his Majestie both before this time at this time and after did shew evidently that he did approve the office of a Bishop as he testified by his divers protestations against those Assemblies which pressed to suppresse the same and by his presentation of Bishops to the places whensoever they hapned to be vacant as he did at that same very time present M. Rob. Montgomery to the Archbishoprick of Glasgow and by that Act of Parliament 1584. whereby the whole Iurisdiction of Bishops was ratified by his Majestie with consent of the whole estates of the Kingdome Seeing then that this Abjuration or Confession call it as they please was framed by the Kings Majestie appointed to be subscribed and sworn by his Authoritie and that in such a sense as that thereby Episcopacie was not understood to be abjured It must be also presupponed that all those who did swear or subscribe the same did it in no other sense or meaning otherwise they did swear falsly sophystically and by Equivocation therefore it must necessarily be concluded that by that Oath of the Covenant 1580. 1581. 1590. and 1591. Episcopacie nor the power and preheminence of one pastor over others or moe particular flocks than one was not abjured by honest men who had an efold and upright meaning in taking their Oath Neither can the interpretation of this Assemblie at Glasgow 1639. give any sure warrant to those who hath sworn in a sense contrary to the Kings meaning for if this Abjuration or Covenant had been the Act of the Church properly there had been some appearance that a lawfull generall Assembly now might give forth the true interpretation thereof but since it is the King and Councels Act and the Oath thereto required of all the Subjects by his Authoritie it doth not appertaine to the Generall assembly especially such an unformall and unlawfull one as this to declare in what sense it should be understood So that it is but false and vaine fear wherewith they would burden the consciences of all the Kingdome of Scotland as being fearfully perjured by establishing contrary to the pretended oath of the Covenant the office of Bishops in Scotland and giving obedience unto them But on the contrary they are rather forsworn and perjured who contrary to the meaning of their first oath have by their new rebellious Covenant and ordinance of their Assembly abjured Episcopacie And of this no man needeth to doubt but that all those who have acknowledged Bishops and have taken their oath of Canonicall obedience and now by perswasion of their Leaders have broken their solemn Oath in disobeying and contemning their authoritie and ratifying their disobedience by another Oath are evidently forsworn as most of the Ministers of that Assembly have done Let them in sincerity of mind search their own consciences in this point and I doubt not that if it have any life therein they will finde themselves sensibly pricked thereby CHAP. VII VVherein is answered to their Argument taken from foure severall sentences of the Abjuration and particularly to the first HAving now shown that neither by the principall Confession of Faith nor by the Appendix thereof called Abjuration nor by the first book of Discipline nor by any Acts of Assemblies nor practice of the Church many yeers after the reformation this power and preheminency of Bishops here controverted is condemned it rests that we answer to those Arguments which are brought by them in the body of the Act to prove the determination of the Assembly which are neither brought from the Word of God nor from the testimonie or practice of the primitive Church immediately after the Apostles dayes nor from any words of the perfect Confession of Faith in the Church of Scotland but all their Arguments are of a later foundation and may be in summe reduced to three sorts first they bring certaine broken sentences â—ut of the Abjuration in the Covenant which they call the Confession then some Acts of their late Generall Assemblies and thirdly some passages out of the second book of Discipline to the which we shall answer in their own order And first they bring foure severall sentences out of the Abjuration or negative Confession falsifying and wresting them strangely as to make them appeare to have some shew of proving their determination The first passage is in these words We professe that we detest all Traditions brought into the Kirk without or against the Word of God and Doctrine of this reformed Kirk The second is We abhorre and detest all contrary Religion and Doctrine but chiefly all kind of Papistry in generall nad particular heads as they were then damned and confuted by the Word of God and Kirk of Scotland when the said Confession was sworn and subscribed Anno 1580. and 1581. 1590. and 1591. The third is That we detest the Roman Antichrist his worldly Monarchy and wicked Hierarchie The fourth is That we joyne our selves to this reformed Kirk in Doctrine Faith Religion and Discipline promising and swearing by the great name of God that we shall continue in the Doctrine and Discipline of this Kirk and defend the same according to our vocation and power We answer first in generall to all these passages that by none of them is either Episcopall Government abjured for first in the words themselves there is no mention either of Bishops or their power and preheminency over others or their charge over moc particular flocks or of Presbyteries of absolute parity of Pastors Therefore except they have recourse to some secret meaning these passage can serve nothing to their purposes and we have shown before both by the meaning of the principall Confession of Faith whereof this Abjuration is an Appendix and by the explained meaning of his Majestie by whose appointment this abjuration is framed and who required the oath and subscription thereunto that it cannot be understood in such a sense as that this power and preheminencie of Bishops should be thereby abjured and therefore neither the words nor the sâ—nse can be able to pâ—ove their purpose Secondly we prove the same by the Confession of the Moderator M. Alexander Henrison and his Associats the Apostles of the Covenant for they in their Disputes with the Doctors of Aberdeene doe confesse plainly that by swearing this Confession of Faith Episcopacie was not abjured and that any man might safely swear that Confession and their Covenant also without abjuring Episcopacie and by this profession they entised many to sweat and subscribe their Covenant who otherwise would nâ—t have done it Now either they spake sincerely at that time according to their knowledge and conscience and so did flatly contradict this position That by swearing the Confession of Faith Episcopacie was abjured or else by dissembling policie they did so professe contrary to their own mind to serve their own designes in advancing per fas nefas their rebellious Covenant And so did shew themselves Iesuiticall temporizers and time-servers En graine abusing
therefore the oath is not broken 11. Discipline is again distinguished in these points which are essentiall and perpetuall and those which are accidentall and mutable 12. The first sort are prescribed by Gods Word and were not abolished by Episcopall government but observed inviolable 13. The other sort is left to the libertie of the Church and therefore alterable by the Church 14. To the observation of those the Oath bindeth so long as the Constitution of the Church standeth in force but being abrogate by a new Constitution the Oath thereto is dissolved 15. Whosoever doth not follow the Church in those Alterations doe against their oath CHAP. XI An Answer to the Acts of the generall Assemblies alleaged contrary to this point untill the year 1580. wherein are these particulars 1. That no Act of Assemblie is nor can be produced before that year 1575. 2. The occasion of impugning Episcopacie at that time 1. some fierie humours lately come from Geneva and zealous of Geneva Discipline 2. The Kings minoritie 3. Factions amongst the Nobilitie and Courtiers 4. The Sacrilegious greedinesse of those gaping after the Church rents who for their own ends abused the simplicitie of some Ministers and pride of others 3. That Bishops were not only tollerate but approved by the Church untill this year 1575. 4. At this Assemblie in August 1575. was the first motion against Episcopacie in the Church of Scotland 5. The proceeding of this Assemblie declared at length whereby it is cleered that this point here in controversie was not challenged therein but expresly approved by all 6. Nothing in substance concluded against Episcopacie for five years after 7. A notable dissimulation of our Covenanters in citing an Act of this Assembly CHAP. XII Answering to the Acts of Generall Assemblies for establishing the second book of Discipline wherein are these particulars 1. This book was brought in by the same occasions whereby Episcopacie began to be challenged 2. This Discipline was never fully agreed unto by the Church some points thereof never practised and those which were practised but of short continuance 3. They doe not themselves nor will not approve some points in this book but refuse obedience thereto instanced in three particulars 4. This book nor any part thereof had any strength of a Law before the injoyning of the Oath 5. It is defective in the most substantiall points of Discipline and superabundant in points not pertaining to Ecclesiasticall discipline 6. And therefore the Discipline therein contained cannot be that whereunto we are sworn to joyne our selvs precisely CHAP. XIII Answering to the Act of the Assembly at Dundee 1580. condemning Episcopacie together with the Act at Glasgo 1581. explaining the same containing these particulars 1. Albeit they condemned in these Acts Episcopacie as it was then used in Scotland as unlawfull in it self yet did they not condemne these points here controverted 2. Neither did the Church then condemn any substantiall point of Episcopacie except they did contradict themselves instanced in six principall points of that Doctrine 3. They condemn only the corruptions which were at that time in Bishops themselvs whereof some are only supposed corruptions some corruptions indeed but only personall and not essentiall to the office 4. The principall point they condemn in Bishops is that they received not their Commission from the Church to exercise their charge and yet it is evidently proved that they had Commission from the Church to exercise all the points of their function CHAP. XIIII Answering to the rest of the Acts here cited 1. Their Acts can be of no greater force than the former whereupon they are grounded and therefore refuted by the same reasons 2. Some particular observations upon these Acts whereby it is shewed that they make more against them nor for them 3. Many of these Acts shews that they were concluded expresly against the Kings Majesties intention 4. The reason why that Act of Parliament 1592. Establishing Presbyteries was suffered to passe by the King and the three Estates 5. It was not because they did approve the same but for eschewing of greater evils which were justly feared 6. That Presbyteriall Government in Scotland did not indure in full force above ten years 7. An Act of that Assembly 1589. disgracefull to the Church of Scotland CHAP. XV Discussing the Conclusion of this Act wherein are contained these particulars 1. Their Hyperbolicall magnifying of their accurate proceeding in concluding this Act not like to be true 2. The proposition of the Question by the Moderator informall obscure ambiguous sophysticall and such as could not be answered Categorically 3. The causes why they did so unanimously agree in their voycing was because all were debarred whom they suspected would make any contradiction 4. The voyces as they are here declared doe neither fully answer to their proposition nor condemn any thing in Episcopacie as it is now in Scotland 5. They cannot excuse this but by laying the fault upâ—n the Printer which is not like to be true for many reasons EPISCOPACY NOT ABIVRED IN SCOTLAND CHAP. I. A Comparison betwixt this Assembly and the Councell of Trent THat turbulent and seditious Conventicle of Covenanting Ministers and mis-ruling Elders assembled at Glasgow Novemb. 1638. can be compared to none of that kind so well as to that infamous Councell of Trent which as it hath for a long time troubled the whole world Emperors Kings and Princes fo this hath vexed mightily the Kings Majestie our dread Soveraigne disturbed both Church and Common-wealth and hath led all his Subjects in Scotland blind-fold to Rebellion given evill example to other Kingdomes and brought an evident Scandall upon the reformed Religion There hath been no lesse humane or rather Satanicall policie and subtile close conveyance practised by the chiefe Rulers in that Assembly of Glasgow both in the Preparation Prosecution and Conclusion thereof yet in this more malice and lesse respect to the Supreme Magistrate and present established estate of the Church than in that of Trent First as the Pope and his Cardinalls in the Consistorie professed that they desired a generall Councell and did openly exhort the Emperor Kings Princes and Republiques to concurre with them yet they declared evidently by their dealing that they desired either not at all a Councell or not such an one as should be assembled by the Authoritie of the Emperor and Kings or that any of them or their Ambassadors should have suffrage therein and much lesse presidencie according to the ancient Custome of the Church esteeming that their Authority suffrage or presence would crosse their particular ends Even so our Covenanters albeit they often petitioned his Majestie for the libertie of a generall Assemblie yet they declared plainly by their proceedings that they did not desire such an one as should be either convocated by his Majesties Authoritie or wherein he his Commission or Councell should preside or give suffrage or be present if it had been in their choice accounting it so
the reformed Church of Scotland for many yeares after the reformation And though repressed for a time yet re-established again by divers more lawfull Assemblies than this ratified by divers Act of Parliament and continued now for many yeeres by-gon there behoved to be many and weighty reasons why such a Doctrine should be conversed with a serious deliberation to ponder and consider them yet neverthelesse in this Assembly in one short Session the whole matter was proponed discussed voiced concluded and a large Act past thereupon CHAP. II. Concerning the Act against Episcopacie ALbeit it were an easie matter to refute all the controverted Acts of this Assemblie yet leaving the rest at this time we intend onely to examine that Act Sess. 26. Decemb. 8. Against Episcopacie And that for two reasons especially First because the grounds whereupon this Act is concluded are the self-same whereupon all the rest of the controverted Acts are grounded and therefore these grounds being declared evidently to be infirme and weak it will also appear that together with this Act of Episcopacie All the rest of their Acts depending thereupon shall be found to be ruinous as I trust their fall shall be suddain Secondly because the principall aime of the most and chiefest of these who were members of that Conventicle was to suppresse Bishops because they esteemed them chiefly to have crossed their Sacrilegious and ambitious 〈◊〉 I or â—efore Bishops were re-established the Noblemen and Baroâ—s both possessed the substance of the Church renâ—s and also ruled the whole Eâ—tate at their pleasure in Councell and Parliament by their own voyces and voyces of the Gentry and Borroughs whom those factious 〈◊〉 did depend for the most part upon one Noble man or other then finding that by the re-establishing of Bishops their rents were taken out of their hands and that they were like to loose their Abbeyes and Prioâ—ies also and finally that their particular ends not alwayes tending to the weell of the Church or Kingdome or Honour of the Prince were crossed by the estate of Bishops no marvell then though they be moved by all meanes possible to suppresse them and for that effect have laboured to make use of the simplicitie of some of the Ministrie and proud humours of others impatient of Subjection to lawfull Authoritie of whom some having aimed in vaine at Bishopricks as is well known of divers of the Ring-leaders of that Faction thought it best for their credit to declare a great contempt of that estate which they had with much labour sought after without the desired effect according to the fable of the Fox others by their former misdemeanors both against the Church and Regall Authority being past hope of further advancement did easily condescend to shake off that yoak which their turbulent humours could never suffer them patiently to bear those were made to blow the trumpet of Rebellion both in their Pulpits and private conferences drawing the people after them and the simplest sort of Ministers also who did not judiciously remark their secret ends cloaked under the colour of Religion and libertie of the Church by which meanes this condemning of Episcopacie was brought in head with all the consequences thereof This is the point we mean to examine for the present and that you may see the weaknes of their reasons the better we shall set down verbatim the Act it self as it was conceived by them Act of the Assemblie at Glasgow Sess. 16. Decemb. 8. 1638. Declaring Episcopacie to have been adjured by the Confession of Faith 1580. And to be removed out of this Kirk THe Assemblie taking to their most grave and serious Consideration first the unspeakable goodnesse and great mercie of God manifested to this Nation in that so necessarie so difficult and so excellent and divine work of Reformation which was at last brought to such perfection that this Kirk was reformed not onely in Doctrine and Worship but also after many conferences and publik reasonings in divers Nationall Assemblies joyned with solemn humiliations and prayers to God the Discipline and Government of the Kirk as the hedge and guard of the doctrine and worship was prescribed according to the rule of Gods word in the book of Policie and Discipline agreed upon in the Assemblie 1578. and insert in the Register 1581. established by the Acts of the Assemblies by the confession of Faith sworn and subscribed at the direction of the Assembly and by continuall practice of this Kirk Secondly that by men seeking their own things and not the things of Iesus Christ divers Novations have been introduced to the great disturbance of this Kirk so firmely once compacted and to the endangering of Religion and many grosse evils obtruded to the utter 〈◊〉 of the work of Reformationâ— and change of the whole form of worship and fâ—ce of this Kirk commanded to receive with reverence a new Book of Common prayer as the onely form to be used in Gods publik worship and 〈◊〉 Contraveeners to be condignely censured and punished and after many supplications and complaints knowing no other way for the preservation of Religion were moved by God and drawn by necessity to 〈◊〉 the Nationall Covenant of this Kirk and kingdome which the Lord since hath blessed from Heaven and to subscribe the confession of faith with an Application thereof abjuring the great evils wherewith they were now pressed and suspending the practice of all Novations formerly introduced till they should be tryed in a free generall Assembly lastly that some of his Majesties Subjects of sundry ranks have by his Majesties command subscribed and renewed the confession of Faith without the former explication And that both the one and the other Subscribers have subscribed the said Confession in this year as it was professed and according to the meaning that it had in this Kingdome when it was first subscribed â—581 and afterward The Assemblie therfore 〈◊〉 by the Subscription of his Majesties high Commissioner 〈◊〉 of the Lords of secret Councell Sept. 22. 1638. and by the Acts of Councell of the date foresaid bearing that they should subscribe the said Confession and ordaining all his Majesties Subjects to subscribe the same according to the foresaid date and tenor and as it was then professed within this Kingdome As likewise by the protestation of some of the Senators of the Colledge of Iustice when they were required to subscribe and by the many doubtings of his Majesties good subjects especially because the Subscribers of the Confession in February 1638. are bound to suspend the approbations of the corruptions of the Government of the Kirk 〈◊〉 they be tryed in a free generall Assemblie finding it proper for them and most necessarie and incumbent to them to give out the true meaning therof as it was at first profest that all his Majesties Subjects in a matter so important as is the publik Confession of Faith so solemnly sworn and subscribed may be of one mind and one heart and have 〈◊〉 satisfaction
called by God And such like to desist and cease from all preaching ministration of the Sacraments or using any way the office of Pastors while they receive de â—ovâ— Admission from the generall Assembly under the paine of excommunication to be used against them wherein if they be found disobedient or contradict this Act in any point the sentence of Excommunication after due admonition to be executed against them In the same Assembly holden Anno 1580. Sess. 10. This Article was appointed to be propounded to the King and Councell that the book of Policie might be established by 〈◊〉 Act of privie Councell while a Parliament be holden 〈◊〉 which it might be confirmed by a Law The extent of the Act maâ—e at Dundie was interpreted and explained in the Assembly holden at Glasgow in April 1581. Sess. 6. as followeth Anent the Act made in the Assembly holden at Dundie against Bishops because some difficultie appeared to some Brethren to arise out of the word Office contained in the said Act what should be meaned thereby the Assembly consisting far the most part of such as voted and were present in the Assembly at Dundie to take away the said difficultie resolving upon the true meaning and understanding of the said Act declare that they meaned wholly to condemne the whole estate of Bishops as they are now in Scotland and that the same was the determination and conclusion of the Assembly at this time because some Brethren doubted whether the former Act was to be understood of the Spirituall function onely and others alleaged that the whole office of a Bishop as it was used was damnable and that by the said Act the Bishops should be charged to dimit the same this Assembly declareth that they meaned wholly to condemne the whole estate of Bishops as they were then in Scotland And that this was the meaning of the Assembly at that time The Kings Commissioner presented unto this Assemblie the Confession of Faith subscribed by the King and his houshold not long before together with a plot of the Presbyteries to be erected which is Registrate in the books of the Assemblie with a Letter to be directed from his Majestie to the Noblemen and Gentlemen of the Countrey for their action of Presbyteries consisting of Pastors and Elders and dissolutions of Prelacies and with an offer to set forward the Policie untill it were established by Parliament The Kings letter subscribed by his hand to the Noblemen and Gentlemen was read in open audience of the whole Assembly This Assembly ordained the book of Policie to be insert in the Register by the Act following For asmuch as travell hath been taken in the framing of the Policie of the Kirk and divers suits have been made by the Magistrate for Approbation thereof which yet hath not taken the happy effect which good men would wish yet that the posteritie may judge well of the present Age and of the meaning of the Kirk the Assemblie hath concluded that the book of Policie agreed to in divers Assemblies before should be registrate in the Acts of the Kirk and remaine therein ad perpetuam rei memoriam And the Copies thereof to be taken to every Presbyterie of which book the Tenor followeth c. Immediately after the inserting of the book of Policie called therâ— the book of Discipline The Assembly ordained that the Confession of Faith be subscribed as followeth Anent the Confession of Faith lately set forth by the Kings Majestie and subscribed by his Highnesse the Assembly in one voyce acknowledgeth the said Confession to be a true Christian and faithfull Confession to be agreed unto by such as truely professe Christ and have a care of Religion and the tenour thereof to be followed out efoldly as the same is laid out in the said Proclamation wherein that Discipline is sworn to In the generall Assemblie holden at Edinburgh in October 1581. Sess. 10. Mr. Robert Montgomery is accused for teaching that discipline is a thing indifferent Sess. 23. The Assemblie gave Commission to the Presbytery of Stirling to charge Mr. Robert Montgomery to continue in the Ministry of Stirling and not to meddle with any other office or function of the Kirk namely in aspiring to the Bishoprick of Glasgow against the Word of God and Acts of the Kirk under the pain of Excommunication In the same Assembly it is acknowledged that the estate of Bishops is condemned by the Kirk Commission for erection of moe Presbyteries was renewed and a new Ordinance made for subscribing the Confession of Faith and to proceed against whatsoever persons that would not aknowledge and subscribe the same In the Assembly holden in April 1582. there was a new Commission for erection of Presbyteries where none was at yet erected Mr. Robert Montgomery pretending to be Bishop of Glasgow was ordained to be deposed and excommunicate except he gave evident tâ—kens of Repentance and promise to superseed which he did not and therefore was excommunicate shortly after according to the ordinance of this Assembly In the generall Assembly holden at Edinburgh 1582. The Generall Assembly gave Commission to some Presbyteries to try and censure such as were called Bishops for the great slander arising by their impunitie Commission was given at this Assembly to present some Articles to the Councell and estates for approving and establishing by their authoritie the Presbyteries the Synodall and Generall Assemblies in the 19. Sess. the Assemblie declared that 〈◊〉 Bishop may â—it upon the Councell in name of the Kirk In the Assemblie holden Anno 1586. these two Articles were agreed upon First It is found that all such as the Scripture appointeth Governors of the Kirk to wit Pastors Doctors and Elders may conveene to the generall Assemblies and vote in Ecclesiasticall matters Secondly There are foure Office-bearers set down to us by the Scriptures to wit Pastors Doctors Elders and Deâ—cons and the name of Bishop ought not to be taken as it hath been in the time of Papistry but is common to all Pastors and Ministers In the Assembly holden Anno 1587. Sess. 8. It was ordained that the admission of Mr. Robert Montgomery by the Presbyterie of Glasgow suppose to the Temporalitie of the Bishoprick only be undone and anulled with all possible diligence to the effect Slander might be removed from the Kirk In Sess. 15. Mr. Rob. Pont sheâ—ed the Kings presentation to the Bishoprick of Cathnes and desired the Iudgement of the Assemblie The Assemblie in their Letter to the Kings Majestie declared that they judged the said Mr. Rob to be a Bishop already according to the doctrine of S. Paul but as to that corrupt estate or office of these who hath been termed Bishops heretofore they found it not agreeable to the word of God and that it hath been 〈◊〉 in divers Assemblies before In the Instructions given to such as were appointed to waitâ— upon the Parliament it was ordained in the same Assembly Sess. 17. thâ—t they be carefull that
nothing bâ— admitted prejudiciall to the liberties of this Kirk as it waâ— concluded according to the Word of God in the generall Assemblies preceeding the year 1584. but precisely to seek the same to be ratified in the Assemblie holden in March 1589. where the Articles were made for the subscribing the confession of Faith with a 〈…〉 it was 〈◊〉 as followeâ—â— For so much as the Neighbour Kirk in England is understood to be heavily troubled for maintaining of the true discipline and government whose griefes ought to move us therefore the Presbyterie of Ediâ—burgh was ordained to comfort the said Kirk in the said matter In the Assemblie holden 1590. when the Confession of Faith was subscribed universally de novo A ratification of the liberties of the Kirk in her Iurisdiction Discipline Presbyteries Synods and generall Assemblies and an abrogation of all things contrary thereunto was ordained to 〈◊〉 sought both of the Councell and Parliament In the next Session it was ordained that the book of Discipline specially the controverted heads should be subscribed by all Ministers that beare or hereafter were to beare office in this Kirk and that they be charged by the Presbyteries under the paine of Excommunication seeing the Word of God cannot be keeped in sincerity unlesse the holy Discipline be preserved The Presbyteries were ordained to get a Copie under the â—lerks hand there was sundry Copies subscribâ—d by the Ministers in the Presbyteries yet extant as Haddington 〈◊〉 c. produced before the Assemblie In the Assembly 1591. Sess. 4. The former Act anent the subscription to the book of Policie is renued and penattis imposed upon the Moderator in case it be not put in exâ—cution In the Assembly 22. May 1592. Sess. 2. These articles were drawne up That the Acts of Parliament made 1584. against the Discipline Libertie and Authoritie of the Kirk be 〈◊〉 and the same Discipline whereof the Kirk hath been in practice precisely ratified that Abâ—â—ts Pryoâ—ies and other Prelats pretending the title of the Kirk be not suffered in time comming In the eleventh Session the number of the Presbyteries were given up and 〈◊〉 in the Parliament immediately following The fifth of Inne 1592. The Libertie Discipline and Iurisdiction of the 〈◊〉 Kirk in her Sessions Presbyteries 〈◊〉 and generall Assemblies is largely ratified as the same was used and exercised within this Realm and all the Acts contrary thereto abrogate the Kings prerogative declared not to be prejudiciall to the same priviledges grounded upon the Word of God the former Commissions to Bishops 1584. rescinded and all ecclesiasticall matters subjected to Presbyteries according to the discipline of this Kirk Anno 1595. the Book of Policie with other Acts is ratified and ordained to be printed It was also cleared that Episcopacie was condemned in these words of the Confession His wicked Hierarchie For the Popish Hierarchie doth consist of Bishops Presbyters and Deacons that is Baptizing and Preaching Deacons for so it is determined in the Councell of Trent in the 4. Chap. De Sacramento ordinis Cant. 6. Si quis dixerit in Ecclesiâ Catholicâ non esse Hierarchiam divinâ ordinatione institutam quae constat ex Episcopis Presbyteris Ministris anathema sit Bellarmine likewise in his Book De Clericis cap. 11. saith That there are three Hierarchies in the Militant Kirk The first of Bishops the second of Priests the third of Deacons and that the Decons are also Princes if they be compared with the people This proposition following Hierarchia ecclesiastica constat ex Pontifice Cardinalibus Archiepiscopis Episcopis Regularibus was censured by the facultie of Theologie in the Vniversitie at Paris as followeth In ista prima propositione enumeratio membrorum Hierarchiae Ecclesiasticae seu sacri Principatus divinâ ordinatione instituti est manca redundans atque inducens in errorem contrarium determinationi sacrae Synodi Tridentinae The proposition was defective because it pretermitted the Presbyters and Deacons it was censured as redundâ—nt because it made the Hierarchie to consist of the Pope Cardinals Archbishops and Regulars the Pope is not within the Hierarchie Primats Metropolitanes and Archbishops but as they are Bishops Furthermore this Hierarchie is distinguished in the Confession from the Popes Monarchie and howbeit this Hierarchie be called the Antichrists Hierarchie yet it is not to distinguish betwixt the Hierarchie in the Popish Kirk and any other as lawfull but the Hierarchie wheresoever it is is called his as the rest of the Popish corruption are called his to wit Invocation of Saints Cannonization of Saints Dedication of Altars c. are called his not that there is another lawfull Cannonization Invocation or Dedication of Altars whatsoever corruptioâ— was in the Kirk either in Doctrine worship or Government since the Mysterie of Iniquitie began to work and is retained and maintained by the Pope and obtruded upon the Kirk by his Authoritie are his A passage also out of the History of the Councell of Trent was alleaged where it is related that the Councell would not define the Hierarchie by the seven Orders we have in our Confession of Faith the manifold Orders set a part and distinguished from the Hierarchie but as it is set down in the Cannon above cited we have in the book of Policie or second book of Discipline in the end of the second Chapter this Conclusion agreed upon Therefore all the ambitious Titles invented in the Kingdome of Antichrist and in his usurped Hierarchie which are not of one of these foure sorts to wit Pastors Doctors Elders and Deacons together with the offices depending thereupon in one word ought to be rejected All which and many other Warrants being publikly read and particularly at great length examined all objections answered in face of the Assemblie all the members of the Assemblie being many times deâ—â—red and required to proponâ— their doubts and 〈◊〉 and every one being heard to the full and after much â—gitation as fully satisfied The Moderator at last exhâ—rting every one to declare his mind did put the master to voyâ—ing in these termes Whether according to the Confession of Taith as it was professed in the year 1580. 1581. and 1590. there be any other Bishop but a Pastouâ— of a particular flock having no power nor preheminence nor power over his Brethren and whether by that Confession as it was then professed all other Episcopacie is abjured and ought to be removed out of this Kirk The whole Assemblie most unanimously without contradiction of any one and with the 〈◊〉 of one 〈◊〉 professing full perswasion of mind did voyce That all Episcopacie different from that of a pastour over a particular flock was abjured in this Kirk and to be removed out of it And therefore prohibits under Ecclesiasticall 〈◊〉 any to usurpe accept defend or obey the pretended authority thereof in time comming Collected visied and extracted forth of the Register of the Acts of Assemblie by me Mr. A.
moe particular â—â—ocks condemned by this Act. 3. They framed the question in this manner to strike a terror of a fearfull perjurie upon the weak Consciences of these who could not discerne rightly either the quality of the Oath or the matter thereof to make them more plyable to their Rebellious projects perswading them that the swearers themselves and all their posteritie were bound to the observation of that Oath according to their false interpretation notwithstanding of any interveening Law or Constitution absolving them from it and that this fearfull perjurie could never be expiated except they renewed their Oath to that Covenant together with their false Applications and perverse interpretations farre different yea flat contrary to their meaning who framed the Confession of Faith and injoyned the Oath which as we shall shew is but an Imaginarie fear It had been more plaine dealing and fitter to have removed all doubts if they had proposed the Question more simply and in more perspicuous termes asking Whether the Office of a Bishop be lawfull in it self or not for if it had been solidly proven by Gods Word to be unlawfull then it had been evident also that the Oath whereby it was abjured was lawfull and no man could have doubted but that Oath did bind both the Actuall swearers and all their posterity to the observation thereof but if it had been found by cleer Scripture that the Office of a Bishop had been lawfull then no man could have doubted but the Oath whereby they did abjure it was unlawfull and therefore that no man was bound to the observation thereof but by the contrary all were bound in Conscience to break such an Oath or if it had been found of middle nature neither simply unlawfull nor necessarily lawfull at all times but a thing indifferent in the power of the Church and Supreme Magistrate to make a Law either establishing or abolishing the same who might also require an Oath of all to observe that Law then certainly no man could have doubted but that so long as that positive Law stood in force that Oath did bind all Subjects to the observation of it as likewise that the Law being abolished by lawfull Authoritie no man was further bound but was ipso facto absolved from the Oath So the Question being propounded in this manner and resolved any other wayes it had cleered all doubts and moved all to be of One mind and one heart but being propounded in their manner no resolution did take away all doubts as they promised to doe by this Act but rather did multiplie them and make them greater For albeit it had been cleered that Episcopacie had been abjured by the Oath of the Covenant which notwithstanding is not done yet a greater doubt remained whether that Abjuration was lawfull or not which could not be resolved except it had been first made manifest that Episcopacie was unlawfull in it self by Gods Word Yet that we may follow them in their own method and reason upon their own grounds we shall leave at this time the probations which may be brought for the office of a Bishop from Gods Word and practice of the Primitive Church which hath been sufficiently performed by divers learned Divines to the which the best of that Sect could never sufficiently answer Taking then the Question as it is set downe by them there are two points which they onely here condemne in that office first that they have charge over moe Parishes than one secondly that they have power and preheminencie over their Brethren we shall make it therefore evident 1. That by the Confession of Faith Books of Discipline Acts of Generall Assemblies and long continued practice of the Church of Scotland at the reformation and many yeers after this preheminence and power of one Pastor over others and charge over moe parishes than one hath been acknowledged to be lawfull Secondly we shall shew that none of those passages brought by them at length in the Act it self which doubtlesse were the strongest they could find forth of the abjuration in the Covenant books of Discipline and Acts of former generall assemblies doe prove their conclusion but that all of them are either falsly or impertinently cited farre by or contrary to the meaning of the Authors and therefore that all of them are Sophystically alleaged CHAP. V. That this preheminence and power of Bishops here questioned is conforme to the true Confession of Faith of the Church of Scotland to the first Book of Discipline and the long continued practice of the Church FIrst we must observe that there are two Confessions of Faith so called in the Church of Scotland as we have remarked before to wit that large Confession established at the first reformation framed by Iohn Knox and other faithfull Ministers Anno 1560. Confirmed by divers generall Assemblies received by the whole body of the Kingdome ratified by Act of Parliament 1567. and inserted in the body of the Act which is the only proper Confession of the Church of Scotland containing all the positive grounds of the Reformed Religion especially in matters of Faith controverted betwixt us and the Papists and other Hereticks the other called commonly the Negative Confession which is not properly a perfeâ—t Confession but an Appendix of the former framed not by any Ordinance of the Assemblie of the Church but by the appointment of the Kings Majestie and Councell first sworn and subscribed by the Kings Majestie himself and his houshold then by an Act of Councell dated the 5. of March 1580. It was ordained that all persons within the Kingdome should swear the same and for more commodious doing thereof it was presented by his Majesties Commissioners to the Assemblie holden at Glasgow 1581. that they might approve it and injoyne every Minister to see the Oath taken by all their Parishioners and it did containe an abjuration of most speciall grosse errors of Poperie the same abjuâ—ation was againe commanded by the King to be renewed in the year 1590. when as that Conspiracie of some Papists trafficking with the King of Spaine was discovered having annexed thereto a generall band or Covenant whereby all the Subjects bindes themselves with the Kings Majestie for maintenance of true Religion according to the Confession of Faith set down at the first reformation and for the defence of the Kings Majesties person Authoritie and estate against all Enemies within and without the Kingdome to the end that true professors and his Majesties loyall Subjects might more easily be discerned from hypocriticall Papists and seditious Rebells Now as for that onely perfect Confession there is no clause nor Article therein which either expresly or by any probable consequence condemneth this power and preheminencie here controverted neither have they been so bold as to alleage any passage out of the same nor was it the meaning of those godly and learned persons who set it down and proposed it to be received by the Church and Kingdome of Scotland nor
Churches within the bounds of their own Diocese and therafter Anno 1572. All Bishops were by speciall Act of the Generall Assemblie restored to the function at the desire of the Earle of Lenox then Regent of Scotland and the next year in the Assembly at Edinburgh 1573. certaine limitations of their power were added not very strict which no Bishop can refuse 1. That the Iurisdiction of Bishops in their Ecclesiasticall function should not exceed the Iurisdiction of the Superintendents which heretofore they had and presently have which Iurisdiction as we have declared was no lesse than that which the Bishops require now 2. That they should be willingly subject to the Discipline appointed by the Generall Assemblie as members thereof This likewise is reasonable and no Bishop will think himself exeemed from the censure of a Nationall Assemblie lawfully constituted according to the established and approved orders of the Church 3. That no Bishops give coâ—â—ation of Benefices within the bounds of Superintendents without their consent and testimoniall subscribed by their hands This was also reasonable for Superintendents were also Bishops and it is conforme to the ancient Canons of the Church That no Bishop should give ordination or collation to any within the Diocese of another Bishop without his consent and testimoniall 4. That Bishops in their own Diocese visite by themselves where no Superintendâ—nts are which indeed is their duty if they be not impedited either by infirmitie or by some weightier affaires of the Church 5. That they give no collation of Benefices without the advice of three qualified Ministers The Bishops of Scotland heretofore did astrict themselves further for they were not accustomed to give collation of Benefices except 〈◊〉 were to men of known worth in the exercise of the ministry before without the advice of the whole Brethren of the Exercise in the bounds where the Benefice lyes committing the whole triall both of their life and doctrine to them and according to their Testificate did accept or reject him who was presented By this then which we have truely related out of the book of Discipline and Acts of Generall Assemblies of the Church it is manifest that the true Confession of faith as it was professed at the Reformation and many yeers thereafter had no such meaning as condemne or â—bjure the power and preheminence of One Pastour over others or over moe particular flocks than one But on the contrary did approve the same as it is explained concerning the point of Government by the book of Discipline and practice of the Church under the title of Superintendent untill the year 1590. and under the title of Bishop untill the year 1580. for untill those years neither the one nor the other were abrogated by the Assembly of the Church the first Act condemning that Iurisdiction under the title of Bishops was in that Assembly at Dundie 1580. and the first Act abolishing the office and title of Superintendents was in that Assembly at Edinburgh August 1590. wherein it is declared that since Presbyteries were fully established that Superintendents and Commissioners were neither necessarie nor expedient What regard should be had to those Acts we shall shew hereafter Is it not therefore too impudent and manifest a calumnie and a scandalous impurtation laid by our Covenainers upon the worthy reformers of the Church of Scotland and those who did prosecute the same for many years that their meaning in the Confession of Faith was to condemne that as unlawfull which they did approve by their plaine and publike declaration and continuall practice As it is also a subtill and hypocriticall dissimulation of the Ring-leaders of this Rebellion against the knowledge and conscience â—f those who knowes the historie of that Church since the Reformation to professe and perswade people that their upright intentions is to reduce the Church to her former purity wherein she was constituted by the Reformations and to abolish all novationâ— since they are manifestly doing the quite contrary abolishing violently that order of Government which was established by the Reformation and establishing in place thereof a most dangerous Novation never heard of in many Christian Church since the beginning untill this 〈◊〉 age and whereof the Church of Scotland never thought of nor dreamed at the Reformation or many yeers thereafter untill it was brought by a violent wind from Geneva bringing therewith great trouble and disturbance to the Church of Scotland and whole Kingdome both first and last CHAP. VI Shewing that this power and preheminence of Bishops was not abjured by the Negative Confession or Covenant HAving showne that this power and preheminence of Bishops was not condemned by the principall and proper Confession of Faith of the Church of Scotland It followes also that we shew that it was not condemned by that abjuration in the Covenant called the Negative Confession which by them improperly and {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} is called a Confession For it is absurd and almost repugnans in adjecto to say that it should be the Confession of Faith in any Church which doth not declare any positive point of Doctrine to be beleeved but consisteth onely of meere Negatives which are not to be beleeved It was onely therefore set down as an Appendix of the true Confession for that end which we declared before For this is the ordinary manner both of publike Confessions of Churches and private Confessions of particular persons first to set down the positive Doctrine in certaine Articles and propositions which are properly the Confession of Faith and then by way of Appendix deduced from thence to adjoyne damning and abjuring of the contrary errors so we see it done in most of the Confessions of reformed Churches collected together in that book called Syntagma Confessionum So doth befa in his Confession and learned Zanchius in his right so we must conceive the matter that those abjurations of Popish errors set down in the Covenant are but Appendices deduced from the Articles and propositions which comprehend the Confession of Faith yea the very words of that Covenant make it cleer and evident for therin it is first said We beleeve with our hearts and confesse with our mouthes that this is the true Christion Faith and Religion which is particularly expressed in the Confession of our Faith established and confirmed by divers Acts of Parliament c. To the which Confession and forme of Religion we agree in all points c. In these words is the proposition and summe of the Confession the Appendix followeth thereafter in these words And therefore we abhorre and detest all contrary Doctrine and Religion but chiefly Papistrie and particular heads thereof c. whereby it is evident that it is onely the proper ancient Confession of Faith set down at the Reformation whereunto they did directly swear in that Covenant but unto the abjuration of errors they did onely swear indirectly and by consequent as they were contrary to the
Beleife whatsoever is said there CHAP. X. Containing an Answer to the fourth place cited out of the Abjuration THe fourth and last passage of the Abjuration or Negative Confession whereby they alleage that Episcopacie is abjured is We professe that we joyne our selves to this reformed Kirk in Doctrine Faith Religion and Discipline promising and swearing by the great Name of God that we shall continue in the Doctrine and Discipline of this Kirk and defend the same according to our Vocation and power all the dayes of our life First we must remark that by these foure distinct terms are not signified foure severall distinct things but by doctrine Faith and Religion is signified one and the self-same thing for Doctrine to be beleeved is the object of Faith and Religion consists in the practice of this Doctrine and Discipline is the meanes to conserve Doctrine Faith and Religion and so we see in the next words containing the promissary part of the Oath they are all reduceed to two Doctrine and Discipline Secondly we must consider what doctrine and discipline this is whereunto they swear It is not every point of doctrine which hath been taught in the pulpits of Scotland nor every point of Discipline which hath been practised in their Sessions Presbyteries Assemblies for then God knowes how doubtsome and uncertaine an Oath this should have been because those points have been often changed and some directly contrary to other the matter of an Oath should be so clearly and particularly set down as is possible for it be set down indefinitely men may involve themselves rashly in a contradictory Oath And therefore those who framed this Oath have wisely and considerately set down divers limitations of the matter of the Oath whereby it is made clear and evident what doctrine and discipline it is whereunto they promise by their oath to joyne themselves But our Covenanters have dissembled subtilly those necessary limitations and set it down in generall and indefinite termes only naming in generall the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church of Scotland Now that we may know more evidently what Doctrine and Discipline is here meaned I shall set down at more length the words of the Oath as they be in the Originall We beleeve with our hearts and confesse with our moâ—thes c. that this is the onely true Faith and Religion pleasing God and bringing salvation to man which is now by the mercy of God revealed to us by the preaching of the blessed Evangel and received beleeved and defended by many notable Churches and Realms and chiefly by the Church of Scotland particularly expressed in the Confession of Faith established and publikely confirmed by divers Acts of Parliament and now of along time publikely professed by the King and whole body of the Kingdome In these words are comprehended foure necessary limitations of the matter of this Oath without the bounds of which it is not to be extended Albeit it were sufficient to shew that Episcopacie was not abjured by this Oath if we prove that by any one of these limitations it can be excluded yet to make the probation more full we shall make it evident that not by one onely but by all these foure limitations this point That it is not lawfull for one Pastor to have power and preheminence over his Brethren or over more particular flocks than one is excluded from this Oath and therefore not abjured as a Popish error The first limitation is that they only did swear to adhere to that Doctrine which is revealed by the preaching of the blessed Evangel or by Gods Word But so it is that no doctrine condemning this power and preheminencie is revealed by the Gospel or expressed by Gods Word or depending thereupon by necessary consequence therefore by that Oath none was sworn to adhere to any such Doctrine condemning that point But the contrary doctrine is so clearly testified by the whole course of Scripture both in the old and new Testament that it is lawfull for one Pastor to have power and preheminence over others or over moe particular flocks that we much admire why men so versed in Scripture can be so blinded as not to soe so cleer a Truth or if they see it to be so impudent and without conscience to abjure it as a damnable Heresie compelling others to abjure the same by so solemn and fearfull an Oath wherein they move them really to perjure themselves for eschewing a supposed perjury The second limitation is that the Doctrine whereunto they swear to adhere was that Which was received beleeved and defended by many notable Churches Realms then when this Oath was first made But so it is that this Doctrine declaring it to be unlawfull that one Pastor should have power and preheminence over others c. was not received beleeved and defended by many notable Churches and Realms at that time for we can shew that the most of the reformed Churches and Realms at that time did professe and practise the contrary as all the Churches of High-Germany Rohemia Denmark Sweden Norway Poland Hungaria Helvetia England Ireland and our own Church of Scotland they cannot produce one Realm nor any Church that had at that time imbraced fully presbyteriall Government except one City of Geneva which notwithstanding did not so absolutely condemne Episcopacie as they doe as we have shown by the Testimonie of the two cheifest members of that Church Calvin and Beza There are now some Churches which have received the Geneva Discipline as the Palatinate in High-Germany the consederate Provinces of Lower-Germany and the reformed Church of France which notwithstanding had not that Discipline nor a full established Church amongst them at that time for the Palatinate continued in the Doctrine and Discipline of the Augustâ—ne Confession untill the year 1584. when Iohn Cassitmere Prince Elector after his Brother Lâ—dâ—wick's death brought in Calvinisme as Lucus Oâ—iander in his Epitom Histor Eccles. Ceâ—t 26. lib. 4. cap. 20. doth testifie In the Low Countries albeit there were many protestants before yet had they not an established Church untill the year 1583. when as they renounced the Authoritie of the King of Spaine neither had they of France an established Church untill the raigne of Henry the Fourth Reade over all the Confessions of Reformed Churches contained in that Syâ—tagâ—â—â—â—onfessionum you shall not finde one of them condemning this power and preheminence or Episcopacie absolutely But on the contrary many of them doe expresly approve it Therefore since there was not many notable Churches and Realmes which received beleeved and defended that it was unlawfull for one Pastor to have power and preheminence over others or over moe particular flocks it is manifest that this point was not abjured by the Oath of the Covenant Thirdly the matter of the Oath is expresly restricted to that Doctrine and Discipline Which is particularly expressed in the Confession of Faith set down Anno 1560. And ratified publikly by divers Acts
of Parliament before this Abjuration was sworn by which limitation is excluded from this oath all points of Doctrine and Discipline added since either by Acts of Generall Assemblies Synods or Presbyteries since that Confession was received as that Act of the Assemblie at Dâ—ndie 1580. and at Glâ—sgow 1581. Condemning Episcopacie and others of that kinde and such are our Covenanters Additions or Applications of the Confession of Faith expressed in their Rebellioâ—s Covenant And the truth is that they neither have nor can produce one word of that Confession condemning this power and preheminence neither had the Church who established it any such purpose or intention to doe so But on the contrary the same Church at the same very time in setting down the first book of Discipline did approve that power and preheminencie under the title of Superintendents therefore this point was not abjured by the Oath Fourthly the matter of this Oath is determined to be that doctrine and discipline Which was for a long time before the first framing of this Oath professed by the King and whole body of this Kingdome But so it is that no point of Doctrine condemning this power and preheminence was professed for a long time before this by the King or body of the Kingdome therefore that power and preheminence was not abjured by that Oath For the Kings profession we have shown Cap. 6. what it was at that time and both before and after then the profession of the whole body of the Kingdome cannot be determined by particular mens opinions but by publik Acts either by the Supreme Civill or Ecclesiastick Court And they have not produced any Act of either of those Courts long before shewing such a profession and therefore it is to be presupposed that there was none such But on the contrary we can produce Acts of both those Courts not onely long before but also continually since the Reformation yea at that same very time when this Abjuration was first made and some yeers after standing in force approving this power and preheminence the first Act they can produce having any appearance of condemning Episcopacie as unlawfull is that Act of the Assemblie at Dundee 1580. which notwithstanding doth not serve their purpose first because this Act was not long before if not after this Abjuration was first framed being even that same very year about that same time Secondly albeit the office of a Bishop as it was then in Scotland be condemned yet notwithstanding this point that it was lawfull that one Pastor might have power and preheminence given him was agreed unto by the whole Assemblie as we have signified before and shall more fully declare hereafter Thirdly long before this the power and preheminencie of Superintendents and Commissioners was publikly approved by the first book of Discipline and by divers Acts of Generall Assemblies even then and some years after standing in force unrepealed which we have before faithfully cited cap. 5. And as for the civill Courts both of Councell and Parliament they declared their profession by rejecting of divers suits made for ratifying the second book of Discipline which seemed to condemne this power and preheminence as in the Assemblies 1578. 1579. and 1580. cited here by themselves It is declared that divers suits were made for establishing the second book of Discipline by Act of Parliament or otherwise if that could not be obtained by Act of Councell but both the one and the other were often refused Moreover it was declared by the King and whole body of the Kingdome assembled in Parliament at Edinburgh May 22. 1584. that they had no such profession but on the contrary in the 129. Act of that Parliament representing the whole body of the Kingdome the whole power preheminence and Iurisdiction of Bishops was ratified and confirmed in most ample forme By which it is evident that there was no point of Doctrine long before the swearing of this Covenant received beleeved and defended by the King and whole body of the Kingdome condemning this power and preheminence now in question And therefore that it was not abjured by the Oath of the Covenant And since it is so it is strange with what face or conscience they can so 〈◊〉 abuse Christian people as to impose falsly â—uch a burden upon the Consciences of all persons within the Kingdome both King and Subjects Pastors and people in pressing to perswade them against so many evident reasons that they are all by vertue of that Oath so fearfully perjured who have consented to the 〈◊〉 of Episcopacie But because this point of Episcopacie is understood by them rather to be abjured under the name of Discipline than under the name of Doctrine therefore to take away all way of Escape or subtâ—rfuge we shall examine the point of Discipline also and shew how farre it is included in the Oath and albeit it be by all those former limitations excluded also for these limitations are to be applied aswell to the Discipline as to the Doctrine Yet for further resolution we must consider that the word Discipline is taken in divers significations first strictly and properly for that part of the Policie which concerneth the censures of the Church to be practised upon those who doe erre either in doctrine or in manners of life And so Episcopacie or power and preheminence of one Pastor over others is not contrary thereto but may very well subsist therewith and hath subsisted actually both during the Governement under Superintendents or Commissioners as also under the Government of Bishops since they were re-established for the same censures which were established by the book of Discipline by the order set down before our Psalm books and by divers Acts of Generall Assemblies long before Bishops were re-established did still remaine the same admoâ—itions private and publik the same sentence of excomâ—unication and manner of proceeding therein by three private and three publik Citations before Ecclesiasticall Indicatories the same publik prayers â—ppointed by order of the Church of repentance to the delinquent upon three severall Sabbath dayes the same forme of pronouncing the sentence and enjoyning private or publik satisfaction the same manner of receiving and absolving of the penâ—tent As all within the Church of Scotland doe know And therefore it is evident that this power and prehâ—minence of Bishops is not contrary to the Disciplâ—â—e of the Church of Scotland taken in this â—eale 〈◊〉 apparently it is taken in the Oath for in â—ll speeches or wâ—â—â—s of conâ—sequencâ— chiâ—â—â— those which are see down for a solâ—â—â— oath â—hich ought to be plain and cleer the words 〈◊〉 be taken in their proper and most usuall sense rather than in an unproper and figurative except by some evident reason it appear that it must be taken improperly And this certainly is the most proper and usuall meaning of this word Discipline as it is taken in the order set down before our Psalm books in the second book of Discipline
is common to every one of them that hath a particular flock but dissembles the other points of agreement which we have rehearsed importing this power and preheminence because they found them directly contrary to their Conclusion Thirdly albeit they intended at this Assemblie presently to have thrown down Episcopacie to the ground yet because many wise learned and godly Brethren did oppose them standing firmly for the ancient discipline of the Church there passed five or six years in these contestations before the finall sentence was pronounced in the mean time those Episcopomastiges ceased not to labour diligently by all meanes to draw others to their judgement using likewise the perswasions of men of speciall note beyond Seas as in the time of the Contestation the Lord Glames then Chancellor of Scotland was moved by our Genevating Ministers to write to Beza craving his opinion concerning the present Government under Bishops Superintendents to the which letter Beza made a large answer condemning the present Government and setting down a plot of that Policie and Discipline which he desired them to imbrace according to the which they did frame their second book of Discipline and that in many points ipsissimis verbis as may appear by conferring the Book with his Epistle That second citation from the Assembly April 1576. serves nothing to their purpose for albeit Some Bishops were censured because they had not betaken themselves to a particular flock yet this might consist with power and preheminence over other as is cleer in the Superindents who albeit they had particular flocks wherein they were specially bound to attend in preaching the Word and administration of Sacraments yet that did not hinder but that they might have charge over other Pastors and moe Parishes Finally those corruptions of the estate of Bishops which are set down in the Assemblie at Edinburgh 1578. were not fully concluded in that Assembly to be damned absolutely but only proposed by some and craved to be considered CHAP. XII Answering to the Acts for establishing of the second Book of Discipline THe second Rank of Acts cited out of Generall Assemblies are those which concern the establishing of the second Book of Discipline such as are that Act of the Assembly in April 1578. Sess. 4. that in April 1578. Iuly 1579. Iuly 1580. Sess. 10. April 1581. 1590. 1591. Sess. 4. to the which they need no particular Answer but Generally concerning this book of Discipline we answer first that this Book of Discipline was brought in head and urged by the same means and occasions whereof we spake before to subvert the former established Government and to bear down Bishops that the Church the more easie might be robbed of her patrimonie by Noblemen and Courtiers gaping after the Church-rents and factious humours striving to singularity contrary to the mind of the wisest and gravest and most modest of the Ministry and opposed continually by the King Councel and whole body of the Kingdome as the very Acts themselves here produced by them doe evidently declare Secondly the Acts of those Assemblies can be of no greater force than the book it self for the establishing whereof they were made But so it is that this Book is not in it self that Discipline whereunto we swear to joyne our selves in the Oath of the Covenant first because at this time the book of Discipline was but onely a thing in fieri not as yet concluded when the Oath was made and therefore could not be accounted to be comprehended therein for that Ordinance of the Assemblie at Glasgow 1581. whereby that Discipline was appointed to be registrated in the Assembly books did not make it a binding Law neither was it intended for that end but as it is expresly set down in the Act it self ad perpetuam rei memoriam and that the posteritie should think well of the intention of the Church So it was but a thing intended by the Church but not effected as likewise that Ordinance of the Assembly at Glasgow 1590. concerning the subscription to that book did not extend it self to all but to actuall Ministers only and yet of those many did resist it as particularly the Ministers of Angus and Mearâ—es and divers other parts of the Kingdome for the which cause it was thought needfull that a new Act should be made Anno 1591. injoyning againe the subscription under a penalty and particularly to those of Angus and Mearâ—es This book was never ratified by any Act of Estate either in Councell or Parliament without the which they themselves confesse it could not be a Law as they doe in that Assembly Iuly 1579. and that Assembly 1580 Sess. 10. As for that Act of Parliament 1592. here alleaged first it was after the last urging of the swearing of the Covenant 1591. and therefore could not be included in the Oath Secondly it was but a partiall ratification not of the whole book but of Generall Synodall and of Presbyteriall Assemblies and Parish Sessions which did still remaine under Episcopall government with greater regularitie than they were before 2. This book of Discipline many years after the first motion thereof could not be agreed unto by the greatest and best part of the Ministrie finding it for the most part but an Imaginary plot which could be hardly effectuate or indure long in the Church without great corruption as the event proved Some of it never put in practice either in the Church of Scotland or any other Church in the world like to the frame of Policie in Plato's Republik or of Outopia as those points de Diaconatu concerning the collecting and distribution of the rents of the Church in some points the contrary hath ever been practised as it is appointed by that Book Cap. 7. That Landward Churches should not nor could not have particular Elderships and yet ever after there was not so small a Landward Church but had their particular Sessions consisting of the Ministers Elders and Deacons It is likewise there appointed that Elders once lawfully called to the office may never leave it again and yet it hath ever been an use that he who was Elder this year should be casheered the next and every year a new Election made Item it is ordained Cap. 3. That all Ecclesiasticall Parsons as Pastors Elders and Deacons should receive the Ceremonie of ordination to their office which are declared to be Fasting and Prayer and imposition of hands of Elderships and yet they did never practise imposition of hands upon Elders or Deacons but only in the Ordination of Pastors many other points might be brought which either were never practised or the contrary practice brought in 3. If this Book of Discipline be a declaration of the meaning of Church whereby the negative Confession in the Covenant should be interpreted then those who have sworn the Covenant have sworn also to this Book of Discipline if it be so then which of all the Covenanters can free themselves of perjurie for
therefore it were but a foolish Logomachie or strife about words to allow the one title and condemne the other Secondly it may aswell be condemned as unlawfull to appropriate the name of Minister to the degree of preaching Pastors which is common to all those who have charge in the Church or to appropriate the name of Elder to their ruling Elders only which is common to all Pastors Apostles Evangelists and Bishops Thirdly neither did they condemne as unlawfull in it self their power and preheminence over the Ministers in their Diocese or charge over moe particular Parishes first because there were points agreed upon by both parties before this Assemblie and approved by a speciall Act as we have shown before Cap. 11. Secondly because this power was as yet still remaining in the persons of Superintendents Commissioners and Visitors and long after this time Fourthly neither did they condemne as unlawfull in it self their power of Convocation of Synodall Assemblies and their moderation therein for the Church acknowledged this power to be lawfull in Superintendents as we have shown by divers Acts of Assemblies Cap. 5. for if it were unlawfull in it self it could not be thought lawfull under any title whatsoever Fiftly neither did they condemne as unlawfull in it self their sitting and voycing in Councell or Parliament or other Civill Iudicatories for they acknowledge in the second book of Discipline Cap. 11. That Pastors may and should assist their Princes when they be required in all things agreeable to Gods Word whether it be in Councell or Parliament or otherwise So a little before this time M. Robert Pont who was a Pastor and Commissioner of Caithenes had licence from the Assemblie to exercise the office of a Senator of the Colledge of Iustice which was a civill Iudicatorie That proviso which is added to this doth not import any unlawfulnes in the office Providing they neglect not their own charge nor by flatterie of Princes hurt the publik estate of the Church if any doe so it is but a personall fault and not essentiall to the office for Bishops may doe more good in those places for the publik weal of the Church than their Apostles of the Covenant by their long staying in Edinburgh farre from their own particular charges attending the tables of the Covenant and gadding up and down the Countrie to stirre up the Kings Subjects to rebellion against him and to disturb the estate of the Church and Kingdome as many of the Covenanting Ministers have done These are the principall points both of the Spirituall and temporall functions of the Bishops and since they were not accounted by the Church unlawfull in themselves how can this be that this Assembly hath justly condemned The whole estate of Bishops as unlawfull in it self except the Ambiguitie lurk in these words which are there added and often repeated As it is now used in Scotland signifying that it was only the corruptions which were in those who were Bishops at that time which they did condemn and not Episcopacie absolutely It may be true indeed that there were some corruptions at that time in those who had the office of Bishops or that they did not exercise their office aright retaining some corruptions of the Roman Church but for these personall faults the office should not have been condemned of it self since these corruptions might have been separated from the office as they were indeed by the new re-establishment of Bishops in the year 1606. 1608. And certainly they understood those corruptions which are remaked to have been in the Bishops by the book of discipline Cap. 11. whereof some are corruptions indeed but not competent to that office as it was now established in Scotland by generall Assemblies and Acts of Parliament others of them are only supposed corruptions which cannot be convinced to be such indeed either by Gods Word or testimonie of approved Fathers or practice or example of the primitive Church 1. They say it is a corruption that the name of Bishop should be appropriated to some few we have answered to this a little before shewing that this is only a proud doting about questions and strife of words as the Apostle sayes 1 Tim 6. 4. 2. They account it a corruption that they addict not themselves to a particular flock I answer that they doe so for their Diocese is their particular flock Then it is neither necessarie nor expedient that he to whom the generall charge of many parishes is committed should astrict himself to one Parish only nor can the contrary be convinced from Gods Word wherein we finde no such divisions of Parishes as is now 3. They challenge them that they are called Lords over their brethren and over the inheritance of the Lord But first we say that they are not called Lords in regard of their rule over their Brethren but in regard of their temporall Lordships bestowed upon them by the Liberalitie of Princes and in regard of their place in Parliament and Councell then this title of Lord like as Dominus in Latine and {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} in Greek is sometimes a word signifying absolute and illimitated Dominion So we see that divers Emperors albeit in effect they had absolute dominion yet did they refuse often the title of Dominus because it was odious to people and in this sense Bishops are not called Lords neither doe they arrogate to themselves such absolute and unlimited dominion as to doe what they pleased but they must be ruled by the Canons of the Church But otherwise the title of Lord is only a word of honour competent to every man of respect to whom it pleases the Prince or custome of the Countrey to give that title as in France we see the Bishops are no otherwise intituted than other ordinarie Gentlemen calling them Mounsieur so likewise in Spaine and Italy Seignior which title is also given to any other man of worth it is only the custome of the Countrey of England and Scotland whereby this title of Lord is given to Bishops and not for any absolute Dominion they arrogate thereby 4. They account it a corruption that Bishops should have further bounds to visite then they may lawfully they would say conveniently but that corruption may easily be amended by division of the Diocese as is lately done in the Diocese of St. Andrews without abolishing the whole office 5. That a Pastor should have criminall Iurisdiction we answer they have not this as Pastors or Bishops but as a priviledge by the Laws of the Countrey annexed to their temporall lands which notwithstanding they doe not exercise in their own person but by their Stewards or Bailifâ—es 6. They count it a corruption that Bishops would not subject themselves to the correction and censures of the particular Elderships or Presbyteries this is but a supposed corruption and if it were so it were a great corruption indeed and a most uncomely and confused disorder to give libertie to
the inferior members to correct the head it is true indeed that Bishops ought to be subject to the censures of Generall or Nationall Councels and none of them will think themselves exeemed from such a one as is lawfully constituted Albeit the Bishops did decline upon many just reasons this Assembly of Covenanters which are at length expressed in their declinature yet if that the Assemblie had been constituted according to the present established order of the Church they would never have declined from the same The last corruptions they remark in the Bishops as they were then in Scotland is that they did not instruct their people in Gods Word which is a corruption indeed but not essentiall to the office of a Bishop or allowed by a Law if any omit that dutie let them be censured for their personall fault it is great iniquitie to condemn the whole office as unlawfull in it self for the personall fault of one or two But I perceive that the chief thing which was then condemned in Episcopacie is that they did not receive their Commission to exercise their charge from the Church or that every Minister had not his voyce in the Nomination or Election of Bishops but that they were nominated and presented by the King elected by those of the Chapton only and consecrated by other Bishops and this was the thing which moved them â—o despitefully to condemn that estate in the constitution whereof every one of them had not a hand and in all their proceedings both in the book of Discipline and Acts of Assemblies it appeares that this was the chief thing they required that if they had had their Commission only from the Church or generall Assemblie they would have condescended to all other points of their function 1. In the second book of Discipline Cap. 11. they confess that albeit Pastors as pastors have not power over moe â—locks than one yet if it be given them by the Church they may exercise it lawfully 2. In the Assemblie 1575. it is agreed by both parties as we have declared that amongst the pastors one may be chosen by the Church to visite certaine bounds comprehending many particular parishes and therein to plant Ministers to suspend and depose them for reasonable causes 3. In the Assemblie at Edinburgh 1578. one of the principall petitions they make to the Regent was that none should be admitted to vote in Parliament in name of the Church excepâ— such as have Commission from the Church 4. In the second book of Discipline Cap. 11. It is said that no person under whatsoever title ought to attempt any Act in name of the Church either in Councell or Parliament having no Commission from the Church so that if that had been done we see that they acknowledge both their power and preheminence over other Pastors their charge over moe particular flocks their sitting in Councell and voting in Parliament to have been lawfull which are the principall points both of the Spirituall and temporall function of Bishops which they challenge in this Assemblie to be unlawfull If then we can shew that the Bishops have received from the Church such a Commission to exercise all these points of their office how can it be denied but they may exercise them lawfully since this is the only exception against them in these things Therefore we shall make it appear that Bishops have received from the Church this Commission 1. Christ himself who is the head of the Church having all power gave to the Apostles this Commission to exercise power and preheminence in all Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall matters over all both Pastors and people throughout the whole world 2. The Apostles who were at the beginning the representative Church gave the like Commission to Bishops over certaine bounds over the which they received Iurisdiction as Paul gave to Timothy in Ephesus and the bounds of Asia minor thereabout Commission to plant Churches to ordaine Presbyters and Deacons to have Iurisdiction and Rule over them being ordained to receive or repell accusations given in against them and by consequent to judge and correct or censure them the same Commission received Titus in the Kingdome of Creta neither can it be doubted but the rest of the Apostles gave the like Commission unto others in these Nations where they travelled to preach the Gospel who were to succeed them in the rule and Government of the Churches wherin they had not only the Name but also the office and that power of Bishops which is here called in Controversie as none can deny except those who will impudently deny all tâ—rue records of Antiquitie since all the oâ—thodox Fathers who succeeded the Apostles and lived in the same age with them doe with unanimous consent testifie the same The which Commission was derived from the Primitive Church who received it from the Apostles to those of succeeding ages confirmed by continuall practice uncontrouled for the space of fifteen hundred years by any Orthodox writers untill this last age that some of the Church of Geneva began to call it in question 3. The Commission to vote in Parliament they could not have at the beginning when there was no Christian Magistrates or Common-wealths yet so soone as Kingdomes and Common-wealths received the publik exercise of Christian Religion authorized by Laws then the Church considering that many of the Civill Laws did either directly or indirectly reflect upon Ecclesiasticall matters and Religion and that it was very expedient that Ecclesiasticall Constitutions for better obedience thereto should be strengthened by the Laws of the Kingdome they did earnestly supplicate Emperors Kings and Magistrates that some Commissioners from the Church might have place in their Soveraign Courts whereby Laws were established to further therein the cause of God and the Church and to take heed Nè Ecclesia aliquid detrimenti capiat the which supplications Christian Emperors Kings and Magistrates out of a pious zeal did grant And therefore did authorize the Bishops and Prelates to sit in their Soveraigne Courts in name of the Church this priviledge many godly and learned Prelates did injoy to the unspeakable good of the Church and advancement of Christian Religion so that it is no lesse but rather a great deal moâ—e wicked Sacriledge to rob the Church of this so profitable a priviledge than to rob her of her patrimonie and therefore no marvell though these who make no scruple in Conscience to be sacrilegious in the one be also sacrilegious in the other 4. To come neerer to our Church of Scotland it is evident by all histories that since there were Christian Princes therein the reverend Bishops did not onely rule the Ecclesiastick affaires but also had a great hand in the affaires of the Civill estate and did much good by their wise Counsell to the King the Church and whole Kingdome before Popish tyrannie had place therein and that since there were any formall Parliament in Scotland the Prelats made up the third
Estate and did represent the whole Church therein both by the consent of the Church and fundamentall Laws of the Kingdome so that to the enacting of any Law the consent of Prelates was ever thought as necessarie as any of the other two Estates And therefore since by the fundamentall Laws of this Kingdome no Act in Civill or Ecclesiasticall matters ever had the strength of a binding Law without the consent of all the three Estates whosoever will prease to suppresse the estate of Prelates doe reverse and destroy the very fundamentall Laws of the Kingdome 5. To come yet neerer to the reformed Church of Scotland at the very first reformation those who were appointed in the place of Bishops called Superintendents had by Commission from the Church as great power and preheminence over other Pastors and all the Parishes within the bounds of the charge committed to them as Bishops doe now require in their Diocese It is true the Superintendents had not vote in Parliament nor could have for why the Bishops retained still their possession in those places upon their ancient Commission often ratified in Parliament both before and after the Reformation never quarrelled by any Generall Assemblie of the Church untill that Assemblie at Edinburgh in October 1578. wherein the Bishops are required only not to vote in Parliament in name of the Church without speciall Commission thereâ—ra And a few years before to wit at the Assemblie at Ediâ—burgh 1573. the whole Iurisdiction and power of Bishops is expresly allowed by the Church with some exceptious not very materiall as we remarked before and yet there is no mention of excepting this power to vote in Parliament in name of the Church whereby they doe tacitely at the least approve this the ancient Commission of the Bishops to vote in Parliament in name of the Church Finally at the last re-establishing of Bishops Thu Commission to vote in Parliament in name of the Church was expresly given to them by the Church for first by that Assemblie at Montrosse 1600. the Church gave Commission to a certaine number of Ministers though not under the title of Bishops to have a care of the Generall affaires of the Church and to voice in Parliament in name of the Church then the generall Assemblies at Glasgoâ— and Lithgow in the year 1606. 1608. 1610. they did under the very title of Bishops receive full Commission from the Church not only to vote in Parliament but likewise to exercise their whole Iurisdiction power and and preheminence over all Pastors and people within the bounds of their Diocese and so every Bishop particularly by their election and consecration receives power to use this Commission whensoever occasion shall be offered neither is it necessary that for every severall Act they doe in name of the Church they have a new particular Commission for that effect but it is sufficient that by the consent of the Church and Estates of the Kingdome this power is annexed to the office of a Bishop for ever so that whosoever should be elected to that office should have this Commission once for all during his life time or untill by his malversation in his charge he be lawfully and legally deprived It is true indeed that the Church may adde new Articles to their Commission as times and occasions requires as is done in England and Ireland where the Convocation of the Clergie sits ever in the time of Parliament to consider upon such Articles as are thought by common consent to serve for the wee l of the Church and by them are presented to the Bishops that by their care they may receive due ratification but the turbulent behaviour of some Ministers in Scotland who scornes to have their petitions proposed orderly by the Bishops hath as yet barred the Clergie of Scotland from that priviledge Now to conclude this point since for ought we can see the only exception that the Church of Scotland hath made against any point of the function of Bishops at that time when Episcopacie was condemned as unlawfull Anno 1580. 1581. is that they had not their power and preheminence by Commission from the Church or generall Assemblie and since that exception as we have shown is now removed it is evident that those Acts of the Assemblies at Dundee 1580. and at Glasgow 1581. doe not serve to prove the Conclusion of this Assemblie and therefore are impertinently alleaged CHAP. XIIII Discussing the rest of the Acts of Assemblies here cited SInce all the rest of the Acts in the subsequent Assemblies against Bishops are grounded upon these two former Acts whereby the office of a Bishop was condemned and since we have shown in the former Chapter that they doe not serve to prove the Conclusion of this Assemblie and therefore the rest of the Acts depending thereupon must have as little strength as they so that we need not to insist in the particular discussing of every one of them yet lest it be thought that we have over past them altogether we shall remark some few particular observations upon them whereby it may be perceived that if they serve not for their purpose here yet that they serve in divers points against them First those Acts cited here concerning the presentation by the King and admission by the Presbytery of Glasgow of M. Robert Montgomerie to the office of the Archbishop of Glasgow and of M. Robert Poâ—s to be Bishop of Caithâ—es and the divers ineffectuall suits made by the Generall Assemblies to the King Councell and Parliament for advancing of their Presbyteriall Discipline and suppression of Bishops to wit those presented by the Assemblies 1580. 1581. 1587. serves against them in so farre as they declare that their violent proceedings against Bishops and for establishing of their new discipline was not allowed by the Kings Majestie and Councell and whole body of the Kingdome in Parliament all this time but directly resisted as contrary to their wills and manifest intentions whereby it is evident that neither the King nor the Councell nor the whole body of the Kingdome had any such meaning or intention as by that oath of the Covenant to abjure Episcopacie 2. Although that the King and estate suffered an Act to passe in Parliament 1592. establishing in a part their new discipline yet was it not their meaning to approve the same directly But for a pregnant reason of estate they did tollerate lesser evils that greater might be eschewed for at that time it is well known that the King and estate were mightily astonished by the late discovery of a dangerous conspiracie of sundry Noblemen of greatest power in the Kingdome by the practice of some trasâ—ieking Iesuites and Gentlemen affected to the Popish Religion such as Father Creightou father Abercromy Sir William Graham of Fentry M. George Carr and others who brought in great summes of Spanish gold and promised greater whereby those Noblemen and many others of their Faction were corrupted to betray their
Native Countrey promising by their letters and subscription of blank papers to give way and assistance to the King of Spaines Navie to enter within the bowels of the Kingdome No marvell therefore although in so perillous a time when a totall ruine both of Church and Kingdome of Policie and Religion was feared and threatned the King and estate thought it fit for eschewing the present danger to give way at that time to those new Disciplinarians suffering that Act of Parliament to passe in their favour fearing that if they should have resisted their present importunity turbulent spirits as some of them were might have made a further distraction even amongst these who adhered to the true Religion whereby an other gate might have been opened for the entrie of forraigne enemies and so the estate being thus devided should have been lesse able to resist the common enemie This was the very true reason whereby his Majestie was in a manner forced to condescend to this Act whereof they brag so much contrary to his own judgement and constant intention as is evident by that which followed for no sooner was that blast past and that Conspiracie repressed but King Iames of happie memory did set himself more earnestly than ever he did before to re-establish Episcopall government and bear down that new discipline the evils and corruptions whereof disturbing both Church and Common-wealth he perceived daily more and more 3 We must remark that this Act of Parliament 1592. was the first that ever did allow presbyteriall Government by a Law and therefore ought to be accounted the first establishment thereof in the Kingdome of Scotland whereby it appears how short a continuance it had in this Church and how soone it became loathsome to all estates of persons Spuria putamina non agunt altas radices For not full eight years after this in the Assemblie at Montrosse 1600. it received a great blow and Episcopacie was by one step more advanced wherein it was concluded that a certaine number of ministers who were nominated by the King should supply the place of Bishops by voycing in Parliament in name of the Church and to have a care of the generall affaires thereof under the name of Commissioners whose power was inlarged by that Assembly at Haliruâ—house 1602. and Bishops thereafter under their own proper title were established in their full power and Iurisdiction by the generall Assemblies of the Church 1606. 1608. 1610. solemnly ratified by consent of the three Estates in Parliament 1612. 4. We cannot omit that Act cited out of the Assemblie March 1589. wherein it is said for asmuch as the Neighbour Kirk in England is understood to be heavily troubled for maintaining of the true Discipline and Government whose griefes ought to move us therefore the Presbyterie of Edinburgh was ordained to comfort the said Church in the said matter I cannot conceive whom they call The Church of England here except it be some few Schismaticks who a little before this time were challenged before the Starre-chamber for disturbing the Church and Kingdome by promoting unto the people a new forme of Discipline different in many points both from the Scottish Discipline and that of Geneva who because they did obstinately refuse to answere to some interrogatories proposed to them by the Councell of England were committed to prison of which number was one Wigintone who stirred up three fanaticall fellows Edmund Coppinger William Hacket and Henry Arthington to labour for their relief perswading them that they were extraordinarily called thereto Hacket being mightily possessed by this humour did give out that Christ was descended from heaven with his fan in his hand and had called him extraordinarily to purge both Church and Common-wealth he sent out before him his two principall Prophets Coppinger and Arthington to whom he assigned a diverse charge that Coppinger should offer grace and mercie to the people if they would beleeve and follow him for the relief of the faithfull servants of God and Arthingtone should denounce Gods wrath and eternall damnation to unbeleevers who would not adhere to them those two being sent by Hacket came to the streets of London and did preach according to their charge railing impudently against the Queen and Councell declaring openly that she was fallen from her right to the Crowne and that Hacket was their King whom they ought to obey being placed in Christs stead whereby they moved great multitudes of the Common people to follow them but before they could effectuate their purpose they were prevented by certaine of the Councell sent by the Queen who apprehended them in the very Act at Cheapside the 16. of Iuly 1591. for the which cause Hacket was executed as a Traitor Coppinger killed himself in prison and Arthington repenting him of his madnesse did confesse their whole proceedings in whose Confession it was declared that they had received an incouragement to this attempt from Scotland by the means of one Penry who having been a certaine space a Preacher in Scotland waâ— returned a little before this enterprise and was lurking then in the City of London or in some place thereabouts this Penry was chiefly the man who procured these consolatorie letters from the Assembly to his Companions to the great disgrace of the Church of Scotland as having given encouragement to further such a treasonable attempt and apparantly that letter written from Scotland by one Gibson to Coppinger was one of these consolatorie letters ordained by the Assemblie to be written to them wherein he saith The best of our Ministers are most carefull of your estate and have sent for that effect a Preacher of our Church to wit Penry this last sommer 1590. of purpose to conferre with the best affected Ministers of your Church to lay down a plot how our Church might best travell for â—our relief I have heard some of the wisest and gravest of the Ministrie of Scotland at that time who did heavily regrate that the Church of Scotland was mightily abused by this Penry who although he was for a time in great estimation amongst the people and some of the chief Ministers likewise yet they found him at last an arrant Kâ—ave I am sorry that the Brethren of this Assemblie have been so inconsiderate as to refricare banâ— scabieâ— in calling to remembrance again that opproâ—ric of the Church of Scotland in these times as having had two deep a hand in that attempt to stirre up a Combustion in our Neighbour Kingdome and Church but our Covenanters are so farre from being ashamed thereof as they cease not as yet to use all meanes to doe the like if they could find in England such fanaticall fellows as Hacket and Coppinger CHAP. XV Discussing the Conclusion of the Act NOw after they have set down their confused rapsody of Reasons for proving the determination of their Assembly they conclude in these Hyperbolicall termes All which and many other reasons being publikly read and particularly at great length