the Exercile of his Ministrie And that the Presbytrie of Dalkeith And others havers of the Lybels given in against him and Depositions of the Witnesses may make the same patent to him as Law appoints That he may know what is lybelled or may seem to be proven to the effect he may the better clear himself of the samen which is nothing but false lyes and calumnies And whereof several of the Presbyterian Ministers who have seen the Lybels and Depositions Affirm that there is nothing proven But the dancing about the Bon-Fire which is not only clearly redargued to be false as said is there being no Bonfires either on the foresaid day nor for several moneths either before or after But likewise if the persons who have deponed it were known and re-examined it will be found they have deponed falsly And that they have been dealt with so to Depone And that this Falshood may not be discovered not only are the Depositions kept up contrary to express Law and Act of Parliament But likewise no notice can be gotten who were the persons who have deponed it that they may be insisted against Whereas it is pretended That the Lords of their Majesties Privy Council are not Judges competent to the sentences of Ecclesiastick Courts and that as they cannot put in Ministers in Churches so they cannot meddle with sentences of Depositions It is answered 1 mo That be the 1 Act 8 Parl Ja 6 It is Statute and Ordained That his Majestie and Council shall be Judges competent To all persons Spiritual and Temporal in all matters And to pretend that the Council is not Judge competent to sentences of Ecclesiastick Courts is no other then to affirm That these Courts have an Arbitrary power and may do wrong at their pleasure without Remeed or control For it is evident That Mr. Heriot is most unjustly pursued and Deposed And it is also evident that if it be not Redressed be the Council he will never be Restored be those Ministers who have dealt so unjustly with him And whereas it is alledged That as the Council cannot put in Ministers so they cannot meddle with sentences of Deposition It is answered That the Council has not the power of Admission and Ordination of Ministers But if a Minister having a lawful Call the Presbyterie should refuse to Admit and Ordain him albeit they have nothing to object against him upon Application to the Council or Session Letters will be direct to Charge the Presbyterie to Admit and Ordain him but multo magis in this case where a Minister is Deposed from his Ministrie as likewise from his Benefice which is his Livelyhood and Maintenance And yet most unjustly and without Ground or Reason The Council is most proper Judge for Restoring him against the foresaid Oppression Injurie and Unjust Sentence And for a further evidence of this unjust Sentence it is Humbly desired that the Lords of Their Majesties Privy Council will be pleased to take notice That in the first Lybel there are many Articles which are not Relevant And it is said that there is none of them proven but the Dancing about the Bonfire And yet the Presbytery by their Sentence found the Lybel Relevant and Proven which must be understood as to the hail Articles of the Lybel complexlie then which there is nothing more false as will appear by the Lybels and Depositions if they were produced And yet thereupon Mr Heriot is first suspended be the Presbytery and referred be them to the General Assembly for further Censure as if great Immorralities in Life and Errours in Doctine had been proven against him And the Synod to which the Assembly remitted him following the steps of the Presbytery deposed him Now when Presbytery and Synod have acted thus contrary to express Law and have done open and manifest Unjustice and whereof all that heard of it are convinced and sensible And having stated themselves Parties against him there can be no Remedie expected from the said Unjustice Injury and Oppression unless the Lords of Their Majesties Privy Council interpose their Authority If it be alledged That be the late Act of Parliament The Act of Supremacy in Church matters is Rescinded It is Answered That the Act of Parliament 1669 is Rescinded which extended the Supremacy to the Ordering and Disposal of the External Government and Policy of the Church and to the Enacting of Constitutions Acts and Orders in the Church But the foresaid Act of K Ja 6 his 8 Parliament is not Rescinded which is only as to the Judging of Ecclesiastick Persons in matters complained upon And which power is inherent to the Crown otherwayes there should be Regnum in Regno And Church Judicatories should have Arbitrary power without Redress or Control as said is In Regard whereof The Lords of Their MAJESTIES Privy Council are Judge Competent to this Injurie Vnjustice and Oppression And the Desire of the Petitions ought to be Granted A short Relation of the Presbytery of Dalkeith their procedure in Reference to the Sentencing of Mr. Alexander Heriot and their planting of the Congregation of Dalkeith IT is not to be doubted but that a late Pamphlet called An Information for Mr. Alexander Heriot Designed Minister at Dalkeith hath spread through a great part of this Kingdom and it may perhaps be thought strange that none of the Members either of the Presbytery of Dalkeith or Synod of Louthian and Tweddale have appeared to vindicate the Innocency of these Judicatories and to wipe off the soul Aspersions cast upon them by that defamatory Paper But the truth is an Answer to that Paper was prepared about four Moneths ago and the Reason why the publication thereof was at that time delayed was because it was judged convenient to know the mind of the Synod whose integrity was also questioned and reproached by the Informer before any Answer to that Paper should be emitted But the Synod sitting in May last and judging the Calumnies of that Paper obvious enough declined to trouble themselves with any review thereof as a thing not worthy of their time But some of the Synod put it in the hands of a Person whose acquaintance with the process of Mr. Heriot qualified him to descry the Informers lies thereanent And again this Person being diverted with a throng of business till the Plantation of the Kirk of Dalkeith was near an Issue it was thought expedient still to forebear the Answer of that Paper till the Answerer might be able to give a joynt view of the process of Mr. Heriot and of the method taken for the settlement of the Paroch of Dalkeith with a qualifyed Minister Which being now brought to an happy Period it seems high time after so long forbearance to undeceive all that are willing to know the truth and to give in the first place a compendious but distinct account of the Process and then refell the Informers mis-representation of the same only let this be premitted that the reason why
the foresaid Procedure of the Presbytery against him and having craved that the Depositions of the Witnesses might be read before him and that he might have a Coppy of the Additional Lybel which he had never seen and that conform to the Act of Parliament the Depositions of the Witnesses might be made patent to him to the end that he might have a Copy thereof to the effect he might the better clear himself from any thing that may seem to be deponed against him yet notwithstanding thereof and contrare to Law the same was also refused by the Synod and undoubtedly for this Reason That the Probation was weak and might not abide the Light nor Trial for Veritas non quaerit Angulos Tertio The said Mr. Alexander having represented to the Synod That he was informed that one of the Articles deponed against him was That he should have danced about a Bonfire the 14 of October 1688. And that the same was the only Article proven against him which he instantly redargued for the said 14 day of October 1688 fell upon a Sunday and that the Witnesses and hail Inhabitants of Dalkeith cannot but declare that there was never Bonfires at Dalkeith upon a Sunday so that they deponed falsly And the Dancing about a Bonfire being so publick an Act that not only the Witnesses that have deponed it but likewayes many others would have seen it and all the Inhabitants of Dalkeith would have heard of it if it had been true Yet notwithstanding thereof all the Neighbours to that Bonfire and hail Inhabitants of Dalkeith will declare and depone that they neither saw nor heard of their Minister dancing at that or any other Bonfire yet notwithstanding of that clear Conviction and redarguing of that Article the Synod had no regard thereto affirming that there was no help for it now it being so deponed which is no other thing than as if they had said that they were not concerned thô it were false for it was so deponed and which is so consequential to a clear and positive Redarguing and Improbation of the Article and Probation thereof that the prejudice and design of the Synod to proceed against the said Mr. Alexander upon whatever was alledged althô without probation or upon a Redargued Probation is evidently manifest Quarto The said Mr. Alexander represented to the Synod that he bad formerly Appealled from the Presbytry and that it was but too evident from what is above narrated that they were his Party And which was farther demonstrate from this That the said Presbytery and Alexander Calderwood did in face of the Synod not only interrupt the said Mr. Alexander when he was speaking but likewayes debated and reasoned against him as Parties so that it could not but be expected but that they would do more when he was removed out of the Synod and therefore the said Mr. Alexander declined the Presbytery and Alexander Calderwood as his Judges and craved that they might not sit to judge him yet notwithstanding thereof against all Law and Justice they were not removed Quinto Several Members of the Synod interrupted the said Mr. Alexander while he was Vindicating himself in the face of the Synod and craving a sight of the Additional Lybel and Deposition of the Witnesses And cryed out That the same should not be granted to him as if every one of them had had a Decisive Voice and which is without Example in any Judicatory for any of the Judges to interrupt the Defenders speaking and to cry out their Opinion or rather Sentence before the Defender be removed And which openly discovers their Prejudice Design and Resolution of proceeding against the said Mr. Alexander altho' without just cause Sexto The Prejudice and Design of the Synods proceeding against the said Mr. Alexander on the said lame weak and null probation is evident in so far as several Members of their Number did speak and deal with him to dimitt or that otherwayes they would depose him And there is no thing more certain than that they would never have Dealt with him to dimitt if the Probation against him had been good Their malice to the Regular Clergie being such as that they would rather Depose them for Immoralities and Errors in Doctrine to Publish them than to suffer them to dimit and get off without staine when they are guilty of the same But Mr. Alexander being Conscious of his own Innocency refused to Demit but rather to suffer their Extremity from which he hoped GOD in his good time would Vindicate him And therefore it being evident from the Grounds forsaid that the Synod has behaved themselves most partially and against all Law and Form The said Mr. Alexander does therefore Protest against the Synods further Proceeding in the said Matter and appeals from them and from any sentence they shall give therein to the next General Assemblie And to their MAJESTIES Protection for Justice and Relief in the mean time And Protests That the said Lybels and Witnesses Depositions taken thereupon may be preserved and not put out of the way That so the same and not Copies thereof may be produced to the next General Assembly Or to any their Majesties shall be pleased out of their Royal Authority to appoint to consider the same And that as the said Mr. Alexander will publish and disperse his Appeal and his Answers to the first Lybel Which he only did see for his own Vindication from any sentence that shall follow thereupon So he expects and earnestly Desires that the said Synod may Print both the Lybels against him and Depositions taken thereupon for vindication of their Justice if they can conceive they have done right But which Mr. Alexander hopes will rather vindicate his Innocency And further Mr. Alexander Craves and Protests That this his Appeal may be insert in the Books of the Synod Notwithstanding of the Appeals foresaid the Synod proceeded and Deposed the said Mr. Alexander from his Ministrie And thereupon the Eldership of the Parish was invaded and some few severals of them scarce worth to be noticed as Residenters have usurped the power of electing Elders and have elected many moe than the number formerly used purposely as they think to make the greater Figure altho but of the most inconsiderable of the Paroch And of Design to Call Impose and Obtrude a Minister upon the Rest against their will contrary to the Laws of Charitie Practices of Christian Churches and profession of Presbyterians Notwithstanding that the said Mr. Alexander Heriot his Appeal does preserve his Right and keeps all in statu quo the time of the Appeal while it be discust Whereupon not only the said Mr. Alexander Heriot but likewise the Heritors and Parishioners of Dalkeith have given in a Petition to the Lords of their Majesties most Honourable Privy Council That they may be pleased to discharge the Calling of a Minister while the Appeal be discust And that in the mean time he may be restored to
the names of the Witnesses are not exprest the Reader will find in the Answer to the Information To begin with the Process then the Reader may remember that the Act of Parliament Restoring Presbyterial Government Authorized the General Meeting of Ministers and Elders to Purge the Church of Ministers that were Insufficient or Scandalous c. Either by themselves or such as they should appoint Whereupon the General Meeting enjoyned Synods and Presbyteries to receive Lybels against any Incumbent within their respective Bounds and to call for Assistants from Neighbouring Presbyteries or Synods to concurr with them in judging the same In complyance wherewith when the Presbytery of Dalkeith received any Information against any of the late Conformists within their Bounds they did not proceed without the assistance of some from the Presbyteries of Edinburgh and Haddingtoun and particularly when the Process of Mr. Heriot was led before them which proceeded thus Upon the 7 th of August 1690. An Information or Lybel was given to the Presbytery against Mr. Alexander Heriot then Incumbent at Dalkeith which being judged Relevant Citation was appointed to be given him to compear against that day eight dayes at which day Mr. Alexander Heriot did personally compear heard his Lybel read received a double thereof and was granted a competent time to answer it viz. till the 28 th day of the said moneth of August unto which day he was summoned apud Acta to compear again and give in his answers But on that day the Visitation consisting of the Presbytery of Dalkeith and assistance from the Presbyteries of Haddingtoun and Edinburgh being constitute and Mr. Heriot Legally called he did not personally compear but for him appeared one Mr. James Hamiltoun alledging a Commission from Mr. Alexander Heriot to compear in his name and desiring to know who were his Accusers that they might subcribe his Lybel The Copy of Mr. Hamiltouns Commission or procuratory follows which the Reader is desired to consider because that Mr. Heriot in his Information and in his Appeal from the Synod calls it an Appeal from the Presbytery and improves it under this Character The Copy of Mr Heriots Factory and Declinatour I Mr Alexander Heriot Minister at Dalkeith do by thir presents nominate and constitute Mr James Hamiltoun Writer at Edinburgh to be Procurator for me to the effect underwritten giving and committing to him full power in my name to compear before the Ministers of this Meeting within the Presbytery of Dalkeith to whom there is a Lybel given in against me and to crave that the Accusers may be condescended upon and subcribe the Lybel in regard the Heretors and Parishioners in whose name it is pretended to be given in disowns the same and to protest that before the same be subscribed it ought not to be respected and in regard I conceive that these Ministers are not the Presbytery of Dalkeith and that by the Act of Parliament they have no judicative Power while it be given them by the General Assembly which is to be in October next therefore to protest and declare that any compearance made herein shall not import an acknowledgment of their pretended Judicatory and Jurisdiction which I hereby disown and disclaime but that the said compearance was and is to know the Lybel and Lybellers that I may vindicate my self from the false Calumnies and Accusations therein contained And upon the hail premisses take Instruments in the Hands of an Notar. In witness whereof their presents are subcribed with my own Hand the twenty eight of August 1690 Years Heriot The Presbytery and assistance having considered this Paper wherein Mr. Heriot does decline the Presbytery in most contemptible Expressions thought it not proper to Debate with Mr. James Hamiltoun in Causa nor yet to admit of any Procuratory nor of Accusers or any under that Character to subscribe the Information or Lybel and also considering that Mr. Heriot did not compear personally as he was obliged thought fit forthwith to proceed to the leading of Witnesses for though the Declinator yielded sufficient ground of Censure yet to prevent all Clamours it was thought expedient to try the truth of the Lybel The Officer having been appointed to cite Witnesses gave in his Executions which being read the Witnesses were called and all who compeared after invocating the Name of God were Sworn and purged of malice and partial Counsel and being severally examined the Presbytery and their assistants collated their Depositions and applying them to the several Articles of the Lybel they found several Articles duely proven as follows 1. Extravagant Lightness in Dancing about a Bon-fire publickly on the street with Pipe and Drum and Drinking an Health upon his Knees For instructing this Article three witnesses being examined in their Depositions they concurr That they saw Mr. Alexander Heriot dance about a Bonfire in the publick Streets of Dalkeith with Pipe and Drum and drink an Health upon his Knees What is alledged by the informer against this Article and to invalidate the testimonies of the Witnesses is afterwards considered and answered 2. Ordinary and usual prophaning of the Lords Table by admitting of Scandalous persons and such as were notourly prophane in their Lives As habitual Drunkards Swearers and the like and several instances given hereof To this Article deponed six Witnesses all concurring that Mr. Alexander Heriot admitted to the Lords Table Scandalous persons and two condescend upon the instance of John Dickson and four whereof two are Elders pitched upon Andrew Nivil besides other Scandalous persons named This Article alone being thus fully proven makes Mr. Heriot deserve the Sentence of Deposition especially because there is an Act of the General Assembly Anno. 1598 Ratified by the Assem Anno 1638. for deposing such prophaners of the Lords Table 3. His debauching the consciences of his Parishioners by pressing and threatning them upon highest pains to take many Oaths contrary to their Light Touching this Article two Witnesses agreed that upon the Sabbath immediatly preceeding the day that the Oath of Abjuration was tendered Mr. Alexander Heriot did threaten all with pain of death that should refuse it Four concurred in this that Mr. Heriot pressed his Parishioners to swear several Oaths whereof one was Sinful and Illegal as the Oath that they should not lift Arms against the King nor any Commissionate by Him upon any pretext whatsomever Others were captious as who and how many had been lodged by them since November preceeding and the like Others deponed that he threatned them with imprisonment in case they refused to Swear 4. His Scandalous and Impudent Railing from the Pulpit upon particular persons of Highest note as the late Duke of Monmouth the late East of Argyle and the Earle of Melvill his Majesties High Commissioner and Others Seven or Eight Witnesses agree in this that from the Pulpit in the year Eightie three Mr. Alexander Heriot Railed against Monmouth Argyle and Melvil calling one of them a Bloody Absalon another
Copy of it and exclaimes wickedly against the Presbytery for this and their procedure thereupon and in the bitterness of his Spirit dictates to the World his Censure of it in these Words than all which saith he there can be nothing in Judicial procedures more partial pernicious and unjust Ans Herein he shews more ignorance and malice than either wit or honesty And if he would be sober and calmly compose himself to hear truth and reason I would tell him that he was still under citation to the Presbytery till he declined them and after that to what purpose should he have been cited to appear before them whose Authority he had simply declined Besides he may know if he please that there was no Addition made to the Lybel after that Diet of the Presbytery unto which he was cited apud Acta by the Moderator in face of the Presbytery And if he had appeared at that Diet to which he was cited he had got the Copy of that Additional Lybel as well as he got of the former and time also to prepare and give in his Answers to it So that he has no reason to complain of the want of a Copy of any Addition that then was made for he would no more bear from nor meddle with the Presbytery but declined them before they did any thing in his affair that he could or did complain of as appears by the Declinature it self 10. He saith with an admirable either ignorance or impudence that he appealed from the Presbytery to the General Assembly Doubtless the mans own Conscience cannot but tell him that there was not the least hint of any such thing There was indeed a pretended Factory to one Mr. James Hamiltoun presented to the Presbytery a true Copy whereof is herewith Printed supra in the Narrative which bears a Declinature of the Presbyteries Jurisdiction but not the least shew of an Appeal So that both malice and weakness appear in his thus making lies his refuge In this his Declinature he would not so much as call them the Presbytery but in contempt the Ministers met at Dalkeith and disclaimed their Authority as incompetent Judges of him forsooth yea expresly denies them to be the Presbytery of Dalkeith And thus he did stubbornly and proudly trample upon both the constitution and Government of this Church and also the Civil Authority of King and Parliament establishing it And for this his Contumacy the Presbytery might well have forthwith deposed him and that by Law and according to their duty but to evite the shew or appearance and Clamours of Rigidity they proceeded to the process It may also here be observed that in this his declinature he declines the Ministers he should have added and Elders if his memory had been good as no Presbytery and that because they could have no Power to Act as a Presbytery till they received it from the General Assembly Which is such a piece of Non-sense as needs no confutation For who knows not that Presbyteries are established by the Law and General Assemblies made up of Delegates from them Besides that by this sort of rare reasoning Mr Heriot bewrayes both Ignorance and infidelity in the Protestant Doctrine about the Jus Divinum of Church Government and the intrinsick power of Ministers and Elders as the judicious Reader will easiely perceive at the first hearing of his Argument And after all this and much more of arrogant stubborn and obstinate carriage towards the Presbytery was it any wonder that the Presbytery declared him contumacious had they not great and Just cause so to do Could they do less Nay let the most bigot Prelatists upon a supposition of the Presbyteries Authority but consider Mr. Alexander Heriots conduct towards them and if he be a Person of any Ingenuity and Candor we might refer this unto his Determination whether or not the Presbytery had reason to declare the said Mr. Alexander contumacious Was he not evidently and eminently such And doth he not still continue and shew himself more and more such even to the Superlative degree Has he not Treated the Synod as Insolently in his Language as the Presbytery as appears from his printed Information doth he not appear to be a scornful and Stout hearted Person that is far from righteousness Doth he not utter vain knowledge and fill his Belly with the East Wind 11. But this vain man proceeds to lye also upon the late General Assembly and boldly saith that they found no contumacy in his Appeal But for Answ 1. Doth he not know that there was no such thing as an Appeal of his from the Presbytery to the General Assembly and that his appearing before the Assembly was upon the Summonds raised at the Instance of the Presbytery of Dalkeith to which Assembly they had referred him Hath he forgot that he appeared not there to prosecute any appeal which never was but to answer the Summonds 2. If there had been any such thing as an appeal of his from the Presbytery to the General Assembly yet it would have been Illegal and Unformal and also unjust and unreasonable because of these Rules of the Cannon Laws 1. Appellaridebet ab Inferiore Judiâ—â— gradatim non per Saltum ad Superiorem 2. Prohibetur Appellatio 1. A regularis Disciplinae correctione 2. A gravamine futuro 3. He speaks as if the Assembly had cognosced upon the Cause whereas it is well known that the Assembly did not at all enter upon the Cause but leaving it intacta integra referred it to the Synod of Louthian and Tweddale giving them full power to determine therein as they should find meet 4. Is it not pleasant here to remember that Mr. Heriot when before the General Assembly called his Paper which he sent in to the Presbytery his Declinature and passed from it yet now in this Information be again and again calls it an Appeal and owns and pleads it as such in his plea against the Presbytery and Synods How shall we understand these contradictions Must he to save others the labour of it give himself the lye It would seem that Mr. Heriot has had some more ingenuity before the General Assembly than he has elsewhere and at other times for that Paper was indeed only a Declinature and he then gave it its true name neither could he have passed from an Appeal if any such thing had been for his so doing would have imported his approbation of the Presbyteries procedure in his affair and even his passing from his Declinature imported little less However he should have remembered the known Proverb that a Lyer has need of a good Memory 12. He injuriously and falsly alledges that the Presbytery founded his contumacy upon his Appeal from them For it s referred to his own Conscience 1. If ever he appeared before the said Presbytery but once 2. If he offered directly or indirectly to make any Appeal from the Presbytery at his then compearance 3. If he did not
Appeal from them as not fit nor worthy to judge of his affair 2. We may here see what may be expected from such as Mr. Heriot when men deal freely friendly and ingenuously with them If Mr. Heriot having made his application privatly to some Members of the Synod and solicited them for their advice or if some of them did of their own accord and out of a superfluous excess of compassion and charity towards him offer such an advice it is most base uncharitable and unjust for him to construct the worst that malice can devise of their freedom with him if he had judged candidly of their Counsel he would have concluded that his Dimission was advised for his relief from the danger and probable hazard of a Sentence of Deposition But ill Doers are commonly ill Deemers 3. That these Members of the Synod said to Mr. Heriot that they would depose him if he dimitted not I utterly deny to be true for this was more than they could then well know whatever probable guess fear or foresight of it they might vent to Mr. Heriot in an officious friendly communing with him 4. Whereas Mr. Heriot adds for confirmation of this his last Reason of Appeal these confident and empty words and there is nothing more certain than that they would never have dealt with him to dimitt if the probation against him had been good I answer that there is nothing more uncertain and if I should say there is nothing more false I would have come nearer the truth than he has in this point 5. To prove what he had last said he adds these charitable words Their malice to the Regular Clergy being such as that they would rather depose them for Immoralities and Errours in Doctrine to publish them than to suffer them to dimitt c. But for answer 1. It is a malicious Alledgance and it will be time enough for me or any man else to believe it when he proves it which I know is impossible for him to do 2. When or where were any of these Irregular Men whom he miscalls the Regular Clergy hindered to dimitt And who can hinder them to dimitt if they please 3. He hints here that when any of them are deposed for immoralities and Errours in Doctrine It is done out of malice and consequently not out of Zeal for the Glory of God and conscience of that great duty of purging the Church of Christ from that great and Soul-destroying plague of a corrupt Scandalous Worldly Carnal Lifeless Ministry but there is a day coming when Sinners must give an account of such hard Speeches As for what he adds to the sixth Reason of his Appeal viz. attesting his consciousness of his own Innocency his hoping that God will vindicate him his renewing his protestation against and Appeal from the Synod c. These things might well have been spared and need no other answer than what is suggested to every mans Conscience from the General Rules of Christian Charity Again in the close of that Section he makes a clamour about the additional Lybel and Depositions of the Witnesses and dictates several things to the Synod about the business which he might have spared the Synod know their duty and need none of his advice till he grow wiser however he needs not fear that the Principal Copies of the Depositions of the Witnesses shall be put out of the way they will according to his desire be preserved and not put out of the way but produced at the next General Assembly if need be 20. To return to his Information he complains that notwithstanding of the foresaid Appeals he should have said Appeal for there is but one of them the Synod proceeded and deposed him from his Ministry Ans 1. I suppose the man may know that an Appeal is not enough to sist and stop procedure to a Sentence otherwise Judicatories would never be rid of them and the most notoriously guilty would not spare to Appeal again and again if they could thereby gain but a small delay of their Sentence 2. He might also have known that he had no place to appeal from that Synod who were in his cause cloathed with the power of the General Assembly and Acted as their Delegats as was formerly said 3. He is grosly mistaken in his saying that his Appeal does preserve his right and keep all in Statu quo the time of the Appeal while it be discust Indeed if he had had place to Appeal and his Appeal had proceeded upon plausible grounds it would give him access to another hearing of his Cause before the Superior Judicatory to which he had Appealed but it doth not in the mean time stop all further procedure of the Inferior Judicatory nor keep all things in reference to him in statu quo prius as he imagines Especially when the case in question is sufficiently clear for then the Inferior Judicatories proceed and Act as they will be answerable to the Superior But when the Case is Dark Dubious and Difficult it is the wisdome of the Inferior Judicatory to forbear further procedure after an Appeal Yet if every Appeal were sufficient to sift the further procedure of inferior Judicatories I am confident that the most Scandalous Person in all Scotland who bears the name of a Minister would not be deposed except by a General Assembly 21. He complains that the Eldership of the Parish was invaded and some few severals of them scarce worth to be noticed as Residenters have usurped the power of Elcting Elders and have elected many moe than the number formerly used purposely as they think to make the greater figure although but of the most inconsiderable of the Paroch and of design to call impose and obtrude a Minister upon the rest against their will contrary to the Laws of Charity practices of Christian Churches and profession of Presbyterians Answer 1 How like is this man to him of whom it is said As for all his Enemies he puffeth at them He still speaks contemptibly of his opposites and of every thing that doth not please him Projicit ampullas sesquipedalta Verba and seing he doth not keep himself Intra moderamen inculpatae Tutelae he must blame himself if his Antogonist answer him sometimes according to his Folly Why should he here and elsewhere through his Paper Rant and Exclaime against the Presbyterians as if he were still dancing about the Bonefire For tho' they have been long and often as the Deaf that heard not and as the Dumb in whose mouth are no reproofs yet he should not think that it will be alwayes so with them especially when such as he provoke them sore to retort the bitter verity upon their unwary Adversaries 2 To come more close to the matter in hand I say as to the alledged invasion of the Eldership that where there is no possession there can be no invasion and Mr. Heriot had no Eldership For the Ruling Elder is a Church-Officer
disowned in the Prelatick Government which owns no other Officers than these Patriarchs Primates Metropolitans Arch-Bishops Bishops Arch-Deans Deans Prebends Rectors Vicars Priests Deacons Curats Church-Wardens Sides-Men Sextons and the rest of the Apocriphal Tribe of Mr. Heriots Regular Clergy which he again and again talks of in his Information And I needed not to have omitted the Pope for he belongs to the same Tribe and diverse of the Prelatick Protestants do own him as the first Bishop that is to say the Head of the Clan And for my part I am content that all go together as birds of the same Feather 3 As to the alledged inconsiderableness of these Elders chosen by the more regular party in Dalkeith they are nothing inferior to Mr. Heriots nominal Elders in any thing that is good and considerable And for their number they exceed not what they were wont to be in times of Reformation 4. As for their design to obtrude a Minister upon the Parish contrary to the profession of Presbyterians c. Ans 1· Is it not pleasant to see Mr. Heriot teaching Presbyterians their own Principles and pleading for them Who can but laugh at it especially if they consider how ill he has learned either his own or theirs as we have seen Supra 2. The Prelatick principles and practices are in this thing too well know to be so soon forgotten And Mr. Heriot seeming to plead for the power of Ruling Elders and the liberty of the Parish in choosing and calling a Minister shews him to be no true Prelatist and consequently neither good Fish nor Flesh. It may be he will say that this was but his Argumentum ad Hominem But then let him take the Answer here given both ad hominem ad rem that his Argument is really ad neutrum 3. It is also well known that Presbyterians deny no member of the Congregation liberty to object against the Intrant and if their objections bear weight and be found just and relevant they are regarded if not rejected And if this course had been observed all alongst it may be questioned whether Mr. Heriot would have got entrance there 4. It may very easily and rationally be supposed that the present Eldership of Dalkeith with the advice and concurrence of the Presbytery when needed and desired may have as good skill of choosing a fit Minister as Mr Heriot and his Party 22. Mr. Heriot not being content with all the insolent Language and usage he has given to the Church Judicatories goes yet farther and ventures upon an untroden Path that he may rid himself of all Church Judicatories and by a Salius quite extra oleas betakes himself to the Lords of their Majesties most Honourable privy Council and supplicates them upon the matter utterly to overthrowthe Government of the Church and the Laws establishing it and to take upon them to judge and pass definitive Sentences in causes meerly Ecclesiastick For he and his Party have petitioned their Lordships to discharge the calling of a Minister while the Appeal be discust and that in the mean time he may be restored to the exercise of his Ministry c. Answer 1. By this trick of Mr. Heriot's if it pass into an approven example and precedent he has cut out abundance of new work for the Honourable Lords of Council I may say for all the dayes of the year not excepting even these dayes which Mr. Heriot calls Sundayes But their Lordships are wise enough to foresee what a vast deal of their precious time it would require to concert and adjust all these differences that arise through the Kingdome about the settling and unsettling of Ministers I suppose their Lordships would soon wearie of it and truly Mr. Heriot in his betaking himself unto their Lordships seems not to have been sufficiently sensible of the greatness of their work otherwise but it is like Mr. Heriot thinks himself and his concern so considerable that it deserves time and place amongst the most weighty affairs of the Kingdom and therefore he puts their Lordships in minde that he is not only deposed from his Ministry but likwise from his Benefice which is his Livelyhood and Maintenance and herein tandem aliquando he speaks ingenuously and brings forth the great Gravamen and quarrel which has occasioned all the clamour and noise we have heard Oh it is the grand lose of his Benefice Livleyhood and Maintinence Quis taliu fando temperet a Lachrymis But who lamented the case when several hundreds of a better character were for smaller faults turned out of their Livelyhoods Surely none of his party 3. This device of Mr. Heriots seems to aim at and tend unto nothing less in some mens apprehension at least than the overthrow of the Civil Government it self for upon the matter he supplicates the Council to invade the late Claim of Right and bring back again that Supremacy which the Convention of Estates claimed to be abrogated as one the grievances of the Nation And in prosecution of this wicked design he cites an antiquated and abrogated Act of Parliament of which more anon and suggests falsly and ignorantly that by the Churches enjoying her wonted and just liberties and priviledges there would be Regnum in Regno and a liberty for the Church to do wrong at her pleasure without controle But we may easily know whose heifer he plougheth with here this is but a new towt in an old horn our worthy Ancestors have solidly and learnedly answered and anticipated these suggestions and because their Testimony and judgment may perhaps have but little weight with Mr. Heriot I would minde him of the Judgement and practice of some of his more sound and honest Brethren and Fathers viz. Those seven Prelates who were put in the Tower of London in the time of the late King James for their Legal adherence unto and asserting of the Churches power and priviledge and that in a strain far contrary to this of Mr. Heriots and it were easie to adduce other instances of more learned and sound men of the prelatical way than Mr. Heriot as to this head of Church-power But I suppose it is needless neither are the Honourable Lords of their Majesties Council so easily imposed upon as to be cheated by such a silly Cavil as this which Mr. Heriot here suggests for they know that Church-Officers do not deny nor refuse the Allegiance of Subjects nor does their power reach mens persons further than what is necessary for suppressing of wickedness and Scandal which Mr. Heriot and his Advocats seem to reckon a doing of wrong without controle nor does the Ecclesiastick power claimed and exerced by Presbyterians reach mens properties any way at all 4 What if there be the hand of some Joab in this contrivance of disturbing the Honourable Privy Council with a business of this nature What if some greater Head-piece than Mr. Heriot has hood-winked him and put him upon this desperate Course and that on purpose