unlawful Act For such a Power being asserted in the Declaration doth no way infer their owning of that Power by their using the Liberty granted them after it had been unjustly with-held from them and which was their Due by a Grant from Christ in the Gospel What could prompt this Author to affirm that the Presbyterians were moved at last to use the Liberty granted because they could no longer be disobedient to the Divine Providence And that according to their Divinity Providential Occurrences make a considerable part of the Rule of Faith and Manners I leave it to others to guess for none are more remote from such Principles than Presbyterians He next undertaketh to prove that Presbyterians did not separate from them he meaneth make use of the Liberty granted them on any Principle of Conscience If this be well proved it will give a deep Wound to our Interest from their continuing in Communion with the Episcopalians some Years before their Liberty and many some Months after Answ. His Arguments 1 st are This Communion was nothing else but Hearing them when they could get none else to â—â—ar which many yea most Presbyterians never scrupled But let him tell us if all that time they ever owned these Men for their lawful Pastors or thought it Duty to forsake them whom they had owned as such to cleave to these or that they ever countenanced the Government or Discipline of the Church which was exercised under Bishops and by their Authority If they had done so it had not consisted with Conscience to separate from them on occasion of a Liberty granted But if otherwise it doth clearly consist with Leaving them for Conscience sake because their Scruple was not simply about hearing but about forsaking their lawful Pastors and owning those others as their Pastors and their Church-Government as Christ's Discipline Arg. 2. While they continued with us they acknowledged that their Consciences allowed them Answ. And well they might on the Grounds already given But the fundamental Mistake on which all his Reasonings are built is that he takes such occasional hearing of a Minister to be the Exercise of that church-Church-Communion that fixed Members of a Congregation have with that Church Arg. 3. Many thanked God that they were reconciled to us and frequently protested all the World should never again engage them in the Schism Answ. He wisely concealeth their Names though he saith he can tell them lest they should contradict him But that which enervateth his Argument is that he inferreth the Practice of Presbyterians which must be meant of all or most from that of many and he is not pleased to tell us how many they were Two or three to do so were many and too many and I confess such as said so and yet did otherwise did not act Conscienciously But I am persuaded not one of a Thousand of them that were from a Principle Presbyterians were guilty of such jugling whatever some might do who from other Motives than Conscience owned that way in whose Actions we are no ways concerned What he calleth Schism we say they are not engaged in who went to the Meetings but they who had departed from the good old ways of the Gospel-Church and the Church of Scotland a Deviation from whose Courses Presbyterians could not own Arg. 4. Some of the ablest Preachers a few Weeks before said they would never embrace that Toleration and that they resolved never to preach more Answ. I have the Charity to think that this is a Falshood that is too gross to be uttered by a Christian but the Author might have consulted his Credit by informing us who these able Men were If any such were I doubt they were neither able nor honest and I am sure if they were known they would be abhorred by Presbyterians Arg. 5. Some even after the 2d Edition of the Toleration continued in their Resolution not to engage in it and it cost their Brethren much pains to prevail with them Answ. They who have considered his above-mentioned Assertions may easily know how to believe this For my part I believe not one word of it save that there were some Men so unreasonable as to be shy of accepting any Liberty granted by the Magistrate which was far from the general Sentiment of Presbyterians A 6th Argument he useth There could be no Conscience in this Matter seeing we had no sinful Condition in our Communion we agree with them in Doctrine the Administration of Sacraments and have Ordination which is valid and our main Difference is about the Doxology Lord's Prayer and the Belief rehearsed at Baptism Answ. For the first of these We deny it for it is sinful to subject to Episcopal Government and without this no Man could be of their Communion that is subject to all the Ordinances among them Again though none of these were removing our faithful Pastors and setling Intruders over us did warrant us to wait on the Ministry of the former and not on that of the latter That any separated merely on Account of the Doxology Lord's Prayer and Belief I know not though many would not use them as his Church did § 4. He tells us next of the wonderful Increase of Meetings and of Meeting-houses which was very true but not well consistent with the Account he had but now given of the Disposition of the Nonconformists to comply with the Episcopal Way It is not usual for a Nation to be born in one Day but it sufficiently sheweth how the Generality of the Nation who do much concern themselves in Religion are inclined That many in the West went to the Meetings we deny not but that few went elsewhere should not be insinuated His Branding them with Fanaticism is expressive of the Spite against them that his Party is eminent for but hath neither Truth nor Charity to warrant it for the Men of that Way will vie with any in the Nation for Sobriety and Soundness in the Faith and for Ability to give a rational Account of what they hold But what followeth of the Cause he assigneth for this Concourse to the Meetings is false to say no worse of it in all the parts of it Never were Men farther from Compulsion than they were in this matter Yea it can be made appear which he doth not so much as pretend to for what he affirmeth that many were restrained from the Meetings by the power of ill-affected Noblemen and Gentlemen But it is not fit to rake into this matter but to forget what caused Differences that we may now unite in one good Way He seemeth p. 12. to ridicule the Presbyterians Grateful Address to King James and Profession of Loyalty to him on occasion of the Liberty that he granted them but I gladly would know by what Topick either of these can be condemned They gave Thanks for restoring them to their just Right which had been unjustly taken from them they professed and practised Loyalty towards their Lawful Sovereign
their Affairs We wish their Reformation but leave the managing of it to themselves What followeth concerning the Clergy we are little concerned in We wish they were better than they are we never thought them all scandalous but we know many are and none shall suffer by us on that Head but they who are made appear to be manifestly and grosly such I shall observe but one thing more in this Letter and dismiss it It is a palpable and most soul Untruth viz. That where but one single Dissenter is in a Parish though all the rest of the Parish be for the Minister it is a sufficient Reason to eject him And he giveth-Instances in the Parishes of Mousgard a place not known here Colingtoun Kirkneâ—â—toun and Kirklistoun Never any Allegation was more injurious and false yea the contrary is daily practised that Men are continued where the far greatest part of the Parish are Dissenters It is true some in that Case have accepted of a Call to another place where they might do more Good and have more Peace but never any was deprived on that Account For Kirklistoun I know the Falshood of what he asserteth Not above Sixteen in that great Parish did ever hear Mr. Mackenzie the Minister there and he had seldom preached in that Church and his Admission to that Church was most irregular even according to the Episcopal way And on these Grounds the Assembly did not depose him only declared him not to be Minister in that place but left him in a Capacity to be called to any other Church Answer to the Second Letter THis Letter is mostly Historical but such a parcel of false and disingenious History it containeth as is not easily parallelled elsewhere We desire nothing more than what he would have us expect An Account of the State of things among us which may set things in their true Light For then we are persuaded the World will be convinced that our Representations are neither unjust nor calumnious nor partial He giveth pag. 1. a most unjust Account of the Unity that he saith was between Presbyterians and the Episcopal Party while he saith That all Scots-men were generally of one Communion and that the Presbyterians except the Cameronians had returned to the Episcopal Church and were become Hearers and many Communicaters with her That there was no separate Meetings kept at least publickly but very rarely This I say is most false For though never any of the Presbyterians would directly nor undirectly own Episcopal Government yet many of the more sober and intelligent among them did not think it unlawful to hear them occasionally who had complied with Episcopacy yet they chused rather to hear their own lawful Pastors though driven into Corners than these unfaithful Men And not only so but there were many Thousands beside Cameronians who would never hear them And that many who when they had occasion to hear others made use of that Opportunity did go to hear these Men when their Liberty of hearing others was taken away it is no wonder Yet this Practice was far less general than he saith and Meetings of Nonconformists were not so rare for all the horrid Persecution that they were under as he would make us believe Many who were no Cameronians kept up their Meetings though I confess it was no wonder that their Meetings were not publick when they were by such barbarous Persecutions driven into Corners and if some under the Heat of Persecution stretched their Consciences to comply it is nothing but that which hath been common among Men of Infirmities § 2. Another Falshood is that the Party which was then treated severely was only the Cameronians Whereas though they had their share of the Persecution yet other Presbyterians were most cruelly dealt with and it was observed that indeed the Spite of his Party appeared most against the most sober of the Presbyterians as being the Persons most capable to do them hurt It is also false that it was the Severity used against them only that maâ— complained of in the Prince of Orange's Declaration and in the Sâ—oâ—â—h Inquisition One of which Papers but which of them no Man can know by his Words and may be such Ambiguity hath been designed he calleth a most scurrilous Pamphlet It is also most false and calumnibus that all Presbyterians in Scotland were of one Principle only the Cameronians were more ingenuous For the sober Presbyterians did always condemn many both Principles and Practices of that Party Such as that Magistrates and Ministers fall ipso facto from their Authority respective and Stations when they are guilty of Mis-managements and that private Persons may treat them as such without a â—â—â—â—enee of State or Church That the rest of the Presbyterians condemned the Cameronians for keeping up their Meetings is also an Untruth for they also kept up Meetings but they condemned them for the manner of their Meeting with such Contempt of and bidding Defiance to the Authority of the Magistrate He giveth a general Account of Argyle's Invasion But the Ground of the Presbyterians not joyning with him he misrepresenteth It was not they but an irritated Party among them who had been provoked by the most desperate Hardships and pinching Necessities who had smarted for other Enterprizes of that nature The general and dark Account he giveth of the Concert made at London by some of the State and some Bishops about taking off the Penal Laws we can make no Judgment of till that fuller Account be given of it that he giveth us hope of But this we know that the Result of it was these Men did what they could for taking away the Penal Laws that were against Papists though that Attempt succeeded not in the Episcopal Parliaments neither did we ever think that all especially of the Gentry and other Members of Parliament who went along with Episcopacy while it had Law for it were inclined to Poperâ—y § 3. He doth most injuriously charge the Dissenters with making a Schism after that above-mentioned Imaginary Union that he had talked of and that by first Refusing and then Accepting of the Toleration granted by King James which was founded on the Dispensing Power And after a great deal of pains to fix some Guilt on them in that matter he concludeth that both the Declarations that came out about that Indulgence being materially the same in pursuance of the same Design and both owning the King 's Absolute Dispensing Power they were as guilty in using their Liberty on the last Declaration as if they had done that on the first For Answer 1. Let his Friends reconcile him to himself in saying the two Declarations were materially the same and yet that the one required an Oath of them who had Liberty of it and the other not so 2. It is well known that the Presbyterians would never meddle with that Liberty till it was so contrived as might neither engage them to own the Dispensing Power nor to any other
gone which was about Eight or Nine-o-Clock at Night when she returned to her House and stayed in it for a considerable time and left it of her own accord without Compulsion I hope the Reader by comparing these two Accounts of the matter may see how a Story may be altered by the right or wrong telling of it Yet I am far from approving what they did but I am sure it is not like the French Dragooning § 8. The third Story is of Mr. Boyd at Carmanock whose Family he saith was as rudely treated And the like was done in many other places This General we cannot answer he not being pleased to mention Particulars but â—hat this Gentleman should give these for Instances of incredible Barbarities as here he is pleased to call them may help us to understand his Words and to put a softer Sense on them than they bear for it is evident that in this Cause his Words are full of monstrous Hyperbolics if not of plain Forgeries The Parish of Carmanock had their own former Pastor among them Mr. Boyd had been a cruel Persecutor of some of them by causing some to be imprisoned forcing others to flee and wander for several Months they peaceably desired his Family to remove which they did leaving only some Lumber in the House they expected several Months till that also should be taken away which not being done and finding that the Parliament had made an Act for the Old Presbyterian Ministers who had been cast out to return to their Charges they took out what remained in the Minister's House and committed it to the keeping of some of Mr. Boyd's Friends till he should send for it and this that they might repair their House for their own Minister All this is attested May 12 1690. by Francis Park James Parker Archibald Park John Smith Matthew Park William Baird Mr. Robert Bell Minister at Kilmarnock is the next Instance of the Persecutions complained of Whom they kept bare-headed four or five Hours in a Frosty Day caused his own Sexton tear his Gown in pieces from his Shoulders burnt the English Liturgy which they found in his Pocket and that with much Ceremony at the Market-Cross This same Story we have at great length in the 2d Book that I have to answer called The Case of the present afflicted Clergy which I shall here consider to prevent Repetition We are told of Abuses done to Mr. Bell by a Party of the Presbyterians now in Arms in Scotland How they took him going to Riccartoun made him put off his Hat called him Rogue and Rascal said they did these things by the Rule and Law of the Solemn League and Covenant and other such Speeches they used That they carried him Prisoner to Kilmarnock that the Laird of Bridge-house by the way reproved them for their illegal Acting willed them to leave these Men to the Parliament now to be assembled by the Prince of Orange That they answered they would not adhere to the Prince of Orange nor the Law of the Kingdom farther than the Solemn League and Covenant was fullfilled and prosecuted by both That when they came near the Town they made the Minister pluck off his Hat threatned to throw him into the Rivir That they met the Body of their Party who at the Market-Cross had discharged the Minister to preach any more That they reproached the Church of England carried him to his House where they got from him a Common-Prayer-Book then carried him to the Market-place where after some opprobcious Speeches against him and the Churches of England and Scotland they burnt the Book holding it upon the point of a Pike while it was burning They asked if he were an Episcopal Prelate's Man and of the Communion of the Church of England and Scotland which he owned Then they tore his Gown required him not to preach any more which he would not promise This is all that is material in that long Narration and his signed at Glasgow January 8. 1689. Robert Bell. In Answer to all this I shall give the Reader a Breviate which is attested by many Persons in that Parish of Worth and Credit whose Names shall be subjoyned They observe his flattering Insinuations on the Church of England and his most dis-ingenious Imputations as if these things had been done by the Presbyterians whereas his own Conscience hath extorted from him in private Discourse a Clearing of that Party from such Principles or Practices They take notice of his small Proficiancy at the College of Glasgow witnessed by his Master and several Students That being some time at Oxford at his Return he was suspected at London and elsewhere by all good Protestants who shunned his Converse Yet by the means of the Archbishop of Glasgow he was planted at Kilwining where he preached but one Lord's Day then got into Kilmarnock by Siâ—â—â—iacal Dealings with the Patron his Father giving a Bond for Two Thousand Marks and he making Exchange of the Glebe During his being Minister there he preached seldom residing mostly at Glasgow sixteen Miles distant spending his Time in Whistling Singing Carding Drinking and the like About this time a Liberty being granted to Presbyterians the Parish had recalled their old Minister Mr. James Rowat and called to his Assistance Mr. James Osburn and built a Meeting-house where the whole Parish frequented So that never above Twelve of that Parish consisting of Two Thousand Five Hundred Persons of Age to be Catechised did hear Mr. Bell. They shew farther that among that whole Party who so treated Mr. Bell there was not one Person that belonged to the Parish of Kilmarnock save one poor young Man but that some of the Parish who never owned Mr. Bell as their Minister yet did deal earnestly with the Party that molested him to desist from their Course but they were in no Case to hinder them by force both because they were surprized by this Tumult and because they had been frequently disarmed through the Jealousies of the former Government and the Party consisted of Two Hundred well armed and resolute Men. They affirm farther that the armed Party were as much Enemies to the Presbyterian Ministers in the Meeting-houses as to the Episcopalians calling them Apostates and Preachers of the Duke of York's Gospel with many other unsavoury Expressions And that they had divers Consultations about the doing the same Indignities to them that they did to the Episcopal Clergy and that particularly they did threaten Mr. Osburn if he did not depart thence At the same time they fixed a Paper on the Meeting-house at Irwin threatning to burn it Farther Though they cannot evince the Falshhood of all that is here alledged yet they can prove some things where they were Ear and Eye-witnesses that they are false from which the Credibility of what they saw not nor heard may be guessed at As that the Service-Book was lifted up on the end of a Pike there was not a Pike among all that Rabble That it
Cousin and saw no appearance of Sickness or Wounds and that when he went out of Mr. Mc Maths House Mr. Richard Hyslop shewed him the place where Mr. Mc Math fell and got his Face dawbed with Dirt And that when Mr. Young said That he had heard that Mr. Mc Math had this done to him by some Persons Mr. Hyslop his Neighbour and Friend said there was no such thing It is also to be observed that not a few Persons who came to see him in his Wounds were not admitted Besides all this we have Proofs well attested to evince the horrid immoralities of Mr. Mc Math such as Lascivious carriage towards several Women Drunkenness Imbezelling the Collections for the Poor taking another Man-Horse and Saddle from his Servant by the way and giving out afterward that he found the Horse which he restored but kept the Saddle 40 days denying it till it was like to come to a publick hearing and then restored it I hope the Reader by this time can see what weight is to be laid on the Histories brought by this Author and what sort of Men they are whose quarrel he espouseth Though we are far from approving Irregularities and Injuries whether done against good or bad Men. § 19. Some other he nameth who were Rabbled but giveth no particular account of what was done to them such as Mr. Burgess at Temple Mr. Mackenzie at Kirklistoun Mr. Hamiltoun at Kirk-newtoun Mr. Nimmo at Collingtoun Mr. Donaldson at Dumbarton some of whom we shall afterward meet with c. And a whole Presbytery in Galloway I hope a particular answer is not expected to these And for the General Assertion the Reader must be strangely byassed if before he have thus far proceeded he doth not understand this Authors Dialect that is if he hath not learned to disbelieve every thing that he affirmeth unless it be sufficiently vouched That is the least punishment due to one who hath so often and so soully prevaricated in his Assertions wherefore we may justly reject all these as Forgeries as two of them I can sufficiently disprove Mr. Mackenzie was never Rabbled only at the time he was at Kirkliston very few of the People heard him And for Mr. Hamiltoun he never was Minister at Kirknowtoun If the People have at any time refused to hear him when he was to Preach transiently there this is no Rabbling He is a Man for whom we have due respect and he is now received into Ministerial Communion by the Presbyterians The rest I know nothing of but three Instances he giveth us more distinctly which obligeth us to a more distinct and particular Answer The 1 st is Mr. Macgil of Kilsyth tho' he had obeyed the Proclamation The Rabble hindered him to enter the Church my Lord Kilsyth's Factor raised a Force to defend him in the strife one of the Rabble was killed The Factor went to Edinburgh and told the Comâ—â—rce of Estates what had happened The Lord Rosse being Preses of the Committee thinking the Person Killed to be one of the other side said it would be hard to get that Murther punished But at last understanding that it was one of the Rabble changed his Note and aggravated the Business The next day the Rabble fell upon Mr. Macgil ' s House destroyed his Furniture Books and Papers plunged his Hat and Peruke in the Churn among Milk emptied out his Meal and a Chamber Box among it So that he suffered loss to the value of 150 pound Sterling and to this day hath got meet her Reparation nor Protection The truth of this story is some Souldiers had hindered Mr. Macgil to Preach they being gone he on the Lords day intended to reassume his Pulpit some of the inferior People gathered together and refused to let him enter but used no other Violence My Lord Kilsyth's Factor caused beat of Drum and gathered a great many Men in Arms and assaulted the People that were in and about the Church door and killed one of them This matter was tryed before the Lords of the Justiciary who found both Parties guilty of a Riot but the Factor to be more guilty as having with Arms fallen upon them who had no Arms and killed one of them He was fined and declared incapable of any publick Imployment For the Stories about my Lord Ross and the Peoples so abusing Mr. Macgil's House and Goods we must receive them on the Credit of this Author id est Look on them as his own Invention or that some Body had told him For I can find no ground to believe one word of what in these he affirmeth His other two Tales of Mr. Craig and Mr. Buchannan I find no ground to believe But on the contrary that they at least Mr. Craig were put from their charges by a Sentence of the Presbytery and that for gross Scandals and obstinate refusing to submit to the Discipline of the Church as can be made appear by their Processes yet on Record The account that he giveth of those two Ministers being also Heretors who have Vote in Election of Members of Parliament their appearing for King William by Voting for such as Voted him into the Throne This I say is a foul Misrepresentation for these two Ministers especially Mr. Craig entered a Protestation at the Meeting for Election that whoever should be chosen should fall from their Commission if they transgressed the limits set to them by the Electors And that they should do nothing in prejudice of King James nor Prelacy nor the Test. It is true they Voted for the Laird of Houston who in the Convention Voted for King William and for Presbytery But it is known that these two persons have often said that the Laird of Houston is a perjured person for they had his Engagement to Vote for Episcopacy And when there was a vacancy by the death of one of their Commissioners at a second Election these two Gentlemen Voted for a known Jacobite who had a little before been actually in Arms against King William but now was freed by the Indemnity It is also known that since it was Enacted that the Oath of Allegiance to the present King and Queen should be imposed on all Electors neither of these two Ministers have appeared § 20. Our Author catcheth hold on all the occasions he can find whether offered or not to reproach us Wherefore he taxeth our Address to the Parliament given in in July 1690 which he taketh to have had its rise from the Councils delay to deprive non complying Ministers being very unpleasant to Presbyterian Preachers This is a strange mistake to call it no worse for in that Address there is not one word of complaint of such delay Nor of Petitioning that the Council would deprive any of these Men. But on this Address he giveth us the best Specimen he can of his Critical Skill with what Success let us consider He passeth the Preface of it with his mocking at our owning the Prince of Orange