people most impudently to promote their own ends Albeit this that we have spoken already may suffice to cleer that Abjuration and Covenâ—â—t or any part thereof of any such meaning as they pretend yet that the matter may be more evident we shall examine particularly every one of these foure sentences cited by them shewing that all of them are either falsly or impertinently alleaged by them to prove such a conclusion As to the first sentence here produced by it we may judge tanquam ex ungue Leonem what we mâ—y expects of the rest of these reverend Fathers 〈◊〉 they begin with a manifest falshood and we 〈…〉 divers more in that kind the words according to that citation are We professe that we detest all traditions brought into the Kirk without or against Gods Word and Doctrine of this Reformed Kirk Whereas in the Covenant it self it is otherwise for there the words are And finally we detest all his to wit the Roman Antichrists Traditions without or against Gods Word First we answer that there is a great difference betwixt All Traditions absolutely and the Roman Antichrists traditions for albeit we detest as sincerely as they doe all Antichristian traditions yet doe we not so detest all traditions absolutely which have not expresse or particular warrant from Gods Word if they be not repugnant thereto the Traditions of the Roman Antichrist are those which are invented by him for upholding his tyrannie over the consciences of men made equall to Gods word and intruded upon the Church as parts of Gods worship those we detest and abhorre from our very heart but to abjure absolutely all Traditions which are not expressed in Gods Word it was never the meaning of the reformed Church of Scotland nor of any well reformed Church for all the ancient Fathers of the Primitive Church and all Neoterick Orthodox writers doe teach that some Apostolicall and Ecclesiasticall traditions are not onely profitable but also almost necessary to be retained in the Chruch Necessary I say if not ad esse simplicter yet ad bene esse such as are according to these generall rules of the Apostle 1 Cor. 14. According to decency and good order and tending to Edification and such as are according to that rule of S. Austin lib. 4. contra Donat. cap. 41. Quod universa tenet Ecclesia nec concilijs constitutum semper retentum est non nisi Apostolicà authoritate traditum rectissimè crediture of which there are many profitably reteined in the Church both concerning doctrine manners government and circumstances of Gods worship as the distinction of Canonicall books from Apocrypha the Constitutions of the Apostolick Creed the manner of the celebration of Marriage before the Church the sprinkling of water upon the head of the Child in Baptisme to be sufficient the gesture of kneeling in the Supper of the Lord the time and place of the ordinarie Celebration thereof in the morning and in the Church and such likewise are the Appropriating of the name and title of Bishops to these Pastors who are set in Authority over others and divers Ecclesiasticall Canons concerning the manner of their Government Secondly albeit it had been so that all Traditions had been simply abjured which men of understanding would not have done yet this sentence could not have served to prove their Conclusion for although some of the points of the office of a Bishop now appertaining thereto be by Apostolick tradition or Ecclesiasticall constitution yet this point here called in Question that one Pastor may have power and preheminencie over others or over more particular flocks is not a Tradition either against or without Gods Word and Doctrine of this reformed Church but first it is a most certaine written veritie approved by Gods Word expresly and the Constant practice of the Church of God from the very first Constitution of the visible Church and publik exercise of Gods worship not only under the old Testament but under the new also continued in all Churches untill this lust age which cannot be denied without great impudencic then it is not against the doctrine of the reformed Church of Scotland but most conformable thereunto as we have sufficiently declared before therefore it is manifest that this passage can prove nothing for their purpose but is both falsly and impertinently produced by them CHAP. VIII VVherein is answered the second Passage of the Covenant THe second passage cited from the Negative Confession or Abjuration is no lesse falsified than the former both in the change of words and addition of others not contained in the Originall the words of their citation are We abhorre and detest all contrary Religion and Doctrine but chiefly all kind of Papistrie in generall and particular heads as they were then damned and confuted by the Word of God and Chruch of Scotland when the said Confession was sworn and subscribed Anno 1580. and 1581. 1590. and 1591. But the words in the Originall are only these As they are now dawned and confuted by the Word of God and Kirk of Scotland So that they change that particle now in then and adde more which is not in the Originall when the Confession was sworn and subscribed Anno 1580. 1581. 1590. 1591. Albeit this Alteration seemeth but small to change now in then yet in effect it is very matteriall and subtilly made to wrest the meaning of the words to their own purpose contrary to the intention of those who framed this Abjuration in making this Now relative to the damning of Episcopacie in that Assemblie at Dundie 1580. and others thereafter albeit it be evident that there was no such thing intended in the framing of this Abjuration for divers reasons First that now in the Kings Covenant is not to be understood of that present definite time then when the Covenant was framed or subscribed but as it is expresly exponed a little before Now for along time to wit from that time when the large Confession of Faith was set forth Anno 1560. and approved by the Generall Assembly and ratified in Parliament 1567. By the which Confession those particular heads of Papistrie were condemned and confuted and the true Doctrine opposite thereunto Now for a long time openly professed by the King and whole body of the Kingdome as it is expresly set down in the same place of the Covenant therefore it is manifest that this Now is not relative to that Condemnation of Episcopacie 1580. which was not then for a long time condemned but only for that present yeer Secondly albeit we should grant that this Now was not to be understood of that definite time yet doth it not serve to prove the point in Controversie for albeit by that Assembly 1580. Episcopacie as it was then used in Scotland was condemned yet this power and preheminence by approbation and practice of the Church of Scotland were standing in force in the persons of Superintendents Commissioners or Visitors and not abrogated
not to be a free Assembly Secondly as the Pope and his Cardinalls in the Consistorie used Politick meanes that none or few of these Prelates whom they supposed in any wayes would crosse their designes should appeare in the Councell although publikly they did admonish all yet by private threatnings and distastes hindred from comming many of the Bishops of Germany France and Spaine but on the contrary allured by divers means those whom they supposed would favour their designes as all the Bishops of Italy so that when the Councell was at the greatest there were above 150. Italian Bishops whereof many were at the Popes charges yet not above 60. of all other Nations So in this at Glasgow politick meanes were used that none should be chosen Commissioners except Covenanters and of those only the strongest and most obstinate who had solemnely already sworn unto these things they intended to conclude and on the other part meanes were used that all those who were suspected to be averse from their designes or not forward enough shoud be excluded as is evident by the particular Instructions sent from the Tables of the Covenant unto all the Presbyteries of Scotland which were discovered by the care and diligence of his Majesties Commissioner and produced in open Assembly to their great confusion whereby it was appointed that care should be taken that none should be chosen as Commissioner for the Ministers or ruling Elders but Covenanters and those wel-affected to the busines And if that any other happen to be chosen by the greater part that all the best affected protest against them and processe them before the Assembly that they might be excluded from voycing and for that effect also directed an informall and illegall Citations against all the Bishops to exclude them from having place or voyce in their assembly who ought to have been by the present lawes of the Church of Scotland and continuall practice of the universall Church in all ages the principall members thereof Thirdly as in the Councell of Trent the Pope of Rome to have more voices favouring his designes did create many titular Bishops who had no Christian slock and had never so much as seen that Church which they did represent So likewise in this Assembly were brought in many Titular Lay-elders as Commissioners from Presbyteries wherein they had no habitations nor ever did sit therein to exercise their rule of Elder-ship before the day of their election to be Commissioners to the Assemblie Fourthly the Pope and his Cardinalls did complaine that the Emperor and Kings would have prelimitate the Councell by their directions yet the Ambassadors and Prelates did in every Session and Congregation complain more justly that the Councell was not free being strangely prelimitate by the Pope and Consistory of Rome both in the members and matters to be proposed as also in framing of the Canons So our Covenanters did require a free assembly affirming that as farre as the assembly should be prelimitate either in the members or matters to be treated so farre the necessary ends of the Assembly and good of the Church was hindred accounting it a most dangerous usurpation to any person or Iudicatoriâ— whatsoever to impose any such limitations except an Assembly it self And therefore did most grievously complaine against his Majestie although unjustly for he required no limitations but such as were prescribed by former lawfull assemblies Yet his Majestie and the whole Kingdome may more justly complaine of them who refusing the reasonable prelimitations of other former assemblies did neverthesse admit strange limitations from the Tables of the Covenant which was neither a lawfull Assembly of the Church nor had any authority over the same and those also against the established Constitutions of former generall Assemblies and Lawes of the Kingdome as appeares evidently by those foure papers of Instructions sent to every Presbytery according to the which the Assembly was limitate both in the members and matters Fiftly as in the Councell of Trent nothing was admitted to Consultation but Proponentibus Legatis which gave occasion of offence to many no Bishop no Prelate no Regall Embassador nor any good Christian had liberty to propose any thing onely the Popes Legates had this Power who did propose every thing as they received instructions from 〈◊〉 even so in this Assemblie nothing was admitted to Deâ—â—beration but Proponente Moâ—â—ratorâ— And he likewise was confined to the Ordinance of the Tables who had before set down every Article which was to be treated All propositions of any other whatsoever though flowing from his Majestie by his Commissioner or Councell were contemptuously rejected Sixtly as in the Councell of Trent let the Fathers and Doctors deliberate and reason Pro Contra as they pleased yet nothing was concluded untill it was first agreed unto by the Pope and his Cardinalls at Rome and their determination who never heard the reasoning was sent to Trent to be enacted and that no otherwise then it was set down by them which gave occasion to that common proverbe That the holy Spirit whereby the Councell was directed came from Rome in a Câ—og-bag So likewise all that which was done in this Assembly was fore-ordained by the Tables of the Covenant in Edinburgh For there were all the members of the Assembly constituted though contrary to the perpetuall practice of the Church there were all the Commissions framed and a Cople thereof sent to every Presbyterie as appeared by the production since never one of them was different in one Syllable from another there also was the whole order of the Assemblie set down and accordingly observed there were all things which were to be proposed in the Assembly discussed and concluded by the Rulers of the Covenant who for the most part were Lay-persons Noblemen Gentlemen Burgeâ—â—es and some few Ministers most forward in the cause therefore it may be justly said that the Spirit whereby those holy Brethren of the Assembly were ruled came not from Heaven but directly from Edinburgh I leave you to imagine by the effects what Spirit that was which hath stirred up such Sedition Rebellion Disorder and Confusion both in Church and Common-wealth Then although in these points of Corruptions and many other which for shortnes we omit this Assembly at Glasgow was not unlike that Councell of Trest yet I will be bold to say and that truely that in some substantiall points that Councell was more formall than this Assemblie For the Councell of Trent in the Externall order and Constitution of the members thereof keeped more formality and decency according to the order of the Church many ages before 1. There was none admitted to that Councell except Prelates of the Church Ambassadours of Princes and the most learned Doctors in all Europe for the time And such as the Prelates thought fit in the bounds of their Iurisdiction to reason in weighty points of Doctrine 2. In their Congregations and Sessions they did sit every man in his owne
place according to his degree with such gravitie modestie and decencie as did become Reverend Fathers distinguished one from another by their habits appointed by the Canons of the Church making it appear to the beholders a Venerable Assemblie 3. In their proceedings were appointed the wisest of the Bishops and most learned amongst the Doctors to frame the Articles and being framed were particularly one by one discussed by weighty reasons maturely in severall dayes and diets all doubts particularly moved and Objections solidly answered according to their grounds using not onely the testimony of former approved Councels Fathers and learned Schoolemen but also very frequently the Authority of Sacred Scriptures So that if in their conclusions they had pondered well the reasons alleaged and had concluded according to the same and not according to the Popes sole Authoritie that Councell might have had a more happy event for the weell and peace of the Christian Church But in this Assemblie at Glasgow was not observed that forme order or decencie which did become a venerable Ecclesiastick meeting for first these who were ever esteemed the Principall members of all generall or Nationall Councels to wit the Reverend Bishops of the Church were excluded a company of Lay-men Earles Lords Gentlemen and Burgesses without warrant Authoritie or example of the ancient Church were thrust in their roomes bearing chiefe Sway in the Assembie carrying all matters violently for their own ends so that it was remarked by wise and grave men that one Earle and one Lord made more speech in the Assemblie than all the Clergie except the Moderator 2. In their Sessions no order or decencie observed all sitting pel-mell without distinction of Degrees save onely that Lay-Noblemen and Gentlemen occupied the chiefest roomes with their swords and pistolls by their sides The Ministers mixt amongst Burgesses Merchants and Noblemens servants hardly to be discerned from them by their Habite or Carriage Many of the Ministers in coloured clothes all in short cloakes except the Ministers of Glasgow who had their Gownes so that unlesse one had known their persons before they should scarcely have discerned the Ministers from the Merchant or Taylor 3. The Ministers were not there by the approbation of their Bishops according to the custome of the Primitive Church and Acts of the generall Assemblies of Scotland long after the Reformation as for instance in that Assemblie at Edinburgh Iuly 1568. It was expresly ordained that no Minister should leave his Flock except such as were chosen by their Superintendants but by Commissions from their new invented form of Presbyteries wherein Lay-men had the greatest rule or rather from the Tables of the Covenant who did not choose the most wise modest and learned Brethren but the most turbulent seditious and bold to oppose Authoritie fit members indeed of such an Assemblie 4. In discussing of the matters which were concluded no reasoning but superficiall no carefull pondering of the Reasons but all taken Implicit fide which had any shew no exact distinguishing of the Articles but many matters of different nature were hâ—dled up together confusedly and with great precipitation were voyced and concluded The Assembly continued onely a moneth and a great part of that time to wit from the 21. of November to the 4. of December was consumed in circumstantiall points concerning the persons to be admitted to have voice in receiving and discussing their Commissions in Contestations betwixt the Commissioner and the Covenanters in excluding some of his Majesties Counsellors authorized by him to have voyce in the Assemblie contrary to the Practice of all Ancient approved Councels either Generall or Nationall in rejecting most just protestations of divers Presbyteries against this Assemblie as that of the Presbyteries of Glasgow of Pâ—ables of Aberdeine of the Channonry of Rosse in refusing to heare read the most just declinature and protestations of the Bishops And finally in declaring certaine books of the former Assemblies to be Authentick registers At last the fourth of December they enter to the principall matters for which this Assembly was required beginning at the condemnation of the six last generall Assemblies conveened continued and concluded by the Kings Majesties Authoritie and full consent of the Church and ratified by the whole bodie of the Kingdome in Parliament which they did in shorter space then could suffice to reade them over so precipitate were they in condemning absolutely so many grave Assemblies with such unanimous consent as never one was called but without reason or judgement condemned them all in one word by implicite faith given to some few neither of the most wise or learned of the company who had a Committee to invent some apparant reasons to anull the same and that is most certaine that the two part of those who voyced against them had never seen the Acts and the proceedings of these Assemblies or at least had never read nor perused them But out of a blind zeal and Iesuiticall obedience did it only because they were so directed by the Tables of the Covenant and their rebellious Leaders In another Session they deposed and excommunicated summarily fourteen Bishops upon a pretended false Libell produced before the Presbytery of Edinburgh against them which by no law or reason could be competent Iudges to their processe without lawfull citation contrary to the Acts of many generall Assemblies the Books of Discipline and perpetuall practice of the Church For the Church of Scotland was never accustomed no not in the most strict times of Presbyteriall government to proceed so summarily to the sentence of excommunication against most notorious offenders without mature deliberation and long space granted to the Accused either to justifie himself or declare his repentance 1. There was used three private personall Citations to appear before the Presbytery next if those were not obeyed three publik Citations one three severall Sabbaths 3. Followed three publik prayers for their conversion and if at any of these times they did appear either to purge themselves of the crime imputed to them or submitting themselves to the censure of the Church The sentence of excommunication was not pronounced against them In another Session they condemned with one voyce the Book of Common Prayer the Book of Canons the Book of Ordination of Ministers and Consecration of Bishops together with the Court of the High Commission which space was not sufficient to have read over all those books muchlesse to peruse them throughly and discusse the controverted points therein which was necessarily requisit to be done before they had been absolutely rejected But this is strange that the principall and most weighty point for the which chiefly they did procure this Assembly should have been so slightly with such precipitation handled to wit whether Bishops should be reteined or removed forth of the Church of Scotland A Doctrine so universally approven by the whole Christian Church even in her purest time since the Apostles dayes and allowed in Substance by