the same manner by converting the Major and making it universall but so it is no more their proposition thus All Orders of Ecclesiasticall Rulers consisting of Bishops Presbyters and Deacons is the Antichristian wicked Hierarchie But the orders of Ecclesiasticall rulers in Episcopall Government consisteth of Bishops Presbyters and Deacons Ergo c. But so the major is evidently also false neither doth their reasons any wayes prove it for if it were true we might aswell prove thereby that the orders in the Ecclesiasticall Rulers in the Apostles dayes and Primitive Church after them was the Popish wicked Hierarchie for they cannot deny but therein were Bishops Presbyters and Deacons As likewise that their Presbyteriall Government is the Antichristian wicked Hierarchie for they grant that their Pastors are Bishops their Elders Presbyters and their Deacons are Ecclesiasticall Rulers also But they seeme to object that their Deacons are not preaching and baptizing Deacons as ours are and those of the Roman Church but onely distributers of the Ecclesiasticall goods I answer their Deacons are so much the worse as unlike to Apostolick Deacons and therefore our Deacons and Popish Deacons more Christian and liker to those who were appointed by the Apostles for Stephen who was the first of these Deacons was a Preacher and for his preaching suffered Martyrdome Act. 7. Philip was a Deacon and yet both a Preacher and Baptizer Act. 8. 5. 12. And so we must esteeme that all the rest of the Deacons had the same power nor are they able to shew the contrary We will not be ashamed therefore in this point rather to joyne with Papists wherein they adhere to Gods Word and sound Antiquity than to their new invented opinion disagreeing from both This reason notwithstanding the grosse informalitie thereof was good enough for the Common people who are well pleased with any shew of reason comming from the mouthes of their Leaders and men of learning amongst them either would not or durst not enquire the strength of it or if they did enquire in their own minds durst not publish their opinion either by word or writ because of an Act of this Assemblie Sess. 23. Act. 17. prohibiting any person of whatsoever qualitie or degree to speak or write against this Assemblie or any Act thereof under paine of incurring the censure of the Kirk Therefore leaving the informality of this Argument I answer to the substance of the matter that all orders of Ecclesiasticall Rulers are and may be called an Hierarchie we grant in that sense which we have declared but that all such is wicked and Antichristian we deny and have even Calvin the first founder of Presbyteriall Discipline for our warrant as we have shown already and therefore that exception they make That this Hierarchie is called the Antichristian Hierarchie
therefore it were but a foolish Logomachie or strife about words to allow the one title and condemne the other Secondly it may aswell be condemned as unlawfull to appropriate the name of Minister to the degree of preaching Pastors which is common to all those who have charge in the Church or to appropriate the name of Elder to their ruling Elders only which is common to all Pastors Apostles Evangelists and Bishops Thirdly neither did they condemne as unlawfull in it self their power and preheminence over the Ministers in their Diocese or charge over moe particular Parishes first because there were points agreed upon by both parties before this Assemblie and approved by a speciall Act as we have shown before Cap. 11. Secondly because this power was as yet still remaining in the persons of Superintendents Commissioners and Visitors and long after this time Fourthly neither did they condemne as unlawfull in it self their power of Convocation of Synodall Assemblies and their moderation therein for the Church acknowledged this power to be lawfull in Superintendents as we have shown by divers Acts of Assemblies Cap. 5. for if it were unlawfull in it self it could not be thought lawfull under any title whatsoever Fiftly neither did they condemne as unlawfull in it self their sitting and voycing in Councell or Parliament or other Civill Iudicatories for they acknowledge in the second book of Discipline Cap. 11. That Pastors may and should assist their Princes when they be required in all things agreeable to Gods Word whether it be in Councell or Parliament or otherwise So a little before this time M. Robert Pont who was a Pastor and Commissioner of Caithenes had licence from the Assemblie to exercise the office of a Senator of the Colledge of Iustice which was a civill Iudicatorie That proviso which is added to this doth not import any unlawfulnes in the office Providing they neglect not their own charge nor by flatterie of Princes hurt the publik estate of the Church if any doe so it is but a personall fault and not essentiall to the office for Bishops may doe more good in those places for the publik weal of the Church than their Apostles of the Covenant by their long staying in Edinburgh farre from their own particular charges attending the tables of the Covenant and gadding up and down the Countrie to stirre up the Kings Subjects to rebellion against him and to disturb the estate of the Church and Kingdome as many of the Covenanting Ministers have done These are the principall points both of the Spirituall and temporall functions of the Bishops and since they were not accounted by the Church unlawfull in themselves how can this be that this Assembly hath justly condemned The whole estate of Bishops as unlawfull in it self except the Ambiguitie lurk in these words which are there added and often repeated As it is now used in Scotland signifying that it was only the corruptions which were in those who were Bishops at that time which they did condemn and not Episcopacie absolutely It may be true indeed that there were some corruptions at that time in those who had the office of Bishops or that they did not exercise their office aright retaining some corruptions of the Roman Church but for these personall faults the office should not have been condemned of it self since these corruptions might have been separated from the office as they were indeed by the new re-establishment of Bishops in the year 1606. 1608. And certainly they understood those corruptions which are remaked to have been in the Bishops by the book of discipline Cap. 11. whereof some are corruptions indeed but not competent to that office as it was now established in Scotland by generall Assemblies and Acts of Parliament others of them are only supposed corruptions which cannot be convinced to be such indeed either by Gods Word or testimonie of approved Fathers or practice or example of the primitive Church 1. They say it is a corruption that the name of Bishop should be appropriated to some few we have answered to this a little before shewing that this is only a proud doting about questions and strife of words as the Apostle sayes 1 Tim 6. 4. 2. They account it a corruption that they addict not themselves to a particular flock I answer that they doe so for their Diocese is their particular flock Then it is neither necessarie nor expedient that he to whom the generall charge of many parishes is committed should astrict himself to one Parish only nor can the contrary be convinced from Gods Word wherein we finde no such divisions of Parishes as is now 3. They challenge them that they are called Lords over their brethren and over the inheritance of the Lord But first we say that they are not called Lords in regard of their rule over their Brethren but in regard of their temporall Lordships bestowed upon them by the Liberalitie of Princes and in regard of their place in Parliament and Councell then this title of Lord like as Dominus in Latine and {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} in Greek is sometimes a word signifying absolute and illimitated Dominion So we see that divers Emperors albeit in effect they had absolute dominion yet did they refuse often the title of Dominus because it was odious to people and in this sense Bishops are not called Lords neither doe they arrogate to themselves such absolute and unlimited dominion as to doe what they pleased but they must be ruled by the Canons of the Church But otherwise the title of Lord is only a word of honour competent to every man of respect to whom it pleases the Prince or custome of the Countrey to give that title as in France we see the Bishops are no otherwise intituted than other ordinarie Gentlemen calling them Mounsieur so likewise in Spaine and Italy Seignior which title is also given to any other man of worth it is only the custome of the Countrey of England and Scotland whereby this title of Lord is given to Bishops and not for any absolute Dominion they arrogate thereby 4. They account it a corruption that Bishops should have further bounds to visite then they may lawfully they would say conveniently but that corruption may easily be amended by division of the Diocese as is lately done in the Diocese of St. Andrews without abolishing the whole office 5. That a Pastor should have criminall Iurisdiction we answer they have not this as Pastors or Bishops but as a priviledge by the Laws of the Countrey annexed to their temporall lands which notwithstanding they doe not exercise in their own person but by their Stewards or Bailifâ—es 6. They count it a corruption that Bishops would not subject themselves to the correction and censures of the particular Elderships or Presbyteries this is but a supposed corruption and if it were so it were a great corruption indeed and a most uncomely and confused disorder to give libertie to
his Majestie both before this time at this time and after did shew evidently that he did approve the office of a Bishop as he testified by his divers protestations against those Assemblies which pressed to suppresse the same and by his presentation of Bishops to the places whensoever they hapned to be vacant as he did at that same very time present M. Rob. Montgomery to the Archbishoprick of Glasgow and by that Act of Parliament 1584. whereby the whole Iurisdiction of Bishops was ratified by his Majestie with consent of the whole estates of the Kingdome Seeing then that this Abjuration or Confession call it as they please was framed by the Kings Majestie appointed to be subscribed and sworn by his Authoritie and that in such a sense as that thereby Episcopacie was not understood to be abjured It must be also presupponed that all those who did swear or subscribe the same did it in no other sense or meaning otherwise they did swear falsly sophystically and by Equivocation therefore it must necessarily be concluded that by that Oath of the Covenant 1580. 1581. 1590. and 1591. Episcopacie nor the power and preheminence of one pastor over others or moe particular flocks than one was not abjured by honest men who had an efold and upright meaning in taking their Oath Neither can the interpretation of this Assemblie at Glasgow 1639. give any sure warrant to those who hath sworn in a sense contrary to the Kings meaning for if this Abjuration or Covenant had been the Act of the Church properly there had been some appearance that a lawfull generall Assembly now might give forth the true interpretation thereof but since it is the King and Councels Act and the Oath thereto required of all the Subjects by his Authoritie it doth not appertaine to the Generall assembly especially such an unformall and unlawfull one as this to declare in what sense it should be understood So that it is but false and vaine fear wherewith they would burden the consciences of all the Kingdome of Scotland as being fearfully perjured by establishing contrary to the pretended oath of the Covenant the office of Bishops in Scotland and giving obedience unto them But on the contrary they are rather forsworn and perjured who contrary to the meaning of their first oath have by their new rebellious Covenant and ordinance of their Assembly abjured Episcopacie And of this no man needeth to doubt but that all those who have acknowledged Bishops and have taken their oath of Canonicall obedience and now by perswasion of their Leaders have broken their solemn Oath in disobeying and contemning their authoritie and ratifying their disobedience by another Oath are evidently forsworn as most of the Ministers of that Assembly have done Let them in sincerity of mind search their own consciences in this point and I doubt not that if it have any life therein they will finde themselves sensibly pricked thereby CHAP. VII VVherein is answered to their Argument taken from foure severall sentences of the Abjuration and particularly to the first HAving now shown that neither by the principall Confession of Faith nor by the Appendix thereof called Abjuration nor by the first book of Discipline nor by any Acts of Assemblies nor practice of the Church many yeers after the reformation this power and preheminency of Bishops here controverted is condemned it rests that we answer to those Arguments which are brought by them in the body of the Act to prove the determination of the Assembly which are neither brought from the Word of God nor from the testimonie or practice of the primitive Church immediately after the Apostles dayes nor from any words of the perfect Confession of Faith in the Church of Scotland but all their Arguments are of a later foundation and may be in summe reduced to three sorts first they bring certaine broken sentences â—ut of the Abjuration in the Covenant which they call the Confession then some Acts of their late Generall Assemblies and thirdly some passages out of the second book of Discipline to the which we shall answer in their own order And first they bring foure severall sentences out of the Abjuration or negative Confession falsifying and wresting them strangely as to make them appeare to have some shew of proving their determination The first passage is in these words We professe that we detest all Traditions brought into the Kirk without or against the Word of God and Doctrine of this reformed Kirk The second is We abhorre and detest all contrary Religion and Doctrine but chiefly all kind of Papistry in generall nad particular heads as they were then damned and confuted by the Word of God and Kirk of Scotland when the said Confession was sworn and subscribed Anno 1580. and 1581. 1590. and 1591. The third is That we detest the Roman Antichrist his worldly Monarchy and wicked Hierarchie The fourth is That we joyne our selves to this reformed Kirk in Doctrine Faith Religion and Discipline promising and swearing by the great name of God that we shall continue in the Doctrine and Discipline of this Kirk and defend the same according to our vocation and power We answer first in generall to all these passages that by none of them is either Episcopall Government abjured for first in the words themselves there is no mention either of Bishops or their power and preheminency over others or their charge over moc particular flocks or of Presbyteries of absolute parity of Pastors Therefore except they have recourse to some secret meaning these passage can serve nothing to their purposes and we have shown before both by the meaning of the principall Confession of Faith whereof this Abjuration is an Appendix and by the explained meaning of his Majestie by whose appointment this abjuration is framed and who required the oath and subscription thereunto that it cannot be understood in such a sense as that this power and preheminencie of Bishops should be thereby abjured and therefore neither the words nor the sâ—nse can be able to pâ—ove their purpose Secondly we prove the same by the Confession of the Moderator M. Alexander Henrison and his Associats the Apostles of the Covenant for they in their Disputes with the Doctors of Aberdeene doe confesse plainly that by swearing this Confession of Faith Episcopacie was not abjured and that any man might safely swear that Confession and their Covenant also without abjuring Episcopacie and by this profession they entised many to sweat and subscribe their Covenant who otherwise would nâ—t have done it Now either they spake sincerely at that time according to their knowledge and conscience and so did flatly contradict this position That by swearing the Confession of Faith Episcopacie was abjured or else by dissembling policie they did so professe contrary to their own mind to serve their own designes in advancing per fas nefas their rebellious Covenant And so did shew themselves Iesuiticall temporizers and time-servers En graine abusing
that Act at Dundee 1580. HAving disoussed those passages alleaged out of the Abjuration of the Covenant it rests that we answer in like manner to the Acts of divers generall Assemblies produced to prove that the Church hath condemned this power and preheminence of one Pastor over another and over moe particular flocks albeit a sufficient answer may easily be gathered by the judicious Reader out of that which we have said already yet because many are moved by the Authority of those Assemblies who doe not understand the manner of their proceedings we must consider them more particularly to the end than we may shew what weight and force they ought to have in the Church Those Acts here cited by them for the more commodious answering without Tautologie may be disposed in three Ranks first some of them containe only preparations to the condemning of Episcopacie as those from the year 1575. to the 1580. next there are some that tend directly to the establishing of the second book of Discipline transferring the power of Bishops to Presbyteries thirdly others are such as condemne Episcopacie which all we shall examine particularly in their own order And first we must observe that they never alleage one word of any Assembly since the Reformation untill that at Edinburgh 1575. albeit there were thirtie generall Assemblies in Scotland before that time more uncorrupt holy and venerable than any of those which are alleaged of them for why they were not able to shew by any probabilitie that before that time the Church of Scotland did think any evill of this power and preheminencie but did continually and constantly approve the same both by her Constitutions and practice Next we must consider the causes and occasions moving the Ministers at that time to alter their judgements in this point and if we remark the estate of the Church and Kingdome of Scotland at that time as it is known to all these who have taken paines to understand the true history of the Church and Kingdome of Scotland in those dayes we shall finde evidently the occasions of this alteration of Iudgement First there were at that time some men of learning but of fiery and violent humours come into Scotland from Geneva who because of their travels abroad and learning were had in great esteeme and they being themselves greatly in love with Geneva discipline did labour by all manner of perswasions to move others to like both of the Clergie and Laitie especially Noblemen to a liking therof also at lest by intreaties perswasions and some shew of reason made secretly amongst themselves a reasonable number both of Nobility and Ministry who carried a great sway in generall Assemblies and were able to make a partie if the former Government were called in Question Secondly they thought the time fit to further their designe in regard of the Kings Majesties minoritie being then about ten yeers of age at most and therefore not capable of the knowledge of that which was most fit for the Government either of the Civill or Ecclesiastick estate governed himself by divers men of divers humours Thirdly there was a great furtherance to this Alteration in regard of the great troubles divisions and factions at that time amongst the Nobilitie and Courtiers every one striving to thrust out his Neighbour from that imployment he had about the King and Court as witnes the violent death of three Regents and the fourth like enough had gone the same way if his Govermneâ—t had indured longer and many of the Nobility cut off by particular quarrells some justly some unjustly under colour of legall proceeding as witnes likewise an Act of the Assemblie at Edinburgh 1578. whereby a solemn Fast was injoyned for divers reasons Especially because of the â—ivill and intestine ungodly Sâ—ditions and Divisions within the Bowells of the Kingdome Some Noblemen therefore and Courtiers in those factious times as fishing in troubled waters to further their own ends did labour to make some pretext of Religion and therefore did strive to haâ—e the Church upon their side abusing the simplicitie of some of the Ministrie zealous of the new Discipline and the pride of others impatient of subjection to their Bishops or Superintendents stirring them up to cast off their yoak knowing that they by their Sermons and private practices might doe much to make the people incline to which faction they pleased best And by that meanes to force the Kings Majestie for fear of a generall insurrection to grant them whatsoever they desired which policie our Covenanting Noblemen have carefully practised now with great but a dangerous effect there was never yet in those times so bold a Traitor but he found Ministers of that sect to Countenance him and approve his doings both privately and publikly as witnes their applauding the Earle of Bothwell in his treasonable attempts for it is certainly known that of those moneyes which was collected by the Ministers for the relief of Geneva a part was imployed to wage souldiers for him I know and could name if I pleased both the deliverers and Receivers thereof It is known also that Ministers of that Sect had a chief hand in all those attempts which commonly are called Roads as at the road of Stritilling the road of Leith and the Abbey road and at the 17. day of December the Earle of Gowry found one of the prime Ministers of that Sect to justifie his cause and refuse to give thanks to God for the Kings Deliverie from that treasonable Attempt Finally it is well known how King Iames of happy memory was vehemently troubled and vexed most unjustly by that Sect during the time of that Anarchie of the Church as he himself left in record in his Basilicon Doron Fourthly to those occasions another was joyned to further the ruine of Episcopacie towit the Sacrilegious greed of some of the Nobilitie and Courtiers gaping after the Church-rents which they perceived they could never obtaine so long as the Authority of Bishops did subsist and therefore did use the uttermost of their endeavour to bear down that estate pushing forward the Ministers to cry out against the Bishops and to blue abroad their personall faults both in their Assemblies Pulpits and private conference to make the very office it self 〈◊〉 to the people It is therefore more than manifest that those troublesome and factioâ—s times cannot be accounted a good prâ—sident for the Government of the Church in after ages for shall a few turbulent Assemblies backed and 〈◊〉 forward by factious humours and sacrilegious greed of Noblemen and Courtiers in the miâ—orage of the Supreme Magistrate constituting a new Discipline by the example of one small Citie of Geneva confirmed onely by the practice of fourteen or fifteen yeers at most be able to counterpoize Gods Word the continuall practice of the Church of God both under the old and new Testament and the example of the blessed Apostles and their Successors the venerable Pastors of the Primitive Church continued
the reformed Church of Scotland for many yeares after the reformation And though repressed for a time yet re-established again by divers more lawfull Assemblies than this ratified by divers Act of Parliament and continued now for many yeeres by-gon there behoved to be many and weighty reasons why such a Doctrine should be conversed with a serious deliberation to ponder and consider them yet neverthelesse in this Assembly in one short Session the whole matter was proponed discussed voiced concluded and a large Act past thereupon CHAP. II. Concerning the Act against Episcopacie ALbeit it were an easie matter to refute all the controverted Acts of this Assemblie yet leaving the rest at this time we intend onely to examine that Act Sess. 26. Decemb. 8. Against Episcopacie And that for two reasons especially First because the grounds whereupon this Act is concluded are the self-same whereupon all the rest of the controverted Acts are grounded and therefore these grounds being declared evidently to be infirme and weak it will also appear that together with this Act of Episcopacie All the rest of their Acts depending thereupon shall be found to be ruinous as I trust their fall shall be suddain Secondly because the principall aime of the most and chiefest of these who were members of that Conventicle was to suppresse Bishops because they esteemed them chiefly to have crossed their Sacrilegious and ambitious 〈◊〉 I or â—efore Bishops were re-established the Noblemen and Baroâ—s both possessed the substance of the Church renâ—s and also ruled the whole Eâ—tate at their pleasure in Councell and Parliament by their own voyces and voyces of the Gentry and Borroughs whom those factious 〈◊〉 did depend for the most part upon one Noble man or other then finding that by the re-establishing of Bishops their rents were taken out of their hands and that they were like to loose their Abbeyes and Prioâ—ies also and finally that their particular ends not alwayes tending to the weell of the Church or Kingdome or Honour of the Prince were crossed by the estate of Bishops no marvell then though they be moved by all meanes possible to suppresse them and for that effect have laboured to make use of the simplicitie of some of the Ministrie and proud humours of others impatient of Subjection to lawfull Authoritie of whom some having aimed in vaine at Bishopricks as is well known of divers of the Ring-leaders of that Faction thought it best for their credit to declare a great contempt of that estate which they had with much labour sought after without the desired effect according to the fable of the Fox others by their former misdemeanors both against the Church and Regall Authority being past hope of further advancement did easily condescend to shake off that yoak which their turbulent humours could never suffer them patiently to bear those were made to blow the trumpet of Rebellion both in their Pulpits and private conferences drawing the people after them and the simplest sort of Ministers also who did not judiciously remark their secret ends cloaked under the colour of Religion and libertie of the Church by which meanes this condemning of Episcopacie was brought in head with all the consequences thereof This is the point we mean to examine for the present and that you may see the weaknes of their reasons the better we shall set down verbatim the Act it self as it was conceived by them Act of the Assemblie at Glasgow Sess. 16. Decemb. 8. 1638. Declaring Episcopacie to have been adjured by the Confession of Faith 1580. And to be removed out of this Kirk THe Assemblie taking to their most grave and serious Consideration first the unspeakable goodnesse and great mercie of God manifested to this Nation in that so necessarie so difficult and so excellent and divine work of Reformation which was at last brought to such perfection that this Kirk was reformed not onely in Doctrine and Worship but also after many conferences and publik reasonings in divers Nationall Assemblies joyned with solemn humiliations and prayers to God the Discipline and Government of the Kirk as the hedge and guard of the doctrine and worship was prescribed according to the rule of Gods word in the book of Policie and Discipline agreed upon in the Assemblie 1578. and insert in the Register 1581. established by the Acts of the Assemblies by the confession of Faith sworn and subscribed at the direction of the Assembly and by continuall practice of this Kirk Secondly that by men seeking their own things and not the things of Iesus Christ divers Novations have been introduced to the great disturbance of this Kirk so firmely once compacted and to the endangering of Religion and many grosse evils obtruded to the utter 〈◊〉 of the work of Reformationâ— and change of the whole form of worship and fâ—ce of this Kirk commanded to receive with reverence a new Book of Common prayer as the onely form to be used in Gods publik worship and 〈◊〉 Contraveeners to be condignely censured and punished and after many supplications and complaints knowing no other way for the preservation of Religion were moved by God and drawn by necessity to 〈◊〉 the Nationall Covenant of this Kirk and kingdome which the Lord since hath blessed from Heaven and to subscribe the confession of faith with an Application thereof abjuring the great evils wherewith they were now pressed and suspending the practice of all Novations formerly introduced till they should be tryed in a free generall Assembly lastly that some of his Majesties Subjects of sundry ranks have by his Majesties command subscribed and renewed the confession of Faith without the former explication And that both the one and the other Subscribers have subscribed the said Confession in this year as it was professed and according to the meaning that it had in this Kingdome when it was first subscribed â—581 and afterward The Assemblie therfore 〈◊〉 by the Subscription of his Majesties high Commissioner 〈◊〉 of the Lords of secret Councell Sept. 22. 1638. and by the Acts of Councell of the date foresaid bearing that they should subscribe the said Confession and ordaining all his Majesties Subjects to subscribe the same according to the foresaid date and tenor and as it was then professed within this Kingdome As likewise by the protestation of some of the Senators of the Colledge of Iustice when they were required to subscribe and by the many doubtings of his Majesties good subjects especially because the Subscribers of the Confession in February 1638. are bound to suspend the approbations of the corruptions of the Government of the Kirk 〈◊〉 they be tryed in a free generall Assemblie finding it proper for them and most necessarie and incumbent to them to give out the true meaning therof as it was at first profest that all his Majesties Subjects in a matter so important as is the publik Confession of Faith so solemnly sworn and subscribed may be of one mind and one heart and have 〈◊〉 satisfaction