Bishops Reformed as Dr. Gordon of Galloway and Adam Bishop of Orkney he bringeth no proof for the former but for the latter he was Excommunicated for Marrying the Queen to the Earl of Bothwel which had been Incongruous if he had not been of the Protestant Communion Answ 1. That two who had been Bishops joyned in the Reformation is but a small evidence that the Reformation was not managed by Presbyters but by Bishops 2. That the one of these complyed with the Reformation he barely asserteth and his proof for the other is insufficient Such things have been done Protestants have Excommunicated Papists as Papists daily Excommunicate Protestants How congruous this is I need not now debate 3. If these Bishops had any hand in the Reformation it is nothing to his purpose unless he can prove that they exercised Episcopal Jurisdiction in the Protestant Church which no History can Countenance if they Acted as Church-men at all they Acted as Presbyters for it is certain that in the beginning of our Reformation none exercised any Jurisdiction among the Reformed above that of Presbyter He saith That where there had been Popish Bishops there Protestant â—ishops were appointed in their places under the Name of Superintendents Here is a double mistake One that the Super intendent were Bishops Another that they were put into the Places and Revenues of the Popish Bishops The falshood of both which I have shewed in my Former Vindication upon Query 1. page 10. That the Revenues of the Popish Bishops were setled on the Superintendents is an Assertion that proveth either that this Author is a Stranger to our History or that he regardeth not the truth or falshood of what he affirmeth What followeth page 29. Of the late bringing in of Presbytery into the Reformed Church of Scotland I have fully disproved in the place last cited page 3. After the most spiteful Venom spued out that could lodge in a humane Breast against the Presbyteriaâ—… which it is fit to despise rather than Answer he concludeth his Letter with an Assertion no less false than the rest of his Allegations are viz. That his party suffer neither for Breach of Divine nor Humane Laws but only for Episcopacy If any honesty remain with him it would oblige him to give some instance or proof that the Presbyterian Church of Scotland for he ascribeth their sufferings to their opposition to the Fanaticks of the Kirk did ever trouble any of them either for their Opinion about Church Government or meerly for their compliance with Episcopacy when it had the Law on its side on the contrary we can shew to the conviction of all unbyassed Men that such as have suffered by the State did suffer for their Breach of the Law of the Nation in not owning the King and Queen as the Law required And that such as were Censured by the Church except two or three whose Sentences were taken off by Superior Judicatories of the Church suffered for the Breach of Divine Laws viz. For gross Immortalities One Instance I shall give Ex re praesenti out of the Presbytery of Stranrawer about which his whole Letter is Conversant Mr. Ramsay late Minister at Stranrawer was by the Synod of Wigtoun put from his place on these Grounds Frequent Drunkenness on the Sabbath day proved by the Oaths of Baily Vause and Andrew Mackennel Beating his Wife on the Sabbath before he went to preach sworn by Andrew Mackennel and Robert Gordon the said Robert Gordon's Wife deponed that she saw at that time Mrs. Ramsay Bleeding Frequent Swearing proved by the Oaths of Provost Row Baily Vause and Robert Gordon I should not thus have exposed Men who once bare the Character of Ministers but the Impudent Accusations of this Scribler and the obligation that lyeth on Persons and Churches to necessary self defence do constrain me ANIMADVERSIONS On a PAMPHLET called A Memorial for His Highness the Prince of Orange in Relation to the Affairs of Scotland HAving proceeded thus far in contributing my poor Mite for Vindicating the Presbyterian Church of Scotland and meeting with this Print of the same strain with these others above-answered that is full of bitter and unreasonable invectives against Presbyterial Government I could not shun making some Observations on it whereby Truth and Innocence may be vindicated against Lies and Railing The design of this Print is manifest to be to dispose His Majesty to preserve Episcopacy in Scotland and to hinder the Setling of Presbytery And it is a real and effectual refutation that our Wise and Gracious King hath not found such weight of reason in it as to be moved by it but hath acted quite contrary to the malicious Insinuations of this Author This Paper is nothing short of the rest for most gross Falsehoods in matters of Fact and most injurious Mis-representations of our Way and Principles It is said to be done by two Persons of Quality One Wit might by a little labour have brought forth a more perfect Birth What is the Quality of the Author or Authors for worldly Dignity I enquire not but his or their Moral Qualities may by the Book be seen to be none of the best We have First a parcel of False and Malicious History as ever was written in so few Lines Next some Counsels to his Highness 3. He refuteth a Paper that he falsly calleth An Address from the Presbyterians to the Prince of Orange And then concludeth as he began with Lies and Railing § 2. The first passage in his Historical Account is a foul mistake to call it no worse viz. That the rise of our Animosities and why they are Warmer here than in England is England was Reformed by the Royal Authority and therefore their Church was suted to the Monarchy But Scotland was Reformed by Force and Violence and some of the Reformers coming from Geneva and Switzerland inspired many of their Converts with an Aversion to Monarchy A Man who taketh Liberty to slander at this rate of Impudence deserveth rather Chastisement than an Answer For 1. With what Brow can he say that our Reformers were averse from Monarchy or that the Antimonarchical Principle did ever get much footing in Scotland as we know it did in England for all their being Reformed by Royal Authority Did ever Scotland set up a Commonwealth as England once did It is known what they Adventured and Suffered for the Monarchy when England abjured it And what yielding there was in Scotland to the Antimonarchical way was by Force from England And it is known to all who lived in those days that the Presbyterians did cleave more firmly to their banished King and prayed for him with more Constancy and Resolution than that party did who after appeared for Episcopacy 2. That Scotland was Reformed by Force and Violence is false it was by the States of the Nation and at last confirmed by King and Parliament The chief difference as to the Original of the two Reformations lay in this
were sent Now the Government was not by the Act of Parliament setled in the persons of Ministers only but of Ruling Elders also Many of whom are Noblemen and Gentlemen of good Abilities Neither can it be said that they were set up as Bishops or acted with their Lordly domination as will appear from answering his following Objections He next saith Presbyters were subject to them who were no more but Presbyters which hath no President in the Catholick Church Ans It is true it is not presidented in the Catholick Church that one or more Presbyters should be subject to one who is no more but a Presbyter which is not our Constitution nor practice But it hath often been that Presbyters in their single Capacity were subject to them who were no more but Presbyters acting jointly in a Church Judicatory and this is all that is now done The Presbyterian Church doth not subject the Episcopal Church to them Nor doth one Presbyter among us judge one Presbyter among them But the Presbyterian Church combined judgeth every single Presbyter in this National Church And when he shall demonstrate the Absurdity of that we shall yield to his Argument Again he argueth thus They who could not be denyed to be lawful Ministers were excluded from any share in the Discipline and Government of the Church which is contrary to Presbyterian Principles Ans The Presbyterians never held a Principle so universal as what he hinteth about the priviledge of Lawful Ministers to govern the Church They never held that a Popish Minister should be a Ruler in the Protestant Church And they deny not such to be lawful Ministers They maintain that though it belong to all Ministers generally to have a share in the Government of the Church yet there might be some Cases in which pro praesenti Ecclesiae Statu they may be restrained from that priviledge Tho' they are not to be restrained perpetually nor in the setled State of the Church The Presbyterian Church had long been born down and almost exhausted they are now through the Mercy of God restored they find a great many Ministers in Charges who may be useful in preaching the Gospel but disposed to overturn the Government of the Church if it should be put in their Hands is it not rational that they should suffer these to preach for the Church needeth their help And yet not suffer them to rule the Church lest they overturn her Settlement They refuse none of them who will secure the Government and are otherwise qualified for the Ministry Again tho' we own them as lawful Ministers yet we cannot own them as Ministers of the Presbyterian Church They have a right to govern the Episcopal Church to which they had betaken themselves and left the Presbyterian Church tho' their Bishops even in it did not allow them that priviledge yet that they have a right to rule the Presbyterian Church we deny They and we agree in Doctrine and therefore we may teach the Church together But we disagree in Government and therefore we cannot rule together He saith That Presbyterians hold that it is unlawful for a Minister to part with his Right of Governing Ans But the Church may deny him the exercise of that priviledge if she find him inhabile for the exercise of it He pleadeth also That we blamed Bishops that they took this Power generally to themselves Ans We did so because they excluded the rest not on account of any special inhability but as having no right to such a power which we maintain to be in all Presbyters alike If any say that Ministerial power is quid indivisum and the exercise of teaching cannot be allowed where that of Ruling power is restrained I answer this is true with respect to the ordinary and setled State of the Church but such an extraordinary case of necessity as this may warrant such a restraint for a time But if this Argument hath any force it proveth that neither Preaching nor Ruling should be allowed and it commendeth the moderation of the Presbyterian Church which will allow them to serve the Lord as they can when they cannot do it as they should § 4. He proposeth tho' not candidly but doth not answer our Reasons for this conduct One is We could not otherwise make our Government sure And is it not reasonable that that Government which Christ hath setled in his Church as we think and which the Authority of the Nation hath setled should not be rendred unsafe by putting it in the hands of the avowed Enemies thereof when we could exclude them on such rational grounds as have have been mentioned Another Argument he maintaineth as ours The Episcopal Men deserved to be thus treated for their Apostasie Ans I know not who ever brought this Argument We go not to the rigour of all the Censure that that wrong step deserved we would rather consider what the present state of the Church and the promoting of Truth and Holiness and Unity doth require than what Men deserve We are for moderation maugre all the reproaches that he and such as he cast upon us Tho' at the same time we think that the Rigour of Church Discipline might put more force in this Argument than he is aware of He inferreth from what he had discoursed That Presbyterians juggle with God and Man because they hold their Government to be so of Divine Right that they can make no composition with Men about it but when it maketh for the Interest they can make Essential Alterations Ans We hold Parity to be of Divine Right and cannot yield to Imparity But this Parity is not taken away as he alledgeth by excluding them who have rendred themselves inhabile more than it is taken away by suspending a Minister for any Immorality or Negligence in his Work Neither is there here any essential alteration in the Government more than there is in that Case Here is no Jugling but fair and plain dealing What he talketh of nine hundred Ministers excluded is a mistake We exclude none of them but such as persist in their Principles and Inclinations to overturn the Government Neither is there Inconsistency as he would make us believe between making Ruling Power Essential to a Minister and sus-spending the exercise of it for a time We hold that Rationality is essential to a Man tho' some Scriblers be now and then Delirous § 5. From this digression he returneth to his History page 4. And giveth an account of the meeting of the Ministers and Elders antecedent to the General Assembly indicted by the King and Parliament to be held October 16. 1690. In which Narrative he doth in several things mis-inform his Readers and represent things to the disadvantage of truth and of the Presbyterians It is a misrepresentation That the Act of Parliament Committed the Care and Management of the Government to these few surviving Presbyterian Ministers who had not complyed with Episcopacy For it was to them
must make it appear that during the late Reigns never any Presbyterian was called Fanatick Rebel Seditious even while they lived peaceably that never any Minister was charged with preaching Rebellion and Sedition who yet either spoke nothing of the Differences of the Times or taught Loyalty and Obedience in all things Lawful even to such Rulers as were of different principles from us He must also demonstrate that no Presbyterians were Fined to the Ruin of their Families for peaceable Hearing the Word in a House or in the Fields Also he must shew that no Presbyterians were Imprisoned Banished or carried Captive and Sold as Slaves for not hearing Episcopal Ministers or for Hearing Presbyterians none of which he can prove But we can make the contrary of all three evident and should be at the pains to do it but that the whole Nation are Witnesses to the Truth of all these § 8. He cometh page 26. to a purpose by what course he draweth it into his method I know not wherein there is some place for Argument But I must the more easily dispatch it because I have debated that point in my former Vindication in answer to the ten Questions It is he pretendeth to take off the force of a Consideration that was in the Narrative of the Act of Parliament whereby the Government of the Church was lately setled in the Hands of Presbyterians viz. That the Reformation of this Church from Popery was managed by Presbyters To this he seemeth to answer two things 1. He denieth the Consequence Reply I know not that ever any did make this the Consequent Ergo The Government of this Church should be Presbyterian for he may know that Presbyterians fix the Government of the Church on a surer and immutable bottom viz. Divine Institution And do hold that whoever were the Reformers the Church ought to be governed by the Presbyters Acting in a parity Wherefore all his talk under this Head is wide from the purpose The true Design of mentioning Presbyters to have been our Reformers is to shew that the Government of this Church hath been Presbyterian even from the Infancy of Protestantism among us They being Presbyters who setled the Protestant Church and managed the Affairs of it from the beginning and ever till unfaithful and self-seeking Men after a tract of time got that way forcibly supprest and Church Domination set up for some years His enlargement on this his Answer is stuffed with Reproaches against the Reformation and against the Presbyterians I shall not rake into that Dunghil for it smelleth rankly of a Temper not much inclined to the Reformation and of an imbittered Mind His Citation out of Basilicon Doron I have clearly answered in the paper before-cited His alledging that the Presbyterians engage Parents when their Children are Baptized to bring them up conform to the Covenant is a gross falshood it is not enjoyned nor by one of many hundreds practised to mention the Covenant on such occasions He speaketh of Rules and Prayers to purge England of Prelacy and Superstition as used also at Baptism which I never was Witness to nor heard that it was done by any in our Nation But this Man pleaseth himself with whatever he can devise to expose the Presbyterians He cometh in the end of page 27. To another answer to that which he fancieth to be our Argument for Presbytery viz. To deny the Antecedent of it or that Scotland was Reformed by Presbyters Here the Gentleman giveth us a Specimen of his Argumentative Skill which will not make any Man admire the Learning of his party which they so much brag of while their Champions do manage an Argument so sillily He asketh Who Ordained these Presbyters Whether Bishops or not Ans It is an Impertinent Question For if they were Ordained the quality of the Ordainers maketh nothing to prove that they were no Presbyters nor that the Reformation was not carried on by Presbyters If the Design of his Question be to prove that they were not Ordained and so had no power to Reform the Church I refer him for Answer to the Learned Claude's Historical Defence of the Reformation Who proveth that every Christian hath power to Reform himself and that every Society of Christians hath power to Reform themselves from all principles and ways that are contrary to the Word of God And to set up Ordinances among themselves that Christ hath Instituted see part 2. c. 4. page 166. and part 4. cap. 1 3 4. The same is maintained by Calvin Instit lib. 4. c. 3. 4. Turrit part 3. loc 18. quest 25. But our present Debate needeth not that we should push this Opinion so far as these Learned Authors do He asketh If they were not Ordained by Bishops where are the Miracles that they have wrought to prove their Mission I shall not here alledge as some have done without being ever Answered by any of his party that there were not wanting among our Reformers extraordinary Appearances of God with them convincing the World of their being sent of him I shall first take notice of the conclusion of this Argument if it have any force which will be that our Reformation was unwarrantable as being carried on A non habentibus potestatem And it is pleasant to observe that this Author can brangle the Presbyterian Interest by no other Arguments than such as will with equal force shake our Reformation from Popery 2. That Miracles are necessary to shew a Mans Mission which is not communicated to him in the ordinary way in respect of the Modes and Circumstances none do maintain but Papists and such as in too many things Symbolize with them John Baptist and several of the Prophets wrought no Miracles and yet had an extraordinary Mission It is only to be expected that they should work Miracles who pretend to be extraordinarily sent to preach a new Doctrine or bring in a new Office into the Church which is not warranted in the Scripture Next he will prove That if they were Ordained by Bishops it cannot be called a pure Presbyterian Reformation His reason for this is strange to drop from the Pen of a pretended Protestant For saith he I suppose which none deny they were obliged to preach the Gospel as the Bishop who conferred Orders on them bound them thereunto Whither will bold Ignorance carry one Can none deny this his Assertion Do not all except Papists and a few Papizing Prelatists deny it If this were so must we not condemn Luther and all the Reformers who preached the Gospel otherwise than the Popish Bishops who conferred Orders on them injoyned The Inference that he subjoineth is none of ours We think our selves exempted from Episcopal Jurisdiction and obliged to abolish that Order not because the Gospel was at first preached by Presbyters but because that Order hath no Foundation in the Word § 9. A Goodly Argument he hath page 28. That Scotland was not Reformed by Presbyters viz. Some
such as neither understood what they pretend to give account of nor had the Honesty to make a true and fair Relation of what was obvious to every mans Observation For tho he calleth them discreet and intelligent Persont yet not only the horrid lies with which by their report he abuseth the World do Witness the contrary but we do more than guess who they were and know them to be very unintelligent in Church affairs what ever knowledge they may have in other things And that they are Persons highly enraged against Presbyterians because they imagine that some of them had a hand in their being deprived of lucrative places Even the keeping of the door of the House where the Assembly sate he mis-representeth It was not to keep out Conformists but to keep out others as well as them that there might be room for the Members of the Assembly And for all the care that could be used there was a very great Croud constantly in the House That ever any were thrust out of the House because they were Conformists is more than I know Neither did I ever hear such a Cry as he mentioneth tho I was daily there Tho I confess it was not very fit to suffer them to be present who it might be rationally thought came to mock or to pick up what they might improve to our disadvantage There were in the Assembly very often some Persons known to be Episcopal who because of their quality and discretion were not only allowed to be present but had all respect given them that could be expected And some of them of Eminent ability to judge of things observing the reasonings of the Members and actings of the Assembly said If the Presbyterians went on at that rate they would gain all Scotland to favour them And I am sure that this was said by such as are incomparably beyond his discreet Persons in every thing that is commendable It is an assertion like to these of his gang which he hath pag. 2. That the Presbyterians exalt the Anthoâ—ity of their Assemblies above that of King or Parliament This is a broad Lie What he saith to support it of Acts of Asseâ—blies against Acts of Parliament I have answered in my former Vindication â—… He next accuseth us that we desired an Assembly after the Parliament had setled our Government That is we are to blame that we would think of ordering the Affairs of the House of God seeing the Parliament had allowed us so to do Is the Church of England to blame because they desired a Convocation to which he maketh our Assembly parallel We desired to meet for other ends than setling the Presbyterian Government We know it was setled by Christ long before as his institution and that now it had the Civil Sanction by King and Parliament for its settlement § 2. Our Historian hath quickly forgot his work for instead of telling us what the Assembly did he giveth us account of what the Parliament Acted And p. 2 3. He severely Lasheth the Parliament for setling the Government of the Church in the hands of the Presbyterians alone and such as they should admit This conduct I have elsewhere vindicated as most rational And surely this was so necessary that either Episcopacy must be continued or this must be done Now the Convention had voted Episcopacy to be a Grievance to the Nation and in the Claim of Right made it a Fundamental Article in the Government that it should be abolished and the Presbyterians being the smaller number many of them being removed by Death through the course of about 30 years and the hardships they endured through Episcopal fury and few coming in their places being hindred by a severe Persecution it had been very incongruous and inconsistent with the standing of the Government which they designed to establish that the plurality of them who should Govern the Presbyterian Church should be Episcopal Yet it was allowed by by the State and determined by the Church that as many of the Episcopal men as were qualified to be Ministers and would submit to concur with and act nothing against Presbyterial Government should be received into a share of the Government And such as had Ministerial qualifications should enjoy their places and benefices tho they should not so far own Presbytery as hath been mentioned What is then the injury that he complaineth of done to the Episcopal Clergy None of them are deprived of their places yea none excluded from Ministerial Communion but of their own choice that they will not submit to terms so reasonable and necessary They would have thought us in the former Reigns very unreasonable if we had been suffered to enjoy our Churches and Stipends if we were not Drunkards or Swearers c. and yet complained of hard usage or if we should have demanded a share in Governing the Episcopal Church and yet would not submit to the Bishop He saith the Publick Faith for even that must abide his severe censure promised them protection upon their Submission to the Civil Government Ans Can he say That they are not protected in all their Civil Rights But it was never promised that whoever would submit to the Civil Government should be put in Capacity to overturn the Church To enjoy a place in the Ministry is no Civil Right The Stipend is a Civil thing but a mans Right to it depends upon his being in the Office and having the Charge of such a People But it was never dreamed that a man should be protected to continue a Minister tho he be Ignorant Scandalous Erroneous or supinely Negligent He according to the Modesty of his Party and their respect to Authority saith Their Petition viz. which was given in to the Parliament that they might have a share in the Church Government was disdainfully rejected and the Act continued as it was Ans Their Petition was indeed rejected on the grounds that I have mentioned but without any shew of disdain and with as much respect to them as was due § 3. He cometh now page 3. to reason the Case against the King and Parliament because of their setling the Government of the Church in the Hands of Presbyterians What is Argumentative in his Discourse I shall consider Neglecting the railing that he intermixeth with it such as A Presbyterian Tyranny is established That they the Presbyterians Lord it over their Brethren more than ever the Bishops did or pretended to do His Reasons so far as I can pick them out of his loose Discourse are first instead of fourteen Bishops now sixty are set up by which he intendeth as I suppose that the Government of the Church was now setled in so few Hands as sixty Ans The falshood of this is manifest The General Assembly consisted of an hundred and sixteen Ministers and forty seven Ruling Elders and they were but Delegates from the several Presbyteries in which there were ordinarily a greater number that sent them than they that
and the Elders and such Ministers and Elders as they had received or should receive Another mistake is That the Meeting that preceded the forementioned Assembly was called to lay down methods how a General Assembly should be called and constituted because one could not be had according to their minds after the old manner and standing Rules of General Assemblies Ans This Meeting was not called for that end nor did act any thing to that purpose nor needed they do so For the Act of Parliament had excluded all the Episcopal Ministers from sitting in the General Assembly unless they were taken in by the Presbyterians All that they did that could any way concern the Constitution of the Assembly was that Presbyteries should send three or four of their number to the Assembly where they had sent but two when there were more Ministers in each Presbytery which could no way alter the Constitution of the Assembly He giveth a false account of the Act of Parliament by which Presbyterian Government was setled when he saith That by it none had a share of the Government but such Ministers as had been removed by the restoration of Episcopacy For both Ruling Elders are expresly mentioned and such Ministers as the Presbyterians had received or should receive Hence followeth another mistake viz. That they were over-seen when they admitted others into the Government and were by that means over-voted None were admitted but such as the Act of Parliament reached nor was there any over-voting in the Case for both they who had been turned out by the Bishops and they who were after taken in did generally agree in the same Votes He would revive the old forgotten and Fatal Division that rent and ruined this Church about the Protestation and Remonstrance But through the Mercy of God it is not so much as mentioned among us That some of the Remonstrators who had been under that woful Schism in the Church deposed by the opposite party sate among us is true and we know no reason why it should not be so for their Sentences were taken off long before And what was moved and done in that meeting was that the revoking of these Sentences should be now confirmed by this Meeting as being of more extensive Authority than these which had recalled them That any of them who sate there were deposed for scandalous and gross Crimes Or for any thing but their Opinion in that controverted point and their practice according to it is more than we know and unless he can make it appear he ought to be reputed a Slanderer if he or any else shall prove it we shall acknowledge our Errour at least our Ignorance and shall rectifie what we have done amiss What he saith of Mr. Pitcairn's protesting against their sitting there is a gross mistake That Reverend Brother was dissatisfied with the way of wording the Determination of the Meeting in that Affair which some proposed and was a little hot about it but he was soon satisfied Neither did he enter any Protestation tho' he spoke of it Nor did he object against the recalling of their Sentences In all this our Author giveth his Readers a most false and unfair Idea of our Affairs § 6. Which he doth yet more in what followeth he telleth us of a Debate betwixt the old and the young Men which of the two should Rule A Controversie that never was so much as named in any of our meetings nor for what I know in private Discourse Nothing can be more false than the story that he telleth for instance in this matter of a Contest between Mr. Rule and Mr. Webster No such words were ever spoken And if they had there had been no truth in them For what he talketh in his Marginal Note of the Contribution of the Sisters savoureth more of Spite than Wit Some of the Nonconformists lived on their own Estates others by their Industry in Lawful Callings yet diligently preaching the Gospel others by the Charity of good Women and good Men too as our Lord and his Apostles did And his own party are now brought to that Mortification that I suppose the Contributions of the Sisters are not despised by them He quarrelleth with the Name of the General Meeting that preceded the Assembly as being none of the Names of the Church Judicatories known since the Reformation What if we should say it was an extraordinary Meeting such as that extraordinary Case of the Church did allow And yet it wanted not Authority neither from God it being made up of the Officers that Christ hath appointed to Rule his Church Nor from Man we have then a Liberty granted fot the exercise of our Ministry in all the parts of it We may also defend it to be a General Assembly of this Presbyterian Church which differed in nothing from that which followed but that the one had the countenance of the King and Parliament this other only that of the King directly and of the Parliament indirectly The Parliament having allowed the King a power of granting Indulgence to Dissenters â—…om the Established way as was noted on Letter 2. Sect. 16. In his account of the Work done by this meeting he doth grosly prevaricate while he saith They prescribed Rules for trying Episcopal Ministers They did indeed suppose that Presbyteries have an Intrinsick power of judging the Life and Doctrine of all the Ministers within their bounds and of excluding the unfit and receiving them that are qualified but considering the present paucity of Presbyterian Ministers which yet was not such as he would have us believe They were so far from directing them to try these men that they did wisely caution them and some way restrain them in this Tryal For their appointment was that if in trying these men the Presbyteries should meet with any Libel the Relevancy of which was doubtful or if the sufficiency of the proof were not clear in such Cases they should not proceed to a Sentence but refer the Case to the General Assembly which was soon after to sit What could they do more to prevent Injury to these Men without denying that power of Presbyteries which is their due He instanceth in some Presbyteries where were very few Ministers we deny it not but that was but in some few places and at first There are more now even in these places and in other parts of the Countrey there were even then a competent number in Presbyteries and in some places few or none wanting As in all the Presbyteries of the Synod of Glasgow That there were so few is not to be wondered at The whole Nation being but t'other day under Episcopacy The Youth having been generally so bred and the Presbyterians being almost worn out by a long tract of time and heavy Persecution There were fewer Protestant Ministers in the beginning of the Reformation from Popery and yet it was not thought fit that either the Church should be without all Government or that it should
those parts I do not remember I know there are not a few in that place of the Country who may be in the Judgment of Charity thought to fear the Lord And there are also many yea a far greater number of whom the Assertion he mentioneth is true The truth is this Author hath inured himself to the foulest Lies and Calumnies that he can hardly speak or write Truth A further instance of this is p. 39. That when before Voting it was desired that the Moderator might pray not for drowning the Noise of the Assembly but for direction from the Lord in a case that was doubtful and of moment to the Church Mr. Kirtoun should have said What needs all this fool praying Mr. Kirtoun useth not to speak of prayer with such contempt and if he had so said it had not past in the Assembly without a check and indeed he is in this beâ—…ed § 14. The account he giveth of Mr. Campbels transportation from Drumfries to be Minister at Edinburgh and Professor of Divinity in the Colledge there needeth little Animadversion save that by giving so lame an account of the Debate about the Inward Call he would represent us as having little knowledge in these things The Inward Call was not said to consist in the things he mentioneth but in being qualified by a sufficiency of gifts for the Work and in the inclination of the Mind to serve God in that Work both which are from the Lord. It was said that the Church was Judge of the former and that when one had these qualifications and also the Outward Call from the Church if he pretended aversion or want of the other part of the Inward Call viz. Inclination he must give some reason for that aversion For the Lord useth not to work Inclinations or Aversions in men which are without reason And of these Reasons the Church is also Judge For the Spirit of the Prophets is subject to the Prophets It will now appear that either the Author or his Informers did not understand what was spoken on this Subject Or that they did prevaricate in representing it About the Earl of Crawford's receiving a Commission from the Town of St. Andrews to represent them as Ruling Elder in the Assembly I have said enough above to stop his mouth and to refel what he here saith only he addeth that Joy might be seen in my Lords Countenance when be received it which none could perceive except such as can fancy any thing that their ill-will suggesteth to them For my Lords seeking time of Deliberation till Lammas as Mr. Campbel had it was not intended as what he sought with expectation but as an expression of his wish and of his dislike of allowing so much time to Mr. Camphel to the great detriment of the Colledge at which others also were dissatisfied tho' they quietly acquiesced in the determination of the Assembly For the Petition from Dundie it was not said They had not the Gospel for they had one Minister What is recorded of that passage is that the Presbyterian Congregation in Dundie made Application to the Assembly complaining that they wanted two Ministers and desiring that the Assembly would take care to supply those Vacancies But that the Moderator or any else said that there was no true Minister in Angus is a falsehood like most of his other Assertions For none of us deny the Episcopal Ministers to be truly Ministers tho' we think a Bishop alone should not Ordain It is also false that any such expression was used by the Assembly as offering the Gospel to the people of Angus The words are that they should go to Angus and travel in the Work of the Gospel in Vacant Churches and where they should be called This is far from supposing that the Gospel was not in that County or that there were no Ministers there It is of the same stamp that he maketh the Moderator tell two young men who had been preaching in Angus and had ill reception there That as they had offered the Gospel to that people in the name of the General Meeting so they should now offer it in the name of the Assembly We offer the Gospel to all whom we preach to in the name of Christ and not in the name of men Another Imputation of the same kind is that the Moderator said We will plant Ministers in Dundie whether the Town-Council will or not I do not remember that such words were spoken or words to that effect But if they were what the Moderator saith is not always the mind of the Assembly but only when a thing is proposed and assented to either by Vote or by Silence He tells us p. 34. Of Mr. William Spence who conformed but fell off from the Bishops because denied an Augmentation of Stipend He spread Papers against them they deposed and excommunicated him This man was sent by the Assembly to preach in Angus Ans That Mr. William Spence fell off from the Episcopal party on the account mentioned is utterly false But it is the way of these men when any fall from their way from conviction of Conscience as many have done to ascribe it to some other Cause And it is but suitable to their temper who know not what it is to concern their own Consciences in such matters Their Deposing and Excommunicating him was for his breaking off from their Communion and his expressing his Reasons and for speaking against some of their practices which galled them And therefore the General Meeting Octob. 11. 1687. After exact search into the grounds of his Sentence did find and declare it to be void and this was ratified by the General Assembly Nov. 12. 1690. § 15. He telleth us of a Letter from Aberdeen Desiring Ministers to be sent to them and complaining that the Gospel had not been preached among them for thirty years And Mr. Meldrum heard this read in the Assembly and did not Contradict it which the Author heavily agggravateth This is another Gross mis-representation like the former Neither they who desired Ministers nor they who sent them did any way suppose that Aberdeen had not the Gospel or Ministers bur that the Presbyterians there wanted a Minister and desired to be supplied Which was accordingly taken care of That Mr. Meldrum was not sent to Aberdeen was no neglect of him the Church of Scotland intending him for other Work For the City of Edinburgh and Colledge of Glasgow are Competitors for him before the Commission of the Assembly The former malevolent Representation he reneweth p. 36. in the second numbring for from p. 33. to 40. the pages are twice numbred viz. That some were sent to the North to offer the Gospel to the Northern Shires The words are as the former That they should travel in the Work of the Gospel in Vacant Churches or where they should be called So that it is an Impudent Assertion which followeth that It was proposed stated voted and determined in these terms
Cloaths But the Blows were such as one that was his Friend did testifie that he was more feared than hurt by them For his Wife it is false that they beat her Only one of them held her while they so dealt with her Husband as abovesaid Whence it is evident that tho' their practices are no way to be defended yet they are grosly belyed by this Pamphleteer I have also further Instances of the Clergies accession to the Persecutions of the Presbyterians under the late Reigns which is so impudently denied Late Letter c. Sect. 6. As that Mr. Graham Minister at Lochmabane Mr. Brown Minister at Drysdale and Mr. Thompson Minister at Applegirth used to stand by Graham of Claverhouse after Viscount of Dundee while on the Bench to judge the persecuted Presbyterians for Noncompliance with the courses of that time and whisper in his Ear the effect of which was observed to be the greatest Severity against such as they were most displeased with on that account Also Mr. Andrew Hamiltoun when a poor Man with his numerous Family having fled from his Dwelling took shelter in another poor Mans House in Midleby caused him to be cast out thence so that he was forced to lodge by a Dyke-side with his Family while two of his Children were sick of the Small Pox. Likewise Mr. Vallance Minister at Johnstoun having persecuted Robert Dunwoody so as he was forced to flee to England when he returned would not suffer him to live in the Parish unless he would go to Church so he fled to Applegirth where Mr. Thompson would not let him stay unless he would hear him Preach and the Mans Wife being ready to bring forth her Child the poor Man against his Light was forced to hear This is attested under the mans own Hand One who had time and would be at pains to collect such Instances might find thousands But this is designed to be done by it self In Vindicating the Ministers whom he reproacheth in the History of the General Assembly I designed Brevity especially not finding that what was laid to their Charge was of much moment and that malice was obvious and observable to every unbyassed Reader in all that he saith of them Only the things that he saith against Mr. Meldrum are of more weight but that Reverend Brother being at a great distance I had not opportunity to be informed of the Truth of matter of Fact But he having heard he was Reproached sent me the following Vindication which I give you in his own Words which are sufficient to shew what a Lying Spirit doth possess the men with whom we have to do Reverend and Dear Brother SOme Months are past since I heard of a Pamphlet published on design to expose our late General Assembly to contempt for which end I am told the Author of it doth impudently misrepresent the Actings thereof and injuriously reflect on diverse of the Members of it among the rest they say he bedaubeth me I have diligently sought for a sight of it but hitherto could not obtain it nec prece nec pretio It seemeth these Men resolve though you told them of it before to hold on their way of spreading these reflective Pamphlets in England keeping them as secret as they can here in Scotland where the falshood of the matters of Fact are known and they might soon have their shame and lying discovered but they know that bold calumniating especially where there is no contradiction nor knowledge of the contrary will make some blot cleave to a Mans Fame I was glad to hear you intended to give a just reproof to the Author of that Pamphlet and an Answer to the Calumnies contained in it And a Friend having when he could not obtain for me the use of the Book transcribed and sent to me some part of it relating to me I judg'd it duty to offer to you my Animadversions thereon which if it come not too late you may cause to publish This I do not so much for my own Vindication as for the Truth and Churches sake which he endeavoureth to wrong and wound through my Sides I profess I do freely forgive him any personal Injury done to me and in some Conformity to my Saviour Luke 23. 34. Pray Father forgive him for he knoweth not what he doth Yet I think I can not be blamed if in Obedience to the Apostolical precept Tit. 1. 13. I rebuke him sharply seeing he is so guilty of the first part of the Character given to the Cretians there Verse 12. For I do ingenuously declare that Narrative concerning me is full of Lies and where he toucheth at Truth he so disguiseth it that it appeareth a quite other thing than it was I find no less than ten or eleven Lies in a few Lines for he Asserts 1. That I with Mr. Meinzies did at St. Andrews upon a Conference with the Bishop of that See subscribe the Oath of Canonical Obedience 2. That the Bishop of St. Andrews did by a Letter under his hand assure the Bishop of Aberdeen of this 3. That Mr. Meldrum himself was the Bearer of it 4. That Dr. Keith did make Intimation of our aforesaid Subscriptions in the Old Church of New Aberdeen 5. That we our selves were present 6. That I so far deserted the Principles of the Covenant and Scottish Presbyterians that I did Swear and Subscribed the Declaration when I was admitted Rector of the Mareschal Colledge of Aberdeen 7. That I struck in with the Presbyterians out of pique because I was not permitted to return to the Exercise of my Ministry in Aberdeen 8. That I broke off all Correspondency with those of the Episcopal party even my most intimate Acquaintance 9. That I vented my self as bitterly and severely against them as any Presbyterian whatsoever 10. That Pique Interest and Popularity were my Temptation 11. That at first I pretended I would only attempt to reclaim the deluded people of the West from their Errours and Extravagancies all which I confidently averr are gross Untruths and Lies I am not sensible that I have given these Men any cause or occasion so to abuse me nor can I see any great advantage to their cause thereby and tho' there were Truth in these charges wherewith he endeavoureth to defame me yet of all Men in the World the Prelates and Prelatists in Scotland should be most ashamed to upbraid me therewith The most of their Bishops and Clergy having contrary to most solemn and sacred Oaths received the abjured Prelacy and renounced and abjured their former Oaths and some of their Bishops having submitted to Re-ordination to the great Scandal not only of this but other Reformed Churches and contrary to the example of their Predecessors in the days of King James the VIth Yet I judge no Man for his Principle or Motives but leave that to God and their own Consciences tho' this Author Intruding in Gods Throne is bold to judge of my Heart and to say It was
I payed formal Canonical Obedience so that the asserting of this may be reputed a thirteenth of this Authors lies Yet if he or any else can shew me wherein I have complied contrary to my Principles or to the just offence of others which I have not confessed already I am ready to acknowledge it was my fault but this I can say the Bishops themselves did not judge me a favourer of Prelacy and my intimates knew me to be Presbyterian in my Principles and I did never wittingly desert these Principles For it 's a manifest untruth which this Author asserts that I swore and subscribed the Declaration when I was admitted Rector in the Mareschall Colledge in Aberdeen I neither took it then nor at any other time anent which I appeal to all records Nor indeed was it required of me nor did the Act mention Rectors It was not the least Cause of my refusing the Test that I was obliged thereby to declare that there lay no Obligation on me to endeavour any Alteration in the Government of the Church For I profess I did judge it Duty in my Station and according to my power did endeavour to promote the Alteration and the removal of Prelacy And do not deny I did Bless God and Call the people of Aberdeen to Bless him for the removal of it and pray that it may never return But that ever I used Bitterness or Severity against any of that party this Author cannot prove And all who know me do know these are things which I abhor and my desire is to promote Meekness and Charity among Men These also who were of the Prelatical way and Intimately acquainted with me know the Falshood of what he says of my breaking off all Correspondence with them in any thing which Civility and Friendship obligeth me unto Yea I am confident not only they but all of that way who know me will allow me this Testimony that whenever they desired yea on all occasions according to my p ower I was ready to do them Acts of Kindness And when I was last in Aberdeen the present Incumbents of that place and I did Friendly Visit one another It 's true one of them being occasionally in a Neighbours House came to me as I lighted from my Horse and desired me to preach for him the next Lords day but neither he nor any else did it afterwards And I hope he will not say but I gave him a Civil and as I conceive an Answer which might have satisfied him As for what this Author saith That it was Pique which moved Me to strike in with the Presbyterians because I was not permitted to return to the Exercise of my Ministry at Aberdeen This is a presumptuous ascending Gods Throne to judge my Heart and Motives As also what he saith afterward That Pique Interest and Popularity were my Temptation I can comfortably say He that knoweth all Things knoweth this is false It was Conscience and not such base Motives that moved Me And I think I may obtain Testimony from these who know me both in the North and West that they have other Thoughts of me than that I am led by such base Motives It 's true the Town of Aberdeen to whose kindness I always was and am on all occasions much obliged when they conceived any hopes of obtaining my regress to them without any Obligation or Oath did move for it But neither this Author nor any else can prove that I did desire it or made any Applicatiom to the Bishops for it How far some of the Bishops complied with a great person of the Popish perswasion to obstruct that design tho it was known that it was difference of Religion that engaged him against it the Town of Aberdeen know in part and I leave it to the Bishops own Consciences to judge For ingenuously profess I never had any Pique at them on that account nor was it Pique but Conscience which moved me to joyn with the Presbyterians for I being such in my judgment and about a year after the time he speaks of by an unexpected Providence receiving an Unanimous Call from a Noble Person who also was Patron of the Parish and other Heretors and Body of the people of the Parish of Kilwinning an united Parish which for divers years had been vacant I did by the Approbation of the Presbytery of Irwin come and Labour among them in the Work of the Gospel Yet there is more than one falshood insinuated by this Author in that which he saith in the beginning of this Paragraph concerning Me that ever since King James's Indulgence I did Preach in a Meeting-house for it was a year after that Liberty was given that I entered here and for these two years without the Reluctancy of any have Preached in the Church It is true in the year 1688. the Congregation Assembled in another House than the Church the Law not allowing us the same tho' all that time it was empty except that Mr. Bell being after my coming here presented by the Bishop came and Preached to his opwn Servant and two or three more who were sollicited to hear him at two several times in the Forenoon and went off in the Afternoon and having for that obtained half a years Stipend was presented to another Church where he had little better Reception It is also false which he saith in the end of this Paragraph that at first I pretended that I would only attempt to reclaim the deluded people of the West from their Errours and Extravagancies Perhaps he designeth by this to breed in the people a dislike of me But I hope they will not believe him And it is most false that ever I exprest my self so concerning the people of the West or my design in going among them My design was to Preach the Gospel of Christ and to advance Truth and Holiness and Peace and Love among Men. I acknowledge if a Minister find any Errours or Extravagancies among a people his endeavour should be to reclaim them but I bless God this Author cannot justly charge this Congregation with these things As for what he saith was foretold by a Person of Quality and great Worth I neither know of whom he meaneth nor yet the prediction and perhaps this is of the same kind with the rest of our Authors Assertions Sure I am diverse Persons of Quality and Worth to whom I did shew my Call did approve my Acceptance of it tho' in their Affection they regrated my going from the North. In fine tho' this Author hath said that it could not be denied that I carried my self well and gained the good Opinion of all while I kept my place at Aberdeen and instanceth me as a judicious Person tho' under Temptation Yet he is so discreet in the end as to represent both this people and me as ensnared in extravagant Fooleries but I forgive him It is a small thing for me to be judged of Men better than I have been rated as Fools But in love to his Soul I commend to his Meditation Mat. 5. 22. and Rev. 22. 15. I am really weary in insisting so long on things relating to my Person I do acknowledge the World would be at no great loss tho' I were buried in the Dust and my Name in Oblivion and were it not for my respect to the publick Interest which this Author endeavoureth to hurt by exposing me I should not have troubled my self and the Reader with this Vindication being hopeful that his defaming of me cannot hinder my acceptance nor the success of my Labours where I am known I hear there are some other things in that Pamphlet which relate to me but my Friend gave me no transcript of them nor have I seen the Book and I am told they are of no great Moment and but By-blows to me while he is reflecting on other Persons and Things and perhaps you may sufficiently Vindicate them without my help I am told he acknowledgeth I preached a Sermon for Moderation but added such Cautions as made all ineffectual To which I shall only say I know none that deny but there is need of Caution lest Men under the Name of Moderation degenerate to Lukewarmness and excluding of Zeal but I know no Caution I gave which had not a Scripture warrant And if this Author had heard it I think he hath good will enough to represent it could he catch at any shadow of ground for it I am also told he reflects on me about a Paper said to be given in to the General Assembly wherein it should have been said the Gospel had not been preached in Aberdeen these 30 years but not having seen the Book nor any Transcript of that matter I can give no distinct Answer But as it 's related to me it seemeth of a Piece with the rest of his Assertions only to satisfie any sober person who may be stumbled at such an Expression I do publickly profess I am so far from thinking so or approving any who should think or speak it that I Assert and Declare I have in that time often heard to my great Comfort and Edification the Gospel both plainly and powerfully preached at Aberdeen But I fear I have wearied you and shall only add that I shall not cease to pray the Lord would preserve you long to do him service in his Church and shall continue Your Brother and Servant in the Lord G. M. Kilwinning September 28. 1691. FINIS