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
much helped the matter They were these two 1. Tho' the Bishops were introduced in the year 1662 and did continue till the year 1689. During which time the far greatest part of all the Ministery in Scotland was brought in by themselves and tho' they had obtained a National Synod formed for their own interest yet they durst never adventure to call it together so diffident were they even of these Ministers And can there be a greater Demonstration says he of the General inclination of this Nation against Prelacy But who sees not how many things are wanting here to make a probable Argument much more a Demonstration For who knows not that it was not in the Power of the Bishops but of the King to Convocate a National Synod And who knows not that Presbyterian National Synods had committed such extravagances as might have tempted any King almost to have little kindness for National Synods Again supposing the Bishops might have obtain'd one if they had been for it but would not ask it was there no other imaginable Reason for their forbearing to ask one but their Diffidence of the Ministers One living 24 or 28 years agone might possibly have slipt into such a mistake But for one who wrote only in the year 1691 after it was visible nay signally remarkable that of near to a thousand Presbyters not above twenty had fallen from the Episcopal principles But all had so generally continued to Profess them and not only so but to Profess them amidst so many discouragements to Profess them and suffer for them After this I say for any man to found a Demonstration for proving that Prelacy is contrary to the inclinations of the People on the Bishops averseness to a National Synod and to found that averseness on the diffidence they had of the Presbyters as if they had dreaded or had ground to dread that the Presbyters would have subverted their order if they had got a National Synod seems to me a very singular undertaking Sure I am if there is any Demonstration here at all it is that there was no great store of Demonstrations to be had for our Authors main Conclusion Neither was his other Argument any stronger which is this 2. This National aversion is yet further Demonstrated from this that albeit Prelacy had all the Statutes that the Bishops could desire on their behalf and had them put in Execution with the outmost severity yet there was ever found a necessity to keep up a standing Army to uphold them and to suppress the Aversion of the People And notwithstanding thereof there were frequent Insurrections and Rebellions Now who sees not the weakness of this Demonstration For who knows not that a small part of a Nation by their notorious Vngovernableness and their habitual Propensities to Rebel may oblige the Government to keep up a little standing Army such as ours in Scotland was for suppressing them if at any time they should break out into a Rebellion The party I think can have but little credit from such Demonstrations For this Demonstration must either suppose that none in the Nation are apt to Rebel except Presbyterians and they too only upon the head of Church Government Or it can conclude nothing For if Presbyterians can Rebel upon other Reasons tho' they make this the main the specious the clamourous Pretext as I doubt not their Democratical principles may incline them to do upon occasion Or if others than sincere Presbyterians can venture on the horrid sin of Rebellion there is still Reason for the standing Army Besides what gain'd they by these their frequent Insurrections and Rebellions Were they not easily and readily crush't by the rest of the Nation But if so I think if there is any Argument here at all it concludes another way than our Author design'd it But it is not worth the while to insist longer on this Argument Only If it is a good one the Bishops and their Adherents have Reason to thank our Author for shewing them the way how they may have their Government restored For by this way of reasoning they have no more to do but fall upon the Knack of raising frequent Insurrections and Rebellions against the present Government And then their work is done For thus a Demonstration shall befriend them this when there is a necessity of keeping up a standing Army to support Presbytery because of frequent Insurrections and Rebellions raised on its account It is a Demonstration that it is a great and insupportable Grievance and Trouble to the Nation and contrary to the inclinations of the Generality of the People and therefore it ought to be Abolished The truth is such reasonings are not only Sophistical but dangerous They are founded upon the principles of Rebellion and they tend directly and naturally towards Rebellion And they ought to be noticed by every wise Government And so I leave this Author The next Paper-combat I shall take notice of was between the Author of the third Letter in the Pamphlet called ane Account of the present Persecution of the Church in Scotland c. published Anno 1690. And G. R. in his Second Vindication published towards the end of the year 1691. The Epistler as G. R. is sometimes pleased to call him had craved a Poll deeming it it seems the only proper method for coming at a sure account of the inclinations of the generality of the People and I think he had Reason For if matters must go by the inclinations of the People it is just to ask the People about their inclinations But would G. R. allow him this Demand which had so much of plain equity in it No His talk says he of putting the Matter to the poll I neglect as ane impracticable fancy But who sees not that this was plain Fear to put it upon such ane Issue What imaginable impossibility or absurdity or difficulty or inconveniency could make polling upon this account Impracticable Was it not found practicable enough in the days of the Covenant when the veriest child if he could write his own Name was put to it to subscribe it What should make it more impracticable to poll the Kingdom for finding the Peoples inclinations about Episcopacy and Presbytery than it was to levy Hearth-money from the whole Kingdom Is it not as practicable to poll the Kingdom about Church Government as to poll it for raising the present subsidy which is imposed by poll I am apt to believe the inclinations of the Generality of the People would have been as much satisfied if polling had been reduced to practice on the one account as the other That same Epistler in that same Epistle adduced another Argument which was to this purpose That in the years 1687 and 1688 when the Schism was in its Elevation there were but some three or four Presbyterian Meeting-houses erected on the North side of the Tay i. e. in the greater half of the Kingdom And these too very little
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
mistake not it may try his Reconciling Skill to make what he says here and what he said on these occasions piece well together Proceed we now to what he has said more about Strachan's Defence The Nations Representative says he had then own'd him W. as their King and therefore it was a contempt of the Authority of the Nation for any man to refuse to own him when called to do so Now what could move our Author to such a stretch of his main Talent as thus to say that the Representative of the Nation had owned him as their King I confess I am not able to fathom For how could they own him as King so long as he had not taken the Oath nor Agreed to the Claim of Right If they own'd him as King before that was he not King before that But if he was King before that where is the use of the Oath or the Claim of Right The Estates indeed upon the 11 th of April Declared W. and M. to be the Persons to whom they had resolved to Offer the Crown upon such and such Conditions as is evident from that day's Proclamation But the â—etter of the Estates by which they actually made the Offer of the Crown on these Conditions was not written till April 24. and the return bearing that They had Accepted of the Crown on these Conditions is dated May 17. And was not Doctor Strachan Deprived even before the Letter of the Estates was sent to London Were not more than 24 Ministers Deprived before their Majesties return came to Edenburgh Besides G. R.'s Impudence as sturdy as it is did not serve him it seems to give a faithful Account of D. Strachan's Defence and grapple with all the force of it For the Doctor if the Author of the Second Letter was right made the supposition that W. and M. might refuse to take the Crown with such Conditions This was so far from being ane Impossible that it was truly a very Reasonable a very Equitable a very Dutiful supposition Now suppose they had done so would they have been K. and Q. for all that by vertue of the Declaration of the Estates of the 11 th of April If so I ask again what the Coronation Oath or the Claim of Right signified Or were the Estates to make them K. and Q. whither they would or not If upon that supposition they had not been K. and Q. as undoubtedly they had not been then what can be more evident than that the Proclamation of the 11 th of April did no more than Nominate them to be K. and Q. upon their Agreeing to such Conditions So that G. R. was even himself when he said that the Nations Representative had own'd them as K. and Q. before the 13 th of April I add further What tho' they had own'd them as K. and Q. by their Proclamation of the 11 th of April Did not the whole Drift the whole Design the whole Train the whole Tendency the whole Aspect and the whole Circumstances of the Deliberations Resolutions and Conclusions of the Estates evidently propose it to the dullest apprehension that the Crown was not to be granted to them but on such and such Conditions This Question I propose for vindicating D. Strachan from the guilt of Contempt of the Authority of the Estates with which G. R. charges him For if the affirmative in the Question be true and I think G. R. himself dares not to say 't is false then I ask how it could be called a Contempt of the Authority of the Nation to have refused then to own W. and M. as K. and Q. How can he be said to Contemn the Authority of the Nation who Reasons upon the Nations Authority Who Reasons upon the Force of all the Deliberations Resolutions and Conclusions of the Representative Body of the Nation If doing so he doth yet Contemn the Authority of the Nation I am apt to think it cannot be his Fault He doth but what a man must needs do when the Nation makes Repugnant and Contradictory Determinations But after all this is it not pleasant that G. R. forsooth should so zealously exaggerate the Crime of Contemning the Authority of the Nation Good Man He paid it a wonderful Dutifulness all his life Far was it still from him to treat it with such Contempt as Dr. Strachan's amounted to But he has not yet done He Answers further that it is a Material mistake of the words of the Claim of Right that was alledged in Strachan's Defence which doth not say none can be King or Queen but that none can exercise the Regal Power till they have taken the Coronation Oath It is certain that on the death of a King his Rightful Successor is King and may be prayed for as such and such praying may be injoined even before taking of the Oath The same may be said of one Chosen and Proclaim'd by the Supreme Authority of the Nation which is the Case now in hand Here is a piece of as odd stuff as one would wish to see For if it was a Material mistake to say none can be King or Queen when it should have been said none can exercise the Regal Power it seems to me to have been a mistake made of very Mathematical Matter not of the solid sensible Matter which can be felt and handled For my part I cannot forbear thinking it must be compounded of Negative Quantities till I shall learn how one can be a King i. e. a Person who has Right to Rule and Act as King who has yet no Right to exercise the Regal Power or Act as King I know one may be Physically incapable of exercising the Regal Power and Acting as King by himself in several Cases such as that of Infancy c. yet even then he has Right which is not a Physical but a Moral Quality Now I say I would fain understand how one can be a King without this Moral Quality or how he can have this Moral Quality called Right and yet be Morally incapable of exercising it I shall own G. R. is good at Metaphysicks if he can give ane Intelligible Account of these things Well! But it is certain that on the death of a King his Rightful Successor is King and may be Prayed for as such and such Praying may be injoyned even before taking of the Oath All this is true But then I affirm it is as true that that Rightful Successor who is King may and can exercise the Regal Power and Act as King before he takes the Oath So I am sure our Scottish Monarchs have done So the Law allows them to do so of necessity they must do For instance they are not bound by Law to take the Oath but at their Coronation And not to speak of other things I think it is truly ane exercising of their Regal Power and Acting as Kings to appoint the preparations for the day the place the solemnities c. of their own
We meddle not with their Titles and Revenues says he These are the Magistrates Gifts and do not cross Christ's institution whatever inconvenience may be in them 2. As to the Plea of the Vsurpation or Intrusion of the Prelatists D. Still had alledged that the Dissenters pleaded That most of the present Ministers of the Church of England were Vsurpers and that from such the People might lawfully separate We deny both parts of the Assertion says G. R. p. 115 116. Whatever Usurpation some of them may be guilty of we know most of them have the Tacite at least consent of the People a post facto and therefore however they may be guilty of Intrusion in their Entry in their continuing in their places they are no Usurpers Neither do we own it to be lawful to separate from Every Minister that is ane Usurper Meerly on the Account of his Vsurpation And he discourses the point copiously as the curious Reader may find ibid. Neither is he less positive about the 3. Thing which in his Scottish Management of the Plea he insists on as the Great Reason of the former viz. The Popular Call For D Still had adduced D. Owen as asserting that the depriving of the People of the Right to choose their own Pastors was a just Ground of Separation And G. R. answers If Doctor Owen hath done so Let it pass for a part of the Independent Iudgment which was a mistake of that Eminent Servant of God Others are not of that Mind And a little after The People by the Laws of the Gospel have the Right of Election of their own Pastors But it doth not follow that they ought not to bear with being hindered the Exercise of this Right for the sake of Peace and Vnity And p. 151. Depriving the People of their Right of chusing their own Church Officers is also Matter of Complaint but we must bear it rather than separate for that from a Church And pag. 197. when he came to assert that Right of the People He told he did Not make the Depriving of the People of that Power a Cause of Separation Nay Not once but very frequently he lays the whole stress of the English Separation Upon the sinful terms of Communion as he calls them imposed by the Church of England Let the Church purge her Offices of humane Inventions Let her lay aside the the Liturgy the Cross in Baptism Kneeling at the Receiving of the Eucharist and Holy-days c. and he and all his Party shall joyn with her chearfully Vide p. 24 81 106 107 109 120 133 144 151 c. Now Let any Man even of his own Sect reconcile these things Let him shew why Episcopacy Vsurpation and Depriving the People of their Right to choose their own Pastors should be so every way sufficient Grounds for Separating from the Church of Scotland and so no ways sufficient grounds for separating from the Church of England What could move the Man to venture upon such lumpish bulkish Contradictions For my part I cannot guess at another Motive than that which I have frequently mentioned viz. The present Argument In England he had some other things to bear the Burden but no other thing in Scotland and it was necessary for his Vindicatorship to justify the Separation And therefore what could not do it in England behoved to do it in Scotland But perhaps he may endeavour to extricate himself by running for shelter to the Old Scottish Plea of the Covenant For Is not Prelacy abjur'd in Scotland Is not the Oath of God upon Presbyterians nay on all the Nation not to own Prelacy Are not all the Prelatists perjur'd c. And now may not the Presbyterians separate lawfully He seems indeed to betake himself to this Plea in his Answer to the Historical Relation of the General Assembly § 20. p. 189. The setting up of Episcopacy says he was more sinful in this Nation Scotland than it could be elsewhere because of the Oath of God that the Nation is under against it Not in latter times only but in the times of King James the Sixth who caused the whole Nation swear the Shorter Confession of Faith called the National Covenant where it is abjured Now Not to insist on shewing that upon the supposition all this were true it militates only against Episcopacy It could conclude it only but neither the Vsurpation nor the Depriving the People of their Right c. to be a sufficient Ground for the Separation Nor yet to insist on the notorious falshood of the supposition viz. That Episcopacy was abjured in King Iames the Sixths time Not to insist on these things I say If he himself is strong enough for himself himself will not suffer himself to make the Abjuration of Episcopacy in Scotland a sufficient Ground for separating from the Episcopal Church of Scotland For in the 40th page of his Rational Defence c. Attempting to shew a Difference between complying with the Church of England at the Reformation and complying with her Now he opens thus I might here alledge the Obligation of the National Covenant that we are under as they were not to whom the Doctor would make our Case parallel i. e. those who lived at the Reformation Tho I never thought that that Bond made any Sins or Duties that were not such Antecedently Now Not to insist on the Pleasantness of pretending that he might insist on a Topick in which he instantly acknowledges there is no Force If Oaths and Covenants make no Duties nor Sins which were not such Antecedently I would fain understand how the National Covenant or whatever Covenant has been in Scotland could make Episcopacy a sufficient Ground for Separating from the Church of Scotland if it was not a sufficient Ground for such Separation Antecedently to these Covenants Thus he himself hath cut off himself from all hopes of escaping by the Covenant Indeed there is no possibility of Escape left him It is not in the power of Nature to rescue one who is so plunged over Head and Ears in such a Sink of Contradictions What hath been said might be sufficient in all Conscience for representing his own Vnnatural Unmercifulness towards himself For what can be more Vnmercifully done to one than to demonstrate him to all the world to be a Manifest Lier And who can be a more manifest Lier than he who upon every turn vomits Contradictions Yet this is not all perhaps it is not the worst There is such an Intimate Relation between himself and his Books written by himself That I think 't is reasonable to say that whosoever treats his Books with any Degrees of Impudence is every whit as Impudent towards himself Now it is not possible that Ranker more Mercyless or more Impudent injury can be done to any thing than himself hath done to his Second Vindication of his Church of Scotland At least to near three parts of four of it To it so far as it Answers The
of before him For Tho the Letter-man was fully justified by the Event tho what he said seem'd to be intended by the Government appear'd undeniably to have been intended by them in the Execution tho they Iustified the Expulsion of the Clergy by the Rabble as plainly and positively as ane Act of Parliament could do it So plainly and positively that the whole Nation was sensible of it and cried shame upon it That some Members in the very time resented it highly calling it ane indelible Reproach upon the Justice of the Nation That many Members to this very minute will frankly acknowledge there was never greater or more notorious iniquity established by a Law Tho G. R. knew it so well and was so much pleased with it that he thanked the Parliament with all his Soul for it telling them He and his Party were filled with Ioy while they beheld the Religious Regard which the High and Honourable Court of Parliament had shewed to the Mountain of the Lords House above other Mountains in the Great Step towards the Establishing thereof that they had made by their Vote Whereof that Justification of the Rabble was a great part Tho he prayed That the Lord would reward them for their good Deeds whereof this was one towards his House Tho all these things were and are clear as the Light and uncontroulable as Matter of Fact can be yet G. R. lasht the Letter-man till he had almost flea'd him made him a Railer one who Vnderstood no Logick a Strainer at Silly Quibbles one who had ane Extraordinary Dose of Brow and whose Wit was a Wool gathering c. And all this for telling this plain Truth That the Government had a design to Justify the Expulsion of the Clergy by the Rabble Thus I think I have made it appear how little tender G. R. was even of his own beloved self when he was straitned in his Argument I might have easily adduced more Instances but the Truth is I am now very weary of him and he himself has done himself the Justice to represent himself to any Mans Satisfaction who shall not be satisfied with the Representation I have given of him For he hath fairly own'd that he sets himself in opposition to those whom he acknowledges to be the Soberest and Wisest of his party I don't love to be unjust to him I 'le give it you in his own words as I find them 1 Vind. Ans. to Quest. 5. § 6. He was complaining of the Persecutions his Party had met with for keeping Conventicles c. And amongst other things he discourses thus There might have been some shadow for such severity against Meeting at Field-Conventicles with Arms tho even that was in some Cases necessary but that was always disallowed by the Soberest and Wisest Presbyterians Now t is plain there are here these two Affirmatives 1. That Meeting with Arms at Field Conventicles was in some Cases necessary This is our Authors sentiment 2. That Meeting with Arms at Field Conventicles was always disallowed by the Soberest and Wisest Presbyterians This I say he plainly affirms to have been always the sentiment of the Soberest and Wisest By Consequence are not both these Affirmatives joyned together Eâ—â—â—pollent to this Complexe Proposition Tho the Soberest and Wisest Presbyterians did always disallow of Meeting with Arms c. Yet in my Iudgment it was sometimes necessary And now have you not from his own Friendly self a Fair Demonstration of his own Folly and Futility For who but a Futile Fool would have said that he differed in his Sentiments from the Soberest and Wisest And now to bring all home to my Original purpose By this time I think I have given Reason enough for my refusing to accept of him for ane Answerer of my Book No Man on Earth I think would willingly enter the Lists with one who is so singular for four such Cardinal Talents Tho Incureable Ignorance and Incorrigible Nonsence may be something pitiable as being the Vices of Nature rather than Choice yet 't is no small Persecution for one to be obliged to grapple with them What must it be then to be committed with the other two Rank Ill-nature I mean and the most stubborn Impudence Some Ill Natures may be cured Men may be either cajol'd or cudgel'd out of them Agelastus himself laught once so did Duke D Alva But what hopes can there be of one whose Common Sense is so intrinsecally vitiated that he can avouch the coursest and most Scurrilous Scolding to be Excessive Civility But this is not the worst of it If there had been any thing Venust or Lepid any shadow of Concinnity or Festivity of Iollity or Good Humor any thing like Art or Life or Wit or Salt in any One of Fifty of his Excessive Civilities if they had had the least Tincture of the Satyre nay if their Mein had resembled so much as the Murgeons of ane Ape I could have pardonâ—d him and let his Talent pass for Tolerable There is something delightful in Marvelism in well humor'd wantonness in lively and judicious Drollery There may be some Enormous Strokes of Beauty in a surprizing Banter some irregular Sweetness in a well cook't Bitterness But who can think on drinking nothing but Corrupted Vinegar What humane patience can be hardy enough for entering the Lists with pure Barking and Whining with Original â—ullness who can think on Arming himself against the Horns of a Snaiâ— or setting a Match for Mewing with a Melancholy Cat But What can be said of his Impudence his Master-Talent Why to tell Truth of it I am not able to define it and so I must let it alone I know nothing in Nature like it 'T is too hard for all the Idea's or words I am Master of Were I to talk any more of it I should design it his Vndefineable Attribute And now I think our Author may be sensible that it is not a good thing to cast a bad Copy to the world lest some for Curiosity try if they can imitate it For my part I do acknowledge that I have crossed my temper to make an Experiment if it was possible to be Even with him To let him see that others as well as he if they set themselves for it may aim at least at Arguing the Case Cuttingly as he phrases it Pref. to 2 Vind. § 6. One thing I am sure of I have been faithful in my Citations from his Books And I am not conscious that I have so much as once forced ane Vnnatural sense on his words For this I am satisfied that what I have said be tried with the greatest and most impartial Accuracy But if he is such ane Author as I have truly represented him to be I hope the world will allow that I had and still have Reason to refuse to have any Dealing with him Nay farther I think 't is nothing for the Honour or Reputation of his Party that he was ever imployed to
the world knows to be true and what cannot be denied If we could contend with them for Virtue and Integrity for Honour and Gallantry for Civility and Loyalty for Glories that are truely manly 'T were for the Credit of our Nation And it were our own fault if we were inferiour to them in such Competitions But 't is Arrant Vanity to contend with them for Wealth or Strength or Multitude Now to bring this home to my purpose God had so ordered in his wife Providence that for many Ages before Scotland had not been so free of foreign influence as a little before and all the time our Church was a reforming The French were the only foreign Influences which were wont to find Entertainment in Scotland And in those times the French had treated us very basely and dishonourably I shall deduce the matter with all convenient brevity King Henry the Eighth of England had resolved upon a War with France Anno 1512. The French King perceiving this applyed to Iames the Fourth of Scotland his old Confederate to engage him in ane Alliance against Henry His Application was successful a private League was made betwixt them in November that year Two of the Articles were That if England should invade Scotland France should wage War with all its might against England Scotland should do the like if England invaded France And neither of the two should take Truce with England without the other gave his Consent and were comprehended therein if he pleased In pursuance of this League Iames raised a potent Army invaded England incurred the Popes Displeasure to the very Sentence of Excommunication fought the fatal Battle of Flowdon Sept. 9. 1513 Lost his Life and the Flower of all the Scottish Nobility and Gentry and left behind him Iames the Fifth ane Infant exposed with his whole State to the not very tender Mercies of King Henry Here was serving the French interests with a witness Well! How did Lewis requite this The next year he patcht up a Peace with Henry without comprehending Scotland without Respect to his Faith and Promise without Pity to those who were reduced to such Extremities on his account If this was not what can be called Disobliging But this was not all The Scots reduced to these difficulties and sensible that it was not possible for the Nation to subsist under ane infant King without a Regent became humble Suppliants to the French King that he would send them Iohn Duke of Albany then in the French Service a Man of great Abilities and next by Blood to the Scottish Crown that he might be their Governour during their Kings Minority But Henry's Threats for a long time prevailed more with the French King than Scotlands Necessities or his Obligations to it For Albany came not to Scotland till May 1515. so that for near two years thro the French Coldness and Indifferency towards Scottish affairs the Kingdom had no setled Government The War brake out again betwixt France and England Anno ..... and a new Peace was concluded Anno 1518. And Albany our Scottish Regent was present in person when it was concluded but the English Obstinacy not to comprehend Scotland was more effectual with Francis the First who had then got upon the Throne than all the Intercessions of Albany or the Merits of our Nation Nay if we may believe Herbert It was one of the main Articles of that Treaty that Albany should not return to Scotland Nor did he return till Octob. 1521. And returning then Henry reckoned it a Main Breach of Treaty nay and plain Perjury in Francis that he gave way to it Thus were we treated then by France Let us now consider if Henry was at any pains all this while to make ane Interest in Scotland And if we may believe the unanimous voice of our own Historians or my Lord Herbert in the History of his Life never was man more earnest for any thing than he in that pursuit and he had brave occasions for it For not only were the Scots highly and justly irritated by the degenerous and undervaluing slights France had put upon them as I have just now made appear But Henry had surprized them with ane Unexpected and Unaccustomed Generosity after the Battel of Flowdon He had not pursued his Victory but had listned gently to their Addresses for Peace and told them that tho he might yet he would not take advantage of their circumstances He would treat them frankly if they were for Peace so was he if for War they should have it A Response so full of true Honour and Gallantry as could not but work on their affections Besides His Sister Margaret the Queen of Scots a Lady of rare Endowments was all alongst working to his hand and making a Party for him Iames the 4 th by his Testament before he went to Flowdon had nominated her Governess of the Realm during her Widowhood This gave her once the principal hand in affairs 'T is true she was young and lively and married within a year after the King's Death and so lost her Title to the Regency But then she married the Earl of Angus the choice of all the Scottish Nobility and one who was in great Repute with all Ranks of People so that however her Marriage annulled her Title it did not so much weaken her Interest but that she had still a great Party in the Nation So great That tho Albany was advanced to the Regency she was for the most part able to over-ballance him in point of power and following In short Such was Henry's and his Sisters influence That all the time Albany was Regent the Nation was divided into two Factions The one French headed by Albany the other English headed by the Queen Dowager and hers was generally the more prevalent so much that tho Albany was perhaps one of the bravest Gentlemen that ever was honoured with the Scottish Regency he was never able to prosecute to purpose any project he undertook for the French Service Thus Anno 1522. He raised ane Army to invade England But with what success Why The Scottish Nobility waited upon him to the Border indeed but they would go no further They told him plainly they would hazard lives and fortunes in defence of their Country but it was another thing to invade England And Lesly plainly attributes all this Refractoriness in these Nobles to the Queens influence Nay 't is evident from the same Lesly that the Baseness and Ingratitude of the French in the forementioned Treaties was one of the principal Arguments that moved them to such Backwardness And Albany was sensible of it and therefore went to France and told the French King so much and asked a swinging Army of Frenchmen five thousand Horse and ten thousand Foot with such a force he promised to Act something against England but from the Scots by themselves nothing was
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
a certain and determined sound To call a thing a great and insupportable Grievance and Trouble seems a little too flashy and fanciful Is it not liker to the flights of the Rhetoricians design'd for popular amusement than to the plain solid significant stile which is proper for the Grand Council of a Nation For Original-Contract and Claim-of Right-makers 5. Seeing 't is plain the Article was formed for the abolition of Prelacy and the Introduction of Presbytery it seems a little strange that such ane important Revolution in the Church should have been founded on such Vntheological Reasons It seems to lye at the bottom of this Article that the Government of the Church is Ambulatory and Indifferent That there is nothing of Divine Institution about it that the State may alter it when it pleases and as it thinks expedient set up Alternatively either Prelacy or Parity or neither but plain Erastianism if it has a mind for it These are suppositions which I think ought not to be very relishing even to our Presbyterian Brethren Tho hitherto they only have got advantage by the Article yet it seems not honourable for their Government to stand on such a foot nor can they be secure but that it may be very soon turn'd down again Tho' in consequence of this 6. By G. R's Measures the Framers of the Article were incapable of Voting about the Establishment of any Form of Government in the Church For they proceeded in voting this Article clearly upon the principles of Indifferency But according to him as I have already observed such tho' they may be persons both Religious and Learned are not to be brought into the Reckoning with those who have Right to vote about Church-Government Indeed according to his Scheme the Nation by this Article is brought to a very lamentable state For thus ane Article is imposed on it by such as had no Right no Power to impose it because they have fairly declared themselves to be for the indifferency of particular forms of Church Government And yet by another proposition in his Scheme this Article cannot be altered For this is one of his positions that the Deed of a Meeting of Estates is to be interpreted the Deed of the whole Nation From which it follows by unavoidable consequence that the whole Nation hereafter must be excluded from voting about the Government of the Church For the whole Nation even Presbyterians themselves not excepted by Establishing this Article have declared themselves indifferent as to the Species of Church Government Now as I said is not this a Lamentable state to which the Nation is reduced It lyes under the burden of ane ill-contrived Article imposed by such as were not Competent had no Right to impose it and yet it must lye Remedilessly under this burden because those who imposed it by imposing it while they were not Competent nor Qualified for imposing it have rendred the whole Nation incompetent and unqualified for altering it or freeing it self of such a burden Was ever Nation so miserably intricated But enough of G. R. These I say and several other things might have been farther considered and insisted on But having already answered the ends of my undertaking I shall proceed no farther I conclude with this If these Papers shall have the Fortune to come to the hand of any Scottish Noblemen or Gentlemen and if they shall think it worth their while to peruse them I earnestly beg one piece of Justice from them It is that they would not apprehend I had the least intention or inclination to cast disgrace on such of them as concurred either to the framing or the voting of this Article I love my native Country I honour all Persons of true honour in it I have no where impugned the Authority of those who Established this Article I had no such purpose My undertaking required no such performance All I designed was to do service to my Countrey according to my poor abilities I cannot think any Ingenuous person any person of true honour can deny that it is good service done to mankind to tell them truth Civilly and endeavour Dutifully to recover them from mistakes if they labour under any We are all fallible and capable of taking things by the wrong handle and a very mean Person may be sometimes a seasonable Monitor If I have said any thing false or amiss I crave all men pardon But if I have advanced nothing but Truth if I have done nothing but Iustice to this Article and I protest seriously I think I have done no more I cannot think it will be Iust or Generous in any Man to harbour Picques against me for doing what I have done The Genuine use I am sure it is Genuine I wish my Countrey-men of whatever Station or Character may make of my Examination of this Article is to suffer themselves to be put to thinking by it and Enquiring whither there may not be some other Articles every whit of as great importance to the Nation in our new Claim of Right as ill-founded as this And if any such are found to contribute their joynt endeavours as becometh true Scottishmen and good Christians to have all Righted FINIS (a) Kn. 260. (b) Spot 149. (c) Kn. 127. (d) Lesl 496. (e) Lesl. 494. Spot 95. (f) Kn. 259. Spot 149. (g) Pet. 222. (h) Spot 60. (i) Spot 154. (k) Calv. Epist. Col. 134 135. (l) Col. 316. (m) Col. (n) Col 466. (o) Col. 190. Sleut hoc Natura dictat unum ex singulis Collegiis deligendum cui praeeipua Cura incumbat Humanus Episcopatus tolerabilis quidem esset Modo veteres puri Canones Impediendae Oligarchiae constituti in usum revocarentur Beza in Resp. ad 1 Quaest. a Dom. Glam propositam (p) Kn. 64. (q) Kn. 70. (r) Spot (s) Kn. 146. (t) Kn. 260. (w) p. 135 143. (u) Spot 275. Cald. 69. (v) Cald. 167. 187. (x) Cald. 536. Pet. 366. (y) Kn. 283. Spot 175. (a) Course of Conform p. 32. Pet. 375. (b) Pet. 55. Cald. 374. (c) Cald. 57. Pet. 875. (d) Cald. 56. Pet. 375. (e) Cald. 57. Sed istud M. Knox te caeterosque fratres velim meminisse quod jam oculis pene ipsis obversatur sicut Episcopi papatum pepererunt c. Beza Epist. 79. pag. 315. (f) Life of Knox. Cald. p. 3. (g) Knox Life Kn. Hist. 102. Heyl. Hist Ref. Burn. hist. Ref. Cald. 3. Calv. Ep. Still Unreasonableness of Separation part 1. Sect. 3. (h) pag. 2â— (i) pag. 32. (k) p. 40. (k) p. 40. (l) See Act for a National Fast. (m) p. 51. (n) p. 90. (o) Kn. 318. (p) Kn. 308. Cald. 401 (q) p 110. (r) Spot 1â—4 Spot 198. Per. 348. Cald. 41. Kn. 445. (t) Kâ— 289. Old Liturgy (w) Spot 211. (v) Spot 266. (a) Lesl. 343. Herb. 27. (b) Herb. 29. (c) Lesl. 349. Herb. 44. Pax pacta est quae res non tantam tranquillitatem Regno Galliae peperit quantam