of the Common Prayers of the Church of England or the Genevian Liturgy For we no where read of a Third ever pretended to have been used in those times in Scotland Now that it was not the Liturgy of Geneva is plain for besides that it is utterly incredible that there could have been so many Copies of the Genevian Form in the vulgar Language then in Scotland as might serve so many Parish Churches Nay that 't is highly probable there was not so much as one Besides this I say in the Genevian Form which was afterwards used in Scotland there is no Order for no footstep of the observation of other Holy-days besides Sunday Neither is there any Order in it for Reading of Lessons of the Old and New Testament except in the Treatise of Fasting which was not compiled till the year 1565. There indeed Lessons are appointed such and such Psalms and such and such Histories in the Old but not so much as one Tittle of the New Testament In all the rest of the Book a deep Silence about Lessons than which there cannot be a clearer Demonstration that the Book appointed to be used in December 1557 was not that of Geneva Indeed 2. None of our Presbyterian Historians neither Petrie nor Calderwood have the confidence to pretend nay to insinuate the possibility of its being the Common Order of Geneva which 't is very probable they would have done if they had had the smallest hopes of making it feasible On the contrary Calderwood seems fairly to acknowledge that it was the English Liturgy but then this acknowledgement lies at such a distance from the year 1557. that no doubt he thought himself pretty secure that few Readers would reflect upon it as ane acknowledgment he doth not make it till he comes to the year 1623 when he had occasion to tell how the use of the English Liturgy was brought into the New Colledge of St. Andrews Take it in his own words Upon the 15 th of January Master Robert Howie Principal of the New College of St. Andrews Doctor Wedderburn and Doctor Melvin were directed by a Letter from Doctor Young in the Kings Name to use the English Liturgy Morning and Evening in the New College where all the Students were present at Morning and Evening Prayers Which was presently put in execution notwithstanding they wanted the warrant of any General Assembly or of any CONTINVED PRACTICE OF THE FORM in time by-past since the Reformation Where you see he lays the stress of his Argument against it on its nor having had a continued Practice since the Reformation which is a clear concession that at the Reformation it was in practice tho that practice was not continued But whither he acknowledged this or not is no great matter we have sufficient Evidence for the point in hand without it For 3. Buchanan's Testimony which was adduced before about the Scots subscriving to the Worship and Rites of the Church of England is unexceptionable And yet it is not all For 4. The Order as you see it appointed by the Lords of the Congregation Decem. 3d 1557. is That the Book there authorised be used in all Churches from that very date but we find by the First Book of Discipline That the Order of Geneva was only coming in to be used then in some of the Churches i. e. 1560. And it had nothing like a public Establishment till the General Assembly holden at Edenburgh Dec. 25 1652. For then and not till then It was concluded that ane Vniform Order should be kept in the Ministration of the Sacraments Solemnization of Marriages and Burial of the Dead according to the Kirk of Geneva So it is in the Mss. and so Petrie hath it But Nature works again with Calderwood For he has no more but this It was ordained that ane Vniform Order be kept in the Ministration of the Sacraments according to the Book of Geneva Omitting Marriage and the Burial of the Dead Marriage I believe to bear the other Company for the Burial of the Dead was the Dead Flee Why The Book of Geneva allowed of Funeral Sermons as he himself acknowledgeth A mighty Superstition in the opinion of Prerbyterians so that it would have been offensive to the sincerer sort as he commonly calls those of his own Gang and inconsistent with the Exigences of the Good Cause to have let the world know that A General Assembly had ratified the Order of that Book about Burials and thereby had justified the Superstition of Funeral Sermons Nay 5. It seems this Act of the General Assembly Decem. 1562. has not been strong enough for turning out the English Liturgy and introducing the form of Geneva For if we may believe Calderwood himself The General Assembly holden at Edenburgh Decem. 25. 1564. found themselves concerned to make another Act ordaining Every Minister Exhorter and Reader to have one of the Psalm books lately printed at Edenburgh and use the Order contained therein in Prayers Marriage and Administration of the Sacraments Where observe further that Prayers not mentioned in the Act 1562. are now put in from which it may be probably conjectured that as much as Knox was against the English Liturgy he found many difficulties to get it laid aside so many that it has not only been used by some few or many I cannot tell in the Ministration of the Sacraments c. after the Act 1562. But the Clergy have not found themselves obliged to forbear the use of it in the publick prayers so that it was needful in this Assembly 1564 to make a New Act restricting them both as to Prayers and other Ministrations to the Order of Geneva And if this holds we have the English Liturgy at least seven Years in continued practice in Scotland But it is enough for my main purpose that it was once universally in use which I think cannot be denied by any who impartially considers what hath been said And now 6. May not I adduce one Testimony more 'T is true it is of a latter date But it is very plain and positive and what I have adduced already is security enough for its Credibility It is the Testimony of the Compilers of our Scottish Liturgy which made the great Stir in the year 1637. And was made one of the main pretences for the first Eruptions of that execrable Rebellion which ensued The Compilers of that Liturgy I say in their Preface to it tell us That it was then known that diverse years after the Reformation we had no other Order for Common Prayer but the English Liturgy A Third Principle wherein our Reformers agreed with the Church of England and which stands in direct contradiction to the Principles of our Presbyterians is that they own'd the Church had a great Dependance on the State That it belong'd to the Civil Magistrate to reform the Church That People might appeal from the Church to the Civil Magistrate c. I
am not now to enter into the Controversie concerning the Dependence or Independence of the Church upon the State that falls not within the compass of my present Undertaking Neither will I say that our Presbyterians are in the wrong as to the true substantial Matter agitated in that Controversie All I am concerned for at present is that in these times those of the Church of England own'd a great Dependence of the Church upon the State and that our Reformers agreed with them in that Principle and I think I may make short work of it For That that was the Principle of the Church of England in these times I think no man can readily deny who knows any thing about her at and a good many years after her Reformation All my business is to shew that our Reformers were of that same Principle And I think that shall be easily made to appear For As to the Civil Magistrates power to reform the Church what can be more clear than the Petition presented to the Queen Regent in November 1558 There our Reformers tell her Majesty that Knowing no Order placed in this Realm but her Majesty and her grave Council set to amend as well the Disorder Ecclesiastical as the Defaults in the Temporal Regiment they do most humbly prostrate themselves before her Feet asking Iustice and her Gracious Help against such as falsely traduced and accused them as Hereticks and Schismaticks c. In which Address we have these two things very clear and evident 1. That they own'd that the Civil Magistrate had power to amend Ecclesiastical Disorders as well as Temporal 2. That in consequence of this they applied to the Civil Magistrate for protection against the pursuits of the Church And in their Protestation given in to the Parliament about that same time They most humbly beseech the sacred Authority to think of them as faithful and obedient Subjects and take them into its Protection keeping that Indifferency which becometh Gods Lieutenants to use towards those who in his Name do call for Defence against Cruel Oppressors c. Meaning the then Church-men Indeed None clearer for this than Knox himself as is to be seen fully in his Appellation from the cruel and most unjust Sentence pronounced against him by the False Bishops and Clergy of Scotland as he himself names it For there He lays down and endeavours to prove this Assertion That it is lawful to Gods prophets and to Preachers of Christ Iesus to appeal from the Sentence and Iudgment of the visible Church to the Knowledge of the temporal Magistrate who by Gods Law is bound to hear their Causes and to defend them from Tyranny And in that same Appellation he largerly asserts and maintains the Dependance of the Church upon the State The Ordering and Reformation of Religion with the instruction of Subjects he says doth appertain especially to the Civil Magistrate For why Moses had great power in the Matters of Religion God revealed nothing particularly to Aaron the Church-man but commanded him to depend from the Mouth of Moses the Civil Magistrate Moses was impowered to separate Aaron and his Sons for the Priesthood Aaron and his Sons were subject to Moses Moses was so far preferred to Aaron that the one commanded the other obeyed The Kings of Israel were commanded to read the Book of the Law all the days of their Lives not only for their own private Edification but for the publick preservation of Religion so David Solomon Asa Iehosophat Hezekiah Iosiah understood it and interested themselves in the Matters of the Church accordingly From which it is evident saith he That the Reformation of Religion in all points together with the Punishment of false Teachers doth appertain to the power of the Civil Magistrate For what God required of them his justice must require of others having the like Charge and Authority what he did approve in them he cannot but approve in all others who with like Zeal and Sincerity do enterprize to purge the Lords Temple and Sanctuary Thus Knox I say in that Appellation I do not concern my self with the truth or falshood of his positions neither am I to justify or condemn his Arguments All I am to make of it is to ask my Presbyterian Brethren whither these Principles of Knox's suit well with declining the Civil Magistrate as ane incompetent Iudge in Ecclesiastical matters with refusing to appear before him prima instantia for the tryal of Doctrines preacht in the Pulpit with the famous distinction of the Kings having power about Church matters Cumulative but not Privative c. I am affraid it shall be hard enough to reconcile them I shall only instance in one principle more which seems to have been common to our and the English Reformers but it is one of very weighty consequence and importance to my main design It is Fourthly That Excellent Rule of Reformation viz. That it be done according to the word of God interpreted by the Monuments and Writings of the Primitive Church That antient solid approven Rule That Rule so much commended by that excellent Writer Vincentius Lirinensis That Rule which the common sense of mankind cannot but justify when it is considered soberly and seriously without partiality or prejudice A Rule indeed which had the Reformers of the several Churches followed unitedly and conscientiously in those times when the Churches in the Western parts of Europe were a Reforming we had not had so many different Faiths so many different Modes of Worship so many different Governments and Disciplines as Alas this day divide the Protestant Churches and by consequence weaken the Protestant Interest A Rule which had the pretenders to Reformed Religion in Scotland still stood by we had not possibly had so many horrid Rebellions so many unchristian Divisions so many unaccountable Revolutions both in Church and State as to our sad Experience have in the Result so unhing'd all the Principles of natural justice and honesty and disabled nay eaten out the principles of Christianity amongst us that now we are not disposed so much for any thing as downright Atheism But were our Reformers indeed for this Rule That shall be demonstrated by and by when we shall have occasion to bring it in again as naturally to which opportunity I now refer it in the mean time let us briefly sum up all that hath been hitherto said and try to what it amounts I have I think made it appear that while our Reformation was a carrying on and when it was established Anno 156â— there was no such Controversie agitated in the Churches as that concerning the indispensible necessity of Presbytery and the Vnlawfulness of Prelacy concerning the Divine Right of Parity or the Vnallowableness of imparity amongst the Governors of the Church I have said enough to make it credible that our Scottish Reformers had no peculiar occasions opportunities provocations abilities for falling on that Controversie or determining of it more
the Case of the Countess of Argyle Anno 1567. She had been guilty of a mighty scandal in being present at the Christening of the Prince afterwards Iames the Sixth which was performed after the Popish manner she behoved therefore to give satisfaction to the Church And was ordered to do it by the General Assembly in such manner and at such time as the Superintendent of Lothian within whose bounds the Scandal was committed should appoint So both Spot and Pet. 26. Another branch was to restore Criminals to the Exercises of their Offices if they had any dependance on the Church after they had performed their Pennance and received Absolution Thus Thomas Duncanson Reader at Sterling had fallen in the Sin of Fornication for this he was silenced He had performed his Pennance and was absolved Then the Question was put to the General Ass. met at Eden Decem. 25. 1563. Whither having made publick Repentance he might be restored to his Office And the Assembly determined He might not till the Church of Stirling should make Request to the Superintendent for him 27. To the Superintendents was reserved the power of Excommunication in Cases of Contumacy c. Thus it is statuted by the Gen. Ass. at Eden Iuly 1. 1562. That in Cases of Contumacy the Minister give notice to the Superintendent with whose advice Excommunication is to be pronounced So the Mss. and both the Mss. and Petrie have another long Act of the Assembly holden at Eden Sept. 25. 1565. to the same purpose 28. It belonged also to them to delate Atrocious Criminals to the Civil Magistrate that condign corporal punishments might be inflicted on them To this purpose I find it enacted by a Convention of the Kirk as it is called in the Mss. met at Eden Decem. 15. 1567. to wait on the motions of the Parliament That Ministers Elders and Deacons make search within their bounds if the crimes of Incest or Adultery were committed and to signify the same to the Superintendent that he may notifye it to the Civil Magistrate Such was the power of Superintendents in the Government of the Church and her Discipline But because several things may have relation to the Church tho not formally and directly yet reductively and by way of Analogical Subordination their power extended even to these things also I shall only instance in two 29. Then because Vniversities Colleges and Schools are the Seminaries of Learning and by consequence Nurseries for the Ministry the power of Superintendents over them was very considerable Thus by the First Book of Discipline Head 5. if e. g. The Principal or Head of any College within the University of St. Andrews died the Members of the College being sworn to follow their Consciences were to nominate three of the most sufficient men within the University This done the Superintendent of Pife by himself or his special Procurators with the Rector and the rest of the Principals were to choose one of these three and constitute him Principal And when the Rector was chosen he was to be confirmed by the Superintendent by that same Book And again by that same Book The Money collected in every College for upholding the Fabrick was to be counted and employed at the sight of the Superintendent Further the Gen. Ass. conveened at Eden Ian. 25. 1565. presented this Article in a Petition to the Queen That none might be permitted to have charge of Schools Colleges or Vniversities c. but such as should be tryed by the Superintendents So 't is in the Mss. 'T is true it was not granted at that time but it shews the inclinations of our Reformers as much as if it had been granted And because it was not granted then it was proposed again in the Ass. in Iuly 1567. and consented to by the Nobility and Gentry and ratified by the Eleventh Act of the First Parliament of King Iames the Sixth in December that same year And accordingly we find the Laird of Dun. Superintendent of Angus and Mearns in Iuly 1568. holding at Visitation of the University of Aberdeen and by formal sentence turning out all the Popish Members The very air and stile of the Sentence as Petrie hath it is a notable Evidence of the paramount power of Superintendents for thus it runs I John Areskin Superintendent of Angus and Mearns having Commission of the Church to visit the Sheriffdoms of Aberdeen and Bamf by the Advice Counsel and Consent of the Ministers Elders and Commissioners of the Church present decern conclude and for final Sentence pronounce That Master Alexander Anderson c. 30. Because bad Principles may be disseminated by bad Books and thereby both the Purity and Peace of the Church may be endangered the Revising and Licensing of Books was committed to the Care of the Superintendents by the General Ass. holden in Iune 1563. whereby it is ordained That No work be set forth in Print neither yet published in Writ touching Religion or Doctrine until such time as it shall be presented to the Superintendent of the Diocess and advised and approven by him or by such as he shall call of the most learned within his bounds c. Thus I have collected no fewer than Thirty Disparities betwixt Superintendents as they were established in Scotland by our Reformers and private Parish Ministers each of them a Demonstration of inequality either of power or figure perchance a more nice and accurate Enquirer may find out more But methinks these may be sufficient for my purpose which was to give the world a fair prospect of the Preheminence of Superintendents and of the Differences betwixt them and other Churchmen And having thus perform'd the first part of my Undertaking it is obvious to all who can pretend to be of the thinking part of mankind that the second part is needless For if these 30 Disparities amount not to ane invincible proof that our Church at the Reformation was not govern'd by Ministers acting in parity I may justly despair of ever proving any thing Yet because I know many simple and less thinking people are imposed on by the Noise and Dust our Presbyterian Brethren have raised about this matter I shall proceed to the next thing I undertook which was II. To dissipate these Mists wherewith our Parity-men are so very earnest to involve and darken this Prelatical power of Superintendents They may be reduced to these Three 1. The Establishments of Superintendents was only temporary and for the then Necessities of the Church Superintendency was not intended to be a perpetual standing Office 2. It was not the same with Episcopacy 3. It was never established by Act of Parliament 1. 'T is pleaded that Superintendency was only design'd to be a temporary not a perpetual standing Office in the Church Thus Calderwood speaking of the First Book of Discipline we may safely say says he the whole was recommended to be perpetually observed except some few things as the
have fully proven and which was all I still aim'd at yet it is easy to Discover they were very far from keeping Closely by the Principles and Measures of the primitive constitution of Church Government This is so very apparent to any who Reads the Histories of these times and is so visible in the Deduction I have made that I shall insist no longer on it Secondly The truth of my charge may further appear from the Instance of Adamson advanced this year 1576 to the Archbishoprick of St. Andrews That Nature had furnished him with a good stock and he was a smart Man and cultivated beyond the ordinary Size by many parts of good Literature is not denyed by the Presbyterian Historians themselves They never attempt to represent him as a Fool or a Dunce tho' they are very eager to have him a Man of Tricks and Latitude Now this Prelates ignorance in true Antiquity is Remarkably visible in his subscribing to these Propositions Anno 1580 if we may believe Calderwood The Power and Authority of all Pastors is equal and alike great amongst themselves The Name Bishop is Relative to the Flock and not to the Eldership For he is Bishop of his Flock and not of other Pastors or fellow Elders As for the Preheminence that one beareth over the rest it is the Invention of Man and not the Institution of Holy Writ That the ordaining and appointing of Pastors which is also called the laying on of hands appertaineth not to one Bishop only so being Lawful Election pass before but to those of the same Province or Presbytery and with the like Iurisdiction and Authority Minister at their Kirks That in the Council of Nice for eschewing of private ordaining of Ministers it was statuted that no Pastor should be appointed without the consent of him who dwelt or remained in the Chief and Principal City of the Province which they called the Metropolitan City That after in the latter Councils it was statuted that things might proceed more solemnly and with greater Authority that the laying on of hands upon Pastors after Lawful Election should be by the Metropolitan or Bishop of the Chief and principal Town the rest of the Bishops of the Province voting thereto In which thing there was no other Prerogative but only that of the Town which for that cause was thought most meet both for the conveening of the Council and Ordaining of Pastors with common Consent and Authority That the Estate of the Church was corrupt when the name Bishop which before was common to the rest of the Pastors of the Province began without the Authority of Gods Word and ancient Custome of the Kirk to be attributed to one That the power of appointing and ordaining Ministers and Ruling of Kirks with the whole procuration of Ecclesiastical Discipline was now only devolved to one Metropolitan The other Pastors no ways challenging their Right and Privilege therein of very slothfulness on the one part And the Devil on the other going about craftily to lay the ground of the Papistical Supremacy From these and such other Propositions sign'd by him at that time it may be judged I say if this Prelate did not bewray a very profound ignorance in true Ecclesiastical Antiquity Ane Arrant Presbyterian could not have said could not have wished more Indeed 't is more than probable as perchance may appear by and by that these Propositions were taken out either formally or by collection of Mr. Beza's Book De Triplici Episcopatu Now if Adamson was so little seen in such matters what may we judge of the rest But this is not all For Thirdly There cannot be a greater Evidence of the deplorable unskilfulness of the Clergy in these times in the ancient records of the Church than their suffering Melvil and his Party to obtrude upon them The Second Book of Discipline A split new Democratical Systeme a very Farce of Novelties never heard of before in the Christian Church For instance What else is the confounding of the Offices of Bishops and Presbyters The making Doctors or Professors of Divinity in Colledges and Vniversities a distinct Office and of Divine Institution The setting up of Lay-Elders as Governours of the Church Jure Divino Making them Iudges of mens Qualifications to be admitted to the Sacrament Visiters of the Sick c. Making the Colleges of Presbyters in Cities in the primitive times Lay Eldership Prohibiting Appeals from Scottish General Assemblies to any Iudge Civil or Ecclesiastick and by consequence to Oecumenick Councils Are not these Ancient and Catholick Assertions What footsteps of these things in true Antiquity How easy had it been for men skilled in the Constitution Government and Discipline of the Primitive Church to have laid open to the Conviction of all sober Men the novelty the vanity the inexpediency the impoliticalness the uncatholicalness of most if not all of these Propositions If any further doubt could remain concerning the little skill the Clergy of Scotland in these times had in these matters it might be further Demonstated Fourthly from this plain matter of Fact viz. that that Second Book of Discipline in many points is taken word for word from Mr. Beza's Answers to the Questions proposed to him by The Lord Glamis then Chancellor of Scotland A fair Evidence that our Clergy at that time have not been very well seen in Ecclesiastical Politicks Otherwise it is not to be thought they would have been so imposed on by a single stranger Divine who visibly aimed at the propagation of the Scheme which by chance had got footing in the Church where he lived His Tractate De Triplici Episcopatu written of purpose for the advancement of Presbyterianism in Scotland carries visibly in its whole train that its design was to draw our Clergy from off the Ancient Polity of the Church and his Answers to the Six Questions proposed to him as I said by Glanus contain'd the New Scheme he advised them to Now let us taste a little of his skill in the Constitution and Government of the Ancient Church or if you please of his accounts of her Policy I take his Book as I find it amongst Saravia's works He is Positive for the Divine Right of Ruling Elders He affirms that Bishops arrogated to themselves the power of Ordination without Gods allowance That the Chief foundation of all Ecclesiastical Functions is Popular Election That this Election and not Ordination or Imposition of hands makes Pastors or Bishops That Imposition of hands does no more than put them in possession of their Ministry in the exercise of it as I take it the power whereof they have from that Election That by consequence 't is more proper to say that the Fathers of the Church are Created by the Holy Ghost and the suffrages of their Children than by the Bishops That Saint Paul in his first Epistle to the Corinthians in which he expressly writes against and condemns the
this purpose I shall only instance in a few Thus The eight Act Parl. 1. Iac. 6. holden in Decemb. 1567 appoints the Coronation Oath to be sworn by the King And it is one of the Articles of that Oath That he shall Rule the People committed to his Charge according to the loveable Laws and Constitutions received in this Realm no wise repugnant to the word of the Eternal God Now I think this Parliament made no Question but that the Fundamental Law of the Constitution of Parliaments was one of these Loveable Laws and Constitutions received in this Realm no wise repugnant to the word of the Eternal God Indeed The 24 th Act of that same Parliament is this word for word Our Soveraign Lord with advice and consent of his Regent and the three Estates of Parliament has Ratified and Ratifies all Civil Priviledges granted and given by our Soveraign Lords Predecessors to the Spiritual Estate of this Realm in all points after the form and tenor thereof Than which there cannot be a more Authentick Commentary for finding the true sense and meaning of the Coronation Oath in Relation to our present purpose I shall only adduce two more but they are such two as are as good as two thousand The 130 th Act Parl. 8. Iac. 6. Anno 1584 is this word for word The Kings Majesty considering the Honour and the Authority of his Supreme Court of Parliament continued past all memory of Man unto these days as constitute upon the free votes of the three Estates of this Ancient Kingdom By whom the same under God has ever been upholden Rebellious and Traiterous Subjects punished the good and faithful preserved and maintained and the Laws and Acts of Parliament by which all men are Govern'd made and Established and finding the Power Dignity and Authority of the said Court of Parliament of late years called in some doubt at least some such as Mr. Andrew Melvil c. curiously travelling to have introduced some Innovations thereanent His Majesties firm will and mind always being as it is yet that the Honour Authority and Dignity of his saids three Estates shall stand and continue in their own integrity according to the Ancient and Loveable custome by-gone without any alteration or diminution THEREFORE it is Statuted and Ordained by our Soveraign Lord and his said three Estates in this present Parliament that none of his Leiges and Subjects presume or take upon hand to impugne the Dignity and the Authority of the said three Estates or to seek or procure the Innovation or Diminution of the Power and Authority of the same three Estates or any of them in time coming under the pain of Treason Here I think the necessity of the three Estates whereof the Ecclesiastical was ever reckoned the first is asserted pretty fairly Neither is this Act so far as I know formally repealed by any subsequent Act And whosoever knows any thing of the History of these times cannot but know that it was to crush the Designs set on foot then by some for innovating about the Spiritual Estate that this Act was formed The other which I promised is Act 2. Parl. 18. Iac. 6. holden Anno 1606. Intituled Act anent the Restitution of the Estate of Bishops In the Preamble of which Act we are told That of late during his Majesties young years and unsetled Estate the Ancient and FUNDAMENTAL Policy consisting in the Maintainance of the THREE ESTATES of Parliament has been greatly impaired and almost subverted Specially by the Indirect Abolishing of the Estate of Bishops by the Act of Annexation of the Temporality of Benefices to the Crown That the said Estate of Bishops is Necessary Estate of the Parliament c. Such were the Sentiments of these times So Essential was the Ecclesiastical Estate deem'd in the Constitution of Scottish Parliaments And no wonder For no man can doubt but it was as early as positively as incontestedly as fundamentally and unalterably in the constitution as either the Estate of Nobles or the Estate of Burrows There is no Question I think about the Burrows As for the Estate of Nobles 't is certain all Barons were still reckoned of the Nobless The lesser Barons in Ancient times were still reckoned a part of the Second never a distinct Estate of Parliament and they must quit all pretensions to be of the Nobless when they set up for a distinct Estate Setting up for such they are no more of the Nobility than the Burrows And then If two Estates can vote out one and make a Parliament without it If they can split one into two and so make up the three Estates Why may not one split it self as well into three Why may not the two parts of the splitted Estate joyn together and vote out the Estate of Burrows Why may not the Nobility of the First Magnitude joyn with the Burrows to vote out the smaller Barons Why may not the smaller Barons and the Burrows vote out the greater Nobility After two have voted out one why may not one the more numerous vote out the other the less numerous When the Parliament is reduced to one Estate why may not that one divide and one half vote out the other And then subdivide and vote out till the whole Parliament shall consist of the Commissioner for Rutherglen or the Laird of or the Earl of Crawford Nay why may not that one vote cut himself and leave the King without a Parliament What a dangerous thing is it to shake Foundations How doth it unhinge all things How plainly doth it pave the way for that which our Brethren pretend to abhor so much viz. a Despotick Power ane Absolute and unlimited Monarchy But enough of this To conclude this point there 's nothing more notorious than that the Spiritual Estate was still judged Fundamental in the Constitution of Parliaments was still called to Parliaments did still Sit Deliberate and Vote in Parliaments till the year 1640 that it was turned out by the then Presbyterians And our present Presbyterians following their footsteps have not only freely parted with but forwardly rejected that Ancient and valuable Right of the Church Nay they have not only rejected it but they declaim constantly against it as a Limb of Antichrist and what not And have they not herein manifestly Deserted the undoubted principles and sentiments of our Reformers It had been easy to have ennumerated a great many more of their notorious Recessions from the principles of the Reformation e. g. I might have insisted on their Deserting the principles and practices of our Reformers about the Constitution of General Assemblies about Communion with the Church of England about the Civil Magistrates Power in Church Matters justly or unjustly is not the present Question and many more things of considerable importance Nay which at first sight may seem a little strange as much as they may seem to have swallowed down the principles of Rebellion and Arm'd Resistances against Lawful Soveraign
the year 1560 till the year 1616. Our Presbyterian Brethren may be ready to reject its Authority if it Militates against them I give My Reader therefore this brief account of it It was transcribed in the year 1638. when the National Covenant was in a flourishing state For I find at the end of it the Transcriber's Name and his Designation written with the same hand by which the whole M S. is written And he says He began to transcribe upon the 15th day of Ianuary 1638. and compleated his work on the 23d of April that same year He was such a Reader as we have commonly in Scotland in Country Parishes It is not to be imagined it was transcribed then for serving the Interests of Episcopacy For as Petrie and the Presbyterians generally affirm The Prelates and Prelatists dreaded nothing more in those days than that the Old Registers of the Kirk should come abroad And it was about that time that Mr. Petrie got his Copy from which he published so many Acts of our Old General Assemblies Nor is it to be doubted but that as several Copies then were so particularly that which I have perused was transcribed for the Ends of the Good Old Cause This I am sure of the Covenant as required then to be subscribed by the Green Tables is set down at full length in the Manuscript Besides The Stile and Language testify that there is no Reason to doubt That the Acts of Assemblies which it contains have been transcribed word for word at first from the Authentick Records And if Calderwood's or Petrie's Accounts of these Acts deserve any Credit My M S. cannot be rejected for it hath all they have published and for the most part in the same Terms except where these Authors have altered the Language sometimes to make it more fashionable and intelligible sometimes to serve their Cause and the Concerns of their Party It hath Chasms also and Defects where they say Leaves have been torn from the Original Registers And I have not adduced many Acts from it which either one or both these Authors have not likewise mentioned in their Histories Calderwood has indeed concealed very many having intended it seems to publish nothing but what made for him tho I think even in that his Iudgment hath not sufficiently kept pace with his Inclinations Nay His Supplement which he hath subjoyn'd to his History as well as the History it self is lame by his own Acknowledgment For these are the very first words of it I have in the preceeding History only inserted such Acts Articles and Answers to Questions as belonged to the Scope of the History and Form of Church Government Some few excepted touching Corruptions in the Worship of God or the Office and Calling of Ministers But because there are other Acts and Articles necessary to be known I have SELECTED such as are of greatest Vse passing by such as were TEMPORARY or concerned only TEMPORARY OFFICES c. Here is a clear Confession that he has not given us all the Acts of Assemblies Nay that he has not given all such as concerned Temporary Offices and amongst these we shall find him in the following Sheets more confidently than warrantably reckoning Superintendency and the Episcopacy which was agreed to at Leith Anno 1572. I have mentioned these things that the World may see it cannot be reasonable for our Presbyterian Brethren to insist on either Calderwood's Authority or Ingenuity against my Mss. How ingenuous or impartial he has been you may have opportunity to guess before you have got through the ensuing Papers Petrie hath indeed given us a great many more of the Acts of General Assemblies than Calderwood hath done as may appear to any who attends to the Margin of my Book But he also had the Good Cause to serve and therefore has corrupted some things and concealed other things as I have made appear However he has the far greater part of what I have transcribed from the Mss. Spotswood hath fewer than either of the two Presbyterian Historians yet some he hath which I find also in the MS. and which they have both omitted In short I have taken but very few from it which are not to be found in some One or More of these Historians Neither have I adduced so much as One from it nor is One in it which is not highly agreeable to the State and Circumstances of the Church and the Genius of the times for which it mentions them So that Upon the whole matter I see no reason to doubt of its being a faithful Transcript And I think I may justly say of it as Optatus said of another MS. upon the like occasion Vetustas Membranarum testimonium perhibet c. optat Milev lib. 1. f. 7. edit Paris 1569 It hath all the Marks of Antiquity and Integrity that it pretends to and there 's nothing about it that renders it suspicious The other Book which I said required some farther consideration is The History of the Reformation of the Church of Scotland containing five Books c. Commmonly attributed to Iohn Knox by our Presbyterian Brethren That which I have to say about it is chiefly That Mr. Knox was not the Author of it A. B. Spotswood hath proven this by Demonstration in his History pag. 267. his Demonstration is That the Author whoever he was talking of one of our Martyrs remitteth the Reader for a farther Declaration of his Sufferings to the Acts and Monuments of Mr. Fox which came not to light till some twelve years after Knox's Death Mr. Patrick Hamilton was the Martyr and the Reference is to be seen pag. 4. of that History I am now considering Besides this I have observed a great many more infallible proofs that Knox was not the Author I shall only instance in some 3 or 4. Thus Pag. 447. The Author having set down a Copy of the Letter sent by the Church of Scotland to the Church of England of which more by and by Tells how the English Nonconformists wrote to Beza and Beza to Grindal Bishop of London which Letter of Beza's to Grindal he says is the Eight in order amongst Beza's Epistles And in that same page he mentions another of Beza's Letters to Grindal calling it the Twelfth in Number Now 't is certain Beza's Epistles were not published till the year 1573. i. e. after Knox's Death It may be observed also that he adds farther in that same page That The sincerer sort of the Ministery in England had not yet assaulted the Iurisdiction and Church Government which they did not till the year 1572. at which time they published their first and second Admonitions to the Parliament but only had excepted against Superstitious Apparel and some other faults in the Service Book From which besides that 't is Evident Knox could not be the Author we may Learn from the Authors Confession whoever he was That the Controversies about Parity and Imparity c. were not so early in
generally is against using the Lords Prayer the only Prayer I can find of Divine Institution in the New Testament as to the MATTER FRAME COMPOSURE and MODE of it Consider 3. that our Author would be very angry and complain of horrid injustice done him if you should charge him with Quakerism or praying by immediate inspiration For who so great enemies to Quakers as Scottish Presbyterians Consider 4. if his Arguments can consist any better with Extemporary Prayers which are not immediately inspired and by consequence cannot be of Divine Institution as to MATTER FRAME COMPOSURE and MODE than with Set-forms which are not of Divine Institution as to MATTER FRAME COMPOSURE and MODE Consider 5. in consequence of these if we can have any publick Prayers at all And then consider 6. and lastly if our Author when he wrote this Section had his zeal tempered with common sense and if he was not knuckle-deep in right Mysterious Theology But as good follows For 4. Never man spoke more profound Mysteries than he hath done on all occasions in his surprizing accounts of the Church of Scotland He tells us of a Popish Church of Scotland since the Reformation and a Protestant Church of Scotland He tells us 1 Vind. Answ. to Quest. 1. § 10. Presbyterians do not say that the Law made by the Reforming Parliament Anno 1576 took from them the Popish Bishops the Authority they had over the Popish Church but it is Manifest that after this Law they had no Legal Title to Rule the Protestant Church This same for once is pleasant enough The Reforming Parliament while it defined the Church of Scotland and it defined it so as to make it but one as is evident from Act. 6. which I have transcribed word for word in my Book allowed of two Churches of Scotland two National Churches in one Nation But this is not all He hath also subdivided the Protestant Church of Scotland into two Churches of Scotland The Presbyterian Church of Scotland and the Episcopal Church of Scotland He insists very frequently on the Presbyterian Church of Scotland Thus in his Preface to his First Vind. of his Church of Scotland in great seriousness he tells the world that that which is determined concerning all them that will live Godly in Christ Iesus that they must suffer persecution is and has long been the lot of the PRESBYTERIAN Church of Scotland And in his Preface to his 2 Vind. § 7. I have in a former paper pleaded for the PRESBYTERIAN Church of Scotland against ane Adversary c. And in Answer to the Hist. Relat. of the Gen. Ass. § 12. his Adversary had said that General Assembly was as insufficient to represent the Church of Scotland as that of Trent was to represent the Catholick Church And G. R. readily replys but he cannot deny that it represented the PRESBYTERIAN Church and was all that could be had of a PRESBYTERIAN Assembly He is as frank at allowing ane Episcopal Church of Scotland Thus in True Represent of Presb. Governm in Answ. to OB. 10. The Ministers that entered by and under Prelacy neither had nor have any Right to be Rulers in the PRESBYTERIAN Church Whatever they might have in ANOTHER Governing Church i. e. the Episcopal Church that the State set up in the Nation c. And more expressly in Answ. to the Hist. Relat. of the Gen. Ass. 1690. § 3. Again says he tho' we own them the Prelatick Presbyters as Lawful Ministers yet we cannot own them as Ministers of the PRESBYTERIAN Church They may have a Right to Govern the EPISCOPAL Church to which they had betaken themselves and left the PRESBYTERIAN yet that they have a Right to Rule the PRESBYTERIAN Church we deny By this time I think the Reader has got enough of Scottish National Churches and their distinct Governours and Governments The Popish Clergy even since the Reformation was established by Law have Right to Rule the Popish National Church of Scotland The Protestant Episcopal Clergy have Right to Rule the Protestant Episcopal National Church of Scotland The Protestant Presbyterian Ministers have only Right to Rule the Protestant Presbyterian National Church of Scotland By the way May not one wish that he and his party had stood here For if the Episcopal Clergy have Right to Rule the Episcopal Churh and if it was only Right to Rule the Presbyterian Church which they had not why was their own Right to Rule themselves taken from them Are not the Presbyterians unrighteous in taking from them all Right to Rule when they have Right to Rule the Episcopal Church of Scotland But this as I said only by the way That which I am mainly concern'd for at present is that the Reader may consider if there is not a goodly parcel of goodly sense in these profound Meditations Yet better follows After all this laborious clearing of marches between Scottish National Churches particularly the Episcopal and Presbyterian National Churches of Scotland He tells you for all that they are but one Church of Scotland But in such Depth of Mystery as perchance can scarcely be parallell'd Take the worthy speculation in his own words True Rep. ad OB. 10. Let it be further Considered says he that tho' we are not willing so to widen the difference between us and the Prelatick party as to look on them and our selves as two distinct Churches Yet it is evident that their Clergy and we are two different Representatives and two different Governing Bodies of the Church of Scotland And that they who are Members of the one cannot at their pleasure go over to the other unless they be received by them Well! Has he now Retracted his making them two Churches You may judge of that by what follows in the very next words For thus he goes on These things thus laid down let us hear what is objected against this Course the Course the Presbyterians were pursuing with Might and Main when he wrote this Book viz. That the Government of the Church might primâ instantiâ be put in the hands of the known sound Presbyterian Ministers c. First this is to set up Prelacy among Ministers even while it is so much decryed That a few should have Rule of the Church and the rest excluded Answ. It is not Prelacy but a making distinction between Ministers of one Society and those of another Tho' they be Ministers they are not Ministers of the Presbyterian Church They have departed from it we have Continued in the good old way that they and we professed for who can doubt that all the Scottish Prelatists were once Presbyterians It is not then unreasonable that if they will return to that SOCIETY they should be admitted by it c. Now What can be plainer than it is hence that they must be still two Churches He makes them in express terms twice over two distinct SOCIETIES He makes one of these Societies the Presbyterian Church Of necessity therefore the
other must be the Episcopal Church And is not this unavoidably to make two Churches Yet neither is this the true yolk of the Mystery as I take it That lyes here That the Episcopal Clergy and the Presbyterian Clergy are two different Representatives two different Governing Bodies of the one Church of Scotland I remember our Author in his Rational Defence of Non-Conformity c. Exercised Dr. Stillingfleet to purpose for talking of something which he thought lookt like two Convocations in England viz. the Vpper and the Lower Houses He seems above says G. R. to make such Convocations and so there must be either two Churches of England and why not as well as three of Scotland Or the one Church of England must be Biceps and so a Monster Thus our Author there p. 195. I say and it seems he was mindful of it when he wrote his True Representation of Presbyt Governm For he was careful indeed to avoid the making of his one Church of Scotland Biceps and made it something else But what thing Your pardon for that I have neither Latin nor English name for it I thought once indeed on Bicorpor But I found it could not do For he makes not his one Church two Bodies What then I told you already I can find no name for it But if I have any Idea of this his one Church she is such a thing as this A Body Govern'd by two different Governing Bodies without ane Head That she is a Body I think cannot be Controverted for all Churches are commonly own'd to be Bodies That she is Govern'd by two different Governing Bodies is clear from the Text For thus it runs We will not so widen the difference between us and the Prelatical partie as to look on our selves and them as two distinct Churches Yet it is evident that their Clergy and we are two different Representatives and two different Governing Bodies of the Church of Scotland That she is Govern'd by these two different Governing Bodies without ane Head is likewise evident for there is not so much as one syllable about ane Head in the Text And there 's all the Reason in the world for it For besides the difficulty of joyning one Head conveniently with two Bodies to what purpose ane Head for her when she is so well stored of Governing Bodies Are they not received maxims that Non sunt multiplicanda entia sine necessitate and Deus natura nihil faciunt frustra The Definition then is unquestionable Well! Perhaps the Reader may be curious to know how G. R. came by this super-fine Idea of a Church I have had my conjectures about it And the most probable that offered was this No doubt he is wondrously well acquainted with Plato otherwise how could he have made the singular discovery that Socinians and Stoicks were Platonists Now Plato Conviv p. 322. Edit Lugd. 1590. as I remember has a pretty story about a certain Species of Rational Animals which were early in the world and which he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if you would say Man-woman or so This Creature had two Faces two Noses four Hands c. in a word it was a round Body which contained both Sexes in it Man and Woman as it were united by their backs It was a vigourous sturdy kind of Animal and Iupiter turn'd afraid of it and therefore to weaken it and make it more toward and subdueable he took ane Ax or some such sharp instrument and clave it from top to bottom in the very middle as if you should cleave ane egg into two equal halves And then being as you know a nimble Mountebank he drew together the skin on each back in a trice and applyed some Soveraign Medecines and both backs were made sound immediately and the divided parts of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being now 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Man and Woman and having the felicity to look one another in the face they fell in Love with one another And this was the Original of Love and Courting and Marriage and all that Now I say The most probable conjecture I can make of the way how G. R. came by his surprizing Idea of the one Church with the two different Governing Bodies is that when he Read this story in Plato it made a deep impression on his imagination and he labouring to out do Plato at nimbleness of design and invention fell upon this stranger and more surprizing Notion of a Church But however this was I think our Author had Reason to say Animad on Iren. p. 51. That a Church is a singular Society and of another nature than other Societies and therefore she ought to have a singular Government For sure I am he has given the one Church of Scotland a Government which is singular enough One thing is certain At this rate she wants not Government nor Governours And of all the Churches in the world she is likest to have the best Canons and the justest Measures prescribed to her For if the one Governing Body prescribes wrong the other must readily prescribe right For never were two Governing Bodies of one Society in greater likelyhood of contradicting one another 'T is true the Governed Body may be sometimes puzled about its obedience and reduced to a state of Hesitation about the opposite prescriptions whither of them it should follow But that 's but a small matter Our Authors invention is not yet so far decayed but that I can promise for him if he pleases he shall as easily extricate it out of that difficulty as he can give ane intelligible account of this his one Church with the two different Governing Bodies Only one thing thing more I add Our Learned Author tells us in his Preface to this his Book in which he has this Mystery that it was a work not undertaken at first of his own private motion and that before it was published it passed ane Examen Rigorosum of not a few Brethren Now if he spake truth here as I am apt to believe he did not the world may judge of the accuracy of some mens Rigorosa Examina And so much for a Taste of our Authors second Cardinal Virtue Proceed we now to III. The third which tho' it looks as like Ill-nature as ever egg was like another in complyance with our Authors generous inclinations I am content should pass under the name of his Excessive Civility I allow it this name I say because our Author himself hath so Dubb'd it For thus he tells us 2 Vind. Pref. § 6. I have treated the Adversaries I deal with as Brethren Desiring rather to EXCEED than come short in CIVILITY and fair dealing with them Never was Author more plentifully furnished with this Ingenuous Quality than G. R. Take a Specimen of it from his Second Vindication c. Edit Eden Anno 1691 And consider with what Excess of Civility he treats his Adversaries
of feeding their Flocks they worried them 103 Inciters to and Abettors of Persecution 126 A Faction that indulged debauched men in their immoralities 166 Hundreds of their party guilty of gross immoralities for one Presbyterian 166 Their debauchery tempts people to count all Religion a sham 173 Generally favourers of Popery passim Men who are wiser than to comply with the present Establishment of the Church from which 't is like they would have been excluded for their immoralities or errors 5 And God knows how frequently he makes them generally Ignorant or Erroneous or Scandalous or Supinely Negligent This I think may serve for a Tryal of his excessive Civilities to the Scottish Clergy Well! But is he as Civil to the Church of England Take a Proof from his Rational Defence c. Those of the Church of England seem wiser than Christ and his Apostles from whom they do manifestly and confessedly differ in the things Controverted between them and the Nonconformists p. 71 They are either strangers to England or strangely byassed who see not cause to complain of the Ignorance Idleness and Vicious Conversation of the English Clergy 40 'T is the spirit of the party still to Create trouble to the Church 63 They are ane imperious Superstitious Clergy that will be Lords over Gods inheritance in despight of the Apostle 80 And how often doth he call them Liars Misrepresenters Calumniators c. vid p. 66 274.275 276 c. I shall only mention one instance of the English Episcopal Knavery which G. R. resents very highly You may see it pag. 276. I have met with another instance says he of Episcopal ingenuity for exposing the Presbyterians among the Foreign Churches It is in a Letter of the famous Bochart dated Nov. 2. 1â—80 in Answer to a Letter from Doctor Morley wherein the Doctor representeth the Presbyterian principles in three positions whereof the third is a GROSS CALUMNY The position is Reges posse vi armis a subditis cogi in ordinem si se praebeant immorigeros De Soliis Deturbari in Carcerem Conjici Sisti in jus per Carnificem denique capite plecti i. e. That Presbyterians maintain that Subjects may call their Soveraigns to ane account by Force of Arms and if they are stubborn incorrigible Soveraigns they may cast them in Prison Iudge them Sentence them and order the Hangman to give them a cast of his craft And now kind Reader judge impartially was not this a Gross Calumny What impudent lying Rogues must these English Prelates and Prelatists have been who so Grossly Calumniated such Eminently Loyal Subjects such True Friends to Monarchy such unquestionable Passâ—ve-obedience and Non-resistance-men But return we to our Author One thing may be pleaded in his behalf It is that this his Rational Defence c. as he says himself was written about the time that K. I. came to the Throne i. e. some four years before the late Revolution and at that time it was excuseable in him to tell his mind freely about the English Clergy Because he was then a Non-conformist in England and suffering under their Yoke But now that Presbytery is Established in Scotland and he has got a Post there in which he can live to purpose his temper is become a little sweetned and he will not any more be ane Enemy to the English Clergy Nay has he not published so much lately in his Second Vindication True He has More he seems to have promised at least professed so much not only for himself but for his whole party He has told the world in his Answer to the first of the Four Letters § 12. That Scottish Presbyterians are far from interposing in the Church of Englands affairs that they are not bound by the Covenant to Reform England but to concur when Lawfully called to advance Reformation That 't is far from their Thoughts to go beyond that Boundary That they wish their Reformation but leave the management of it to themselves And in his Answer to the Case of the Afflicted Clergy c. § 1. he goes a farther length The Author had said That the Church of England should bethink themselves how to quench the flames in Scotland c. And G. R.'s Answers Thus they sow discord among Brethren and animate England to concern themselves in the affairs of our Church when we do not meddle in their Matters Here you see he owns the English Clergy for no less than his Brethren Are they not Cock-sure now that they shall never have more of his excessive Civilities Well! I cannot tell what may be but I can tell something of what hath already been This same Loving Brother to the Church of England published his Rational Defence c. Anno 1689 i. e. since the beginning of the late Revolution And it is evident his Preface was written since likewise For therein he Discourses Rhetorically How God by the late Revolution hath made us like them that dream and done exceeding abundantly for us above what we could think out-done our Faith as was foretold Luk. 18.8 Now In that same Preface he owns he published his Book then because he thought it a fit Season and it seem'd allowable if not necessary that each party should put in their Claim and give the best Reasons they could for their pretensions Which how it consisted with designs for the peace of the Church of England let herself consider This I am sure of if his excessive Civilities could be helpful for unhinging her she got them in that Preface with a witness Take this for a Taste He not only exhorts his Readers to purge the Church of England of bad Men ane Ignorant Scandalous Heady and unsober Ministery But he farther Discourses thus God will not be at peace with the Church while such are countenanced and good men cannot with any satisfaction behold such scandals to Religion and such effectual Instruments of the ruine of Souls continued in the Church while some effectual course is not taken to remove them The Church is like to have little peace either with God or in her self Let all then contribute their endeavours to have the unsavoury salt cast out if this piece of Reformation be endeavoured all ranks must put hand to it The People by discovering such where they are And not calling nor countenancing them when they want a guide to their Souls And Magistrates by endeavouring the Regulating of such Laws as do in any wise open the door to such men to enter And again Church Reformation must also truely be endeavoured by us if we would have Church peace It is no token for good when sinful evils images of jealousie which provoke the Lord to jealousie such as Episcopacy the Liturgy Ceremonies Holy-days c. are in the Church and yet all agree in these ways none lament them nor reprove them nor take care to keep their Garments clean from the Corruptions of the time c. Now that all this is directly
Rebellion committed by Presbyterians you see All were EXTRAORDINARY ACTINGS In short Presbyterians are beyond reproaches in the Consciences of all that know them and do not hate them 2. Vind. p. 37 Now 'T was none of my designs to render the Presbyterians peculiarly odious by adducing these instances I know these Crimes are not peculiar to them I doubt not many of them are not violently inclined to Persecution or Rebellion I doubt as little many of them will be ready to acknowledge they are peccable as other men and things have been done by many of their party which such as are Ingenuous will not offer to Apologize for That which I was mainly concern'd for was our Authors Impudence For who ever saw greater Impudence than there is in these Ridiculous Defences he has been pleased to publish in Vindication of his party 4. Another instance might be his making his party so frequently the only Protestants in the Nation The only men that resisted or could resist or were willing to resist Popery Thus the Author of the Ten Questions had said and said truly That the Presbyterians accepted and gave thanks for ane Indulgince notwithstanding that they knew that all the Designs of the Court were for advancing Popery How our Author Justifies their Thankful Addressing to K. J. for such a favour shall be considered by and by That which I take notice of at present is his Apology for their accepting of that Indulgence It had been a strange thing says he 1 Vind. ad Quest. 8. § 2. if they should have been backward to Preach and hear the Gospel when a door was opened for it because some men had a design against the Gospel in their opening of it The Gospel you know was neither Preached nor heard in Scotland before a door was opened for it by that Indulgence But this by the way Surely their silence and peevish refusing on that occasion had been much to the hurt of the Gospel For then Papists who would not fail to use the Liberty for their part should have had the fairest occasion imaginable to mislead People without ANY TO OPPOSE THEM On the contrary their using that Liberty was the great mean by which with the blessing of the Lord so very few during that time of Liberty were perverted to Popery in the Nation Now who should doubt after this that all the Prelatists were silent Encouragers of Popery And that the Presbyterians were the only People who Preached against it zealously and opposed it boldly Here is such a Master-piece of our Authors main talent as I am confident no other Presbyterian in the nation will offer to extenuate far less justify He insists on the same Theme in his 2 Vind. p. 91. where he tells That wise men thought that the best way to keep out Popery was to make use of the Liberty for setting the People in the right way c. As if there had been no possibility of keeping them from turning Papists but by making them Presbyterians 5. Near of kin to this is that other Common Head he sometimes insists on viz. That all are Papists or Popishly affected who were not for the late Revolution Thus in his 1 Vind. ad Quest. 9. § 4. in Answer to that Allegation that the Presbyterians denyed the Kings prerogative of making Peace and War c. He tells the world If this his Argument can cast any blame on Presbyterians 't is this that there are Cases in which they allow the States and Body of the Nation to resist the King so far as to hinder him to root out the Religion that is by Law Established among them And one should think that he might have been by this time convinced that this is not peculiar to Prebyterians But that all the Protestants in Britain are engaged in the same thing And in his True Represent ad Ob. 2 He has these plain words what was done in removing K. J. from his Throne was not by us alone but by all the TRUE PROTESTANTS in the Nation who were indeed Concerned for the safety of that Holy Religion Now 'T is none of my present business to justify or Apologize for such as were or are against the late Revolution Let Iacobitism be as great ane Heresie as our Author pleases to call it Let him rank it with Platonism or Socinianism if he will Only I dare be bold to say that it was ane odd stretch of Impudence to make it Popery I mentioned a little above his Apologizing for his party's Addressing so thankfully to K. I. for his Toleration And truly his performances that way may pass 6. For another instance of his having a good Dose of Brow as himself commonly calls his own prime Accomplishment For it was such ane Arrant mixture of Flattery and Hypocrisy especially when enlightened by their subsequent practice that no Sophistry can palliate it so as to make it seem innocent But it has been so frequently tossed already that I need not to insist upon it Far less am I at leisure to examine all the ridiculous stuff our Author has vented about it Only one thing I shall propose to the world to be farther considered Whoso has Read any of our Authors Vindications of his Church of Scotland cannot but have observed that even to loathsomeness he was precise in pursuing his Adversaries foot for foot on all occasions when Impudence it self could afford him any thing to say Yet one thing of very great consequence was alledged by the Author of the Second Letter to which he has Answered nothing What else could move our Author to this sinful and unseasonable silence but the Conscience that it was not fit to meddle with it The Matter is this The Author of that Letter having Discoursed how amazed the Presbyterians themselves were at the Dispensing Power upon the publication of K. I.'s first Proclamation for the Toleration How little forward they were at first to accept of it And how they complyed not with its designs till they got a Second Edition of it c. Offered at conjecturing about the Reasons which might have induced them afterwards to embrace it so thankfully and unanimously as they did Amongst the rest I find he insisted on this as one viz. That they had got secret instructions from Holland to comply with the Dispensing Power in subserviency to the ensuing Revolution And he added that for this he knew there were very strong Presumptions Now G. R. I say passed this over in a profound silence which to me seems a considerable presumption that there was some truth in the matter and the Epistler had guesâ—ed right But if it was so I think the Presbyterian Address to K. I. for the Toleration may now appear in blacker colours than ever I am earnest not to be mistaken I do not Condemn their keeping a Correspondence with the Court at the Hague on that occasion Let that have been done dutifully or undutifully as it might All I am
be the Vindicator of their Kirk If they can imploy any civil discreet ingenuous person to write for them I shall be heartily satisfied and for his Encouragement I do promise if he falls to my share I shall treat him suitably Nay After all if even G. R. himself will lay aside such Qualities as I have demonstrated adhere to him if he will undertake to write with that Gravity and Civility that Charity and Modesty that Honesty and Ingenuity which may be thought to become One of his Age and Character I can as yet admit of him for my Adversary for I think the Party cannot assign me a weaker one And I do hereby promise him ane Equitable Meeting FINIS ADVERTISEMENT THis Book was designed for the Press December 1693. The Article That Prelacy and the Superiority of any Office in the Church above Presbyters is and hath been a great and insupportable Grievance and Trouble to this Nation and contrary to the Inclinations of the Generality of the people ever since the Reformation they having Reformed from Popery by Presbyters And therefore ought to be Abolished THis Article was Established in our Claim of Right April 11 1689. By vertue of this Article Prelacy was actually Abolished by Act of Parliament Iuly 22. 1689. Upon the foot of this Article Presbyterian Government was Established Iune 7. Anno 1690. This Act Establishing Presbyterian Government was Ratified in the whole Heads Articles and Clauses thereof Iune 12. 1693. It is indisputable then That This Article is the Great Foundation of that Great Alteration which hath been made in the Government of the Church of Scotland since the Beginning of the Late Revolution Whether therefore This is a Solid or a Sandy Foundation cannot but be deem'd a Material Question And I think I shall bid fair for the Determination of this Question if I can give clear and distinct Satisfaction to these following Enquiries I. Whether the Church of Scotland was Reform'd solely by persons cloath'd with the Character of Presbyters II. Whether our Scottish Reformers whatever their Characters were were of the present Presbyterian Principles Whether they were for the Divine institution of Parity and the unlawfulness of Prelacy amongst the Pastors of the Church III. Whether Prelacy and the superiority of any Office in the Church above Presbyters was a great and insupportable Grievance and trouble to this Nation and contrary to the inclinations of the generality of the people ever since the Reformation IV. Whether it was Such when this Article was Established in the Claim of Right V. Whether supposing the premisses in the Article were True They would be of sufficient Force to infer the Conclusion viz. That Prelacy and the Superiority of any Office in the Church ought to be abolished The Determination of the main Question I say may competently result from a perspicuous discussion of these five Enquiries And therefore I shall attempt it as fairly as I can leaving to the world to judge equitably of my performance And without further prefacing I come to The First Enquiry Whether the Church of Scotland was Reformed solely by persons cloath'd with the Character of Presbyters IF the Framers of the Article meant that it was in these words They having Reformed from Popery by Presbyters I think I am pretty sure they meant amiss For there is nothing more obvious to one who reads and compares our Histories than That persons standing in other stations and cloath'd with other Characters had a very great hand and were very considerable Instruments in carrying on our Reformation Particularly 1. There were Prelates who concurred in that work as well as Presbyters Knox says there were present in the Parliament holden in August 1560. which Parliament gave the first National Establishment to our Reformation The Bishop of Galloway the Abbots of Lundoris Culross St. Colmes-inih Coldingham Saint Mary-isle and the Subprior of St. Andrews with diverse others And of all these he says That they had Renounced Papistrie and openly professed Jesus Christ. Spotswood reckons up no fewer than Eight of the Spiritual Estate all Protestants chosen at that time to be Lords of the Articles Namely the Bishops of Galloway and Argyle the Prior of St. Andrews the Abbots of Aberbrothoik Kilwinning Lundors Newbottle and Culross Lay these two Accounts together and you shall have at least a Round Dozen of Reforming Prelates 'T is True Spotswood says The Popish Prelates stormed mightily at such a Nomination for the Articles alledging that some of them were meer Laicks But what if it was so I am apt to think our Presbyterian Brethren will not be fond to make much advantage of this I am apt to think they will not say That all those whom they allow to have been Reforming Presbyters were Duely and Canonically Ordained That they were solemnly seperated for the Ministery by such as had Commission and Power to Separate them and in such Manner as had Universally obtained from the Apostles times in the Separation of Presbyters for their holy Function The plain truth is 2. Our Reformation was principally carried on by such as neither Did nor Could pretend to be Canonically promoted to Holy Orders Knox himself tells us that when the Reformation began to make its more publick Advances which was in the Year 1558. there was a great Scarcety of Preachers At that time says he we had no publick Ministers of the word Only did certain Zealous Men among whom were the Laird of Dun David Forress Mr. Robert Lockhart Mr. Robert Hamilton William Harlaw and others Exhort their Brethren according to the Gifts and Graces granted to them But shortly after did God stir up his Servant Paul Methven c. Here we have but a very Diminutive account of them as to Number And such an Account as in its very Air and Countenance seems to own they were generally but Lay-Brethren They were but Zealous Men not Canonically ordained Presbyters And if we may believe Lesly Paul Methven was by Occupation a Baker and William Harlaw a Taylor The Laird of Dun that same very year was Provost of Montrose and as such sent to France as one representing not the First or the Spiritual but the Third Estate of Parliament the Burrows to attend at the Celebration of the Queens Marriage with the Dauphine of France He was indeed a Gentleman of good Esteem and Quality and he was afterwards as Superintendent but it no where appears that he was ever Received into Holy Orders Nay 3. After the pacification at Leith which was concluded in Iuly 1560 when the Ministers were distributed amongst the several Towns we find but a very small Number of them Iohn Knox was appointed for Edenburgh Christopher Goodman for St. Andrews Adam Herriot for Aberdeen Iohn Row for Perth William Chrystison for Dundee David Ferguson for Dunfermline Paul Methven for Iedburgh and Mr. David Lindesay for Leith Beside these Five were nominated to be Superintendents Spotswood for Lothian and
Mers Winram for Fife the Laird of Dun for Angus and Merns Willock for Glasgow and Carsewell for Argyle and the Isles These are all who are reckoned up by Knox and Spotswood And Spotswood adds With this small Number was the Plantation of the Church at first undertaken And can we think tho all these had been Presbyters duly ordained That they were the only men who carried on the Scottish Reformation Farther yet 4. Petrie tells us that the First General Assembly which was holden in Dec. 1560 consisted of 44 persons and I find exactly 44 Names Recorded in my Mss. Extract of the Acts of the General Assembly's as the Names of the Members of that Assembly But of all these 44 there were not above Nine at most who were called Ministers so that at least more than Thirty were but Lay-Brethren according to the then way of Reckoning probably they were generally such if you speak in the Dialect and reckon by the Measures of the Catholick Church in all Ages In short 5. There is nothing more evident to any who considers the Histories of these times than that they were generally Laymen who promoted our Violent and Disordered Reformation as Spotswood justly calls it And 't is Reasonable to think the Sense of this was One Argument which prevailed with our Reformers to Declare against the Antient Catholick and Apostolick Ceremony of Imposition of Hands in Ordinations as is to be seen in the 4 th Head of the First Book of Discipline and as is generally acknowledged Thus I think I have sufficiently deduced Matters as to my First Enquiry It had been easy to have insisted longer on it but I had no inclination for it considering that there is a kind of Piety in Dispatch when the longer one insists on a subject of this Nature he must still the more Expose the Failures of our Reformation and the Weaknesses of our Reformers Proceed we now to The Second Enquiry Whether our Scottish Reformers whatever their Characters were were of the present Presbyterian principles Whether they were for the Divine Institution of Parity and the Vnlawfulness of Prelacy amongst the Pastors of the Church THis Enquiry if I mistake not is pretty far in the interests of the main Question For the Article as I am apt to take it aims at this That our Reformation was carried on with such a Dislike to Prelacy or the Superiority of any Office in the Church above Presbyters as made Prelacy or such a Superiority ever since a great and insupportable Grievance and Trouble to this Nation c. But if this is the Sense of the Article what else is it Than that our Reformers were Presbyterian But whether or not This was truly intended as 't is truly very hard to know what was intended in the Article This is Certain this Enquiry is material and pertinent And if it faces not the Article Directly Undoubâ—edly iâ— doth it by fair Consequence 'T is as certain our Presbyterian Brethren use with confidence enough to assert that our Reformers were of their Principles This is One of the Main Arguments by which they endeavour on all occasions to influence the Populace and Gain Proselytes to their Party And therefore I shall endeavour to go as near to the bottom of this Matter as I can and set it in its due Light And I hope It shall appear to be competently Done to all who shall attentively and impartially weigh the following Deduction And I. Let it be considered That while our Reformation was on the Wheel and for some years after its publick Establishment there was no such Controversy agitated in Europe as this concerning The Divine Institution of Parity or Imparity amongst the Pastors of the Church The Popes pretended universal Headship was Called in Question indeed And Called in Question it was run down with all imaginable Reason some years before the Settlement of our Reformation That Controversie was One of the First which were accurately ventilated by the Patrons of Reformation And it was very natural that it should have been so considering what stress was laid upon it by the Pontificians 'T is likewise true That the Corruptions of the Ecclesiastical Estate were Enquired into in most Provinces every where where the Truth began to Dawn and the Reformation was Encouraged And it was not to be imagined but in such Scrutinies Bishops would be taken notice of for their general Defection from the Antient Rules and Measures of the Episcopal Office and the vast Dissimilitude between them and those of the same Order in the primitive times both as to the Discharge of their Trust and their Way of Living And who doubts but in these things the Popish Bishops were too generally culpable 'T is farther true That some Countries when they reformed Religion and separated from the Church of Rome did set up New Models of Government in the Churches they erected as they thought their civil Constitutions could best bear them And having once set them up what wonder if they did what they could to justify them and maintain their Lawfulness Thus for instance Mr. Calvin erected a Model of the Democratical Size at Geneva because that State had then cast it self into a Democracy And the Protestants in France partly for Conveniency partly in imitation of Calvins Platform fell upon a method of governing their Churches without Bishops And so it fared with some other Churches as in Switzerland c. while in the mean time other Churches thought it enough for them to Reform the Doctrine and Worship without altering the Ancient form of Government But then 'T is as evident as any thing in History that all this while from the first Dawnings of the Reformation I mean till some years after the publick Establishment of our Reformation That there was no such Controversie insisted on by Protestants either in their Debates with the Papists or with one another as that about the Divine and Vnalterable Institution of parity or imparity amongst the Pastors of the Church And I dare confidently challenge my Presbyterian Brethren to produce any One Protestant Confession of Faith for their side of the Question Nay more I dare challenge them to instance in any One Protestant Divine of Note who in these times maintained their side of the Controversy who maintain'd the Vnlawfulness of Imparity amongst Christian Pastors before Theodore Beza did it if he did it Sure I am They cannot without the greatest impudence pretend that Mr. Calvin the only Transmarine Divine I can find consulted by our Reformers about matters relating to our Reformation was of their Principles For whoso shall be pleased to consuâ—t his Commentaries on the New Testament particularly on 1 Cor. 11.2 Or some Chapters in the beginning of his 4 th Book of Institutions Or his Book about the Necessity of Reforming the Church Or his Epistles particularly his Epistle directed to the Protector of England dated Octob. 22. 1548. Or to Cranmer Archbishop of
Canterbury To the Bishop of London To Ithavius Bishop of Vladislavia dated Decem. 1. An. 1558 Or his Resolution of that Case if a Bishop or Curate joyn himself to the Church c. Or lastly his Epistle to the King of Poland wherein he tells him That It was Nothing but pride and ambition that introduced the Popes Supremacy That the Ancient Church had indeed her Patriarchs and Primates for the Expedition of Discipline and the Preservation of Unity As if in the Kingdom of Poland one Archbishop should have the precedency of the rest of the Bishops not that he might Tyrannize over them but for Orders sake and for Cherishing Unity amongst his Collegues and Brethren And next to him there should be Provincial or City Bishops for keeping all things orderly in the Church Nature teaching says he that from every Colledge One should be chosen who should have the chief Management of affairs But 'T is another thing for one Man as the Pope doth to arrogate that to himself which exceeds all humane abilities namely The Power of governing the whole Universe Whoso shall perpend these writings of Mr. Calvins I say shall find that he was very far from maintaining the Vnlawfulness of Prelacy Nay farther yet I challenge my Presbyterian Brethren upon their ingenuity to tell me weither it was not a good many years after 1560. that Beza himself the true founder of their Sect condemn'd Prelacy if he did condemn it I say if he did maintain the Necessity of Parity and condemn'd Prelacy For however he may seem upon several occasions not only to give the preference to Presbyterian Government and represent it as the most eligible But to endeavour to found it on Scripture And represent Episcopacy as an humane invention yet I have not observed that any where 〈◊〉 calls it absolutely or simply Unlawful On the contrary he says in express terms That it is Tolerable when it is duely Bounded when the pure Canons of the Ancient Church are kept in vigour to keep it within its proper Limits Sure I am he was not for separating from a Church as our modern Presbyterians are upon the account of its Governments being Episcopal as might be made appear fully from his Letters so that whatever greater Degrees of Dislike to Episcopacy he may have discovered beyond his Predecessor Mr. Calvin yet it is not unreasonable to think that his great aim was no more than to justify the Constitution of the Church he lived in and recommend it as a pattern to other Churches The Scope of this whole Consideration is this That if what I have asserted is true if there was no such Controversie agitated all the time our Church was a Reforming nor for a good many years after Then we have one fair Presumption that our Reformers were not Presbyterians It is not likely that they were for the Indispensibility of Parity that being the side of a Question which in these times was not begun to be tossed And this Presumption will appear yet more ponderous if II. It be considered that we have no reason to believe that our Reformers had any peculiar Motives or Occasions for adverting to the pretended Evils of Prelacy or any peculiar interests to determine them for Parity beyond other Churches or that they were more sharp-sighted to espy faults in Prelacy or had opportunities or inclinations to search more diligently or enquire more narrowly into these matters than other Reformers The truth is The Controversies about Doctrine and Worship were the great ones which took up the thoughts of our Reformers and imployed their most serious Applications This is obvious to any who considers the accounts we have of them so very obvious that G. R. himself fairly confesses it in his First Vind. ad Quest. 1. where he tells us That the Errors and Idolatry of that way meaning Popery were so gross and of such immediate hazard to the Souls of People That it is no wonder that our Reformers minded these First and Mainly and thought it a great step to get these Removed so that they took some more time to consult about the Reforming of the Government of the Church From which 't is plain he confesses the Reformation of the Churches Government was not the subject of their Main Thinking which indeed is very true and cannot but appear to be so to any who considers what a Lame Scheme was then drest up by them But however this was 't is enough to my present purpose That our Reformers were more imployed in reforming the Doctrine and Worship than in thinking about Church Governments From which together with the former presumption which was that our present Controversies were not begun to be agitated in these times one of two things must follow unavoidably viz. either 1. That if they were for the Divine and indispensible Right of Parity 't is no great matter their Authority is not much to be valued in a Question about which they had thought so Little Or 2. That it is to be presumed they were not for the Divine Right of Parity That being the side of a Question which was not then agitated in any Protestant Church and as Little in Scotland as any To be ingenuous I think both inferences good tho 't is only the Last I am concerned for at present But this is not all For III. So far as my opportunities would allow me I have had a special eye on all our Reformers as I found them in our Histories I have noticed their sentiments about Church Government as carefully as I could And I have not found so much as one amongst them who hath either directly or indirectly asserted the Divine and Vnalterable Right of Parity By our Reformers here I mean such as were either 1. Martyrs or 2. Confessors for the Reformed Religion before it had the countenance of Civil Authority or 3. Such as lived when it was publickly established and had a hand in bringing it to that perfection Such I think and such only deserved the Name of our Reformers And here again I dare be bold to challenge my Presbyterian Brethren to adduce clear and plain proof that so much as any one man of the whole Number of our Reformers was of the present principles of the party Some of them indeed seem to have laid no great stress on Holy Orders and to have been of opinion That personal Gifts and Graces were a sufficient Call to any man to preach the Gospel and undertake the pastoral Office Thus that excellent person Mr. George Wishart who in most things seems to have juster notions of the Gospel Spirit than most of our other Reformers when at his Tryal he was charged with this Article That every man was a Priest and that the Pope had no more power than another man answered to this purpose That St. Iohn saith of all Christians He hath made us Kings and Priests And St. Peter He hath made us
can it be imagined that Henry who was so serious with the King of Scots was at no pains at all with his Subjects with the Nobility and Gentry with such as might had influence either at the Court or in the Country No certainly as may be evident if we consider 4. That when in the year 1540 or 1541 Henry was earnest for a Congress with Iames to try no doubt if meeting face to face and personal and familiar Converse and Conference might prevail with him All our Scottish Protestants were mighty zealous that the Interview might take effect and both time and place which was York might be punctually observed Is not this a Demonstration that they understood Henry's project and approved his designs and that they were in the same Bottom with him in pursuance of a Reformation 'T is true Iames followed other Counsels and disappointed the Interview and therefore Henry turn'd angry and raised War against him But then 't is as true that Iames found his Subjects so backward as I shewed and was so unsuccessful in the management of that War that he contracted Melancholy and soon after died Add to this 5. That after Iames's Death Henry persisted in his Concern to advance the Reformation in Scotland as well as in England To this end He was careful that those of the Scottish Nobility and Gentry who were taken Prisoners at Solway-moss might be lodged with such persons as could instruct them in the Reforming Principles And so soon as he heard that Iames was dead and had left a Daughter some few days old yet Heiress of the Crown He dispatched them for Scotland to promote his interests in the Matter of the Match he was zealous to have made betwixt his Son Prince Edward and our Infant Soveraign Indeed they were as diligent as he could have desired They got it carried in Parliament and that they did it from a prospect of carrying on the Reformation of Religion by that conjunction cannot be doubted if we may believe Dr. Burnet in his Abridgment of the History of the Reformation of the Church of England For there he not only tells That Cassils had got these seeds of Knowledge at Lambeth under Cranmer ' s influences which produced afterwards a Great Harvest in Scotland But also That the other Prisoners were instructed to such a degree that they came to have very different thoughts of the Changes that had been made in England from what the Scottish Clergy had possessed them with who had encouraged their King to engage in the War by the assurance of Victory since he fought against ane Heretical Prince c. And a little after They were sent home and went away much pleased both with the Splendor of the Kings Court and with the way of Religion which they had seen in England And that we have reason to believe this Author in this matter is evident because he is justified herein by all our Historians especially Buchanan as my appear by the sequel Here was Success of the English influences Seven of the Supreme Order i. e. Noblemen and 24 of inferior Quality considerable Gentlemen all enlightned in England for so Buchanan numbers them And here by the way it will not be amiss to consider the strength of the Protestant Party in Scotland when in this Parliament wherein the Match by the influence of the English Converts was agreed to They were so strong that they carried the Regency for the Earl of Arran prompted thereto chiefly by the perswasion they had of his affection to the Reformation as is evident from the consentient Accounts of Buchanan Knox and Spotswood They carried it for the Match with England in opposition to all the Popish Party as I have just now represented Nay which is more because more immediately concerning the Reformation of Religion they procured ane Act to be made That it should be Lawful to every Man to take the Benefit of the Translation which they then had of the Bible and other Treatises containing wholsome Doctrine c. Indeed at that time the Reformation was so far advanced That the Regent kept his two Protestant Chaplains Guillam and Rough both Church of England men as we shall hear who preached publickly to the Court and declaim'd boldly against the Roman Corruptions So far advanced that it stood fair within a short space to have got the publick establishment if Arran the Regent to keep the Popes Cover on his Title to the Succession wherein without it there were a Couple of sad Chasms and for other worldly ends had not play'd the Iade by renouncing his Profession and returning to the Popes Obedience Observe further by the way That this first Parliament of Queen Mary's was holden in her name and by her Authority upon the 13th of March 1542 3 as is clear not only from our Historians but the printed Acts of Parliament and she was not crowned till the 20th of August thereafter if we may believe both Lesly and Buchanan And yet there was not so much as the least objection made then against the Legality of the Parliament no such thing was thought on So that 't is no new nor illegal thing for Scottish Monarchs to hold Parliaments before their Coronations But this as I said by the way Such was the strength of the Reforming Party then and this strength under God advanced so far principally by English influences And all this will appear more convincing still when it is considered in the 6th place That all alongst the Popish Clergy were very sensible of it and very much offended with it and were at all imaginable pains to disappoint it and oppose it Thus When Henry sent the Bishop of St. Davids as we have heard Anno 1535. to treat with Iames about Reforming the Clergy were in a dreadful pother how to keep off the Interview and used all imaginable Arguments with the King to disswade him from listening to it Telling him it would ruine Religion and that would ruine his Soul his State his Kingdom c. Nay The Pope himself was extreamly solicitous how to prevent so great a mischief as he deem'd it For as Lesly tells us His Holiness finding that Henry had cast off his Yoke and fearing lest Iames should transcribe his Uncles Copy sent his Legates to Scotland to confirm him in the Faith and fortify him against Henry's impressions And Buchanan says He allowed him the Tenths of all the Benefices within the Kingdom for three years time to keep him right Again When Henry Anno 1540. insisted the second time for ane Interview the Clergy were in a whole Sea of troubles They used all arts and tried all Methods to impede it At last they sell upon the true Knack and a true Demonstration of their Concern seeing it was a Knack that lookt so unkindly on their Pockets which was to promise him Money largely no less than 30000 Crowns yearly says Buchanan Knox
of England e. g. Friar Alexander Seaton when he was forced to flee in King Iames the 5th's time went to England and became the Duke of Suffolk's Chaplain and died in that service Alexander Aless was in great favour with King Henry and called the King's Schollar He was a Member of the English Convocation and disputed against Stokesly Bishop of London and maintain'd there were but two Sacraments Baptism and the Eucharist Anno 1536 or 37 And he it was that first turn'd the English Liturgy into Latin for Bucer's use Anno 1549 as both Heylin and Burnet in their Histories of the English Reformation tell us Iohn Fife and one M' Dowdal stayed as long in England as Aless did And 't is not to be doubted that they were of the same principles Iohn M' Bee during his abode in England was liberally entertained by Nicol. Saxton Bishop of Salisbury who made much account of him which is no argument I think that he was a Presbyterian Sir Iohn Borthwick was charged with Heresie Anno 1640 for maintaining That the Heresies commonly called the Heresies of England and their New Liturgy was Commendable and to be embraced of all Christians And That the Church of Scotland ought to be govern'd after the manner of the Church of England i. e. under the King and not the Pope as Supreme Governor Friar Thomas Guillam the first publick Preacher of the Reformed Religion in Scotland He by whose Sermons Iohn Knox got the first lively impressions of the Truth This Guillam I say after Arran the Regent Apostatized withdrew and went into England and we hear no more of him From which 't is reasonable to conclude That he kept the Common Course with the other Reformers there Iohn Rough was the Regents other Chaplain while he was Protestant He likewise fled to England tho sometime after Guillam He preached some years in the Towns of Carlisle Berwick and Newcastle and was afterwards provided to a Benefice by the Archbishop of York where he lived till the Death of King Edward When Mary's Persecution turn'd warm he fled and lived some time in Freesland He came to London about some business Anno 1557. was apprehended and brought before Bonner Questioned if he had preached any since he came to England Answered he had preached none But in some places where godly people were Assembled He had read the Prayers of the Communion Book set forth in the Reign of King Ed. VI. Question'd again what his Judgment was of that Book Answered He approved it as agreeing in all points with the word of God And so suffered Martyrdom I think this man was neither for Parity nor against Liturgies But to proceed The excellent Mr. Wishart as he had spent some time in England as was told before so it seems he returned to Scotland of English I am confident not of Presbyterian Principles For he was not only for the Lawfulness of Private Communion as appeared by his practice but Knox gives us fair intimations that he ministred it by a Set-form I know King Edward's Liturgy was not then composed But it is not to be imagined That the Reformers in England in Wishart's time administred the Sacrament without a Set-form The Extemporary Spirit was not then in vogue And why else could Sir Iohn Borthwick have been charged with the Great Heresy of Commending the English Liturgy However I shall not be peremptory because I have not the opportunity of enquiring at present what Forms the English Reformers had then All I shall say is if they had a Liturgy 't is very probable Wishart used it For as Knox tells us when he celebrated the Eucharist before his Execution After he had blessed the Bread and Wine he took the Bread and Brake it and gave to every one of it bidding each of them Remember that Christ had died for them and feed on it spiritually so taking the Cup he bade them Remember that Christs Blood was shed for them c. So Knox word for word which account I think seems fairly to intimate that Wishart used a Form but if he did what other could it be than such as he had learned in England I have accounted already how Iohn Willock and William Harlaw had served in the English Church before they came to Scotland I might perhaps make a fuller Collection But what needs more Even Knox himself lived in Communion with the Church of England all the time he was in that Kingdom He went not there to keep Conventicles to erect Altar against Altar to gather Churches out of the Church of England to set up separate and schismatical Churches as some of our present Parity-men have sometimes done No he preached in the publick Churches and in subordination to the Bishops and he preached before King Edward himself as he himself tell us in his Admonition to the Professors of the Truth in England which it is very improbable he would have been allowed to have done if he had Condemned the Communion of the Church of England as it was then established For who knows not that in King Edwards time all Schism and Non-Conformity were sufficiently discouraged And through that whole Admonition he still speaks of himself as One of the Ministers of the Church of England Nay If it be Reasonable to Collect mens Sentiments from their Reasonings I am sure in that same Admonition I have enough for my purpose For he reasons upon suppositions and from Principles which clearly condemned Separation from the Church of England as then established For when he gives his thoughts of that fatal Discord which happened between the two great men Somerset and the Admiral as I take it He discourses thus God compelled my tongue says he openly to declare That the Devil and his Ministers the Papists Intended only the Subversion of Gods true Religion by that Mortal Hatred amongst those who ought to have been most assuredly Knit together by Christian Charity And especially that the wicked and envious Papists by that ungodly Breach of Charity diligently minded the overthrow of him Somerset that to his own Destruction procured the Death of his innocent friend and Brother All this trouble was devised by the Devil and his instruments to stop and lett Christ's Disciples and their poor Boat i. e. the Church What can be more plain I say than that Knox here proceeds on suppositions and reasons from Principles which condemned Separation from the Church of England as then established Doth he not suppose that the Church of England as then established was Christ's Boat his Church And that the Sons of the Church of England were Christ's Disciples Doth he not suppose that these two Brothers as Sons of the Church of England ought to have been assuredly knit together by Christian Charity That the Breach between them was ane ungodly Breach of that Charity by which Members of that same Church ought to have been assuredly knit together And
that it was a contrivance of the wicked and envious Papists thereby to Ruine the Church of England Doth he not suppose all these as unundoubted Truths I say Or rather doth he not positively or expresly assert them And now if Separation from the Church of England and condemning her Communion as ane Vnlawful Communion can consist with these principles and suppositions or if he who reasons on these suppositions and from these principles can be deem'd at the same time to have been for the Vnlawfulness of the Communion of the Church of England I must confess I know not what it is to collect mens sentiments from their Principles and Reasonings Whoso pleases may find more of Knox's sentiments to this purpose in his Exhortation to England for the speedy receiving of Christs Gospel Dated from Geneva Ianuary 12. 1559. For there he calls England happy In that God by the power of his verity of late years i. e. in King Edward's time had broken and destroyed the intolerable yoke of her spiritual Captivity and brought her forth as it had been from the bottom of Hell and from the Thraldom of Satan in which she had been holden blinded by Idolatry and Superstition to the fellowship of his Angels and the possession of that rich Inheritance prepared to his Dearest Children with Christ Iesus his Son And a little after he says of the Church of England that in that same King Edward's days she was a Delectable Garden planted by the Lords own hand And in his Letter to Secretary Cecil from Diep April 10 1559. he tells him He expects that same favour from him which it becometh one Member of Christs Body to have for another And in his Letter to Q. Elizabeth from Edenburgh 28 Iuly 1559. He renders thanks unfeignedly to God That it hath pleased him of his eternal Goodness to exalt her Head to the Manifestation of his Glory and the Extirpation of Idolatry Is this like the Clamour which has been ordinary with our Presbyterians about the Idolatry of the Church of England And in the conclusion of that Letter he prays that the Spirit of the Lord Iesus may so rule her in all her Actions and Enterprizes that in her God may be Glorified his Kirk Edified and she as a lively Member of the same may be ane Example of Virtue and Godliness of Life to all others Are these like the sayings of one who in the mean time judged the Communion of the Church of England ane Unlawful Communion 'T is true indeed Iohn Knox was displeased with some things in the English Liturgy He thought she had some Modes and Ceremonies there which were scandalous as symbolizing too much with the Papists and it cannot be denied that he disturbed the peace of the English Church at Francfort But if I mistake not he did so not that he thought the terms of her Communion truly sinful but that he judged his own or rather the Genevian Model purer For 't is reasonable to think he proceeded on the same principles and was of the same sentiments with his Master Calvin And nothing can be clearer than that Calvin did not condemn the things scrupled at as impious or unlawful but as not agreeable to his Standard of Purity as appears from the Citation on the Margin and might easily be made appear more fully if one were put to it but 't is needless now considering that all I aim at is that it cannot be inferred from what Knox did at Francfort That he judged the Communion of the Church of England ane Vnlawful Communion tho I must confess in making these stirs he proceeded not according to the true Catholick Principles of Christian Communion But enough of him at present To proceed As our Reformers thus generally looke upon the Church of England as a true Church and her Communion as a Lawful Communion so after our Reformation was established those of the Church of England had the same sentiments of the Church of Scotland The Ambassadors who at any time for many years came from England to the Scottish Court made no scruple to live in the Communion of the Church of Scotland and joyn in her publick Worship Thus the Earl of Bedford who came to assist at the Solemnization of the Princes afterwards K. Iames the Sixth's Baptism Anno 1566. went daily to Sermon i. e. by a Synecdoche very familiar in Scotland to the publick Worship Neither did I ever observe the least intimation in any monument of these times I have seen of these two Churches having opposite Communions till many years after the Reformation But I have insisted long enough on this Consideration The sum whereof is briefly this Our Reformers so far as can appear from their private sentiments and practices lookt upon the Church of England as a true Christian Church They lived in her Communion when they had occasion to be within her Bounds not one of them condemned her Communion as ane Vnlawful Communion not one of them set up Conventicles in England when they were there nor erected separate Churches c. From all which it seems to follow at least very probably That they reformed generally upon the same Principles intirely upon the same as to Church Communion The reason why I have insisted so long on this argument is that it smooths the way for the next which is 2. That our Reformers in their publick deeds openly and solemnly profest that they were of one Religion one Communion with the Church of England This as I take it is a point of considerable importance and therefore I shall endeavour to set it at least in a competent Light 1. Then Unity of Religion and by good Consequence I think Oneness of Communion between the Scottish and the English Protestants was the great Argument insisted on by the Scots in their Addresses to England for Assistance to turn out the French and establish the Reformation in Scotland Anno 1559 And it was one of the main Grounds on which all that great Revolution was transacted that year and the next viz. 1560. Take the account as I have it from that which is commonly called Knox his History When the Lords of the Congregation found it would be necessary for them to implore foreign Assistance for driving out the French then the great Obstacles to the Reformation They resolved in the first place to apply to England and the Reason given for this Resolution was That ENGLAND WAS OF THE SAME RELIGION Or if ye please take it in the Authors own words We thought good to seek aid and support of all Christian Princes against her the Queen Regents Tyranny in case we should be more sharply persued AND BECAUSE THAT ENGLAND WAS OF THE SAME RELIGION and lay next unto us it was thought expedient first to prove them c. It was rational enough to try there first indeed considering what I have already observed concerning Queen Elizabeth And Tryed it was and
found successful For Secretary Cecil no sooner heard of their intention than he sent them word That their Enterprize misliked not the English Council Upon the sight of this great Ministers Letter which brought them so comfortable news they instantly return'd ane Answer Knox has it word for word I shall only take ane Abstract of what is proper for my present purpose In short then They perceive their Messenger Master Kircaldie of Grange hath found Cecil ane unfeigned favourer of Christ's true Religion As touching the Assurance of a perpetual Amity to stand betwixt the two Realms as no earthly thing is more desired by them so they crave of God to be made the Instruments by which the Unnatural Debate which hath so long continued between the Nations may be composed To the Praise of Gods Name and the Comfort of the Faithful in both Realms If the English Wisdom can foresee and devise how the same may be brought to pass they may perswade themselves not only of the Scottish Consent and Assistance but of their Constancy as Men can promise to their lives end And of Charge and Commandment to be left by them to their posterity that the Amity between the Nations IN GOD contracted and begun may be by them kept inviolate for Ever Their Confederacy Amity and League shall not be like the pactions made by worldly men for worldly profit but as they Require it FOR GODS CAUSE so they will call upon his Name for the Observation of it As this their Confederacy requires Secresy so they doubt not the English Wisdom will communicate it only to such as they know to be favourers of such A GODLY CONJUNCTION And in their opinion it would much help if the Preachers both in perswasion and in publick prayers as theirs in Scotland do would commend the same unto the people And thus after their most humble Commendation to the Queen's Majesty whose Reign they wish may be prosperous and long to the Glory of God and Comfort of his Church they heartily commit him to the Protection of the Omnipotent Given at Edenburgh Iuly 17. Anno 1559. Before I proceed further I must tell my Reader that all our Historians are extreamly defective as to this great Transaction between Scotland and England I am now accounting for None of them neither Buchanan nor Lesly nor Spotswood hath this Letter except Knox and he calls it the first Letter to Sir William Cecil from the Lords of the Congregation which imports there were more as no doubt there were many and yet he hath not so much as a second Besides I find by Knox Buchanan and Spotswood that in November 1559 Secretary Maitland was sent by the Lords of the Congregation to treat with the Queen of England I find likewise that he managed the matter so and brought it to such maturity that immediately upon his return the League between the Queen of England and the Scottish Lords was transacted and finished and yet I can no where find what Commission he had nor what Instructions how he manag'd his business nor upon what terms the Queen of England and He came to an Agreement and several other such lamentable defects I find so that it is not possible for me to give so exact a Deduction of such ane important Matter as were to be wished Tho I doubt not if it had been clearly and fully deduced it might have brought great Light to many things about our Reformation which now so far as I know are buried in Obscurity Any man may readily imagine how sensible one that would perform my present task must needs be of so great a disadvantage However when we cannot have what we would we must satisfy our selves the best way we can And so I return to my purpose which tho I cannot dispatch so punctually as might be desired yet I hope to do it sufficiently and to the satisfaction of all sober tho not nicely critical Enquirers To go on then By the aforementioned Letter you see The Lords of the Congregation referr'd it to the Wisdom of the English Council to foresee and devise the Means and Assurances they are the very words of the Letter how ane effectual Confederacy might be made between them for Gods Cause Now let us reason a little upon the common principles of prudence where Matter of Fact is so defective What was more natural for the English Council to Require than that now that the English Reformation was perfected and legally established and the Scottish was only in forming the Scots should engage to transcribe the English Copy and establish their Reformation upon that same foot i. e. receive the Doctrine Worship Rites and Government of the Church of England so that there might be no difference between the two Churches but both might be of the same Constitution so far as the necessary distinction of the two States would allow The point in Agitation was a Confederacy in opposition to Popery and for the security of the Reformed Religion in both Kingdoms It was obvious therefore to foresee that it would be the stronger and every way the better suited to that great End if both Churches stood on one bottom For who sees not that Different Constitutions are apt to be attended with Different Customs which in process of time may introduce Different Sentiments and Inclinations Who sees not that the smallest Differences are apt to create jealousies divisions cross-interests And that there 's nothing more necessary than Vniformity for preserving Vnity Besides Queen Elizabeth was peculiarly concerned to crave this There 's nothing more necessary to support a State especially a Monarchy than Vnity of Religion It was for the Support of her State the Security of her Monarchy that she was to enter into this Confederacy She was affraid of the Queen of Scotland's pretensions to the Crown of England For this cause she was confederating with the Queen of Scotland's Subjects that she might have them of her side It was her concern therefore to have them as much secured to her interests as possibly she could they were then at a great Bay without her succour and had referred it to her and her Council to foresee and devise the terms on which she would grant it And now laying all these things together what was more natural I say than that she should demand that they should be of the same Religion and their Church of the same Constitution with the Church of England This politick was so very obvious that 't is not to be imagined she and her wise Council could overlook it And tho it had been no where upon Record that she craved it yet the common sense of mankind would stand for its Credibility what shall we say then if we find it recorded by ane Historian whose Honesty is not to be questioned in this matter And such ane one we have even Buchanan himself tho he misplaces it and narrates it a long time after it
than the Reformers of other Churches In consequence of this I have further shewed that from all the monuments of these times I have seen not so much as One of our Reformers can be adduced as asserting the Presbyterian side of this Controversie Lastly I have I think made it evident that our Reformers went very much upon the same Principles on which the English Reformers went who still continued Episcopacy unquestionably on many Principles of great weight and importance as to the Constitution and Communion the Government and Polity of the Church which staid in direct opposition and contradiction to the Principles of our present Presbyterians And now let any judicious and impartial person lay these things together and then let him ingenuously determine whether it be not highly incredible that our Reformers were for the divine institution and indispensible Right of Parity and the Vnlawfulness of Prelacy which is the Principle at least the Profession of our present Presbyterians Yet after all this I must tell my Reader that I have insisted on these things so much as I have done principally for smoothing the way for the Evidences I am yet to produce for the certainty of my side of the Second Enquiry And I am content that these things I have already discoursed should pass for no more than Rational Presumptions till I have tried if more strength can be added to them and they can be rendered more cogent and concluding by a succession of plain positive direct and formal proofs of my Assertion And to engage my Readers attention I dare adventure to promise him that to as high a degree as the nature of the thing is capable of at least can reasonably bear And so without further address I thus proceed Before our Reformation was established by Law our Reformers addressed to the Government by several Petitions that Religion and the Church might be reformed I shall take notice of Three all pertinent to my purpose One of them is no where that I have seen set down at length the other two are in Knox his History That which is no where set down at length is to be seen abridged in Buchdâ—aâ— Lesly and Spotswood but with some little variation For Buchanan has given that Article which I am at present concerned aboutâ— according to his way in general terms Thus Vt Ministrorum Electio juxtà antiquam Ecclesiae consuetudinem penes populum esset Spotswood has translated Buchanan's words faithfully enough in this matter as he doth in many other things but Lesly gives it a little more distinctly thus Vt EPISCOPI deinceps PASTORES illi Dominorum ac Nobilium cujuscunque DIOICESIS hi PAROCHORVM assensione ac voluntate ad BENEFICIA cooptentur That this Petition thus abridged by these three Historians was a Petition different from that which we have published at length in Knox seems unquestionable for that which is in Knox has not one syllable about the Election of Ministers and beside Buchanan fairly insinuates that there was another distinct from that which he had abridged tho not much different For thus he discourses Papani Edinburgi ad eadem FERE postulata quaeper Nobilitatem ad eam Reginam proregem sunt delata PENE paribus usi sunt Responsis Now if it had been the same Petition why would he have said ad eadem FERE postulata and PENE paribus Responsis This I take notice of that my Presbyterian Brethren may not have occasion to â—avil at the Article as it is in Lesly as if it were not genuine because it is not in the Petition recorded by Knox and from him most imperfectly abridged by Calderwood their two great and authentick Historians For as for Mr. Petrie he was so wise as not to trouble himself with either of these Petitions perceiving belike that neither of them was favourable to his beloved Parity To proceed now with the Article as it is in Lesly If he has set it down faithfully I think we have a fair account of the sentiments of our Reformers concerning Mother Parity so very fair that he who runs may read it The Question then is whither Lesly has faithfully transmitted this Article to us And for the affirmative I offer these Reasons 1. There 's no reason to doubt of his integrity in this matter he was a zealous Papist and a Bishop to boot And it is evident as he was either of these it was not his interest to make our Reformers such friends to Episcopacy if they were not such really For if they had not made that Distinction between Bishops and Presbyters if they had professed the Divine Right of Parity he had had good ground for accusing them of receding from the undoubted principles and universal practice of the Catholick Church in all times and in all places in a point of so great weight and consequence in the Government of the Church Ane occasion which one of his Zeal for his party would not probably have neglected to take hold of far less would he have lied so palpably to save the Reputation of his Adversaries 2. As he had no temptation to falsify in this matter so he had all other Qualifications of a credible Witness He lived in these times he himself was a Clergy man then probably he was a Member of that same Convocation to which the Petition was offered and I think no man will doubt of his Abilities to comprehend such a matter Indeed 3. If he forged this Article he was ridiculously impudent at Forging for as he did it without any imaginable necessity without any shadow of a degree of subserviency to his Cause so he put himself upon a necessity of forging more even a good long Answer which he says was return'd to that Article by the Convocation viz. That it was not reasonable they should alter the Method of Electing Bishops and Presbyters prescribed by the Canon Law especially in the time of the Queens Nonage Her Prerogative was interested in the matter She with the Popes Consent had power to nominate the Prelates and to take that Power out of her hands without her Consent or before she came to perfect Age was notoriously as well as undutifully to invade her Royalty Ane Answer indeed exactly fitted for the Article as he hath transmitted it But the truth is 4. That he neither forged the Article nor the Convocations Answer to it we have further undoubted Evidence for I have seen ane Old Manuscript Scottish History which I can produce if I am put to it which exactly agrees with Lesly as to the Article for thus it hath it The Election of the Bishops and Kirkmen to pass by the Temporal Lords and People of their Diocesses and Parishes And Buchanan upon the matter gives that same account of the Convocations Answer affirming that As to the Election of Ministers they answered That such Matters were to be regulated by the Canon Law or the Decrees of the Council of Trent
were deposable by the Superintendent of the Diocess and the Elders of the Parishes where they were Ministers but of this more hereafter But by that same First Book of Discipline the Superintendent was to be judged by the Ministers and Elders of his whole Province over which he was appointed and if the Ministers and Elders of the Province were negligent in correcting him one or two other Superintendents with their Ministers and Elders were to conveen him providing it were within his own Province or Chief Town and inflict the Censure which his Offence deserved Of the Reasonableness of this afterward 4. There was as remarkable a difference in point of Ordination which in the then Scottish stile was called Admission Private Ministers were to be admitted by their Superintendents as we shall find afterwards But by the First Book of Discipline Head 5. Superintendents were to be admitted by the Superintendents next adjacent with the Ministers of the Province 5. In the case of Translation the General Assembly holden at Edenburgh Decem. 25. 1562. Gives power to every Superintendent within his own bounds in his Synodal Assembly with consent of the most part of the Elders and Ministers of Kirks to translate Ministers from one Kirk to another as they shall consider the Necessity Charging the Minister so translated to obey the Voice and Commandment of the Superintendent But according to the First Book of Discipline Head 5. No Superintendent might be translated at the pleasure or request of any one Province without the Council of the whole Church and that for grave Causes and Considerations 6. A special care was to be taken of his Qualifications and Abilities for such ane important office for thus it is appointed by the First Book of Discipline Head 5. That after the Church shall be established and three years are past no man shall be called to the Office of a Superintendent who hath not two years at least given a proof of his faithful Labours in the Ministry A Caution simply unapplyable to Parish Ministers 7. He had a living provided for him by the First Book of Discipline Head 5. about five times as much yearly as was alotted for any private Minister And it is to be observed that this was in a time when the Popish Bishops still brooked their Benefices But when the Resolution was Anno 1567 to deprive all the Popish Clergy it was agreed to in the General Assembly by the Churchmen on the one hand and the Lords and Barons on the other That Superintendents should succeed in their places as both the Mss. and Spotswood have it expresly 8. Superintendents by vertue of their Office were constant Members of the General Assemblies Therefore the General Assembly holden at Perth Iune 25. 1563. statuted That every Superintendent be present the first day of the Assembly under the pain of 40 sh. to be given to the poor without Remission So it is in the Mss. but Petrie has it barely That they shall conveen on the first day of every Assembly And it seems because that punishment had not sufficient influence on them it was again ordained by the G. Ass. at Edenburgh March 6. 1573. That they shall be present in the Assembly the first day before noon under the pain of losing one half of their stipend for a year c. So both the Mss. and Petrie But as we shall find afterwards such presence of Parish Ministers was not allowed far less necessary 9. It belonged to them to try those who stood Candidates for the Ministery thus 1. B. of Disc. Head 4. Such as take upon them the Office of Preachers who shall not be found qualified therefore by the Superintendent are by him to be placâ—d Readers And again Head 5. No Child nor person within the age of 21 years may be admitted to the Office of a Reader but such must be chosen and admitted by the Superintendent as for their Gravity and Discretion may grace the Function that they are called unto And the Ass. at Edenburgh Dec. 15. 1562. Ordains That Inhibition be made against all such Ministers as have not been presented by the people or a part thereof to thâ— Superintendent and he after Examination and Tryal has not appointed them to their Charges So the Mss. and so Petrie and Spotswood cites another Act of the General Assembly at Edenburgh 1564. to the same purpose 10. As appears by that Act of the Assembly Decem. 25. 1562. just now cited and the 7 Act Parl. 1 Iac. 6. cited before also Superintendents had the power of granting Collations upon presentations And the Assembly at Perth holden in Iune 1563. appoints That when any Benefice chances to vaik or is now vacant that a qualified person be presented to the Superintendent of that Province where the Benefice lyeth and that he being found sufficient be admitted c. So I find it cited by the Author of Episcopacy not abjured in Scotland 11. A Superintendent had power to plant Ministers in Churches where the people were negligent to present timeously and indeed that power devolved much sooner into his hands by the First Book of Discipline Head 4. than it did afterwards into the hands of either Bishop or Presbytery for there it is ordered That if the people be found negligent in electing a Minister the space of forty days the Superintendent with his Counsel may present unto them a man whom they judge apt to feed the flock c. And as he had thus the power of trying and collating Ministers and planting Churches in the case of a Ius Devolutum So 12. He had the power of Ordination which as I said was then called Admission as is evident from the First Book of Discipline cap. 5. and several Acts of Assemblies already cited 13. All Presbyters or Parish Ministers once admitted to Churches were bound to pay Canonical Obedience to their Superintendents Thus in the Assembly at Edenburgh Iune 30. 1562. It was concluded by the whole Ministers assembled that all Ministers should be subject to the Superintendents in all lawful admonitions as is prescribed as well in the Book of Discipline as in the Election of Superintendents So the Mss. And by that aforecited Act of the Assembly at Edenburgh Decem. 25. 1562. Ministers translated from one Church to another are commanded to obey the Voice and Commandment of the Superintendent Indeed it was part of ane Article presented by the Church to the Council May 27. 1561. That ane Act should be made appointing a civil Punishment for such as disobeyed or contemned the Superintendents in their Function 14. He had power to visit all the Churches within his Diocess and in that Visitation they are the words of the First Book of Discipline Head 5. To try the Life Diligence and Behaviour of the Ministers the Order of their Churches the Manners of their People how the Poor are provided and how
believe he would institute a Model of Government for his Church which could not answer the ends of its institution And is it not plain that Parity cannot answer the ends for which Church Government was instituted if the Church can be reduced to that State that the Governors thereof forced by Necessity must lay it aside and for a time establish a Prelacy Besides What strange Divinity is it to maintain that Parity is of divine Institution and yet may be laid aside in Cases of Necessity 'T is true G. R. in his True Representation of Presbyterian Government cited before is bold to publish to the world such Divinity But let him talk what he will of the Case of Necessity the Force of Necessity the Law of Necessity let him put it in as many Languages as he pleases as well as he hath done in Latin telling that Necessitas quicquid coegit defendit tho I must confess I have seen few Authors more unhappy at Latin And all that shall never perswade me ought never perswade any Christian that any Necessity can oblige Christians to forsake far less to cross Christs institutions for if it can oblige to do so in one Case why not in all Cases Indeed to talk of crossing Christs institutions when forced to it by the Laws of Necessity what is it else than to open a Door to Gnosticism to Infidelity to Apostacy to all imaginable kinds of Antichristian Perfidy and Villany But enough of this at present That which I am concerned for is only this that being it was so very obvious and easy for our Reformers to have cast the very first Scheme of the Government of the Church according to the Rules and Exigencies of Parity if they had believed the divine and indispensable institution of it and being that they did it not we have all the reason in the world to believe that they believed no such principle For my part I am so far from thinking it reasonable that Prelacy should be only needful where there is a scarcity of men qualified to be Ministers that on the contrary I do profess I am of opinion that Prelacy seems to be every whit as needful and expedient if not more supposing we had it in our power to cut and carve as we say on Christs institutions where there are many as where there are few Ministers Sure I am Experience hath taught so and teaches so daily and as sure I am it can with great reason be accounted for why it should be so but if it is so I think it is only help at a dead Lift as we say to say that Superintendency was established at our Reformation only because of the Scarcity of men qualified to be Ministers And so I proceed to our Brethrens next Plea which is SECONDLY That Superintendency was not the same with Episcopacy Calderwood assigns seven or eight differences between Superintendents and Bishops and his faithful Disciple G. R. in his First Vindication in answer to the first Question resumes the same Plea and insists mostly on the same Differences Calderwood reckons thus 1. In the Election Examination and Admission of Ministers the Superintendents were bound to the Order prescribed in the 4 th Head of the First Book of Discipline which is far different from the Order observed by Prelates 2. Superintendents kept not the bounds nor the limits of the old Diocesses 3. Superintendents might not remain above twenty days in any place till they had passed through the whole bounds must preach at least thrice in the week must stay no longer in the Chief Town of their Charge than three or four Months at most but must re-enter in Visitation of the rest of the Kirks in their bounds Bishops think preaching the least of their Charge 4. The Election Examination and Admission of the Superintendent is set down far different from the Election Examination and Admission of Bishops now adays c. 5. Superintendents were admitted without other Ceremonies than sharp Examination c. To the Inauguration of a Bishop is required the Metropolitans Consecrations 6. There were no degrees of superior and inferior provincial and general Superintendents It is otherwise in the Hierarchy of the Prelates c. I have set down these six huge Differences without ever offering to consider them particularly are they not huge Differences Behold them examine them carefully is not each of them as essential and specifick as another Think not courteous Reader it was Malice or Ill-will to Episcopacy made our Author muster up these Differences These make but a small number if he had been acted by passion or vicious Byass if his Malice had been vigorous and earnest to discharge it self that way he could have easily reckoned six hundred every whit as considerable Differences He might have told them that Bishops wore Black Hats and Superintendents Blue Bonnets that Bishops wore Silks and Superintendents Tartan that Bishops wore Gowns and Cassocks and Superintendents Trews and slasht Doublets and God knows how many such differences he might have readily collected And if he had adduced such notable differences as these he had done every way as Philosophically and as like a good Difference-maker But in the mean time what is all this to Parity or Imparity amongst the Governors of the Church Do these differences he has adduced distinguish between Bishops and Superintendents as to preheminence of power and the essentials of Prelacy Do they prove that Superintendents had no Prerogative no Authority no Jurisdiction over Parish Ministers I have treated him thus coursly because I know no other way of treatment Authors deserve who will needs speak Nonsense rather than speak nothing 'T is true indeed One difference he has mentioned which seems something material and therefore I shall endeavor to account for it with some more seriousness It is that by the Constitution as we have it both in the First Book of Discipline and the Form and Order of electing Superintendents Superintendents were made obnoxious to the Tryal and Censures of the Ministers within their own Diocesses This I acknowledge to be true and I acknowledge further that herein there was a considerable difference between them and Bishops as Bishops stood eminenced above Presbyters in the primitive times and as they ought to stand eminenced above them in all well constituted Churches But then I have these things to say 1. I shall not scruple to acknowledge that herein our Reformers were in the wrong and that this was a great Error in the Constitution I do avowedly profess I don't think my self bound to justify every thing that was done by our Reformers If that falls to any mans share if falls to theirs who established this Article in the Claim of Right which gave occasion to this whole Enquiry That our Reformers herein were in the wrong I say I make no scruple to acknowledge and I think it cannot but be obvious to all who have spent but a few thoughts about matters of
I shall be put to it But I think his own Act which he cited tho most ridiculously as shall be made appear afterwards in the immediately preceeding paragraph may be good enough for him For He concludes it as evident that Episcopal Jurisdiction over the Protestants was condemned by Law in the Parliament 1567. because it is there statute and ordained that no other Iurisdiction Ecclesiastical be acknowledged within this Realm than that which is and shall be within this same Kirk established presently or which sloweth therefrom concerning preaching the Word correcting of Manners administration of Sacraments and Prelatical Jurisdiction was not then in Scotland So he reasons Now I dare adventure to refer it to his own judgment whither it will not by the same way of reasoning follow and be as evident that the Iurisdiction of Superintendents was allowed of by this same Act seeing he himself cannot have the Brow to deny that it was then in its vigor and daily exercised I think this is Argument good enough ad hominem But as I said we shall have more of this Act of Parliament hereafter Thus I have dispelled some of these clouds our Presbyterian Brethren use to raise about the Prelacy of Superintendents perhaps there may be more of them but considering the weakness of these which certainly are the strongest it is easy to conjecture what the rest may be if there are any more of them And thus I think I have fairly accounted for the Sentiments of our Reformers in relation to Parity or Imparity amongst the Governors of the Church during the First Scheme into which they cast the Government of the Church BEFORE I proceed to the next I must go back a little and give a brief Deduction of some things which may afford considerable Light both to what I am now to insist on and what I have insisted on already Tho I am most unwilling to rake into the Mistakes or Weaknesses of our Reformers yet I cannot but say that our Reformation was carried on and at first established upon some principles very disadvantageous to the Church both as to her Polity and Patrimony There were Mistakes in the Ministers on the one hand and sinister and worldly designs amongst the Laity on the other and both concurred unhappily to produce Great Evils in the Result There was a principle had then got too much sooting amongst some Protestant Divines viz. That the best way to reform a Church was to recede as far from the Papists as they could to have nothing in common with them but the Essentials the necessary and indispensable Articles and Parts of Christian Religion whatever was in its nature indifferent and not positively and expresly commanded in the Scriptures if it was in fashion in the Popish Churches was therefore to be laid aside and avoided as a Corruption as having been abused and made subservient to Superstition and Idolatry This principle Iohn Knox was fond of and maintained zealously and the rest of our reforming Preachers were much acted by his Influences In pursuance of this principle therefore when they compiled the First Book of Discipline they would not reform the Old Polity and purge it of such Corruptions as had crept into it keeping still by the main Draughts and Lineaments of it which undoubtedly had been the wiser the safer and every way the better course as they were then admonisht even by some of the Popish Clergy But they laid it quite aside and instead thereof hammered out a New Scheme keeping at as great a distance from the Old one as they could and as the Essentials of Polity would allow them establishing no such thing however as Parity as I have fully proven And no wonder for as Imparity has obviously more of Order Beauty and Vsefulness in iâ—â— Aspect so it had never so much as by Dreaming entered their Thoughts that it was a Limb of Antichrist or a Relique of Popery That our Reformers had the aforesaid principle in their view all alongst while they digested the First Book of Discipline is plain to every one that reads it Thus In the First Head they condemn Binding Men and Women to a several and disguised Apparel to the superstitious observing of Fasting Days Keeping of holy days of certain Saints commanded by Man such as be all these THE PAPISTS HAVE INVENTED as the Feasts of the Apostles Martyrs Christmas c. In the Second Head The Cross in Baptism and Kneeling at the Reception of the Symbols in the Eucharist In the Third Head they require not only Idolatry but all its Monuments and Places to be suppressed and amongst the rest Chappels Cathedral Churches and Colleges i. e. as I take it Collegiate Churches And many other such instances might be adduced particularly as to our present purpose They would not call those whom they truly and really stated in a Prelacy above their Brethren Prelates or Bishops but Superintendents They would not allow of Imposition of hands in Ordinations They made Superintendents subject to the Censures of their own Synods they changed the bounds of the Diocesses they would not allow the Superintendents the same Revenues which Prelates had had before They would not suffer Ecclesiastical Benefices to stand distinguished as they had been formerly but they were for casting them all for once into one heap and making a new Division of the Churches Patrimony and parcelling it out in Competencies as they thought it most expedient In short A notable instance of the prevalency of this principle we have even in the year 1572. after the Restauration of the Old Polity was agreed to For then by many in the General Assembly Exceptions were taken at the Titles of Archbishop Dean Arch-Deacon Chancellor Chapter c. as being Popish Titles and offensive to the Ears of good Christians As all Historians agree Buâ— then As they were for these and the like alterations in pursuance of this principle so they were zealous for and had no mind to part with the Patrimony of the Church Whatever had been dedicated to Religious Uses whatever under the notion of either Spirituality or Temporality had belonged to either Seculars or Regulars before they were positive should still continue in the Churches hands and be applied to her Maintainance and Advantages condemning all Dilapidations Alienations Impropriations and Laick Usurpations and Possessions of Church Revenues c. as is to be seen fully in the Sixth Head of the Book Thus I say our Reformers had digested a New Scheme of Polity in the First Book of Discipline laying aside the Old one because they thought it too much Popish And now that we have this Book under consideration it will not be unuseful nay it will be needful for a full understanding of what follows to fix the time when it was written Knox and Calderwood follows him says it was written after the Dissolution of the Parliament which sate in August 1560. and gave the legal Establishment to the
Having thus removed this seeming difficulty I return to my purpose The Earl of Lennox was then Regent He was murthered in the time of the Parliament So at that time things were in confusion and these Commissioners from the General Assembly could do nothing in their business The Earl of Mar succeeded in the Regency Application was made to him It was agreed to between his Grace and the Clergy who applied to him that a Meeting should be kept between so many for the Church and so many for the State for adjusting matters For this end ane Assembly was kept at Leith on the 12 of Ianuary 1571 2. By this Assembly Six were delegated to meet with as many to be nominated by the Council to treat reason and conclude concerning the Settlement of the Polity of the Church After diverse Meetings and long Deliberation as Spotswood has it they came to an Agreement which was in effect That the Old Polity should revive and take place only with some little alterations which seemed necessary from the Change that had been made in Religion Whoso pleases may see it more largely in Calderwood who tells us that the whole Scheme is Registred in the Books of Council more briefly in Spotswood and Petrie In short It was a Constitution much the same with that which we have ever since had in the times of Episcopacy For by this Agreement those who were to have the Old Prelatical power were also to have the Old Prelatical Names and Titles of Archbishops and Bishops the Old Division of the Diocesses was to take place the Patrimony of the Church was to run much in the Old Channel particularly express provision was made concerning Chapters Abbots Priors c. That they should be continued and enjoy their Old Rights and Priviledges as Churchmen and generally things were put in a regular Course This was the Second Model not a new one of Polity established in the Church of Scotland after the Reformation at a pretty good distance I think from the Rules and Exigencies of Parity The truth is both Calderwood and Petrie acknowledge it was Imparity with a witness The thing was so manifest they had not the brow to deny it all their Endeavours are only to impugne the Authority of this Constitution or raise Clouds about it or find Weaknesses in it So far as I can collect no man ever affirmed that at this time the Government of the Church of Scotland was Presbyterian except G. R. who is truly singular for his skill in these matters But we shall have some time or other occasion to consider him In the mean time let us consider Calderwood's and Petrie's Pleas against this Establishment They may be reduced to these four 1. The Incompetency of the Authority of the Meeting at Leith in January 1571 2. 2. The Force which was at that time put upon the Ministers by the Court which would needs have that Establishment take place 3. The Limitedness of the power then granted to Bishops 4. The Reluctancies which the subsequent Assemblies discovered against that Establishment These are the most material Pleas they insist on and I shall consider how far they may hold The 1. Plea is the Incompetency of the Authority of the Meeting at Leith Ian. 12. 1571 2. which gave Commission to the Six for agreeing with the State to such ane Establishment It is not called ane Assembly but a Convention in the Register The ordinary Assembly was not appointed to be holden till the 6 th of March thereafter As it was only a Convention so it was in very great haste it seems and took not time to consider things of such importance so deliberately as they ought to have been considered It was a corrupt Convention for it allowed Master Robert Pont a Minister to be a Lord of the Session These are the Reasons they insist on to prove the Authority of that Meeting incompetent And now to examine them briefly When I consider these Arguments and for what end they are adduced I must declare I cannot but admire the Force of prejudice and partiality how much they blind mens Eyes and distort their Reasons and byass them to the most ridiculous Undertakings For What tho the next ordinary Assembly was not appointed to meet till March thereafter Do not even the Presbyterians themselves maintain the Lawfulness yea the Necessity of calling General Assemblies extraordinarily upon extraordinary occasions pro re nata as they call it How many such have been called since the Reformation How much did they insist on this pretence Anno 1638 And What tho the Register calls this Meeting a Convention was it therefore no Assembly Is there such an opposition between the words Convention and Assembly that both cannot possibly signify the same thing Doth not Calderwood acknowledge that they voted themselves ane Assembly in their second Session Doth he not acknowledge that all the ordinary Members were there which used to constitute Assemblies But what if it can be found that ane undoubted uncontroverted Assembly own'd it as ane Assembly and its Authority as the Authority of ane Assembly What is become of this fine Argument then But can this be done indeed Yes it can and these same very Authors have given it in these same very Histories in which they use this as ane Argument and not very far from the same very pages Both of them I say tell that the General Assembly holden at Perth in August immediately thereafter made ane Act which began thus Forasmuch as the Assembly holden in Leith in January last c. But if it was ane Assembly yet it was in too great haste it did not things deliberately Why so No Reason is adduced no Reason can be adduced for saying so The Subject they were to treat of was no new one it was a Subject that had imployed all their Heads for several months before Their great business at that time was to give a Commission to some Members to meet with the Delegates of the State to adjust matters about the Polity and Patrimony of the Church This Commission was not given till the Third Session as Calderwood himself acknowledges Where then was the great haste Lay it in doing a thing in their Third Session which might have been done in the First But were not these Commissioners in too great haste to come to ane Agreement when they met with the Delegates of the State Yes if we may believe Petrie for he says That the same day viz. January 16. the Commissioners conveened and conclued c. But he may say with that same integrity whatever he pleases For not to insist on Spotswood's account who says it was after diverse Meetings and long Deliberation that they came to their Conclusion not to insist on his authority I say because he may be suspected as partial doth not Calderwood expresly acknowledge that they began their Conference upon the
and convince them from Scripture and Antiquity and Ecclesiastical History c. that Episcopacy was of divine Institution or the best or a lawful Government of the Church If I mistake not such Topicks in these times were not much thought on by our Statesmen But if they were such Arguments as I have given a Specimen of which they insisted on as no doubt they were if they insisted on any then I would fain know which of them it was that might not have been as readily insisted on by the Clergy as by the Statesmen Nay considering that there were no Scruples of Conscience then concerning the Lawfulness of such a Constitution how reasonable is it to think that the Clergy might be as forward as the Statesmen could be to insist on these Arguments Especially if it be further considered that Besides these and the like Arguments the Clergy had one very considerable Argument to move them for the Re-establishment of the Old Constitution which was that they had found by Experience that the New Scheme fallen upon in the First Book of Discipline had done much hurt to the Church as I have already observed that by forsaking the Old Constitution the Church had suffered too much already and that it was high time for them now to return to their Old Fond considering at what losses they had been since they had deserted it And all this will appear more reasonable and credible still if two things more be duely considered The First is That the Six Clergymen who were commissioned by the Assembly on this occasion to treat with the State were all sensible men men who understood the Constitution both of Church and State had Heads to comprehend the consequences of things and were very far from being Parity-men The Second is The Oddness to call it no worse of the Reason which our Authors feign to have been the Motive which made the Court at that time so earnest for such ane Establishment namely that thereby They might gripe at the Commodity as Calderwood words it That is possess themselves of the Churches Patrimony What Had the Clergy so suddenly fallen from their daily their constant their continual Claim to the Revenues of the Church Had they in ane instant altered their sentiments about Sacrilege and things consecrated to Holy uses Were they now willing to part with the Churches Patrimony Did that which moved them to be so earnest for this Meeting with the State miraculously flip out of their Minds so that they inconcernedly quate their pretensions and betrayed their own interests Were they all fast asleep when they were at the Conference So much asleep or senseless that they could not perceive the Court intended them such a Trick On the other hand If the Court had such a design as is pretended I must confess I do not see how it was useful for them to fall on such a wild project for accomplishing their purposes Why be at all this pains to re-establish the Old Polity if the only purpose was to rob the Church of her Patrimony Might not that have been done without as well as with it Could they have wished the Church in weaker circumstances for asserting her own Rights than she was in before this Agreement Was it not as easy to have possest themselves of a Bishoprick ane Abbacy a Priory c. when there were no Bishops nor Abbots nor Priors as when there were What a pitiful politick or rather what ane insolent wickedness was it as it were to take a Coat which was no mans and put on one and possess him of it and call it his Coat that they might rob him of it Or making the uncharitable supposition that they could have ventured on such a needless such a mad fetch of iniquity were all the Clergy so short-sighted that they could not penetrate into such a palpable such a gross piece of Cheatry But what needs more 'T is certain that by that Agreement the Churches Patrimony was fairly secured to her and she was put in far better condition than she was ever in before since the Reformation Let any man read over Calderwoods account of the Agreement and he must confess it And yet perhaps the account may be more full and clear in the Books of Council if they be extant 'T is true indeed the Courtiers afterwards played their Tricks and robb'd the Church and it cannot be denied that they got some bad Clergymen who were subâ—ervient to their purposes But this was so 〈◊〉 from being pretended to be aim'd at by 〈◊〉 Courtiers while the Agreement was a mâ—kâ—ng It was so far from these Clergy-mens minds who adjusted matters at that time with the Laity these Courtiers to give them the smallest advantages that way to allow them the least Scope for such Encroachments That on the contrary when afterwards they found the Nobility were taking such Methods and plundering the Church they complained mightily of it as a manifest breach of the Agreement and ane horrid iniquity But whatever Truth is in all this Reasoning I have spent on this point is not much material to my main purpose For whither at that time Episcopacy was imposed upon the Church or not or if imposed whither it was out of a bad design or not affects not in the least the principal Controversie For however it was 't is certain the Church accepted of it at that time which we are bound in Charity to think a sufficient Argument that she was not then of Antiprelatical principles She had no such Article in her Creed as the Divine Right of Parity which is the great point I am concerned for in all this tedious Controversie 3. The Third Plea is The Limitedness of the Power which was then granted to Bishops They had no more Power granted them by this Establishment than Superintendents had enjoyed before This all my Authors insist upon with great Earnestness And I confess it is very true This was provided for both by the Agreement at Leith and by ane Act of the Assembly holden at Eden March 6. 1574. But then 1. If they had the same power which Superintendents had before I think they had truly Prelatic Power they did not act in Parity with other Ministers 2. Tho they had no more power yet it is certain they had more Privilege They were not answerable to their own Synods but only to General Assemblies as is clear even from Calderwoods own account of the agreement at Leith In that point the absurd Constitution in the First Book of Discipline was altered 3. One thing more I cannot but observe here concerning Mr. Carlderwood This judicious Historian when he was concerned to raise Dust about the Prelacy of Superintendents found easily 7 or 8 huge Differences between Superintendents and Bishops And now that he is concern'd to raise Dust about the Prelacy of Bishops he thinks he has gain'd a great point if he makes it the same with the Prelacy of
Superintendents What a mercy was it that ever poor Prelacy out-lived the Dint of such doughty Onsets But it seems it must be a tough-lived thing and cannot be easily chased out of its Nature There is another considerable Thrust made at it by Calderwood and his Disciple G. R. which may come in as a Succedaneum to the former Argument What is it 〈◊〉 is even that in the Gen. Assembly at 〈◊〉 March 6. 1573. David Ferguson was chosen Mâ—â—â—rator who was neither Bishop nor Superiâ—tenâ—ent And so down falls Prelacy But so was 〈◊〉 George Buchanan in the Assembly holden in Iuly 1507. who was neither Superintendent Bishop nor Presbyter and so Down falls Presbytery Nay Down falls the whole Ministery Is not this a hard Lock Prelacy is brought to that it shall not be it self so long as one wrong step can be found to have been made by a Scotch General Assembly I have adduced and discussed all these Plea's not that I thought my Cause in any hazard by them but to let the World see what a party one has to deal with in his Controversie Whatever it be Sense or Nonsense if their Cause requires it they must not want an Argument But to go on But 4. The Fourth and greatest Plea is That this Episcopacy was never owned by the Church It was never allowed by the General Assembly It was only tolerated for three or four years It was protested against as a Corruption As these Articles were concluded without the Knowledge of the Assembly so the whole Assembly opposed them earnestly They were obtruded upon the Church against her Will. The Church from the beginning of the Reformation opposed that kind of Bishops The Church did only for a time yield to Civil Authority yet so that she would endeavour to be free of these Articles These and many more such things are boldly and confidently asserted by Calderwood Petrie and the strenuous Vindicator of the Church of Scotland who seldom misses of saying what Calderwood had said before him and I shall grant they are all said to purpose if they are true But how far they are from being that may sufficiently appear I hope if I can make these things evident 1. That the Agreement at Leith was fairly and frequently allowed approven and insisted on by many subsequent Assemblies 2. That after Episcopacy was questioned and a Party appeared against it it cost them much strugling and much time before they could get it abolished 1. I say The Agreement at Leith was fairly and frequently allowed approven and insisted on by many subsequent Assemblies This Assertion cannot but appear true to any unbyassed Judgment that shall consider but these two things 1. That in Every Assembly for several years after that Establishment or Agreement or Settlement at Leith Bishops were present and sate and voted as such and as such were obliged to be present and sit and vote c. As both Calderwood and Petrie acknowledge and shall be made appear by and by 2. That these two Authors have been at special pains to let the world know how punctually they were tryed and sometimes rebuked and censured for not discharging their Offices as they ought to have done Both Authors I say have been very intent and careful to represent this in their accounts of the subsequent Assemblies I know their purpose herein was to expose the Bishops and cast all the Dirt they could upon Episcopacy But then as I take it their pains that way have luckily furnished me with a plain Demonstration of the falsehood of all they have said in this Plea I am now considering For Would these Assemblies have suffered them to be present and sit and vote as Bishops Would they have tryed and censured them as Bishops Would they have put them to their Duty as Bishops if they had not own'd them for Bishops And was there any other Fond for owning them for Bishops at that time except the Agreement at Leith This alone might be sufficient I say for dispatching this whole Plea Yet 3. To put this matter beyond all possibility of ever being with the least colour of probability controverted hereafter I recommend to the Readers consideration the following Series of Acts made by subsequent Assemblies The Agreement at Leith as was observed before was concludâ—d 〈◊〉 the First day of February Anno 1571 2. 〈◊〉 Ordinary Assembly met at Saint Andrews on the Sixth of March thereafter The Archbishop of St. Andrews newly advanced to that See by the Leith Agreement was present and the first person named as Calderwood himself hath it to be of the Committee that was appointed for Revising the Articles agreed upon at Leith And ane Act was made in that Assembly as it is both in the Mss. and Petrie Ordaining the Superintendent of Fife to use his own Iurisdiction as before in the Provinces not subject to the Archbishop of St. Andrews and requesting him to concur with the said Archbishop in his Visitations or otherwise when he required him until the next Assembly And in like manner the Superintendents of Angus and Lothian without prejudice of the said Archbishop except by Vertue of his Commission By the Assembly holden at Perth August 6. 1572. this Act was made Forasmuch as in the ASSEMBLY not the Convention of the Church holden at Leith in January last Certain Commissioners were appointed to deal with the Nobility and their Commissioners to reason and conclude upon diverse Articles and Heads thought good then to be conferred upon according to which Commission they have proceeded in sundry Conventions is this consistent with Petrie's assertion that the same day they met and concluded and have concluded for that time upon the Heads and Articles as the same produced in this Assembly proport In which being considered are found certain Names as Archbishop Dean Archdeacon Chancellor Chapter which Names are thought slanderous and offensive in the Ears of many of the Brethren appearing to found towards Papistry Therefore the whole Assembly in one voice as well they who were in Commission at Leith as others solemnly protest that they mean not by using such Names to ratify consent or agree to any kind of Papistrie or Superstition wishing rather the said Names to be changed into other Names that are not scandalous and offensive and in like manner they protest That the said Heads and Articles agreed upon be only received as ane Interim until farther and more perfect Order be obtained at the hands of the Kings Majesties Regent and Nobility For the which they will press as occasion shall serve Vnto the which Protestation the whole Assembly in one voice adhere So the Mss. Spot Cald. Pet. This is the Act on which Calderwood Petrie and G. R. found their assertion That Episcopacy as agreed to at Leith was protested against and earnestly opposed by a General Assembly but with what Shadow of Reason let any Man consider For what can be more
plain than that they receive the substance of the Articles and only protest against the Scandalousness of the Names used in them What reason they had for that besides the over-zealous Principle I mentioned before let the curious enquire That 's none of my present business But They protest that they receive these Articles only for ane Interim True But how doth it appear that they received them only for ane Interim out of a Dislike to Episcopacy Had they believed the Divine Right of Parity how could they have received them so much as for ane Interim How could they have received them at all The Truth is there were many things in the Articles which required amendment even tho the Gen. Ass. had believed the Divine Right of Episcopacy And that they did not receive them for ane Interim upon the account of any Dislike they had to Episcopacy shall be made evident by and by In the mean time we have gained one point even That they were received by this Assembly unless receiving for an Interim be not receiving But if they were received I hope it is not true that they were never allowed by a General Assembly And if Episcopacy was not protested against at all and if there was no such word or phrase in the Act as had the least Tendency to import that they judged it a Corruption I hope it may consist well enough with the Laws of Civility to say that G. R. was talking without Book when he said It was protested against as a Corruption by this General Assembly I doubt if he had found any of the Prelatists talking with so much Confidence where they had so little ground he would have been at his beloved Lies and Calumnies But enough of this proceed we in our Series By the Vniversal Order so it is worded in the Mss. of the General Ass. holden at Eden March 6. 157â— 3. It was Statuted and Ordained that all Bishops Superintendents c. present themselves in every Gen. Ass. that hereafter shall be holden the first day of the Assembly before Noon c. Again It is thought most reasonable and expedient That Bishops c. purchase General Letters without any delay commanding all Men to frequent Preaching and Prayers according to the Order received in the Congregations c. In the Ass. holden at Eden Aug. 6. 1573. The Visitation Books of Bishops c. were produced and certain Ministers appointed to examin their Diligence in Visitation In that same Assembly Patoun Bishop of Dunkeld was accused that he had accepted the Name but had not exercised the Office of a Bishop not having proceeded against Papists within his bounds He was also suspected of Simony and Perjury in that contrary to his Oath at the receiving of the Bishoprick he gave Acquittances and the Earl of Argyle received the Profits If these things were true he was a foolish as well as a bad Bishop But then it was evident that this Assembly fairly own'd Episcopacy Further that by the Agreement at Leith express provisions were made against Simony and Dilapidation of Benefices and that Bishops should swear to that purpose c. which I think is not well consistent with the Plea insisted on before viz. That the Agreement at Leith was forced on the Clergy by the Court out of a design it had upon the Revenues of the Church I find these further Acts made by this Assembly in the Mss. Touching them that receive Excommunicates the whole Kirk presently assembled ordains all Bishops c. to proceed to Excommunication against all Receivers of Excommunicate persons if after due Admonition the Receivers rebel and be disobedient The Kirk ordains all Bishops c. in their Synodal Conventions to take a List of the Names of the Excommunicates within their Iurisdictions and bring them to the General Assemblies to be published to other Bishops and Superintendents c. That they by their Ministers in their Provinces may divulgate the same in the whole Countries where Excommunicates haunt The Kirk presently assembled ordains all Bishops and Superintendents c. to conveen before them all such persons as shall be found suspected of consulting with Witches and finding them guilty to cause them make publick Repentance c. That Vniformity may be observed in processes of Excommunication It is ordained that Bishops and Superintendents c. shall direct their Letters to Ministers where the persons that are to be Excommunicated dwell commanding the said Ministers to admonish accordingly and in Case of Disobedience to proceed to Excommunication and pronounce the Sentence thereof upon a Sunday in time of Preaching and thereafter the Ministers to indorse the said Letters making mention of the days of their Admonitions and Excommunication for Disobedience aforesaid and to report to the said Bishops c. according to the Direction contained in the said Letters Petrie has the substance of most of these Acts but has been at pains to obscure them And no wonder for here are so many Branches of true Episcopal power established in the persons of these Bishops that it could not but have appeared very strange that a General Assembly should have conferred them on them if there was such ane aversion then to the Order as he and his Fellows are willing to have the world believe there was But Honest Calderwood was wiser for he hath not so much as ane intimation of any one of them And Calderwood having thus concealed them nay generally all alongst whatever might make against his Cause as much as he could what wonder if G. R. who knows nothing in the matter but what Calderwood told him stumbled upon such a notable piece of Ignorance in his first Vindication as to tell the world That Nothing was restored at Leith but the Image of Prelacy That these Tulchan Bishops had only the Name of Bishops while Noblemen and others had the Revenue and the Church all the power Nay That notwithstanding of all was done at Leith The real Exercise of Presbytery in all its Meetings lesser and greater continued and was allowed But of this more hereafter The Assembly holden at Eden March 6. 1574. Concluded concerning the Iurisdiction of Bishops in their Ecclesiastical Function that it should not exceed the Iurisdiction of Superintendents which heretofore they have had and presently have And that they should be subject to the Discipline of the General Ass. as Members thereof as Superintendents had been heretofore in all sorts And again This Assembly Ordains That no Bishop give Collation of any Benefice within the bounds of Superintendents within his Diocess without their Consent and Testimonials subscribed with their hands And that Bishops within their Diocesses visit by themselves where no Superintendent is and give no Collation of Benefices without the Consent of three well qualified Ministers Here indeed both Calderwood and Petrie appear briskly and transcribe the Mss. word for word Here was something like limiting the power of
the Bishops and that was ane opportunity not to be omitted But as I take it there was no very great reason for this Triumph if the true reason of these Acts be considered as it may be collected from Spotswood and Petrie which was this The Earl of Morâ—on then Regent and sordidly covetous had flattered the Church out of their Possession of the Thirds of the Benefices the only sure Stock they could as yet claim by any Law made since the Reformation of Religion promising instead thereof to settle local'd Stipends upon the Ministers but having once obtain'd his end which was to have the Thirds at his Disposal he forgot his promise and the Ministers found themselves miserably trickt Three or four Churches were cast together and committed to the Care of one Minister and a Farthing to live by could not be got without vast attendance trouble and importunity Besides the Superintendents who had had a principal hand in the Reformation and were Men of great Repute and had spent liberally of their own Estates in the Service of the Church were as ill treated as any body For when they sought their wonted allowances they were told there was no more use for them Bishops were now restored it was their Province to govern the Church Superintendents were now superfluous and unnecessary The Superintendents thus Mal treated what wonder was it if they had their own Resentments of it So when the General Assembly met Areskin Spotswood and Winram three of them and by that time 't is probable there were no more of them alive came to the Assembly offered to dimit their Offices and were earnest that the Kirk would accept of their Dimission They were now turn'd useless Members of the Ecclesiastical body their Office was evacuated they could serve no longer The whole Assembly could not but know the matter and as they knew for what reasons these ancient and venerable persons were so much irritated so their own concern in the same common interest could not but prompt them to a fellow-feeling they knew not how soon the next Mortonian Experiment might be tryed upon themselves they therefore unanimously refuse to accept of the Dimission and whither the Superintendents will or not they continue them in their Offices and not only so but they thought it expedient to renew that Article of the Agreement at Leith viz. That Bishops and Superintendents stood on the same Level had the same Power the same Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction and were to be regulated by the same Canons Importing thereby that both were useful in the Church at such a juncture and that the Church had not received Bishops to the Exauctoration of the few surviving Superintendents and now in their old age rendring them contemptible And who could condemn the Assembly for taking a course that was both so natural and so obvious Nay it was even the Bishops interest as much as any other Assembly-mens to agree to this conclusion For the great business in hand was not about Extent of Power or Point of Dignity had no Incentive to Iealousie or Emulation in it but it was about the Revenues of the Church To secure these against the insatiable Avarice of a Griping Lord Regent A point the Bishops were as nearly concerned in as any Men For if these three Superintendents who had so long born the heat of the day and done such eminent and extraordinary services to the Church should be once sacrificed to Mortons Covetousness how easy might it be for him to make what farther Encroachments he pleased How easy to carry on his project against other men who perhaps had no such Merit no such Repute no such Interest in the Affections of the People This I say was the Reason for which these two Acts were made in this Assembly and not that the Assembly were turning weary of Bishops or were become any way disaffected to them So that Calderwood and Petrie had but little reason to be so boastful for these two Acts. That it was not out of any Dislike to Episcopacy that these two Acts were made is clear as Light from the next Assembly which met in August 1574. For therein the Clergy manifestly continuing of the same Principles and proceeding on the same Reasons order a Petition consisting of Nine Articles to be drawn and presented to the Regent Calderwood indeed doth not mention this Petition But it is in the Mss. and Petrie talks of it but disingenuously for he mentions it only Overly telling That some Articles were sent unto the Lord Regent and he sets down but two whereas as I said there are Nine in the Mss. and most of them looking the Regents Sacrilegious inclinations even Staringly in the Face I shall only Transcribe such of them as cannot when perpended but be acknowledged to have tended that way They are these 1. That Stipends be granted to Superintendents in all time coming in all Countreys destitute thereof whither it be where there is no Bishop or where there are Bishops who cannot discharge their Office as the Bishops of St. Andrews and Glasgow who had too large Diocesses This Article Petrie hath but Minc'd Indeed it is a very considerable one For here you see 1. That in contradiction to the Regents purposes the Assembly owns and stands by the Superintendents They are so far from being satisfied to part with the Three they had that on the contrary they crave to have more and to have provisions for them and that in all Countries where Bishops either are not or are but have too large Diocesses 2. They crave these things For all times coming a Clause of such importance to the main Question that Petrie has unfaithfully left it out And truly I must confess if it were lawful for Men to be Vnfaithful when it might serve that which they conceived to be a Good End he had great Reason to try it in this instance For this Clause when not concealed but brought above board gives a fatal Overthrow to all these popular Plea's of Episcopacy's being then obtruded on the Church forced upon her against her Will tolerated only for a time c. For from this Clause it is as clear as a Clause can make it that this Assembly entertain'd no such imaginations They supposed Episcopacy was to continue for all time coming For for all time Coming they petition that provision may be made for Superintendents where no Bishops are or where their Diocesses are too large for them 2. The Second Article is That in all Burghs where the Ministers are displaced and serve at other Kirks these Ministers be restored to wait on their Cures and be not obliged to serve at other Churches c. Directly striking against the Regents politick of Uniting three or four Churches under the Care of one Minister The 4. Which Petrie also hath is That in all Churches destitute of Ministers such persons may be planted as the Bishops Superintendents and Commissioners shall name and that
Spotswood has done him before me A Man he was who thought no Shame to acknowledge his Error when he was convinced of it For so it was that when after many years Experience he had satisfied himself that Parity had truly proved the Parent of Confusion and disappointed all his Expectations and when through Age and Sickness he was not able in person to attend the General Assembly Anno 1600. he gave Commission to some Brethren to tell them as from him That there was a Necessity of restoring the Ancient Government of the Church c. Such was the Man I say to whose share it fell to be the first who publickly questioned the Lawfulness of Prelacy in Scotland which was not done till the Sixth day of August 1575. as I said before no less than full fifteen years after the first legal Establishment of our Scottish Reformation And so I come to my purpose On this Sixth of August 1575. the Gen. Ass. met at Edenburgh according to the Order then observed in General Assemblies the First thing done after the Assembly was constituted was the Tryal of the Doctrine Diligence Lives c. of the Bishops and other constant Members So while this was a doing Iohn Durie stood up and protested That the Tryal of the Bishops might not prejudge the Opinions and Reasons which he and other Brethren of his Mind had to propose against the Office and Name of a Bishop Thus was the fatal Controversie set on foot which since hath brought such Miseries and Calamities on the Church and Kingdom of Scotland The Hare thus started Melvil the Original Huntsman strait pursued her He presently began a long and no doubt premeditated Harangue commended Durie's Zeal enlarged upon the flourishing State of the Church of Geneva insisted on the Sentiments of Calvin and Beza concerning Church Government and at last affirmed That none ought to be Office-bearers in the Church whose Titles were not found in the Book of God That the the Title of Bishops was found in Scripture yet it was not to be understood in the Sense then current That Iesus Christ the only Lord of his Church allowed no Superiority amongst the Ministers but had instituted them all in the same Degree and had endued them with equal power Concluding That the Corruptions which had crept into the Estate of Bishops were so great as unless the same were removed it could not go well with the Church nor could Religion be long preserved in Purity The Controversie thus plainly stated Mr. David Lindesay Master George Hay and Master Iohn Row three Episcopalians were appointed to confer and reason upon the Question proponed with Mr. Andrew Melvil Mr. Iames Lawson and Mr. Iohn Craig two Presbyterians and one much indifferent for both sides After diverse Meetings and long Disceptation saith Spotswood after two days saith Petrie they presented these Conclusions to the Assembly which at that time they had agreed upon 1. They think it not expedient presently to answer directly to the First Question But if any Bishop shall be chosen who hath not such Qualities as the word of God requires let him be tryed by the General Assembly De Novo and so deposed 2. The Name Bishop is common to all them who have particular Flocks over which they have particular Charges to preach the Word administer the Sacraments c. 3. Out of this Number may be chosen some to have power to Oversee and Visit such reasonable Bounds beside his own Flock as the General Kirk shall appoint and in these bounds to appoint Ministers with Consent of the Ministers of that Province and of the Flock to whom they shall be appointed Also to appoint Elders and Deacons in every principal Congregation where there are none with Consent of the People thereof and to suspend Ministers for reasonable Causes with Consent of the Ministers aforesaid So the Mss. Spot Pet. Cald. 'T is true here are some things which perhaps when thoroughly examined will not be found so exactly agreeable to the Sentiments and Practice of the Primitive Church However 't is evident for this Bout the Imparity-men carried the day and it seems the Parity-men have not yet been so well fixed for the Divine and indispensible Right of it as our Modern Parity-men would think needful otherwise how came they to consent to such Conclusions How came they to yield that it was not expedient at that time to answer directly to the first Question which was concerning the Lawfulness of Episcopacy Were they of the Modern Principles G. R's Principles Did they think that Divine institutions might be dispensed with crossed according to the Exigencies of Expediency or Inexpediency What ane Honour is it to the Party if their first Hero's were such Casuists Besides is not the Lawfulness of imparity clearly imported in the Third Conclusion Indeed both Calderwood and Petrie acknowledge so much Calderwood saith It seemeth that by Reason of the Regents Authority who was bent upon the Course i. e. Episcopacy whereof he was the chief Instrument that they answered not directly at this time to the Question Here you see he owns that nothing at this time was concluded against the Course as he calls it whither he had reason to say It seemed to be upon such ane account shall be considered afterward Petrie acknowledges it too but in such a passion it seems as quite mastered his Prudence when he did it for these are his words Howbeit in these Conclusions they express not the Negative because they would not plainly oppose the particular interest of the Council seeking security of the Possessions by the Title of Bishops yet these Affirmatives take away the pretended Office Now let the world consider the Wisdom of this Author in advancing this fine period They did not express the Negative they did not condemn Episcopacy because they would not plainly oppose the particular interest of the Council seeking Security of the Possessions c. Now let us enquire who were these They who would not for this reason condemn Episcopacy at that time It must either belong to the Six Collocutors who drew the Concusions or to the whole Assembly If to the Collocutors 't is plain Three of them viz. Row Hay and Lindesay were innocent they were perswaded in their Minds of the Expediency to say no further as well as the Lawfulness of Episcopacy and I think that was reason enough for them not to condemn it The Presbyterian Brethren then if any were the persons who were moved not to condemn it because they would not plainly oppose the particular interest of the Council c. But if so hath not Master Petrie made them very brave fellows Hath he not fairly made them such friends to Sacrilege that they would rather baulk a divine Institution than interrupt its Course and offend its Votaries If by the word They he meant the General Assembly if the whole Assembly were they who would not express the
Negative because they would not oppose c. I think Mr. Petrie were he alive would have enough to do to prove that that was the Reason they were determin'd by What Had the whole Church quate all their pretensions they insisted on so much on every Occasion Had they now given over their Claim to the Revenues of the Church Shall I declare my poor opinion in this matter I am apt to believe that it was one of the great Arguments insisted on by the Three Episcopalian Collocutors at that time That if Episcopacy should be concluded unlawful and by consequence overturned the Patrimony of the Church would undoubtedly go to wreck The hungry Courtiers would presently possess themselves of the Revenues belonging to the Bishops Sure I am as things then stood there was all the Reason in the world for insisting on this Argument But to pass this Petrie it seems was not content with giving the quite contrary of that which in all probability was the true Reason at least one of the true Reasons for not overturning Episcopary at that time But he behoved to add something more Extravagant He behoved to add That the Affirmatives in the aforesaid conclusions took away the pretended Office of Episcopacy What might he not have said after this It seems that in this Authors opinion all is one thing to assert the Lawfulness of ane Office and thereupon to continue it and to take it away But perhaps I may be blamed for taking so much notice of ane angry mans Excesses For no doubt it was anger that such conclusions should have been made that hurtied him upon such Extravagances and therefore I shall leave him and return to my threed By what I have told it may be easy to judge how cold the first Entertainment was which Parity got when it was proposed to the General Assembly and so much the more if it be further considered that by this same Assembly some 8 or 9 Articles were ordered to be presented to My Lord Regents Grace whereof the First as I find it in the MS. and in Petrie himself tho' neither so fully nor so fairly was this Imprimis for planting and preaching the word thro' the whole Realm It is Desired that so many Ministers as may be had who are yet unplaced may be received as well in the Countrey to relieve the charge of them who have many Kirks as otherwise throughout the whole Realm with Superintendents or Commissioners within these Bonnds where Bishops are not and to help such Bishops as have too great Charges And that Livings be appointed to the aforesaid Persons and also payment to them who have travelled before as Commissioners in the years of God 1573. and 1574. and so forth in time coming without which the travels of such Men will cease This I say is the First of many Articles ordered by this Assembly for the Regent From which it is Evident not only that Mr. Melvils Project made little or no progress at this time but also that the Assembly continued firm and stedfast in the same very intentions and of the same very Principles which had prevailed in former Assemblies viz. to stop the uniting of Churches to multiply the number of persons cloathed with Prelatick power To continue that power in the Church and by all means to secure her Patrimony and guard against and Exclude all alienations of it Melvil and his Partisans thus successless in their first attempt but withal once engaged and resolved not to give over began it seems against the next Assembly to reflect on what they had done and perceive that they had mistaken their measures And indeed it was a little precipitantly done at the very first to state the Question simply and absolutely upon the Lawfulness or Vnlawfulness of Episcopacy in the General as they had stated it It was a new Question which had never been stated in the Church of Scotland before And it could not but be surprizing to the greatest part of the Assembly Thus to call in Question the Lawfulness of ane Office which had been so early so universally so usefully so incontestedly received by the Catholick Church This was a point of great importance For to Declare that Office Vnlawful what was it else than to condemn all these Churches in the primitive times which had own'd it and flourish't under it What else than to condemn the Scottish Reformation and Reformers who had never Question'd it but on the contrary had proceeded all alongst on principles which clearly supposed its Lawfulness if not its Necessity Nay was it not to condemn particularly all these General Assemblies which immediately before had so much Authorized and confirm'd it Besides as hath been already observed to Declare Episcopacy Vnlawful was unavoidably to stifle all these projects they had been so industriously forming for recovering the Churches Patrimony And not only so but to expose it more and more to be devoured by the voracious Laity It was Plain it could no sooner be declared Vnlawful than it behoved to be parted with and turn out the Bishops once and what would become of the Bishopricks Nay to turn them out what was it else than to undo the whole Agreement at Leith which was the greatest security the Church then had for her Patrimony For these and the like reasons I say laying aside the impiety and insisting only on the imprudence of the Melvilian Project it was no doubt precipitantly done at the very first to make that the State of the Question And it was no wonder if the Assembly was unanimous in agreeing to the conclusions which had been laid before them by the six Collocutors Nay it was no wonder if Melvil and his Party sensible of their errour and willing to cover it the best way they could yielded for that time to the other Three who had so visibly the advantage of them at least in the point of the Churches interest And therefore At the next Assembly which was holden at Edenburgh April 24. 1576. they altered the State of the Question as Spotswood observes and made it this Whether Bishops as they were then in Scotland had their Function warranted by the word of God But even thus stated at that time it avail'd them nothing For as it is in the MS. The whole Assembly for the most part after Reasoning and long Disputation upon every Article of the Brethrens viz. the six Collocutors opinion and advice resolutely approved and affirmed the same and every Article thereof as the same was given in by them And then the Articles are Repeated Calderwood and Petrie do both shuffle over the state of the Question but upon the matter they give the same account of the Assembly's Resolution However I thought fit to take it in the words of the MS. the very stile importing that they are the most Authentick And in this Resolution we may observe these three things 1. That whatever the Melvilian Party might then be They
on the most abominable courses who hath not observed who hath not seen that Men have sold Religion Honour Conscience Loyalty Faith Friendship every thing that 's sacred for Money Now by making this proposition He projected a very fair opportunity for gratifying this his predomining appetite He had so anxiously coveted the Emoluments of the Arch-Bishoprick of St. Andrews in the year 1571 as Sir Iames Melvil tells us in his Memoirs that meeting with a repulse he forsook the Court and was so much discontented that he would not return to it till Randolf the English Ambassadour perswaded Lennox then Regent to give it to him Promising that the Queen of England should recompence it to him with greater advantage How much of that Bishoprick he had continued still to possess after the Agreement at Leith and Douglass's advancement to that Arch-Bishoprick I cannot tell But it is not to be doubted whatever it was it sharpened his stomack for more of the Churches Revenues and now the juncture made wonderfully for him For as he had found by experience and many Acts of Assemblies c. That the Church careful of her interests and watchful over her Patrimony was no ways inclined to sit still and suffer her self to be cheated and plundered according to his hungry inclinations but was making and like to continue to make vigorous opposition to all such sacrilegious purposes so long as she continued united and settled on the foot on which she then stood So he found that now Contention was arising within her own Bowels and a Party was appearing zealous for innovations and her peace and unanimity were like to be broken and divided and what more proper for him in these circumstances than to lay the reins on their necks and cast a further bone of Contention amongst them He knew full well what it was to fish in troubled waters as Sir Iames Melvil observes of him and so 't is more than probable he would not neglect such ane opportunity still so much the more if it be considered 3. That whatever professions he might have made in former times of good affection to Episcopal Government yet there is little reason to think that his Conscience was interested in the matter For besides that covetous selfish subtle men such as he was use not to allow themselves to stand too precisely upon all the Dictates of a Nice and tender Conscience The Divine Right of Episcopacy the true fund for making it matter of Conscience in these times was not much asserted or thought on That was not till several years afterwards when the Controversies about the Government of the Church came to be sifted more narrowly It is commonly acknowledged that the main Argument which prevailed with him to appear for Episcopacy was its aptitude for being part of a fund for a good Correspondence with England Spotswood tells us that one of the Injunctions which he got when he was made Regent was That he should be careful to entertain the Amity contracted with the Queen of England And Calderwood saith thus expressly of him His great intention was to bring in conformity with England in the Church Government without which he thought he could not Govern the Countrey to his Fantasie or that Agreement could stand long between the two Countreys And again He pressed his own injunctions and Conformity with England Now this being the great motive that made him so much inclined at any time for Episcopal Government It is to be considered 4. That however prevalent this might be with him when first he was advanced to the Regency civil Dissentions raging then and the Party of which he was the Head being unable to subsist unless supported by England Yet now that all these Dissentions were ended and the Countrey quieted and things brought to some appearance of a durable settlement His Dependance on England might prompt him to alter his scheme and incline him to give scope to the Presbyterian wild-fire in Scotland To set this presumption in its due light Two things are to be a little further enquired into 1. If it is probable that Queen Elizabeth was willing that the Presbyterian humor should be Encouraged in Scotland 2. If Morton depended so much on her as to make it feasible that he might be subservient to her Designs in this Politick As for the First this is certain it was still one of Queen Elizabeth's great cares to Encourage confusions in Scotland She knew her own Title was Questionable as I have observed before and tho' that had not been yet without Question the Scottish blood had the next best Title to the English Crown and as 't is Natural to most People to worship the rising Sun especially when he looks Bright and Glorious when he has no Clouds about him I mean the Apparent Heir of a Throne when he is in a prosperous and flourishing condition So 't is as Natural for the Regnant Prince to be jealous of him Therefore I say Queen Elizabeth for her own security did still what she could to Kindle wildfire in Scotland and keep it burning when it was Kindled Thus in the year 1560. She assisted the Scottish subjects against their Native Soveraign her jealoused Competitrix both with Men and Money as I have told before And Anno 1565. She countenanced the Scottish Lords who began to raise tumults about the Scottish Queens Marriage with the Lord Darnley She furnisht them with money and harbour'd them when they were forced to flee for it And how long did She foment our Civil wars after they brake out Anno 1567 What dubious Responses did She give all the time She Vmpir'd it between the Queen of Scotland and those who appeared for her Son And is it not very well known that She had ane hand in the Road of Ruthven 1582 and in all our Scottish seditions Generally Sir Iames Melvil in his Memoirs gives us enough of her Practices that way He lived in these times and was acquainted with intrigues and he tells us That Randolf came with Lennox when he came to Scotland to be Regent after Murray's death to stay here as English Resident That this Randolf's great imployment was to foster discords and increase Divisions among the Scots particularly That he used Craft with the Ministers offering Gold to such of them as he thought could be prevail'd with to accept his offer 'T is true he adds But such as were honest refused his gifts But this says not that none took them and who knows but the most Fiery might have been foremost at receiving It hath been so since Even when it was the Price of the best blood in Britain But to go on Sir Iames tells further that Morton and Randolf contrived the Plot of keeping the Parliament at Stirling 1571. to forefault all the Queens Lords thereby to Crush all hopes of Agreement That he was so much hated in Scotland for being such ane Incendiary that he was
forced to return to England Mr. Henry Kellegrew succeeding in his stead in Scotland that this Killegrew at a private meeting told himself plainly that he was come to Scotland with a Commission contrary to his inclinations which was to encourage Faction c. Thus practiced Queen Elizabeth and such were her Arts and influences in Scotland before she had the opportunity of improving the Presbyterian humour to her purposes And can it be imagined she would not encourage it when once it got sooting Certainly she understood it better than so The Sect had set up a Presbytery at Wandsworth in Surrey in the year 1572 four years before Morton made this Proposition seven years before a Presbytery was so much as heard of in Scotland No doubt she knew the Spirit well enough and how apt and well suited it was for keeping a State in disorder and trouble Nay I have heard from knowing Persons that to this very day the Treasury Books of England if I remember right sure I am some English record or other bear the Names of such Scottish Noblemen and Ministers as were that Queens Pensioners and what allowances they got for their Services in fostering and cherishing seditions and confusions in their Native Countrey From this sample I think it is easy to collect at least that it is highly probable that Queen Elizabeth was very willing that the Presbyterian humour should be encouraged in Scotland Let us try 2. If Morton depended so much on her as may make it credible that he was subservient to her Designs in this Politick And here the work is easy For he was her very Creature he stood by her and he stood for her Randolf and he were still in one bottom The whole Countrey was abused by Randolf and Morton Morton and Randolf contrived the Parliament 1571. Mentioned before When Lennox the Regent was killed Randolf was earnest to have Morton succeed him Randolf had no Credit but with Morton Killegrew told Sir James Melvil at the Private Meeting mentioned before That the Queen of England and her Council built their course neither on the late Regent Lennox nor the present Mar but intirely on the Earl of Morton as only true to their interests Morton after Mar's death was made Regent England helping it with all their Might And again in that same page Sir Iames tells that those who were in the Castle of Edenburgh and stood for Queen Mary's Title were so sensible of all this that when Morton sent the same Sir Iames to propose ane accommodation to them He found it very hard to bring on ane Agreement between them and Morton for the evil opinion that was then conceived of him and the hurtful marks they supposed by proofs and appearances that he would shoot at being by Nature Covetous and too great with England And to make all this plainer yet Sir Iames tells us that Morton entertaind a Secret Grudge against his Pupil the Young King He was ever jealous that the King would be his Ruine And England gave greater Assistances to Morton than to any former Regents for they believed he aim'd at the same mark with themselves viz. to intricate the Kings affairs out of old jealousies between the Stuarts and the Douglases Now Let all these things be laid together and then let the judicious consider if it is not more than probable That as England had a main hand in the advancement of our Reformation so it was not wanting to contribute for the encouragement of Presbytery also and that Morton playing England's game which was so much interwâ—â—eâ— with his own made this ill favoured Proposition to this Gen. Ass. But however this was â—lâ—â—her he had such a Plot or not It is cleaâ— that his making this proposition had all the effects he could have projected by being on such a Plot. For No sooner had he made this Proposition than it was greedily entertain'd It Answered the Melvilian wishes and it was easy for them to find colourable Topicks for obtaining the consent of the rest of the Assembly For most part of them were ready to acknowledge that there were Defects and things to be mended in the Agreement at Leith And it had been received by the General Assembly in August 1572. for ane Interim only The revising of that Agreement might end some Controversies and the Regent having made this Proposition it was not to be doubted but he would Ratify what they should Unanimously agree to c. These and the like Arguments I say might 't is clear some Arguments did prevail with the Assembly to entertain the Proposition For A commission was forthwith drawn to nineteen or twenty Persons to Compose a Second Book of Discipline a step by which at that time the Presbyterian got a wonderful advantage over the other Party For not only were Melvil and Lawson the two first Rate Presbyterians nominated amongst these Commissioners But they had their business much prâ—meditated They had spent much thinking about it and it is not to be doubted they had Mr. Beza bespoken to provide them with all the Assistance he and his Colleagues at Geneva could afford them Whereas the rest were Generally very ignorant in Controversies of that Nature They had all alongst before that imployed themselves mainly in the Popish Controversies and had not troubled their heads much about the Niceties of Government They had taken the Ancient Government so far at least as it subsisted by imparity upon trust as they found it had been Practiced in all ages of the Church perceiving a great deal of Order and Beauty in it and nothing that naturally tended to have a bad influence on either the principles or the life of serious Christianity And with that they were satisfied Indeed even the best of them seem to have had very little skill in the true fountains whence the solid subsistence of the Episcopal Order was to be derived The Scriptures I mean not as Glossed by the Private Spirit of every Modern Novelist but as interpreted and understood by the First ages as sensed by the constant and universal practice of Genuine Primitive and Catholick Antiquity This charge of Ignorance in the Controversies about the Government of the Church which I have brought against the Scottish Clergy in these times will certainly leave a blot upon my self if I cannot prove it But if I can prove it it is clear it is of considerable importance in the present disquisition and helps much for coming by a just comprehension to understand how Presbytery was introduced into Scotland And therefore I must again beg my Readers patience till I adduce some evidences for it And First The truth of this charge may be obviously collected from the whole train of their proceedings and management about the Government of the Church from the very first Establishment of the Reformation For however they Established a Government which clearly subsisted by imparity as I
former proceedings and fairly advised them to shew more temper and proceed more deliberately Calderwood calls it ane Harsh Letter It is to be seen word for word both in him and Petrie But what had they to do with the Kings of this World especially such Babie Kings as King Iames was then they I say who had now the Government of Christs Kingdom to settle However no more was done against Prelacy at this time than had been ordered formerly Indeed there was little more to be done but to declare the Office abolished But that it seems they were not yet Ripe for Perchance the Corruptions mentioned before had proved a little Choaking and peoples stomachs could not be so soon disposed for another dish of such strong meat in ane instant so that was reserved till the next Assembly Nevertheless In the mean time take we Notice of one thing which we never heard of before which started up in this Assembly and which must not be forgotten It was proposed by the Synod of Lothian saith Calderwood That a General Order might be taken for Erecting of Presbyteries in places where publick exercise was used until the Polity of the Church might be Established by Law And it was Answered by the Assembly That the exercise was a Presbytery A Presbytery turned afterwards and now is one of the most specifick essential and indispensible parts of the Presbyterian constitution Provincial Synods can sit only twice in the year General Assemblies only once according to the Constitution 'T is true 't is allowed to the King to Convocate one extraordinarily pro re natà as they call it And the Kirk claims to have such a power too as she sees occasion But then 't is as true that Kings have been so disgusted at such meetings that they have hindred General Assemblies to meet for many years So that their meetings are uncertain and in innumerable cases there should be too long a Surcease of Ecclesiastical Iustice if Causes should wait either on them or Provincial Synods The Commission of the General Assembly as they call it is but ane accidental thing The suddain dissolution of a General Assembly can disappoint its very being as just now there is none nor has been since the last Assembly which was so surprizingly dissolved in February 1692. When there is such a Court it commonly sits but once in three Months and it meddles not with every matter Besides many of themselves do not love it and look upon it as ane error in the Custome of the Kirk for it was never made part of the Constitution by any Canon of the Kirk nor Act of Parliament But A Presbytery is a Constant Current Court They may meet when they will Sit while they will adjourn whither when how long how short time soever they will They have all the substantial Power of Government and Discipline They have really a Legislative Power They can make Acts to bind themselves and all those who live within their Jurisdiction and they have a very large Dose of Executive power They can Examine Ordain Admit Suspend Depose Ministers They can Cite Iudge Absolve Condemn Excommunicate whatsoever Criminals The Supreme power of the Church under Christ is Radically and Originally in them It is in General Assemblies themselves Derivatively only and as they Represent all the Presbyteries in the Nation and if I mistake not if a General Assembly should Enact any thing and the greater part of the Presbyteries of the Nation should Reprobate it it would not be binding and yet how necessary how useful how powerful so ever these Courts are tho' they are essential parts of the constitution tho' they may be really said to be that which Specifies Presbyterian Government This Time this seventh or eighth or tenth of Iuly Anno 1579 was the first time they were heard of in Scotland That which was called the Exercise before was nothing like a Court had no imaginable Iurisdiction Could neither Injoyn Pennance to the smallest Offender nor Absolve him from it It could exert no Acts of Authority It had not so much Power as the meanest Kirk-session It was nothing like a Presbytery and however it was said in this Assembly That the Exercise was a Presbytery yet that saying as omnipotent as a Presbyterian Assembly is did not make it one That was not a Factive proposition There were no Presbyteries erected at this time The First that was erected was the Presbytery of Edenburg And if we may believe Calderwood himself That Presbytery was not erected till the thirtieth day of May 1581. more time was run before the rest were erected They were not agreed to by the King till the year 1586. They were not Ratified by Parliament till the year 1592. And now let the Impartial Reader judge if it is probable that our Reformers who never thought on Presbyteries were of the present Presbyterian principles Were they Presbyterians who never understood never thought of never dream'd of that which is so Essential to the constitution of a Church by Divine Institution according to the present Presbyterian principles But doth not G. R. in his First Vindication of the Church of Scotland in Answer to the First Question § 8. tell us that the Real Exercise of Presbytery in all its meetings lesser and greater continued and was allowed in the year 1572 c. True he saith so But no Man but himself ever said so But I know the Natural History of this Ignorant blunder His Historian Calderwood had said that the Kirk of Scotland ever since the beginning had four sorts of Assemblies and this was enough for G. R. For what other could these four sorts of Assemblies be than Kirk-Sessions Presbyteries Provincial Synods and General Assemblies But if he had with the least degree of any thing like attention read four or five lines further he might have seen that Calderwood himself was far from having the brow to assert that Presbyteries were then in being For having said there were four sorts of Assemblies from the beginning he goes on to particularize them thus National which were commonly called General Assemblies Provincial which were commonly called by the General Name of Synods Weekly Meetings of Ministers and Readers for interpretation of the Scripture whereunto succeeded Presbyteries that is Meetings of many Ministers and Elders for the Exercise of Discipline and the Eldership of every Parish which others call a Presbytery In which account it is evident that he doth not call these weekly Meetings for interpretation of the Scriptures Presbyteries But says that Presbyteries succeeded to these weekly Meetings and he gives quite different Descriptions of these weekly Meetings and Presbyteries making the weekly Meetings to have been of Ministers and Elders for the interpretation of Scripture and Presbyteries to have been as they still are Meetings of many Ministers and Elders for the Exercise of Discipline 'T is true he might have as well said that Presbyteries succeeded to
the Meeting of the Four Kings against the Five or of the Five against the Four mentioned in the 14 th Chapter of the Book of Genesis For the Meetings of these Kings were before our Presbyteries I think in order of time And these Meetings of these Kings were as much like our present Presbyteries as those Meetings were which were appointed at the Reformation for the inteâ—pretation of Scripture So that even Calderwood himself was but triâ—ling when he said so But triâ—ling is one thing and impudent founding of false History upon another Mans trifling is another But enough of this Author at present we shall have further occasions of meeting with him This Assembly was also earnest with the King that the Book of Policy might be farther considered and that farther Conference might be had about it That the Heads not agreed about might be compromised some way or other But the King it seems listned not For they were at it again in their next Assembly And now that I have so frequently mentioned this Second Book of Discipline and shall not have occasion to proceed much further in this wearisome Deduction Before I leave it I shall only say this much more about it As much stress as the Presbyterian party laid on it afterwards and continue still to lay on it as if it were so very exact a Systeme of Ecclesiastical Polity yet at the beginning the Compilers of it had no such Confident sentiments about it For if we may believe Spotswood and herein he is not contradicted by any Presbyterian Historian when Master David Lindesay Mr. Iames Lawson and Mr. Robert Pont were sent by the Assembly to present it to the Regent Morton in the end of the year 1577 They intreated his Grace to receive the Articles presented to him and if any of them did seem not agreeable to reason to vouchsafe Audience to the Brethren whom the Assembly had named to attend Not that they thought it a work complete to which nothing might be added or from which nothing might be diminished for as God should reveal further unto them they should be willing to help and renew the same Now upon this Testimony I found this Question Whither the Compilers of the Second Book of Discipline could in reason have been earnest that this Book which they acknowledged not to be a work so complete as that nothing could be added to it or taken from it should have been confirmed by ane Oath and sworn to as ane Vnalterable Rule of Policy Are they not injurious to them who make them capable of such a bare faced absurdity Indeed whatever our present Presbyterians say and with how great assurance soever they talk to this purpose this is a Demonstration that the compilers of it never intended nay could not intend that it should be sworn to in the Negative Confession That it was not sworn to in that Confession I think I could prove with as much evidence as the nature of the thing is capable of if it were needful to my present purpose But not being that I shall only give this further Demonstration which comes in here naturally enough now that we have mentioned this Book so often The Negative Confession was sworn to and subscribed by the King and his Council upon the 28. of Ianuary 1580 1. Upon the second of March thereafter the King gave out a Proclamation ordering all the subjects to subscribe it But the King had never approven never owned but on the contrary had constantly rejected the Second Book of Discipline Nay it was not Ratiâ—ied got not its finishing stroke from the General Assembly it self till towards the end of April in that year 1581. By necessary consequence I think it was not sworn to in the Negative Confession And thus I leave it Proceed we now to the next Assembly It met at Dundee upon the twelfth of Iuly 1580. full twenty years after the Reformation For the Parliament which Established the Reformation as the Presbyterian Historians are earnest to have it had its first Meeting on the tenth of Iuly 1560. This this was the Assembly which after so many fencings and strugglings gave the deadly Thrust to Episcopacy I shall transcribe its Act word for word from Calderwood who has exactly enough taken it from the MS. and both Spotswood and Petrie agree It is this Forasmuch as the Office of a Bishop as it is now used and commonly taken within this Realm hath no sure Warrant Authority nor good Ground out of the Book and Scriptures of God but is brought in by the Folly and Corruptions of mens invention to the great overthrow of the true Kirk of God The whole Assembly in one voice after Liberty given to all men to Reason in the matter none oppening themselves in defence of the said pretended Office Findeth and Declareth the same pretended Office Vsed and Termed as is abovesaid Vnlawful in the self as having neither Fundament Ground nor Warrant in the word of God And Ordaineth that all such Persons as brook or hereafter shall brook the said Office be charged simpliciter to dimit quite and leave off the Samine as ane Office whereunto they are not called by God and sicklike to desist and cease from preaching Ministration of the Sacraments or using any way the Office of Pastors while they receive de novo Admission from the General Assembly under the pain of Excommunication to be used against them Wherein if they be found Disobedient or Contraveen this Act in any point The sentence of Excommunication after due admonition to be execute against them This is the Act. Perhaps it were no very great difficulty to impugn the Infallibility of this true blue Assembly and to expose the boldness the folly the iniquity the preposterous zeal which are conspicious in this Act Nay yet after all this to shew that the Zealots for Parity had not arrived at that height of Effrontery as to Condemn Prelacy as simply and in it self Unlawful But by this time I think I have performed my promise and made it appear that it was no easy task to Abolish Episcopacy and Introduce Presbytery to turn down Prelacy and set up Parity in the Government of the Church when it was first attempted in Scotland And therefore I shall stop here and bring this long Disquisition upon the Second Enquiry to a Conclusion after I have Recapitulated and represented in one intire view what I have at so great length deduced I have made it appear I think That no such Article was believed professed or maintained by the body of any Reformed or Reforming Church or by any Eminent and Famous Divine in any Reformed or Reforming Church while our Church was a Reforming No such Article I say as that of the Divine and indispensible Institution of Parity and the Vnlawfulness of Prelacy or Imparity amongst the Governours of the Church I have made it appear that there is no reason to believe that our
Reformers were more prying in such matters than the Reformers of other Churches I have made it appear that there is not so much as a syllable a shew a shadow of ane Indication That any of those who Merited the Name of our Reformers entertain'd any such Principle or maintain'd any such Article I have made it appear that our Reformation was carryed on much very much by the Influences and upon the principles of the English Reformers amongst whom that principle of parity had no imaginable footing These are at least great presumptions of the Credibility of this That our Reformers maintain'd no such principle Agreeably to these presumptions I have made it appear that our Reformers proceeded de Facto upon the principles of Imparity They formed their petitions for the Reformation of our Church according to these principles The first Scheme of Church Government they erected was Established upon these principles Our Superintendents were notoriously and undeniably Prelates The next Establishment in which the Prelates resumed the old Names and Titles of Archbishops and Bishops was the same for substance with the first At least they did not differ as to the point of Imparity I have made it appear that this second Establishment was agreed to by the Church unanimously and submitted to calmly and peaceably and that it was received as ane Establishment which was intended to continue in the Church At least no Objections made against it no appearances in opposition to it no indications of its being accepted only for ane Interim upon the account of Imparity's being in its constitution I have made it appear that Imparity was received practised owned and submitted to and that Prelates were suitably honoured and dutifully obeyed without reluctancy and without interruption for full fifteen years after the Reformation and I have made it appear that after it was called in Question its Adversaries found many Repulses and mighty difficulties and spent much travel and much time no less than full five years before they could get it Abolished and if the Deduction I have made puts not this beyond all doubt it may be further confirmed by the Testimonies of two very intelligent Authors The first is that ingenious and judicious Author who wrote the accurate piece called Episcopacy not Abjured in Scotland published Anno 1640. Who affirms positively That it was by Reason of opposition made to the Presbyterians by many wise learned and Godly Brethren who stood firmly for the Ancient Discipline of the Church that Episcopacy was so long a condemning It appears from his Elaborate work that he was ane ingenuous as well as ane Ingenious Person and living then and having been at so much pains to inform himself concerning not only the Transactions but the Intrigues of former times it is to be presumed he did not affirm such a proposition without sufficient ground But whatever dust may be raised about his Credit and Authority Sure I am my other witness is unexceptionable He is King Iames the Sixth of Scotland and the First of England This Great and Wise Prince lived in these times in which Presbytery was first introduced and I think it is scarcely to be Questioned That he understood and could give a just account of what passed then as well as any man then living and he in his Basilion Doron affirms plainly That the Learned Grave and Honest Men of the Ministery were ever ashamed of and offended with the Temerity and Presumption of the Democratical and Presbyterian party All these things I say I think I have made appear sufficiently and so I am not affraid to leave it to the world to judge Whither our Reformers were of the present Presbyterian principles Only one thing more before I proceed to the next Enquiry Our Presbyterian Brethren Calderwood Petrie and G. R. as I have already observed are very earnest and careful to have their Readers advert that when Episcopacy was Established by the Agreement at Leith Anno 1572. the Bishops were to have no more Power than the Superintendents had before and indeed it is true they had no more as I have already acknowledged But I would advise our Brethren to be more Cautious in insisting on such a dangerous point or Glorying in such a Discovery hereafter For thus I Argue The Episcopacy Agreed to at Leith Anno 1572 as to its Essentials its Power and Authority was the same with the Superintendency Established at the Reformation Anno 1560. But the General Assembly holden at Dundee Anno 1580. Condemned the Power and Authority of the Episcopacy Agreed to at Leith Anno 1572. Ergo they condemnd the Power and Authority of the Superintendency Established by our Reformers Anno 1560. Ergo the Assembly 1580. not only forsook but Condemned the principles of our Reformers But if this Reasoning holds I think our present Presbyterian Brethren have no Reason to Claim the Title of Successors to our Reformers They must not ascend so high as the year 1560 They must stand at the year 1580 For if I mistake not the Laws of Heraldry will not allow them to call themselves the True Posterity of those whom they Condemn and whose principles they Declare Erroneous In such Moral Cognations I take Oneness of principle to be the foundation of the Relation as Oneness of Blood is in Physical Cognations Let them not therefore go farther up than the year 1580. Let them date the Reformation from this Assembly at Dundee and Own Master Andrew Melvil and Iohn Durie c. for their First Parents When they have fixed there I shall perchance allow them to affirm that the Church of Scotland was Reformed in their sence of Reformation by Presbyters that is Presbyterians Proceed we now to The Third Enquiry Whether Prelacy and the Superiority of any Office in the Church above Presbyters was a great and insupportable Grievance and trouble to this Nation and contrary to the inclinations of the Generality of the People EVER since the Reformation Considering what hath been Discoursed so fully on the former Enquiry this may be very soon dispatched For If Prelacy and the Superiority of other Officers in the Church above Presbyters was so unanimously consented to and Established at the Reformation If it continued to be Owned Revered and Submitted to by Pastors and People without interruption without being ever called in Question for full fifteen years after the Reformation If after it was called in Question its Adversaries found it so hard a task to subvert it that they spent five years more before they could get it subverted and declared Vnlawful even as it was then in Scotland If these things are true I say I think it is not very Credible that it was a great and insupportable Grievance and trouble to this Nation and contrary to the Inclinations of the Generality of the People EVER since the Reformation This Collection I take to be as clear a Demonstration as the subject is capable of But beside this we
have the clear and consentient Testimonies of Historians to this purpose Petrie delivers it thus Mercy and Truth Righteousness and Peace had never since Christs coming in the Flesh a more Glorious Meeting and Amiable Embracing on Earth Even so that the Church of Scotland justly obtain'd a Name amongst the Chief Churches and Kingdoms of the world The hottest Persecutions had not greater Purity The most Halcyon times had not more Prosperity and Peace The best Reformed Churches in other places scarcely Parallel'd their Liberty and Vnity Spotswood thus The Superintendents were in such Respect with all Men as notwithstanding the Dissensions that were in the Country no Exception was taken at their proceedings by any of the parties But all concurred in the Maintainance of Religion And in the Treaties of Peace made That was ever one of the Articles such a Reverence was in those times carried to the Church The very form of Government purchasing them Respect I might also cite Beza himself to this purpose in his Letter to Iohn Knox dated Geneva April 12. 1572 wherein he Congratulates heartily the happy and Vnited state of the Church of Scotland Perhaps it might be no difficult task to adduce more Testimonies But the truth is no man can Read the Histories and Monuments of these times without being convinced that this is true and that there cannot be a falser proposition than That Prelacy was such a Grievance then or so contrary to the Inclinations of the Generality of the People Further even in succeeding times even after it was Condemnd by that Assembly 1580 it cannot be proven that it was such a Grievance to the Nation 'T is true indeed some Hot-headed Presbyterian Preachers endeavoured all they could to possess the People with ane opinion of its Antichristianism forsooth and that it was a Brat of the Whore a Limb of Popery and what not But all this time no account of the Inclinations of the Generality of the People against it On the contrary nothing more evident in History even Calderwoods History than that there was no such thing Is it not obviously observable even in that History that after the Civil Government took some 12 or 14 of the most forward of these Brethren who kept the pretended Assembly at Aberdeen Anno 1605 a little Roundly to Task and some 6 or 8 more were called by the King to attend his will at London all things went very peaceably in Scotland Was not Episcopacy restored by the General Assembly at Glasgow Anno 1610 with very great Unanimity Of more than ane hundred and seventy voices there were only five Negative and seven Non liquet Nay Calderwood himself hath recorded that even these Ministers who went to London after their return submitted peaceably to the then Established Prelacy And there are few things more observable in his Book than his Grudge that there should have been such a General Defection from the good Cause Indeed I have not observed no not in his History that there were six in all the Kingdom who from the Establishment of Episcopacy Anno 1610. did not attend at Synods and submit to their Ordinaries I do not remember any except two Calderwood himself and one Iohnston at Ancrum and even these two pretended other Reasons than Scruple of Conscience for their withdrawing It is further observable that the Stirs which were made after the Assembly at Perth Anno 1618. were not pretended to be upon the account of Episcopacy Those of the Gang could not prevail it seems with the Generality of the People to tumultuate on that account All that was pretended were the Perth Articles Neither did the Humour against these Articles prevail much or far all the time King Iames lived nor for the first twelve years of King Charles his Son and Successor It fell asleep as it were till the Clamours against the Liturgy and Book of Canons awakened it Anno 1637 And all that time I mean from the year 1610 that Episcopacy was restored till the year 1637 that the Covenanting work was set on foot Prelacy was so far from being a great and insupportable Grievance and Trouble to this Nation and contrary to the Inclinations of the Generality of the People that on the contrary it was not only Generally submitted to but in very good esteem Indeed it is certain the Nation had never more Peace more concord more plenty more profound quiet and prosperity than in that Interval Let no man reckon of these things as naked Assertions I can prove them And hereby I undertake with Gods allowance and assistance to prove all I have said and more if I shall be put to it But I think my cause requires not that it should be done at present Nay further yet I don't think it were ane insuperable task if I should undertake to maintain that when the Covenanting Politick was set on foot Anno 1637. Prelacy was no such Grievance to the Nation This I am sure of it was not the Contrariety of the Generality of the Peoples Inclinations to Prelacy that first gave life and motion to that Monstrous Confederation Sure I am it was pretty far advanced before the Leading Confederates offered to fix on Prelacy as one of their Reasons for it So very sure that it is easy to make it appear that they were affraid of nothing more than that the Generality of the People should smell it out that they had designs to overturn Episcopacy How often did they Protest to the Marquis of Hamilton then the Kings Commissioner that their meaning was not to Abolish Episcopal Government How frank were they to tell those whom they were earnest to Cajole into their Covenant that they might very well swear it without prujudice to Episcopacy Nay how forward were the Presbyterian Ministers themselves to propagate this pretence When the Doctors of Aberdeen told the Three who were sent to that City to procure subscriptions that they could not swear the Covenant because Episcopacy was abjured in it Are not these Hendersons and Dicksons very words in their Answer to the fourth Reply You will have all the Covenanters against their intention and whither they will or not to disallow and condemn the Articles of Perth and Episcopal Government But it is known to many hundreds that the words were purposely conceived for satisfaction of such as were of your Iugment that we might all joyn in one Heart and Covenant Many more things might be readily adduced to prove this more fully But 't is needless for what can be more fairly colligible from any thing than it is from this Specimen that it was their fear that they might miss of their mark and not get the people to joyn with them in their Covenant if it should be so soon discovered that they aim'd at the overthrow of Episcopacy 'T is true indeed after they had by such disingenuous and Iesuitish Fetches gain'd numbers to their party and got many well-meaning Ministers and
People engaged in their Rebellious and Schismatical Confederacy they took off the Mask and condemned Episcopacy in their pack't Assembly Anno 1638 Declaring with more than Iesuitish impudence that notwithstanding of their protestations so frequently and publickly made to the contrary it was abjured in their Covenant And yet I dare advance this Paradox that even then it was not ane Insupportable Grievance to the Presbyterians themselves far less to the whole Nation I own this to be a Paradox and therefore I must ask my Readers allowance to give my Reason for which I have dared to advance it It is this Considering how much Prelacy affects the Church as a Society Of how great consequence it is in the Concerns of the Church whatever it is in itself it cannot in Reason be called ane Insupportable Grievance to such as are satisfied they can live safely and without sin in the Communion of that Church where it prevails If such can call it a Grievance at all I think they cannot justly call it more than a Supportable Grievance I think it cannot be justly called ane Insupportable Grievance till it can Iustify and by consequence Necessitate a Separation from that Church which has it in its Constitution How can that be called ane Insupportable Grievance especially in Church matters where Grievance and Corruption if I take them right must be terms very much equivalent to those who can safely support it i. e. Live under it without sin and with a safe Conscience continue in the Churches Communion while it is in the Churches Government How can that be called insupportable which is not of such Malignity in a Church as to make her Communion sinful How can that be called insupportable in Ecclesiastical concerns or Religious matters to those who are perswaded they may bear it or with it without disturbing their inward Peace or endangering their Eternal Interests Now such in these times were all the Presbyterians at least Generally in the Nation They did not think upon Breaking the Communion of the Church upon separating from the solemn Assemblies under Prelacy and setting up Presbyterian Altars in opposition to the Episcopal Altars They still kept up one Communion in the Nation They did not refuse to joyn in the Publick Ordinances the Solemn worship of God and the Sacraments with their Prelatick Brethren all this is so well known that none I think will call it in Question Indeed that Height of Antipathy to Prelacy had not prevailed amongst the party no not when Episcopacy had its fetters struck off Anno 1662. for then and for some years after the Presbyterians generally both Pastors and People kept the Vnity of the Church and joyned with the Conformists in the publick Ordinances And I believe there are hundreds of thousands in Scotland who remember very well how short a time it is since they betook themselves to Conventicles and turn'd avowed Schismaticks I Confess the reasoning I have just now insisted on cannot militate so patly against such For if they had reason to separate they had the same Reason to call Prelacy ane insupportable Grievance No more and no other But I cannot see how the Force of it can be well avoided by them in respect of their Predecessors who had not the Boldness to separate upon the account of Prelacy But it may be said that those Presbyterians who lived Anno 1637. and downward Shook off Prelacy and would bear it no longer and was it not then ane insupportable Grievance to them True indeed for removing the pretended Corruptions of Prelacy they then ventured upon the really horrid sin of Rebellion against their Prince they embroyled three Famous and flourishing Kingdoms They brake down the Beautiful and Ancient Structures of Government both in Church and State They shed Oceans of Christian blood and made the Nations welter in gore They gave up themselves to all the wildnesses of rage and fury They gloried in Treason and Treachery in Oppression and Murther in Fierceness and Unbridled Tyranny they drench't innumerable miss-led souls in the Crimson guilt of Schism and Sedition of Rebellion and Faction of Perfidy and Perjury In short they opened the way to such ane Inundation of Hypocrisie and Irreligion of Confusions and Calamities as cannot easily be Parallell'd in History And for all these things they pretended their Antipathies to Prelacy and yet after all this I am where I was Considering their aforesaid principles and practices as to the Vnity of the Church they could not call it ane Insupportable Grievance They did not truly find it such Had they really and sincerely in true Christian simplicity and sobriety found or felt it such they would no doubt have lookt on it as a forcible ground for separating from the Communion in which it prevailed as the Protestants in Germany found their Centum Gravamina for separating from the Church of Rome To have made it that indeed and then to have suffered patiently if they had been persecuted for it without turning to the Antichristian course of Armed Resistance had had some colour of ane Argument that they deem'd it ane insupportable Grievance But the Fiercest fighting against it so long as they could allow themselves to live in the Communion which own'd it can never infer that it was to them ane insupportable Grievance at most if it was it was to wanton humour and wildfire only and not to Conscience and real Christian Conviction And so I leave this Argument I could easily insist more largely on this Enquiry but to avoid tediousness I shall advance only one thing more It is a Challenge to my Presbyterian Brethren to produce but one publick deed one solemn or considerable Appearance of the Nation taken either Collectively or Representatively which by any tolerable construction or interpretation can import that Prelacy or the superiority of any Office in the Church above Presbyters was a great and insupportable Grievance and trouble to this Nation and contrary to the Inclinations of the Generality of the People for full thirty years after the Reformation The Learned G. R. thought he had found one indeed it seems for he introduced it very briskly in his first Vindication of the Church of Scotland in Answer to the first Question § 9. hear him It is Evident says he that Episcopal Iurisdiction over the Protestants was condemned by Law in that same Parliament 1567 wherein the Protestant Religion was Established What No less than Evident Let us try this Parliamentary condemnation It is there Statute and Ordain'd That no other Iurisdiction Ecclesiastical be acknowledged within this Realm than that which is and shall be within this same Kirk Established presently or which floweth therefrom concerning Preaching the word Correcting of manners administration of Sacraments So he No Man who knows this Author and his way of writing will readily think it was ill manners to examine whither he cited right I turn'd over therefore all the Acts of that Parliament
which are in Print and I think his citation shall scarcely be found amongst the unprinted ones but could not find this citation of our Author's What was next to be done I knew that full well I turn'd to the 43. page of his Historian Calderwood and there I found it word for word Well! But is there no such Period to be found in the Acts of that Parliament Not one indeed 'T is true there is ane Act the sixth in number Intituled Anent the true and Holy Kirk and of them that are declared to be of the same which Act I find insisted on by the Covenanters Anno 1638. in their Answer to the Marquis of Hamiltons Declaration at Edenburgh in December that year as is to be seen in the large Declaration as condemning Episcopacy 'T is very probable this might be the Act Calderwood thought he abridged in these words borrowed from him by G. R. I shall set it down word for word that the world may judge if Episcopacy is Condemned by it Forasmuch as the Ministers of the blessed Evangel of Iesus Christ whom God of his mercy hath now raised up amongst us or hereafter shall raise Agreeing with them who now live in Doctrine and Administration of the Sacraments as in the Reformed Kirks of this Realm they are publickly Administrate according to the Confession of Faith Our Soveraign Lord with advice of My Lord Regent and three Estates of this present Parliament has declared and declares the aforesaid Persons to be the only true and Holy Kirk of Iesus Christ within this Realm And Decerns and Declares that all and sundrie who either gainsay the word of the Evangel received and approved as the Heads of the Confession of Faith Professed in Parliament before in the year of God 1560. years As also specified in the Acts of this Parliament more particularly doth express and now Ratified and approved in this present Parliament Or that refuses the Participation of the Holy Sacraments as they are now Ministrate to be no Members of the said Kirk within this Realm presently Professed so long as they keep themselves so divided from the Society of Christs Body This is the Act Now here not one word of Ecclesiastical Iurisdiction either Foreign or Domestick Not one word of any Iurisdiction within this Realm or in the Kirk within this Realm or that should ever flow from the said Kirk Not one word of Correcting of Manners From which it is evident that if this was the Act Calderwood aim'd at he gave the world a very odd abridgement of it And G. R. should consider things a little better and not take them upon trust to found Arguments on them so Ridiculously But doth not this Act condemn Episcopacy Let the world judge if it doth what can be more plain than that all this Act aims at is only to Define that Church which then was to have the legal Establshment and the countenance of the Civil Authority This Church it Defines to be that Society of Pastors and People which professed the Doctrine of the Evangel c. according to the Confession of Faith then Established 'T is plain I say this is all that Act aims at Not one word of Iurisdiction or Discipline of Government or Polity of Episcopacy or Presbytery of Prelacy or Parity of Equality or Inequality amongst the Governours of the Church Whatever the Form of Government was then in the Church or whatever it might be afterwards was all one to this Act so long as Pastors whither Acting in Parity or Imparity and People kept by the same Rule of Faith and the same manner of administting the Sacraments What is there here like a Condemnation of Episcopal Iurisdiction Is this the way of Parliamentary Condemnations to Condemn ane Office or ane Order or a Jurisdiction call it as you will without either naming it or describing it in terms so circumstantiated as the world might understand by them that it was mean't To Condemn a thing especially a thing of so great importance without so much as repealing any one of many Acts which Established or Ratifyed it before Surely if this Act Condemned Episcopacy this Parliament happened upon a New Stile a Singular Stile a Stile never used before never used since Besides If this was the Act G. R. intended I would earnestly desire him to name but any one Man who lived in these times and understood Episcopacy to have been Condemned by this Act. How blind was Master Andrew Melvil How blind was all the Presbyterian Fraternity that all the five years they were fighting against Prelacy could never hit on this Act and prove that it ought to be no longer tolerated seeing it was against ane Act of Parliament Were they so little careful of Acts of Parliamant that they would not have been at pains to cite them for their purpose Mr. Andrew Melvil in his so often mentioned Letter to Beza dated Novemb. 13. 1579. writes thus We have not ceased these five years to fight against Pseudepiscopacy many of the Nobility resisting us and to press the severity of Discipline We have many of the Peers against us For they allege if Pseudepiscopacy be taken away one of the Estates is pulled down c. Now how easy had it been for him to have stopt the mouths of these Peers by telling them that it was taken away already by this Act of Parliament What a dunce was the L. Glamis Chancellor of Scotland by consequence one obliged by his station to understand something I think of the Laws of the Nation and all those whom he consulted about the Letter he wrote to the same Beza that neither he nor they knew any thing of this Act of Parliament but told the Gentleman bluntly that Episcopacy subsisted by Law That the Prelates made one of the three Estates that nothing could be done in Parliament without them and that the Legal Establishment of the Order and its lying so very near the foundation of the Civil Constitution made it extremely dangerous to alter it far more to abolish it But what needs more Let the Reader cast back his eyes on the Articles agreed on betwixt the Church and the Nobility and Barons in Iuly 1567 that same year by which it was provided that all the Popish Bishops should be deprived and that Superintendents should succeed in their places And then let him consider if it be probable that Episcopacy was Condemned by this Act of Parliament But G. R. continues I hope says he none will affirm that Prelatical Iurisdiction then was or was soon after Established in the Protestant Church of Scotland Was not our Author pretty forward at hoping Will none affirm it I do affirm it and I do affirm that if our Author had but lookt to the very next Act of that Parliament the seventh in number nay if he had but cast his eye some ten lines upward in that same 43. page of Calderwoods History he would have seen the Prelacy of
Superintendents expressly own'd and supposed in being by ane Act of that same Parliament in the matter of granting Collations upon Presentations And now I leave it to the world to judge if G. R. has not been very happy at citing Acts of Parliaments against Prelacy But Being thus engaged with him about Acts of Parliament I hope it will be a pardonable digression tho' I give the world another instance of his skill and confidence that way The Author of the ten Questions had said in his Discussion of the first Question That the Popish Bishops sate in the Parliament which settled the Reformation A matter of Fact so distinctly delivered by Knox Spotswood and Petrie but passed over by Calderwood that nothing could be more unquestionable Nay even Leslie himself has it for he tells us that the three Estates Conveened and I think in those days the Ecclesiastical Estate was one the first of thee three I think also That Estate was Generally Popish Yet however plain and indisputable this matter of Fact was our learned Author could contradict it Take his Answer in his own words To what he saith of the Popish Bishops sitting in a Reforming Parliament I oppose what Leslie Bishop of Rosse a Papist hath de Gest. Scotorum lib. 10. pag. 536. that Concilium a Sectae Nobilibus cum Regina habitum nullo Ecclesiastico admisso ubi Sancitum ne quis quod ad Religionem attinet quicquam novi Moliretur Ex hac lege inquit omne sive Haereseos sive inimicitiarum sive seditionis malum tanquam ex fonte fluxit Now in the first place I think it might be made a Question for what Reason our Author changed Leslies words Might he not have given us the Citation just as it was Leslie has it thus Convenientibus interim undique Sectae Nobilibus Concilium nullo Ecclesiastico viro admisso Edinburgi initur In eo Concilio in primis Sancitum est ne quis quod ad Religionem attineret quicquam novi moliretur Sed res in eo duntaxat Statu quo erant cum Regina ipsa in Scotiam primum appulisset integrae manerent Ex hac Lege tanquam fonte omne sive haereseos sive inimicitiarum sive Seditionis malum in Scotia nostra fluxit Because Leslie was a Papist must his very Latine be Reformed If this was it if I mistake not a further Reformation may be needful for if Leslie was wrong in saying in eo Concilio I think our Author has mended it but sorrily by putting ubi in its stead i. e. by making ane Adverb of place the Relative to Concilium And let the Criticks judge whither G. R's attinet or Leslies attineret was most proper But perhaps the true Reason was that there was something dark in these words Sed Res in eo duntaxat Statu quo erant cum Regina ipsa in Scotiam primum appulisset integrae manerent 'T is true indeed this Sentence quite subverts our Authors purpose for it imports that there had been some certain sort of Establishment of Religion before the Queen came to Scotland which was not judged fit then to be altered Now that this Learned man may be no more puzzled with such ane obscure piece of History I will endeavour to help him with a Clue Be it known to all men therefore and particularly to G. R. the Learned and renowned Vindicator of the Church of Scotland That the Parliament which Established the Reformation and in which the Popish Bishops sate was holden in August 1560 That Queen Mary returned not to Scotland till August 1561. That this Council which Leslie speaks of met after the Queens return as is evident from Leslies words and that it was at most but a Privy Council and nothing like a Parliament Have we not G. R. now a very accurate Historian And so I leave him for a little and proceed to the Fourth Enquiry Whither Prelacy and the Superiority of any Office in the Church above Presbyters was a great and insupportable Grievance and Trouble to this Nation and contrary to the Inclinations of the Generality of the People when this Article was Established in the Claim of Right THis Enquiry is about a very recent matter of Fact the subject will not allow of Metaphysical Arguments It is not old enough to be determined by the Testimonies of Historians It cannot be decided by the publick records or Deeds of the Nation For if I mistake not there was never publick deed before founded mainly and in express terms upon the Inclinations of the Generality of the People and I do not think it necessary by the Laws of Disputation that I should be bound by the Authority of a publick deed which I make the main thing in Question The Method therefore which I shall take for discussing this Enquiry shall be to give a plain Historical narration of the Rise and Progress of this Controversie and consider the Arguments made use of on both sides leaving it to the Reader to judge whither side can pretend to the greater probability The Controversie as I take it had its Rise thus The Scottish Presbyterians seasonably forewarned of the then P. of O.'s designs to possess himself of the Crowns of Great Britain and Ireland against his coming had adjusted their Methods for advancing their interests in such a juncture and getting their beloved Parity Established in the Church They were no sooner assured that he was in successful circumstances than they resolved on putting their projects in execution The first step was in ane hurry to raise the Rabble in the Western Counties against the Episcopal Clergy thereby to Confound and put all things in Disorder The next it seems amidst such confusion to endeavour by all means to have themselves elected members for the Meeting of Estates which was to be at Edenburgh upon the 14 th of March 168â— In both steps the success answered their wishes and it happened that they got indeed the prevailing sway in the Meeting and in gratitude to the Rabble which had done them so surprizing service they resolved not only to set up Presbytery but to set it up on this foot That Prelacy was a great and insupportable Grievance and Trouble to the Nation and contrary to the Inclinations of the Generality of the People If this was not it that determined them to set up their Government on this foot I protest I cannot conjecture what it might be that did it Sure I am there was no other thing done then that with the least shew of probability could be called ane Indication of the Inclinations of the People They could not collect it from any clamours made at that time against Prelacy by the Generality of the People There were no such clamours in the mouths of the twentieth part of the People They could not collect it from the Peoples separation from the Episcopal Clergy during the time of K. I.'s toleration The tenth part of the Nation had not
frequented or encouraged and that on the South side of that River except in the five Associated Shires in the West the third man was never engaged in the Schism This was Matter of Fact And if true a solid Demonstration that Prelacy and the Superiority of any Office in the Church above Presbyters was not then a great and insupportable Grievance and Trouble to the Nation and contrary to the inclinations of the generality of the People For had it been such how is it imaginable when there was such ane Ample Toleration such ane Absolute and Vnperplex't Liberty nay so much notorius encouragement given by the then Government to separate from the Episcopal Communion that so few should have done it Whoso pleased might then have safely and without the least prospect of worldly hazard joyn'd the Presbyterians yet scarcely a fifth or a sixth part of the Nation did it I am not sure that the nature of the thing was capable of a clearer evidence unless it had been put to the impracticable Fancy Let us next consider G. R.'s Answers and judge by them if the Epistler was wrong as to the matter of Fact He hath some two or three we shall try them severally The First to the purpose is If there be many in the Northern parts who are not for Presbytery there are as few for the present settlement of the State To what purpose is the present settlement of the State forced in here Was the Controversie between him and his Adversary concerned in it in the least What impertinent Answering is this Is there so much as one syllable here that Contradicts the Epistlers position But 2. We affirm says G. R. and can make it appear not only that there are many in the North who appeared zealously for Presbytery as was evident by the Members of Parliament who came from these parts Very few of them were otherwise inclined and they made a great figure in the Parliament for settling both the State and the Church If one were put to it to examine this Answer particularly and minutely I think he might easily make even G. R. himself wish that he had never meddled with it It were no hard task to give a just account how it only happened that there was so much as one Northern member who was not such by birth of the Presbyterian perswasion in the Meeting of Estates It were as easy to represent what Figures some of them made or can readily make Vncouth Figures truly All this were very easy I say if one were put to it But as it is not seasonable so it is not needful For 't is plain nothing here contradicts the Epistlers position Tho' the Northern members of the Presbyterian perswasion had been twice as many as they were and tho' they had made greater figures than can be pretended yet it may be very true that there were so few separatists in the Northern Counties as the Epistler affirmed there were And for the respect G. R. owes to his Northern Friends and Figure-makers I would advise him never again to insist on such a tender point And so I leave it and proceed to what follows 3. There are very many Ministers in the North and People that own them who tho' they served under Episcopacy are willing to joyn with the Presbyterians and whom the Presbyterians are ready to receive when occasion shall be given and those of the best Qualified among them How such Ministers as have joyn'd or are ready to joyn with the Presbyterians can be called the best Qualified amongst the Episcopal Clergy so long as integrity of life constancy in adhering to true Catholick Principles ane hearty abhorrence of Schism Conscience of the Religion of Oaths Self-denyal taking up the Cross patiently and chearfully and preferring Christian Honour and innocence to worldly conveniences can be said to be amongst the best Qualifications of a Christian Minister I cannot understand I understand as little what ground our Author had for talking so confidently about these Northern Ministers Sure I am he had no sure ground to say so And I think the transactions of the last General Assembly and the unsuccessfulness of Mr. Meldrum's Expedition to the North this Summer are Demonstrations that he had no ground at all to say so But whatever be of these things I desire the Reader to consider impartially whither supposing all were uncontroverted truth our Author asserts so confidently here this Answer convells the Matter of Fact asserted by the Author of the Letter What is there here that looks like proving that the Schism was greater in the North than was asserted by the Epistler Or what is there here that can by any colour of consequence infer that Prelacy in these Northern parts was a great and insupportable Trouble and Grievance and contrary to the Inclinations of the Generality of the People Doth not our Author acknowledge that these Ministers served under Episcopacy and that their People own'd them without any Reluctancies of Conscience But the Epistler had said there were not above 3 or 4 Presbyterian Meeting-houses on the North side of the Tay and the Vindicator says they far exceeded that number How easy had it been for the Vindicator to have given us the Definite number of Presbyterian Meeting-houses in these parts during the time of the above-mentioned Toleration He who was so very exact to have his informations from all corners might one would think have readily satisfied himself in this instance and fairly fixt one lie on the Epistler And is it not a great presumption that the Epistler was in the Right and that the Vindicator who was so anxious to have all his Adversaries Liers was hardly put to it in this Matter When he could do no more than oppose ane Indefinite number to the Epistlers Definite one For my part I think it not worth the while to be positive about the precise number But I can say this without Hesitation that all who separated from their Parish Churches on that side the River would not have filled four ordinary Meeting-houses From what hath been said I think 't is clear the Epistler was honest enough in his reckoning for the North side of the Tay. Can all be made as safe on the South side The Epistler had said that except in the West the third Man was never engaged in the Schism G. R. Answers We know no Schism but what was made by his party But that the plurality did not suffer under the horrid persecution raised by the Bishops Doth not prove that they were not inclined to Presbytery But either that many Presbyterians had freedom to hear Episcopal Ministers or that all were not resolute enough to suffer for their principle So that this is no Rational way of judging of the Peoples inclinations I will neither engage at present with him in the Question who is the Scottish Schismatick Nor digress to the point of the horrid Persecution raised by the Bishops Another occasion
may be as proper for them But I desire the Reader again to consider this Answer and judge if it keeps not a pretty good distance from the Epistlers position Is any thing said here that contradicts that looks like contradicting the Matter of Fact What new fashion of Answering is this to talk whatever comes in ones head without ever offering to attack the strength of the reasoning he undertakes to discuss By this Taste the judicious Reader may competently judge which is the right side of the present Controversie and withal if I mistake not he may guess if the Presbyterian Kirk in Scotland was not well provided when it got G. R. for its Vindicator Shall he furnish thee O patient Reader with any more divertisement If thou canst promise for thy patience I can promise for G. R. This Learned Gentleman found himself to puzzled it seems about this part of the Article that he was forced to put on the Fools-cap and turn Ridiculous to mankind However it was even better to be that than to yeild in so weighty a Controversie than to part with the Inclinations of the People that Articulus Stantis Cadentis Ecclesiae But is there a Play to succeed worthy of all this Prologue Consider and judge He has so limited and restricted the Generality of the People to make his cause some way defensible that for any thing I know he has confin'd them all within his own doublet At least he may do it before he shall need to yeild any more in his Argument He is at this trade of limiting in both his Vindications I shall cast them together that the world may consider the Product 1. There are many ten thousands who are inconcerned about Religion both in the greater and the lesser truths of it And it is most irrational to consider them in this Question 2. There are not a few who are of opinion that Church-Government as to the species of it is indifferent These ought not to be brought into the reckoning 3. There are not a few whose light and conscience do not incline them to Episcopacy who are yet zealous for it and against Presbytery Because under the one they are not censured for their immoralities as under the other These ought to be excluded also So ought all 4. Who had a Dependance on the Court And 5. All who had a Dependance on the Prelates 6. All Popishly Affected and who are but Protestants in Masquerade 7. All Enemies to K. W. and the present Government I am just to him all these Exclusions out of the reckoning he has if he has not more And give him these and he dares affirm That they who are Conscientiously for Prelacy are so few in Scotland that not one of many hundreds or Thousands is to be found 1 Vind. They who are for Episcopacy are not one of a Thousand in Scotland 2 Vind. Now not to fall on examining his Limitations singly because that were to be sick of his own disease In the first place one would think if he had been allowed his Limitations he might in all Conscience have satisfied himself without begging the Question to boot Yet even that he has most covetously done For I think the Question was not who were Conscientiously for Prelacy or inclined for Episcopacy But whither Prelacy and the Superiority of any Office in the Church above Presbyters was a great and insupportable Grievance and Trouble to the Nation and contrary to the inclinations of the Generality of the People And there is some difference as I take it between these Questions But let him take the State of the Question if he must needs have it I can spare it to him Nay if it can do him service I can grant him yet more When the Matter comes to be tryed by this his Standard I shall be satisfied that it fall to his share to be judge He should understand his own Rule best and so may be fittest for such Nice Decisions as a point so tender must needs require Tho' I think He may take the short cut as we say and give his own judgment without more ado For thither it must recur at last Only I cannot guess why he excluded all Popishly affected c. Was it to let a friend go with a fee I think he might have learned from History if not from Experience that Papists have been amongst the best friends to his Interest and very ready to do his party service upon occasion which it is not to be thought they would have done for nothing But however this is Having granted him so much I think he is bound to grant me one little thing I ask it of him only for peace I can force it from him if I please It is that all his Limitations Restrictions Exclusions Castings-out Settings-aside or what ever he pleases to call them were adduced by him for setting the Article in its Native and proper light and as it ought to be understood But if so I cannot think he himself can repute it unfair dealing to give the world a fair view of the Article as thus explained and enlightened And so digested it must run to this purpose as I take it That Prelacy and the Superiority of any Office in the Church above Presbyters is and hath been a great and insupportable Grievance and Trouble to this Nation and contrary to the inclinations of the Generality of the People Excluding from this Generality of the People 1. All these many ten thousands of the People who are unconcerned about Religion both in the greater and lesser truths of it 2. All these many of the People who are of opinion that Church-Government as to the species of it is indifferent 3. All these other many of the People whose Light and Conscience do not incline them to Episcopacy who are yet zealous for it and against Presbytery because under the one they are not censured for their immoralities as under the other 4. All such of the People as had any dependance on the Court. 5. Or on the Prelates 6. Or are Popishly affected and Protestants only in Masquerade And 7. All such as are Enemies to K. W. and the present Civil Government Ever since the Reformation They i. e. such of the People as are not excluded from the Generality of the People by any of the aforesaid Exceptions having Reformed from Popery by Presbyters and therefore it ought to be Abolished So the Article must run I say when duely Englightned by our Authors Glosses and when a New Meeting of Estates shall settle another New Government and put such ane Article in another New Claim of Right I do hereby give my word I shall not be the first that shall move Controversies about it But till that is done G. R. must allow me the use of a certain sort of Liberty I have of Thinking at least that his wits were a wool-gathering to use him as mannerly as can be done by one of his own
Complements when he spent so many of his sweet words another of his Phrases so very pleasantly Thus did G. R. defend this part of the Article against the Arguments of his Adversaries But did he produce none for his own side of the Controversie Yes one and only one so far as I can remember It is in his Answer to the first of the four Letters § 7. The Letter written by the Military Chaplain as he was pleased to call him This Military Chaplain had said That the Church Party was Predominant in this Nation both for Number and Quality That it is not so says G. R. is evident from the Constitution of our Parliament This is the Argument Now not to enter upon dangerous or undutiful Questions about Parliaments I shall say no more at present but this When G. R. shall make it appear that all the Acts and Deeds of the present Parliament have been all alongst agreeable to the Inclinations of the Generality of the People or when he shall secure the other part of the Article against the Dint of this his own good Argument I mean when he shall make it appear that such reasoning is firm and solid in the present case and withal shall make it appear that the Deeds and Acts of twenty seven Parliaments he knows well enough who numbred them to him Ratifying and consuming Episcopacy cannot or ought not to amount to as good ane Argument for the Inclinations of the Generality of the People in former times When he shall make these things appear I say I shall then think a little more about his Argument This I think is enough for him At present I shall consider it no more Only now that he hath brought the present Parliament upon the stage I will take occasion to propose some few Questions which the minding of it suggests to me and I seriously desire not G. R. but some truly sensible ingenious and sober person of the Presbyterian perswasion Some person who had opportunity to know how matters went and a head to comprehend them and who has Candour and Conscience to relate things as they truly were or are To give plain frank direct and pertinent answers to them speaking the sense of his heart openly and distinctly without mincing and without â—ergiversation My Questions shall not in the least touch the Dignity or Authority of the Parliament All I design them for is to bring Light to the present Controversie And I ask 1. Whither the Presbyterian party did not exert and concenter all their Wit and Force all their Counsel and Cunning all their Art and Application all their Skill and Conduct in Politicks both before and in the beginning of the late Revolution for getting a Meeting of Estates formed for their purposes 2. Whither the Universal Vnhinging of all things then and the general Surprize Confusion and Irresolution of the rest of the Nation occasioned thereby did not contribute extraordinarily for furthering the Presbyterian Designs and Projects 3. Whither notwithstanding all this when the Estates first met they had not both great and well-grounded fears that their Projects might miscarry and they might be outvoted in the Meeting 4. Whither very many very considerable Members had not deserted the House before it was thought seasonable to offer at putting the Article about Church-Government in the Claim of Right 5. Whither tho' they got this Article thrust into the Claim of Right and made part of the Original Contract between King and People in the Month of April 1689. They were not to their great grief disappointed of the Establishment of their Form of Church-Government in the first Session of Parliament holden in Iune c. that same year 6. Whither in the beginning of the next Session which was in April 1690. they were not under very dreadful apprehensions of another disappointment And whither they would not have been very near to if not in a state of Despair if all the Anti-Presbyterian Members had unanimously conveen'd and sate in Parliament 7. After they had recovered from these fears and when they had the courage to propose the Establishment of their Government and it came to be voted in the House I ask if it was any thing like a full House Plainly if a third part of those who might have sâ—te as Members were present 8. Whither all those Members who voted for it at that time can be said to have done it from a Principle of Conscience or a firm perswasion they had that Prelacy was a great and insupportable Grievance and Trouble to the Nation and contrary to the Inclinations of the Generality of the People Or whither it may be said without Breach of Charity that not a few of the few voted so mainly from other principles such as Complyance with some Leading Statesmen c. 9. Whither those of the Presbyterian perswasion after they found that they had prevailed in the Parliament did not proceed to make the Act obliging all Persons in publick Stations to sign the Declaration called the Assurance as much if not more for securing the Government in their own hands and keeping out Anti Presbyterians than for strengthning K. W.'s interests 10. Whither they had not in their prospect the great difficulty of getting Presbyterian Ministers planted in Churches if Patronages should continue when they made the Act depriving Patrons of these their Rights And whither they had not in their prospect the as great difficulties of getting such Ministers planted if according to the true Presbyterian principles at least pretensions the calling of a Minister should have depended upon the plurality of voices in the Parish when they consented to such a Model for calling of Ministers as was Established in that same Session of Parliament 11. Notwithstanding that Act of Parliament which Abolished Patronages did notoriously encroach upon the Peoples power Legated to them by Christ in his Testament according to the Genuine Presbyterian principles by putting the Real power of calling Ministers in the hands of the Presbytery for the greater Expedition and security of getting Presbyterian Ministers planted in Churches notwithstanding all this I say I ask whither they did not meet with many difficulties and much impediment and opposition in the plantation of such Ministers in very many Parishes In consequence of this I ask 12. Whither it was not the sense of these difficulties and oppositions which so frequently encumbred them that made the Presbyterian Ministers so notoriously betray their trust which they pretend to have as Conservators of the Liberties and Privileges of Christs Kingdom and People when they consented that in the last Session of Parliament Christs Legacy should be so clogg'd and limited as that none shall have Power of giving voice in the calling of Ministers till they shall first swear the Oath of Allegiance and sign the Assurance 13. And lastly I ask whither our Presbyterian Brethren would be content that all that has been done in reference to Church Matters since the beginning of
the late Revolution should be lookt upon as undone and that the settlement of the Church should again depend upon a new free unclogg'd unprelimited unover awed Meeting of Estates I am very much perswaded that a plain candid impartial and ingenuous Resolution of these few Questions might go very far in the Decision of this present Controversie And yet after all this labour spent about it I must confess I do not reckon it was in true value worth threeteen sentences As perchance may appear in part within a little And so I proceed to The Fifth Enquiry Whither supposing the Affirmatives in the proceeding Enquiries had been true they would have been of sufficient force to infer the Conclusion advanced in the Articles viz. that Prelacy c. ought to be Abolished THe Affirmatives are these two 1. That Prelacy was a great and Insupportable Grievance c. 2. That this Church was Reformed by Presbyters The purpose of this Enquiry is to try if these were good Reasons for the Abolition of Prelacy without further Address I think they were not Not the First viz. Prelacy's being a great and insupportable Grievance and Trouble to this Nation and contrary to the Inclinations of the Generality of the People Sure I am 1. Our Presbyterian Brethren had not this way of Reasoning from our Reformers For I remember Iohn Knox in his Letter to the Queen Regent of Scotland rejected it with sufficient appearances of Keenness and Contempt He called it a Fetch of the Devils to blind Peoples eyes with such a Sophism To make them look on that Religion as most perfect which the Multitude by wrong custom have embraced or to insinuate that it is impossible that that Religion should be false which so long time so many Councils and so great a Multitude of men have Authorized and confirmed c. For says he if the opinion of the Multitude ought always to be preferred then did God injury to the Original world For they were all of one mind to wit conjured against God except Noah and his family And I have shewed already that the Body of our Reformers in all their Petitions for Reformation made the word of God the Practices of the Apostles the Catholick Sentiments and Principles of the Primitive Church c. and not the inclinations of the People the Rule of Reformation Nay 2. G. R. himself is not pleased with this Standard He not only tells the world That Presbyterians wished and endeavoured that that Phrase might not have been used as it was But he ridicules it in his first Vindication in Answer to the tenth Question thoâ— he made himself ridiculous by doing it as he did it The Matter is this The Author of the ten Questions finding that this Topick of the inclinations of the People was insisted on in the Article as ane Argument for Abolishing Prelacy undertook to Demonstrate that tho' it were a good Argument it would not be found to conclude as the Formers of the Article intended Aiming unquestionably at no more than that it was not true that Prelacy was such a great and insupportable Grievance c. and to make good his undertaking He formed his Demonstration as I have already accounted Now hear G. R. It is a new Topick says he not often used before that such a way of Religion is best because c. This his Discourse will equally prove that Popery is preferable to Protestantism For in France Italy Spain c. not the Multitude only but all the Churchmen c. are of that way Thus I say G. R. ridiculed the Argument tho' he most ridiculously fancied he was ridiculing his Adversary who never dream'd that it was a good Argument But could have been as ready to ridicule it as another However I must confess G. R. did indeed treat the Argument justly For 3. Supposing the Argument good I cannot see how any Church could ever have Reformed from Popery For I think when Luther began in Germany or Mr. Patrick Hamilton in Scotland or Zuinglius or Oecolompadius or Calvin c. in their respective Countreys and Churches they had the inclinations of the People generally against them Nay if I mistake not our Saviour and his Apostles found it so too when they at first undertook to propagate our Holy Religion and perchance tho' the Christian Religion is now Generally Professed in most Nations in Europe some of them might be soon Rid of it if this Standard were allowed to take place I have heard of some who have not been well pleased with Saint Paul for having the word Bishop so frequently in his Language and I remember to have been told that one not ane Vnlearn'd one in a Conference being prest with a Testimony of Irenaeus's in his 3 Cap. 3 Lib. Adversus Her for ane uninterrupted Succession of Bishops in the Church of Rome from the Apostles times at first denyed confidently that any such thing was to be found in Irenaeus and when the Book was produced and he was convinced by ane ocular Demonstration that Irenaeus had the Testimony which was alleged he delivered himself to this purpose I see it is there Brother but would to God it had not been there Now had these People who were thus offended with St. Paul and Irenaeus been at the writing of their Books is it probable we should have had them with their Imprimatur as we have them Indeed for my part I shall never consent that the Bible especially the New Testament be Reformed according to some Peoples inclinations For if that should be allowed I should be very much affraid there would be strange cutting and carving I should be very much affraid that the Doctrine of self-preservation should justle out the Doctrine of the Cross That Might should find more favour than Right that the Force and Power should possess themselves of the places of the Faith and Patience of the Saints and that beside many other places we might soon see our last of at least the first seven verses of the 13 th Chapter to the Romans I shall only add one thing more which G. R.'s naming of France gave me occasion to think on It is that the French King and his Ministers as much as some People talk of their Abilities must for all that be but of the ordinary Size of Mankind For if they had been as wise and thinking men as some of their Neighbours they might have easily stopt all the mouths that were opened against them some years ago for their Persecuting the Protestants in that Kingdom For if they had but narrated in ane Edict that the Religion of the Hugonots was and had still been a great and insupportable Grievance and Trouble to their Nation and contrary to the Inclinations of the Generality of the People ever since it was Professed amongst them their work was done I believe G. R. himself would not have called the Truth of the Proposition in Question How easy were it to
dwell longer on this subject But I am affraid I have noticed it too much already To conclude then What is this Standard else than the Fundamental principle of Hobbism that Holy Scheme for Brutalizing Mankind and making Religion Reason Revelation every thing that aims at making men Manly to yeild unto at least to depend on the Frisks of Flesh and Blood or which is all one Arrant sense and ungovernable Passion And so I leave it But is the Second Reason any better If this Church had been Reformed by Presbyters would that have been a good Argument for Abolishing Prelacy Who sees not that it is much about the same Size with the former Indeed I am apt to think had the several Churches in the world erected their Governments by this Rule we should have had some pretty odd Constitutions Thus the Church collected of old amongst the Indians by Frumentius and Aedesius should have been Govern'd still by Laicks For Frumentius and Aedesius were no more than Laicks when they first converted them Thus all Xaverius's Converts and their Successors should have been always Govern'd by Iesuits For 't is past Controversie Xaverius was a Iesuit Thus the Churches of Iberia and Moravia should have been Govern'd by Women For if we may believe Historians the Gospel got first footing in these parts by the Ministery of Females Indeed if the Argument has any strength at all it seems stronger for these Constitutions than for Presbytery in Scotland inasmuch as it is more to Convert Infidels than only to Reform a Church which tho' Corrupt is allowed to be Christian. Nay which is more and worse more contrary to the Inclinations of Scotch Presbyterians and worse for Scotch Presbytery By this way of Reasoning Episcopacy ought still hitherto to have continued and hereafter to continue the Government of the Church of England Because that Church was Reformed by her Bishops But if so what can be said for the Solemn League and Covenant How shall we defend our Forty-three-men and all the Covenanting work of Reformation in that Glorious Period And if it must continue there what constant Perils must our Kirk needs be in especially so long as both Kingdoms are under one Monarch What I have said I think might be enough in all Conscience for this Fifth Enquiry But because it is obvious to the most overly Observation that the Framers of the Article have not been so much concerned for the strength and solidity of the Reasons they choosed for supporting their Conclusion as for their Colour and Aptitude to catch the vulgar and influence the populace and because our Presbyterian Brethren have of a long time been and still are in use to make zealous Declamations and huge noises about Succession to our Reformers Because the clamour on all occasions that those who stand for Episcopacy have so much forsaken the principles and maximes of the Reformation that they Pay our Reformers so little Respect and Deference That they have Secret Grudges at the Reformation That they would willingly return to Popery And what not Whereas they themselves have a Mighty Veneration for those who Reformed the Church of Scotland They are their only true and Genuine Successors They are the only Men who stand on the foot of the Reformation the only sincere and heart-Protestants the only Real Enemies to Antichrist c. For these Reasons I say I shall beg the Readers patience till I have discoursed this point a little farther And to deal frankly and plainly In the first place I own those of the Episcopal perswasion in Scotland do not think themselves bound to maintain all the principles or embrace all the sentiments or justify all the Practices of our Reformers 'T is true I speak only from my self I have no Commission from other men to tell their sentiments Yet I think the Generality of my Fathers and Brethren will not be offended tho' I speak in the Plural number and take them into the reckoning And therefore I think I may safely say Tho we think our Reformers considering their Education and all their disadvantages were very considerable men and made very considerable progress in Reforming the Church yet we do not believe they had ane immediate allowance from Heaven for all they said or did We believe they were not endued with the Gifts of infallibility inerrability or impeccability We believe and they believed so themselves that they had no Commission no Authority to Establish new Articles of Faith or make new Conditions of Salvation We believe they had no Power pretended to none for receding from the Original and immovable Standard of Christian Religion In consequence of this We believe and are confident that where they missed and being Fallible it was very possible for them to do it of Conformity to that Standard we are at Liberty to think otherwise than they thought to Profess otherwise than they professed We are not bound to follow them To instance in a few of many things We own we cannot allow of the principle of Popular Reformations as it was asserted and practised by our Reformers We own indeed 't is not only Lawful but Necessary for every Man to Reform himself both as to Principles and Practice when there is Corruption in either And that not only without but against publick Authority whither Civil or Ecclesiastical Farther we own 't is not only Lawful but plain and Indispensible Duty in the Governours of the Church to Reform her Acting in their own Sphere even against humane Laws in direct opposition to a thousand Acts of a thousand Parliaments I say Acting and keeping within their own Sphere i. e. so far as their Spiritual Power can go but no farther Keeping within these their own bounds they may and should condemn Heresies purge the publick worship of Corruptions continue a Succession of Orthodox Pastors c. In a word do every thing which is needful to be done for putting and preserving the Church committed to their Care in that State of Orthodoxy Purity and Vnity which Iesus Christ from whom they have their Commission and to whom they must be Answerable has Required by his holy Institution But we cannot allow them to move Excentrically to turn Exorbitant to stir without their own Vortex We cannot allow them to use any other than Spiritual means or to make any other than Spiritual Defences We think they should still perform all dutiful submission to the Civil Powers Never Resist by Material Arms never absolve subjects from their Allegiance to their Civil Sovereign Never Preach the Damnable Doctrine of Deposing Kings for Heresie never attempt to make those whom they should make good Christians bad Subjects But to teach them the great and fundamental Doctrine of the Cross and Exemplify it to them in their Practice when they are Called to it This we Profess And we do not think it Popery But our Reformers taught a quite different Doctrine Their Doctrine was that it belong'd to the Rabble to
within the Church is dissolved which is not for the most part till much of the day is spent indeed cannot readily be considering what work there is of it The Congregation dissolved there is a little breathing time Then the Bell rings again and the work is renewed Some other Brother than the Parish Minister mounts the Pulpit in the Church in the afternoon and Preaches a Thanksgiving Sermon and the rest are as busy in the Church yard as ever And then on Moondays morning the Preaching work is fallen to a fresh and pursued vigorously one Preaching in the Church another in the Church yard as formerly I am sure I am just in all this Account I could prove it by many instances if it were needful but I shall only name two Thus Last year when this Sacrament was Celebrated at St. Cuthberts where the renown'd Mr. David Williamsone Exercises on the three dayes viz. Saturday Sunday and Moonday in the Church and Church-yard there were no fewer than 12 or 13 formal Sermons besides all the Incidental Harrangues and all the Exhortations at the Tables c. And when the Sacrament was given in the New Church in the Canon-gate in September or the beginning of October 1692 there was much about the same number I my self overheard parts of some three or four which were Preached in the Church-yard And that which made me have the deeper impressions of the unaccountableness of this their Method was that all who were in the Church-yard on Sunday at least and four times as many might that day have had room enough in the Churches of Edenburgh which were at no great distance But it seems the solemnity of Church-yard Sermons is now become necessary on such occasions I have narrated nothing in this strange account I say but what is Notorious Matter of Fact All this Parade they have ordinarily even in the Countrey and tho' there are but some scores or at most but some hundreds to Communicate yet the Communion is not Solemn enough there 's a Cloud upon the Ministers reputation something or other is wrong if there are not some thousands of Spectators I doubt not when strangers Read this account they will think it a very surprizing one And no wonder for not to insist how much they have receded not only from the Rules and Practices of our Reformers but even from the Determinations of their own General Assembly 1645 not only receded from them but almost in every particular run quite Counter to them not to insist on what occasions may be given to much scandal and many wickednesses by such indigested disorderly confused and mixt Convocations For who knows not that hundreds generally strangers to one another who have no sense of no concern for no care about serious Religion may meet on such occasions for Novelty for Curiosity for Intrigues not to be named for a thousand such sinister ends Not to insist on these things I say tho' they are of no small consequence What a vast difference is there between such Communions and the Orderly and Devout Communions of the Primitive Church What would the Ancient Lights and Guides of the Christian Church who would suffer none to stay in the Church but such as were to Participate say if they saw such promiscuous Routs assembled and mostly for no other end than making a Spectacle of such a Venerable Mystery Is not such unaccountable Parade much liker to the Popish Processions than the Devout Performances of the purer times of Genuine Christianity How impossible were it at this rate to Celebrate the Sacrament once a Month in every Parish Church How much more impossible to restore it to its due and proper frequency How far is this from looking on this Holy Sacrament as ane ordinary tho' a very signal part of Divine worship Or rather is it not to make a Prodigie of this Divine Mystery Certainly when People observe how seldome and withal with what strange Pomp with what ordinarily impracticable solemnity such ane holy ordinance is gone about it cannot but work differently upon their different dispositions It stands fair to be a Scare-crow to the weak Christian He dares not approach where there is so much frightening Address It stands as fair for being a scandal to the strong and understanding Christian when he sees so much vain shew so much needless ostentation so much odd external tricking about it And the Hypocrite can hardly wish any thing more useful for him For who should doubt of his being a Saint when he approaches amidst so much solemnity Besides Every body may easily see what is aim'd at by all this It is as they think a proper Method for catching the Populace It is to make them admire the Devotion the Religion the Abilities of the Party How Glorious and August are their Communions What singular preparations have they How many Powerful Prayers How many Soul-searching Sermons Who can compare with them for fervour and zeal for Graces and Gifts for special marks of Gods peculiar favour and assistance Must not their way be Gods way Must not those of their way be the true the only People of God! I ask God and my Presbyterian Brethren pardon if this is not at the bottom of the Matter But if it is I wish they would consider from what principles it proceeds How easy is it to discern in such Arts and Methods the clear Symptomes the lively Signatures of a Schismatical temper How easy to perceive the plain features of Faction and the Lineaments of a preposterous Fondness to have their way and party had in Admiration How easy were it more fully to expose such dangerous and dreadful Methods But I am affraid I have digressed too much already There is 8. Another very considerable instance of their Deserting the principles of our Reformers in the Matter of this Sacrament Such ane instance as may make another strange Figure when seriously considered Our Reformers having once Established the Confession of Faith as the Standard for this National Church required no more for qualifying private Persons for the Sacrament of the Eucharist than that they could say the Lords Prayer the Articles of the Belief and the summ of the Law and understand the use and Vertue of this Holy Sacrament So it is expressly delivered in the ninth Head of the First Book of Discipline Supposing the Person free from scandal this was certainly a Genuine Measure and agreeable to the Rules and Principles of Catholick Vnity For However expedient it may be upon some Emergent Occasions or Necessities to require suitable Obligations of Office-bearers in the Church yet no man I think who loves Christian Simplicity and Vnity but will acknowledge 't is proper and prudent to make the terms of Communion as Catholick and Comprehensive as Christs institutions will allow them to be made Now not to insist on our Brethrens separating from the Communion of those who keep by the terms of Communion required by our Reformers
taken from them without a Direct crossing of Christs institution and the horrid sin of Robbing his People of their indisputable Priviledge Patronages are ane Intollerable Grievance and Yoak of Bondage on the Church They have been always the cause of Pestering the Church with a bad Ministery They came in amongst the latest Anti-Christian Corruptions and Vsurpations c. This is their Doctrine tho' 't is obious to all the world they put strange Comments on it by their Practice Well! What were the sentiments of our Reformers in this Matter The First Book of Discipline indeed affirms Head 4. That it appertaineth to the People and to every several Congregation to Elect their own Minister But it has not so much as one syllable of the Divine institution of such a Priviledge On the contrary in that same very breath it adds and in case they be found negligent therein the space of 40 days the Superintendent with his Council may present a Man c. If this Man after tryal is found qualified and the Church can justly reprehend nothing in his Life Doctrine or Utterance then We judge say our Reformers the Church which before was destitute unreasonable if they refuse him whom the Church doth offer And that they should be compelled by the Censure of the Council and Church to receive the Person appointed and approved by the Iudgment of the Godly and Learned unless that the same Church hath presented a Man better or as well Qualified to Examination before that the aforesaid tryal was taken of the Person presented by the Council of the whole Church As for Example the Council of the Church presents a Man unto a Church to be their Minister not knowing that they are otherwise provided In the mean time the Church hath another sufficient in their judgement for that charge whom they present to the Learned Ministers and next Reformed Church to be examined In this case the presentation of the People to whom he should be appointed Pastor must be preferred to the presentation of the Council or greater Church unless the Person presented by the inferiour Church be judged unable for the Regiment by the Learned For this is always to be avoided that no man be intruded or thrust in upon any Congregation But this Liberty with all care must be reserved for every several Church to have their voices and suffrages in Election of their Ministers Yet we do not call that violent intrusion when the Council of the Church in the fear of God regarding only the salvation of the People offereth unto them a man sufficient to instruct them whom they shall not be forced to admit before just Examination So that Book Add to this this consideration That at that time the Popish Clergy were in possession of all the Benefices the Reformed Clergy had not then so much as the prospect of the Thirds which I have discoursed of before These things laid together 't is obvious to perceive 1. That it was only from Prudential Considerations our Reformers were inclined to give the People so much Power at that time It was much for the Conveniency of the Ministers who were to live by the Benevolence of the Parish c. They did not grant them this Power as of Divine Right No such thing so much as once insinuated as I have said 'T was plainly nothing but a Liberty And no injury no violence was done to a Parish even in these circumstances of the Church when the Council of the Church gave them a Minister without their own Election 'T is as plain 2. that so far as can be collected from the whole Period above our Reformers the Compilers of the Book I mean abstracting from the then circumstances of the Church were more inclined that the Election of Ministers should be in the hands of the Clergy than of the People Which I am much inclined to think was not only then but a long time after the prevailing sentiment And all the world sees I am sure it was a sentiment utterly inconsistent with the opinion of the Divine Right of Popular Elections I have been at pains to set the First Book of Discipline thus in its due light that our Brethren may not complain it was neglected not that my Cause required it For that Book was never Law either Civil or Ecclesiastical and so I might fairly have omitted it Let us try next what were truly the publick and Authoritative sentiments of our Reformers The first which I find of that nature is the sentiment of the General Assembly holden in September 1565. The General Assembly holden in Iune immediately before had complained that some vacant Benefices had been bestowed by the Queen on some Noblemen and Barons The Queen answered She thought it not Reasonable to deprive her of the Patronages belonging to her And this General Assembly in September answer thus Our mind is not that her Majesty or any other Person should be defrauded of their just Patronages but we mean whensoever her Majesty or any other Patron do present any Person unto a Benefice that the Person presented should be tryed and examined by the judgement of Learned Men of the Church Such as are for the present the Superintendents And as the presentation of the Benefice belongs to the Patron so the Collation by Law and Reason belongeth to the Church Agreeably we find by the 7 Act 1 Parl. Iac. 6. Anno 1567. The Parliament holden by Murray Regent It was enacted in pursuance no doubt of the Agreement between the Nobility and Barons and the Clergy in the General Assembly holden in Iuly that year That the Patron should present a qualified Person within six Months to the Superintendent of these parts where the Benefice lyes c. And by the Agreement at Leith Anno 1572 the Right of Patronages was reserved to the Respective Patrons And by the General Assembly holden in March 1574 it was enacted that collations upon presentations to Benefices should not be given without consent of three qualified Ministers c. The General Assembly in August that same year supplicated the Regent that Bishops might be presented to vacant Bishopricks as I have observed before By the General Assembly holden in October 1578 It was enacted that presentations to benefices be directed to the Commissioners of the Countreys where the Benefice lyes 'T is true indeed the Second Book of Discipline Cap. 12. § 10. Condemns Patronages as having no ground in the word of God as contrary to the same and as contrary to the Liberty of Election of Pastors and that which ought not to have place in the Light of Reformation But then 't is as true 1. That that same General Assembly holden in April 1581 which first Ratified this Second Book of Discipline Statuted and Ordained That Laick Patronages should remain whole unjoynted and undivided unless with consent of the Patron So that let them who can reconcile the Acts of this Presbyterian
Church after that he is well tryed and found qualified It ennumerates Fasting Prayer and imposition of hands of the Eldership as the Ceremonies of Ordination § 11 12. Now the whole Nation knows no such thing as either Tryal Fasting or imposition of hands are used by our present Presbyterians in the Ordination of Ruling Elders The Sixth Chapter is particularly concerning Ruling Elders as contra-distinct from Pastors or Teaching Elders And it determines thus concerning them § 3. Elders once Lawfully called to the Office and having Gifts of God fit to exercise the same may not leave it again Yet nothing more ordinary with our present Presbyterians than laying aside Ruling Elders and reducing them to a state of Laicks So that Sure I am if ever they were Presbyters they come under Tertullians Censure De Praescrip Hodie Presbyter qui cras Laicus A Presbyter to day and a Porter to morrow By the 9 th § of that same Chapter It pertains to them these Ruling Elders to assist the Pastor in examining those that come to the Lords Table and in visiting the Sick This Canon is not much in use I think as to the last part of it as to the first it is intirely indesuetude Indeed some of them would be wondrously qualified for such ane Office The Seventh Chapter is about Elderships and Assemblies By § 2. Assemblies are of four sorts viz. either of a particular Congregation or of a Province or a whole Nation or all Christian Nations Now of all these indefinitely it is affirmed § 5. In all Assemblies a Moderator should be chosen by common consent of the whole Brethren conveened Yet no such thing observed in our Kirk-Sessions which are the Congregational Assemblies spoken of § 2. But Ma◠Iohn takes the Chair without Election and would not be a little grated if the best Laird in the Parish should be his Competitor Crawford himself the First Earl of the Kingdome had never the Honour to be Moderator in the Kirk Session of Ceres The 14 th Canon in the same 7 th Chapter is this When we speak of Elders of particular Congregations we mean not that every particular Parish Church can or MAY have their particular Elderships especially to Landward but we think three or four more or fewer particular Churches may have a common Eldership to them all to judge their Ecclesiastical Causes And Chapter 12. Canon 5. As to Elders there would be in every Congregation one or more appointed for censuring of manners but not ane Assembly of Elders except in Towns and Famous Places where men of Iudgement and Ability may be had And these to have a common Eldership placed amongst them to treat of all things that concern the Congregations of whom they have the Oversight But as the world goes now every Parish even in the Country must have its own Eldership and this Eldership must consist of such a number of the Sincerer sort as may be able to out-vote all the Malignant Heritors upon occasion as when a Minister is to be chosen c. So long as there is a precise Plough-man or a well-affected Webster or a covenanted Cobbler or so to be found in the Parish such a number must not be wanting The standing of the Sect is the Supreme Law The good cause must not suffer tho' all the Canons of the Kirk should be put to shift for themselves IV. The last thing I named as that wherein our present Presbyterians have forsaken the principles and sentiments of our Reformers was the Government of the Church But I have treated so fully of this already that 't is needless to pursue it any farther I shall only therefore as ane Appendage to this represent one very considerable Right of the Church adhered to by our Reformers but disclaim'd by our present Presbyterians It is her being the First of the three Estates of Parliament and having vote in that great Council of the Nation It is evident from the most Ancient Records and all the Authentick Monuments of the Nation That the Church made still the First of the Three Estates in Scottish Parliaments since there were Parliaments in Scotland This had obtained time out of mind and was lookt upon as Fundamental in the Constitution of Parliaments in the days of the Reformation Our Reformers never so much as once dream'd that this was a Popish Corruption What Sophistry can make it such They dream'd as little of its being unseemly or scandalous or incongruous or inconvenient or whatever now adays men are pleas'd to call it On the contrary they were clear for its continuance as a very important Right of the Church The First Book if Discipline Head 8 th allowed Clergy-men to Assist the Parliament when the same is called 'T is true Calderwood both Corrupts the Text here and gives it a false Gloss. Instead of these words when the same is called he puts these if he be called and his Gloss is Meaning with advice says he not by voice or sitting as a Member of that Court I say this is a false Gloss. Indeed it runs quite counter to all the principles and practices of these times For not only did the Ecclesiastical Estate sit actually in the Reforming Parliament Anno 1560 and all Parliaments thereafter for very many years But such stress in these times was laid on this Estate that it was generally thought that nothing of publick concern could be Legally done without it The Counsel of the Ecclesiastick Peers was judged necessary in all matters of National Importance Thus Anno 1567. when the Match was on foot between the Queen and Bothwell that it might seem to be concluded with the greater Authority pains were taken to get the consent of the principal Nobility by their susbcriptions But this was not all that all might be made as sure as could be All the Bishops who were in the City were also Convocated and their subscriptions required as Buchanan tells us And Anno 1568. when the Accusation was intented against the Queen of Scotland before the Queen of England's Arbitrators that it might be done with the greater appearance of the Consent of the Nation That it might have the greater semblance of a National Deed as being a matter wherein all Estates were concerned the Bishop of Orkney and the Abbot of Dunfermline were appointed to represent the Spiritual Estate Again Anno 1571. when the two Counter Parliaments were holden at Edenburg those of the Queens Faction as few as they were had the Votes of two Bishops in their Session holden Iuly 12 as is clear from Buchanan and Spotswood compared together In their next Session which was holden at Edenburg August 22 that same year tho' they were in all but five Members yet two of them were Bishops as Spotswood tells But Buchanan's account is more considerable For he says one of these two was there unwillingly so that it seems he was forced by the rest to be there out
consequence of this their frankness the Earl of Argyle and the Prior of St. Andrews two first-rate Protestants were the persons nominated to pass into France to honour the Dauphine with that complement And they undertook it cordially But in the very instant almost they were informed that Mary of England was dead and Elizabeth on the Throne and withal professing Protestancy This altered their whole Scheme They presently considered The English Influences so long stopt in their Courses might now begin to Drop again And there were hopes of Assistance from that Female Soveraign So these two Lords no doubt with the advice of the rest of the fraternity gave over thoughts of their French Voyage The Dauphine might purchase a Crown for himself or wait till his Father dyed if he could not do better They resolved to carry him no Matrimonial Crowns from Scotland Indeed their hopes of Assistance from England to carry on the Reformation of Religion were better grounded then than ever For Upon the Death of Queen Mary of England by French advice our Queen as Next Heir to that Crown had assumed the English Titles 'T is not to be thought Elizabeth lik'd this well and resolving to continue Queen of England she had no reason For who knows not that her Title was Questionable But our Queens Descent was Vncontroverted What wonder then if Elizabeth thought herself concerned to secure herself as well as she could And what more feasible and proper way for her security than to have the Affections and by consequence the Power of Scotland on her side And what measure so natural for obtaining that as to cherish the Reformation of Religion in Scotland and weaken the Popish and by consequence the French interests there and get the Rule of that Kingdom put in the hands of Protestants The politick was obviously solid all the work was to set it a going But that difficulty was soon over for no sooner did she employ some private instruments to try the Scottish pulses than they smelt the matter and relisht it immediately The least intimation that she was so inclined was to them as a spark of fire amongst Gun-powder it kindled them in a thought They addrest her quickly beg'd her protection and plighted their Faith that they would depend upon her and stand by her and to the outmost of their power secure her interests if she would grant them suitable assistances Thus the bargain was readily agreed to on both sides and both perform'd their parts successfully For who knows not that our Reformation was carried on by Elizabeths Auspices by English Arms and Counsels and Money in the year 1560 And who knows not that by the Treaty at Leith in Iuly that same year after the French were expelled Scotland when our Reformers by her help had got the upper hand her Crown was secured as far as the Scottish Protestants could secure it Who knows not I say that it was one of the Articles of that Treaty That the Queen of Scotland and King of France should not thereafter usurp the Titles of England and Ireland and should delete the Arms of England and Ireland out of their Scutchions and whole Houshold-stuff By this time I think it may competently appear how much our Scottish Reformation under God depended on English influences But I have two things more to add 10. Then It is considerable that some of our Chief Luminaries of those who had a principal hand in preaching and planting the Gospel in Purity among us had drunk in these principles in England and brought them thence to Scotland with them Thus the excellent Martyr Mr. George Wishart of whom in part before as Spotswood tells us had spent his time in Cambridge and return'd to his own Country to promote the Truth in it Anno 1544. And Mr. Iohn Spotswood that worthy man who was so long Superintendent of Lothian after our Reformation was one of Cranmers Disciples as you may see in the beginning of the Life of Archbishop Spotswood his Son and also in his History And Iohn Willock and William Harlaw had both lived in England before they preacht in Scotland as I have already accounted and perhaps a strict Enquiry might discover some others 11. and lastly On the other hand except so far as Iohn Knox was Calvinist and a Lover of the Forms of Geneva for which perhaps I shall account hereafter none of our Historians give so much as one particular instance of a Scottish Reformer who had his Education in any other foreign Church except Mr. Patrick Hamilton who I think cannot be proven to have been a Presbyterian and tho it could be done it could amount to no more than the Authority of a very young man considering he was but 23 years of age when he died Neither do they mention any Foreigner who came here to Scotland to assist us in our Reformation Lesly indeed says that the Scottish Protestants sent Letters and Messengers to Germany to call thence Sacramentarian Ministers as being very dexterous at fostering Sedition and subverting Religion but no other Historian says so and he himself says not that ever any such came to Scotland Thus I think I have accounted competently for the first thing proposed viz. That our Reformation under God was principally Cherished and Encouraged by English Influences I proceed to the 2. Which was That in Correspondence to these Influences our Reformers were generally of the same Mind with the Church of England in several momentous instances relating to the Constitution and Communion the Government and Polity of the Church wherein our present Presbyterian principles stand in direct opposition and contradiction to her That our Reformers agreed with those of the Church of England in the Common Articles of the Christian Faith in their Creed was never called in Question But it is not my present purpose to consider the sentiments of our Reformers in relation to the Church as it is a Sect but as it is a Society neither shall I be curious to amuse many particulars I shall content my self with two or three of considerable weight and importance And 1. Our Reformers generally or rather unanimously lookt on the Church of England as a Church so well constituted that her Communion was a Lawful Communion For this we have two as good Evidences as the nature of the thing is capable of viz. The constant and uniform practice of our Reformers joining in the Communion of the Church of England when they had occasion as those of the Church of England did with the Church of Scotland and their open profession in their publick deeds that they thought it Lawful 1. I say it was the constant practice of our Reformers to joyn in the Communion of the Church of England when they had occasion as those of the Church of England did with the Church of Scotland Thus we find all such of our Reformers as in times of Persecution fled into England still joyning with the Church