for consecration then the Oath the new Bishop was to take before his Majesty viz. That he acknowledged the Kings Majestie Supreame Governour of his Realme as well in things Temporall as in the conservation and purgation of Religion which differs in wordes from the English Oath of Supremacie but is in sense the same And that he held the said Bishoprick and the possessions thereof under God onely of his Majesties Crown c. Lastly there was a forme concluded on for his restitution to his Temporalities Now this agreement was in precise tearmes confirmed by his Majestie and Councell in that selfe same yeere 81. when that Covenant was commanded by them to be sworne by the Subject So that it cannot be conceived that his Majesty and Councell should in the same yeere give order to sweare downe Episcopacie wherein they apparantly took such speciall care to confirme it And no honest man will deny that the subject was bound to sweare that Covenant in that sense and none other which was agreeable to their intentions who commanded it to be sworne It is objected that under those words Wee abjure c. The Popes wicked Hierarchie Episcopacie is sworn downe R. If by those wordes they will over-throw Episcopacie I see not but withall they must be forced to confesse that they have at once abjured both their Presbyters and their Deacons For the Councell of Trent makes the Hierarchie of the Church to consist of those three Orders Bishops Presbyters and Deacons Now if under the word Hierarchie one of these be sworne down how can the other two escape for it consists alike of three and therefore all three must needes runne the same fortune If they reply that indeed they still retaine Presbyters and Deacons but yet so onely as they are ordained in the reformed Churches R. The like I reply for Bishops that they were then ordained in a forme allowed by reformed Churches as this in substance was by the Church of England and in precise tearmes by the Commissioners of the Church of Scotland For it is not probable that in ten yeeres space there should bee no Bishoprick voyde and so none ordained according to the forme in the Councell Bookes Nay it is apparently plaine that some were so ordained and took that fore-named Oath viz. John Archbishop of Saint Andrewes in the yeere 72. and James Bishop of Dunkell in the yeere 73. as it is registred in the books of Councell where perhaps others are recorded too If they say That the Scottish Bishops must needes be part of the Popes Hierarchy because they succeeded those and received imposition of hands from those who lived in obedience to the Pope R. I againe reply That their Presbyters are in the very same case for I presume they will not say but they must needes derive their orders either from Bishops of that obedience or from Presbyters who were ordained by such Bishops Because that seeing in the beginning of the Reformation there were no other Clergie men in these parts they must take their orders either from them or none for I perswade my self they will not affirme That non Presbyter can ordinare Presbyterum Nay as they are learned men they should not say but that a Priest ordained by the new Roman Church if he leave his superstition and turne Protestant needes no more ordination to become a Presbyter with us But what then must be the meaning of those words That they abjure the Popes wicked Hierarchy R. As I conceive the sense of them is plaine from a precedent clause in that Covenant viz. that they abjure the Popes five bastard Sacraments and yet I hope they intended not to sweare out either Matrimony or holy orders in generall which yet are two as all know reckoned by that Church amongst her five but onely they abjured those corruptions and superstitious formes which the Romish Church had annexed to these divine Institutions as in calling them Proper Sacraments So when they abjured his wicked Hierarchy they did not sweare out Bishops no more then they did Presbyters or Deacons But they abjured the corruptions and superstitious Con-comitants which the Pope had annexed to those holy Callings V.g. amongst many other abuses that Bishops were constrained to sweare such an obedience and dependence on the Pope as was derogatorie to the supreame power of their owne native Prince So that then it was almost an impossible thing to be at once a stout Prelat and a loyall subject And suppose Bishops or Presbyters in this treasonable constitution they were then no doubt in that point the Popes wicked Hierarchy as now they may be the Consistories All this I the rather urge because I conceive that the acts of King and Councell are the best interpretors of that Covenant because it was set on foot by authority of King and Councell for Quisque optimus interpres sui THE ANSWER Whether in commanding to sweare the Covenant 1580. and 81. his Majesty that then was and his Councell did intend the abjuration of Episcopacie IN all commanded oaths and abjurations a twofold deception is to be avoided One is in him who taketh the Oath that he have no fraudulent intention contrary to the sound professed intention of him who tendereth the Oath otherwise both Gods Name is taken in vaine and our Superiour is deluded The other is In him that tendereth the Oath that hee have not an hid and secret intention contrair to that which is open and professed In this case the regard must be had not to that which is secret and unknowne but to that which is professed and which is knowne to be the true meaning of the words of the Oath That abjuration of Episcopacie was professedly intended in the Covenant 1580. and 1581. by his Majestie and his Councell may be apparant First from the words of the Confession commanded to be sworne where profession is made that we shall continue in the obedience of the doctrine and discipline of this Church which discipline at that time was not the governement of the Church by Bishops but by Presbyteries the whole heads of the policie of the Church except such as concerned Patronages Church rents and the like after much agitation from Assembly to Assembly being agreed upon not onely by the Generall Assembly but by his Majesties Councell Episcopacie being abandoned and Presbyteriall governement established such as before were called Bishops being tyed to particular flocks ordained to be called by their own names and by the name of brethren and forbidden to usurp the power of Presbyteries till at last in the Generall Assembly holden at Dundie July 1580. the office of a Bishop was abolished by a particular act as unlawfull in it self and Bishops ordained to dimit the samine under the pain of Excommunication Like as in the Assembly at Glasgow April 1581. the said act was further explained and confirmed the Kings Commissioner presented to the Assembly the Confession of faith subscribed by his Majesty and
his houshold together with a delineation of the bounds of the Presbyterie to bee erected with a Letter to that end for the dissolving of Prelacie the booke of Policie was insert in the Register of the Church and the Confession of faith immediatly thereafter ordained to be subscribed according to his Majesties Proclamation As before the forming of the book of discipline and the abolishing of Episcopacie so now the subscription of the Confession of faith and erection of Presbyteries went on together In July 1580. Episcopacie was abolished In January following the Confession of faith was subscribed by the King and his houshold In March it was commanded to be subscribed by the subjects And in Aprill direction was given by the Assembly for subscription and erection of Presbyteries 2. The same is manifest from other words of the Confession wherein the Popes wicked Hierarchie is abjured It is confessed according to the Councell of Trent that the Popish Hierarchy consisteth of these three orders Bishops Presbyters and Deacons for neither are the Pope Primates Metropolitans or Archbishops members of the Hierarchy but as they are Bishops neither are the inferiour orders of Subdeacons Acoluths Exorcists c. of the Hierarchy because they have no rule over the people but onely serve the Priests and Deacons which although they be the lowest order in the Hierarchy yet are they of the Hierarchy by reason of their charge over the people Hence is it that in the Confession of faith the Popes manifold orders are set apart and distinguished from the Popes Hierarchy This being the Popish Hierarchy abjured by us it must be interpreted to bee as farre abjured as by the doctrine and constitution of our Kirk it is interpreted to be Popish that is as it is made up and doeth consist of these three orders and therefore the unlawfulnesse of any one of the orders maketh the Hierarchy componed of the three to be unlawfull It is a paralogisme to argue from our abjuration of the Popish Hierarchy that wee have at once abjured every member thereof It is enough that any one member is abjured Secondly all the three orders are interpreted to be Popish in so farre as Bishops the head of the Hierarchy not onely had their dependance on the Pope which was an high derogation to the Prince but also because their office was in it selfe a corruption it having no warrant in the word of God which was a dishonour done to the Son of God And the other two of presbyters and Deacons are thought lawfull and warrantable in themselves interpreted to be Popish as having Popish corruptions adhering to them their Presbyters being sacrificing Priests c. and receiving ordination before and without a calling to a particular charge and their Deacons admitted to minister Baptisme and having nothing of the office of a Deacon as it is institute by the Apostle and used in the reformed Churches And therefore the office of Bishops was purged out of this Church as Popish in it self and the other two which had degenerated were purged of their Popish corruptions and abuses and the office retained according to the first institution and primitive integrity It is to be observed here that althogh this Hierarchy did enter into the Church before the Pope came to his greatnes yet it is called the Popes Hierarchy because it was maintained and obtruded upon the Church after the mystery began to work that is after Popery began even as dedicating of Churches Altars Dayes Vowes to creatures c. are here called the Popes although all of these entred not at one time into the Church This one ground of trueth furnisheth answer to all objections made in the contrair The rule and paterne of office bearers in the Church is to bee learned from Scripture and not from the example of other reformed Churches which wee reverence according as they are conforme to that straight rule and first patterne We doe not abjure Scottish Bishops because they succeed to Popish Bishops who lived in obedience to the Pope and because they received ordination from them but because although they presume to be the chief office bearers in the house of God they have no warrant nor authority from God And therefore it cannot bee inferred that Presbyters and Deacons ought to be abjured because they received ordination either from popish Bishops or from Presbyterâ— ordained by such Bishops for whatsoever be the consecration of the one or ordination of the other we still account Episcopacie to be one of the reliques of poperie and for that cause to be rejected and the office of Presbyters and Deacons to be a divine Institution and therefore to be purged and being purged to be retained Where it is objected That by like reason we might be interpreted to abjure Matrimonie and Orders because we abjure the Popes five bastard sacraments This objection were strong if wee could give no better warrant from Scripture for Matrimonie and Ordination of Ministers then for Episcopacie but since these are warranted and not this the accidentall corruptions of these and the substance of this ought to be abjured 3. The intention of authority is manifest by the commanding to subscribe the Confession of faith in the yeare 1590. when we had no Bishops and after Bishopricks were annexed to the Crown It is not to be supposed that authority had one intention at this time and a contrary intention in the yeere 1580. The Kings Majesty that then was did write and subscribe with his own hand in the margine of a printed Sermon which was preached by D. Bancroft at Pauls crosse these words My speaking writing and actions were ever one and without dissembling or bearing up any thing whatsoever ne quid asperius IAMES REX As the Assembly had the same intention in subscribing the Confession 1581. at the commandment of authority which they had in the yeere 1590. when they petitioned the Councell for interposing their authority to the subscription so must we think that the King and Councell had the same intention at the one time and the other and that the Councell and Assembly had the same intention at both times conforme to this intention of the Councell and Assembly when at any time afterward there was any meaning or motion to bring in Episcopacie again in this Church the confession of faith was alledged to the contrary as may be seen by diverse instances 4. His Majesties intention is further knowne if there be yet any doubt by the true commentary thereof in his actions for after the Assemblies had cast forth Episcopacie and established presbyteriall governement while they were now about the dividing of the countrey in circuits for presbyteries the Kings Majesty sent to the Assembly conveened at Glasgow Aprill 1581. a delineation or plot for this end and for the dissolving of Prelacies and with all the frame of a Letter to bee directed to Noblemen and others for promoving the work for which the Assembly returned humble thanks
to his Majesty All this was done immediatly after the confession of faith was subscribed by his Majesty and his houshold in January and was commanded to bee subscribed by the Subjects in March so that there can be no question about the intention and meaning of King Councell and Assembly in the point of the discipline of the Church mentioned in the confession of faith Yet One thing is mainly objected to prove that his Majestie and his councell did not intend the abjuration of Episcopacie In the yeere 1571. there was a solemne agreement between the Commissioners of his Majesties Councell and the Commissioners of the Generall Assembly that during the Kings minoritie or without a contrary order from Parliament there should be Archbishops and Bishops Deans Chapters Abbots and Priors their office and forme of election the oath taken by them at their admission the restitution to their Temporalities were all particularly agreed upon This agreement in the yeare 1571 was in precise tearmes confirmed by his Majesty and Councell in the yeere 1581. when the Covenant was commanded to bee sworne by the Subject and therefore it cannot be conceived that his Majesty and Councell did in the same yeere give order to abjure Episcopacie wherein they took such speciall care to confirme it Ans For answering this objection we are to consider first that in the yeere 1571 January 12. there was indeed a convention of Superintendents Ministers and other Commissioners for consulting about the governement of the church but that convention was not a Generall Assembly of the Church for the Register calls it onely a Convention and not an Assembly the ordinary Assembly was holden at Saint Andrewes in the same yeere 1571 March 6. according to the appointment of the Generall Assembly the yeere before This convention was procured by the Court for worldly ends especially that titles of Bishops Abbots and Priors which were not proper in the persons of Noblemen might be given to Kirk-men or Ministers with some small portion of the benefice that the noble men themselves might reape the benefite of the Rent which was the cause of the Scottish name of Tulchan Bishops at that time a name not improper for them a Tulchan in our language being the skin of a calfe stuffed with straw and set up beside the Kow to make her give milk to the owner 2. Although that convention at Leith was not a Generâ—ll Assembly yet did it not appoint those Bishops by it selfe but gave power to seven of the number or any foure of them to conferre with the Regent some of the Lords of secret Councell who did agree upon the office of Archbishops and Bishops Deanes and Chapters within the bounds of Dioceses c. which was of lesse authority in a matter of so high importance then if it had been their own doing 3. The articles and conclusions agreed upon by the Commissioners of his Majesties Councell and that convention were not approven in the next ordinary Generall Assembly holden at Saint Andrewes March 6. 1571. the Generall Assembly at Perth 1572. was not only offended with the names of Archbishops Deanes Archdeacons Chancellours c. as sounding to Popery but also declared that they did not approve that order of Church governement but did tolerat the same allanerly till a more perfect should be obtained for which they laboured afterward at all occasions So that the conclusions of that meeting at Leith 1571. never had the authority of this Church but were disclaimed by it During the time of this toleration many complaints were made in the Assemblies against Bishops and in the yeere 1573. and afterward some were appointed by the Assemblies to conferre with the Regent and Lords of secret Councell upon the jurisdiction and policie to bee continued and established in the Church till at last after many disputations and much reasoning the matter was brought to a finall conclusion the office of Bishops was abolished and Presbyteriall governement established Next concerning the act of Councell in the yeere 1580. confirming the agreement at Leith we answere 1. That the Councell lawfully could not confirme that agreement introduce Episcopacie or change the governement of the Kirk contrary to the acts of so many Generall Assemblies keeped from the yeere 1571 to 1580. wherein the policie and governement of the Church was so expressely set downe 2. The act of Councell was never published nor made known to the subject nor heard of in this cause till this time wherein no other thing can be alledged for salving of Episcopacie from abjuration 3. This act of Councell was posterior to the command for subscribing the confession of faith for the act was made in October 1581. and the commandement came forth in March many moneths before 4. No such intention was professed when the charge was given for subscription neither could the confession of faith in any sense beare the conclusions of that agreement these offices and the forme of their election being damned as Popish in the Assembly before no man will marvell much at such an act of Councell who knoweth what other acts passed that yeere in Councell and who is not a stranger in the history of that time the perusall and knowledge whereof will both shew how suddenly Covenants have been broken and will easily give satisfaction against all mistakings of this kind to so many as desire to know the trueth AGainst this our abjuration of Episcopacie first and last our adversaries arise with great hate strength and fight with tooth and naile for upon the one hand Episcopacie must be asserted by no other then by divine right and Hierarchie maintained not only as tollerable and lawfull but as necessary and divine Although before this time neither our own Doctors and Prelats nor the English have been so peremptory bold about this point for while some of them have maintained Episcopacie by divine authority yet others have been more ingenuous confessing it only to be grounded upon ancient custome and therefore to be an humane invention or Ecclesiastick tradition And a third sort different from both will have it to be Apostolick Again some of them make the forme of Kirk government to be universall and perpetuall and others hold it to be locall and conformable to the civill policy Thus have they been divided one of them from another But in this exigence and point of time one must undertake for all to cry up Episcopacie as coming from Heaven not from the earth even as it hath the altitude of fixed superiority the latitude of spirituall jurisdiction And why because we have abjured it and our Assemblies have found it unlawfull in this Kirk this was their modesty of expression desiring more to reforme at home then to be busie abroad for which they find no more courtesie nor lesse acerbity of spirit then if they had given out a generall sentence concerning the government of the Kirk It is not for us nor for this naked relation