THE CASE OF THE Afflicted Clergy I Now proceed to examine another of the Pamphlets by which these of the Episcopal Clergy who hate and malign the Presbyterians do load them with reproaches and aggravate their own sufferings beyond all the bounds of Modesty and Truth Its Title is The Case of the present afflicted Clergy in Scotland truely represented Thus we are Treated by Men of a restless Temper who are imbittered in their Spirits by what inconveniency they are fallen into from the Ease and Dominion over their Brethren that they lately had One Book after another we are Lashed with If they would speak Truth and exercise Reason rather than express Rage and Fury we would bear it and clear our selves in the Consciences of all impartial Men. But we must be content to take things as they are and defend the truth and our selves from these assaults that they think fit to make of whatever sort they be Before I come to the Book it self I shall a little consider the Preface He commendeth the Moderation and Integrity of the Author and indeed it was needful For none living could gather either of these two good qualities from this Pamphlet He telleth us of the design of that Book To procure pity from the most Charitable Church of England a begging design as I marked on the other Pamphlet That Men may consider the Fatal Consequences of Papal Supremacy in a Protestant Kirk If he would have his words understood or believed be should shew us wherein such a Supremacy is exercised But railing doth best in general Terms It is also That the Church of England should bethink themselves how to quench the Flames lest it destroy themselves Thus they sow Discord among Brethren and animate England to concern themselves in the Affairs of our Church when we do not meddle in their matters He will have all Scots Presbyterians to be Persecutors and chargeth them with thinking that they do God good service when they kill Bishops Which Facts that he aimeth at the Generality of Presbyterians did abhor as much as he can do This is an early test of the Moderation and Integrity that we are to expect from this piece He further proveth our Persecution by citing some passages out of B. Burnet Whom being a party we are not to admit as a witness against us Yet we acknowledge in his Citations the truth of some rigour that was used in these times of Broils and Contentions which Presbyterians do not Generally allow If we would recriminate we could lessen these excesses almost to nothing by narrating the Barbarity used in Scotland by his party against us But I rather wish that both may study Sobriety and Moderation than defend or practise over again what hath been amiss I commend what followeth His attempting to narrow the differences that are between Presbyterians and Episcopal Men in Scotland In Doctrine we are professedly one but really there is a party among them who differ from us especially about the Arminian points In Worship the difference is very small Only contrary to his design he wideneth it when he falsly saith that some in time of Prayer uncover their heads but by halves Was ever this approved by Presbyterians What he imputeth to us of fulsome Expressions and vain Repetitions is a Calumny if there be some on our side there are more on his who through ignorance or unseriousness may be charged with this It is also false that at Baptism we bind the parties to the solemn League and Covenant May be some might do it in a time when we had no Government but it is thought fit among us to make the Word of God the standard of what we believe and bind our selves to practise § 2. He essayeth to make a parallel also betwixt our and their Discipline but in that he is not so happy For tho' we deny not that they have something that looketh like Parochial Discipline And also the name of Presbyteries yet they have but a shadow of both For not only all that power that any of their pretended Judicatories exercise is derived from the Bishop But the exercise of it dependeth on him and he can supersede it when he pleaseth Which if any of them should deny I can prove by two Instances in one Presbytery Viz. That of Chirnside One for habitual Drunkenness on the Sabbath day being cited before the Session and for disobedience to them being cited before the Presbytery while they were managing the process a prohibition was procured from the Bishop of Edinburgh which stopt the process and the Man Drank on in defiance of both Presbytery and Session Another accused for living with a Woman as his Wife to whom he was never Married and being processed by the same steps as the former by a prohibition from the same Bishop the Presbytery desisted and the parties continued in their former course of Life And yet this Prefacer hath the Forehead to say that their Discipline is the same with that of Geneva and I believe his party will give him little thanks for the condescentions he hath here made as we dislike them because not true nor ingenuous But we know the design of such pretended moderation it is to load the Presbyterians with the guilt of causless Schism as appeareth in the sequel of his Discourse But when they debate with us about the difference betwixt a Presbyter and Bishop they speak in another strain It is also false that they have Elders who are no Ministers these among them who are more ingenuous will not allow them that name much less do they give them the Power of Ruling Elders or own in them the same Authoritative and decisive Power as the Ministers have I know no other design in keeping up Sessions and Presbyteries in Scotland but that the people who have since the Reformation been used to Presbyterian Government and can comply willingly to no other Church way may be deceived with the shadow of it when the thing is cunningly taken away He saith that in Synods all things are carried by plurality of Votes It is so indeed when the Bishop pleaseth but dare they Vote any thing or can any thing be carried by their Authority without his Lordships consent I think none of them will affirm this He confesseth the Bishop hath the power of Ordination in him tho' he useth to take the consent of the Brethren of the Presbytery along with him that this is always to be done he affirmeth but I am sure it is not the Principle of Episcopal Men All this considered let any judge whether he speaketh truth when he saith that the Bishop is but a constant Moderator A Moderator hath no Power more than the least of the Meeting hath only he ordereth the meeting that all may not speak at once proposeth Matters to them pronounceth as their Mouth what is the Mind of the Meeting But nothing is determined by his Authority nor are the Judicatories of the Church his
Council as Episcopal Assemblies are to the Bishop We do then maintain that there is such a difference between them and us as may justifie our not owning of the Bishops Authority nor the Authority of the Meetings that is derived from it and dependeth on it We never used such an Argument to justifie Rebellions It was not the exercising Episcopal power that caused what he so calleth but their forcing the Consciences of Men and Barbarous Persecutions whereby people were put to the utmost extremities If the Consciences of his party could plead not guilty of the Murthers and Butcheries that have happened as well as the Sober Presbyterians can who had no interest in them but to Lament them and the occasions of them it were well for them If Barbarities be committed now against them we defend them not nor are they chargeable on the Presbyterians but on some few whom their Persecution hath enraged He telleth us of more Histories of the Clergies Sufferings to come out Our Work is to Examine these that now he is pleased to offer If he prove by his Collection of passages all that in his Preface he proposeth to make out by them we shall succumb in the Debate But I am sure some of them cannot be proved other things cannot infer the Consequents that he draweth from them But I will not anticipate What remains of his Preface is a renewing of his begging Address to the Church of England What they get that way we do not envy We wish indeed the Change of Episcopacy though we will take no unwarrantable course to effect even that but not the Ruine of Episcopal Men. § 3. The Book it self is odly methodized We have two leaves called the first Collection of Papers Next a Letter under the Title of the whole Book Then the first Collection of Papers begun again And so to the second third and fourth Collections But we must follow whither he thinketh fit to lead I must here refer the Reader to what I have said in Answer to the first Book and the second Letter Sect. 6. Where it is made appear that the Presbyterians are not accountable for the disorders that are said to have been acted Tho all the Stories that are told were true But because in this Pamphlet we have Attestations added to the Narratives that are brought which is not done in the other somewhat must be observed concerning that Which is that mostly they are teste meipso the Complainant is the witness which is not fair And often one of these Ministers witnesses for another and he doth him the like kindness for requital Which derogateth much from the Credibility of such Testimonies Further all of his Witnesses are the sworn Enemies of Presbyterians and in a Combination to defame them And we have from the Pamphlets now under consideration a taste of the veracity of the Men whom we have to do with If his Witnesses make no more Conscience of speaking truth than the Author or Authors of these Pamphlets do few thinking Men will be moved with what they say I come now to consider his particular Stories He beginneth with the Minister of Cumnock with whom he joineth the Minister of Auchinleck Whom ninety Armed Men forced into the Church-yard discharged them to Preach and tore their Gowns And declared that this they did not as Statesmen nor as Churchmen but by Violence and in a Military way of Reformation Ans It is Attested under the hands of George Logan of Logan William Crawfurd of Dalegles John Camphel of Horsecleugh George Camphel of Glaisknock John Beg of Dornal John Mitchel of Whetstonburn all of the two Parishes mentioned That they who did this were not of either of these Parishes nor was it known who they were Only that they were Cameronians who had suffered severely and were now gathered together on occasion of an Alarum that then was in the Countrey Nor had any in these Parishes any Accession to that practice And it is to be observed that many of these Ministers entred by a Military Force as they were so put out particularly the Minister of Auchinleck had his Edict served with three Troops of Dragoons And that People never submitted to these Mens Ministry but by the force that was put on them by Armed Men And they suffered very hard things and yet the people of these Parishes bore it patiently In the business of Machlin he grosly belyeth them They used no violence to the Ministers Wife only gravely reproved her for Cursing and Swearing which she used He passeth page 4. to the Presbytery of Dumbartoun where first he telleth us What Mr. Walter Stirling Minister at Badernock met with by a Company of Dissenters This is a gross Lie These five Armed Men who assaulted his House having done the like to a Gentlemans House and a Countrey-mans House the same Night seeking Arms or Plunder were no Dissenters of any sort or way but Debauched Men horrid Swearers and Cursers who were of broken desperate Fortunes their Names are John Momillan Patrick Motarged George Tomoch Archibald Ferguson Archibald Shinning This one passage duely considered might discredit all that is asserted in his Book and expose the Author as a malicious Calumniator designing to fix all the Thefts Robberies and other Villanies that are committed in the Country not only on some Presbyterian or other but on the whole party It is also witnessed that Mr. Stirling's Parish gave him all the help and succour they could in this his trouble This Mr. Stirling was afterwards deprived by the State for not Reading nor Praying after which time he behoved to remove from the Church and Dwelling-house but to this day liveth peaceably in the Parish Yea Mr. Stirling himself disowned that account of his Case which is in the Pamphlet as what he had no hand in For the two following Mr. Duncan of Kilpatrick Easter and the Minister that was to preach at Boiall In the Narration of what concerneth Kilpatrick Easter there is a gross Lie None touched Mr. Duncan nor did any personal hurt to him Which is affirmed by them who know that Matter And may be confirmed by considering that that parties Zeal led them no farther than to rid themselves of these Ministers who had been such a burden to them For that Man who was to preach at Boiall the Truth of the Story is A great many came with a Burial to the Church-yard among them not above six or seven had Arms who did always bear Arms None of them made any Opposition Only they sent to the Minister of the Parish to desire him to give them the Keys of the Church seeing he himself could not Preach He promised to do it if the Heritors should demand them which several of them did and offered to suffer him to stay in the house forty days if he would give up the Keys He contrary to his promise refused to give them up but went away that day and carried away his Furniture except some Lumber
that in England the King whether from Light or Interest I do not judge begun a half Reformation And Royal Authority enlightned the Minds of the people I speak not of all but of the Multitude but in Scotland Light from the Word of God did move first the People then the Great Ones and they prevailed with the King at last Zealously to own the Truth of God Yea and to defend it in Print 3. That the Government of the Church of England was suited to the Monarchy that is as I suppose he meaneth framed by a suitableness to the Monarchy as the Standard of it is not its commendation For that is to make it a humane Contrivance or worldly Policy brought into the Church of Christ over which he is the Head and which is to be governed by his Laws Whereas the Government of the Church of Scotland was contrived by the Word of God as the Standard of it yet was it as much suited to the Monarchy as that of England could be That is it gave and giveth to the King all that power in the State that our Laws gave him And all that Authority over the Church that is due to any Man on Earth The Abettors of it preach and practise as much Obedience and Subjection to Kings as others do and can vie in Loyalty with their Accusers as shall after be observed 4. I do not understand how our present Animosities about Church Government should depend on the one way being suited to the Monarchy and the other not seeing this Author as well as his opposites really are doth highly pretend to be not only for the Monarchy but for the present Monarch King William But either he hath a latent Meaning which hath much Truth in it or he hath hit on the Truth by guess as Cajaphas did viz. That our Animosities about Church Government arise mainly from the different Inclinations that are in the two parties toward the Monarchy as now established in the Persons of our Gracious King William and Queen Mary The strain both of their Writings and Actings make it evident that with him the Interest of King James and that of Prelacy are linked together And their Zeal for the one filleth them with Spite and Animosity against what is opposite to the other And whoso considereth the strain of this Pamphlet will find that the Zeal that this Scribler pretendeth to for King William is expressed usually under the general Notion of the Monarchy which may be understood of either of two Monarchies What he saith that Buchannan and others wrote Books that were condemned for Treason is no Argument For that which by one party is condemned for Treason by another party when they have got the Ascendent hath been absolved as not guilty of that Crime That the Puritans vexed King James VI. is no further true than that they could not yield to the endeavours of some evil Counsellers about him for overturning the Setled Government of the Church and encroaching on its Rights It is true He at last got Episcopacy setled by the help of some both in State and Church who were either none of the best Protestants or had their worldly Designs in promoting that way but still our Author owneth on the matter that the Word of God was not consulted in this weighty Concernment of the Church But only his fancied suitableness to the Monarchy and Conformity to England The account he giveth of putting down Episcopacy afterwards and setting up of Presbytery is neither like a Christian nor like a Historian It is perfect railing while he calleth the Nobles that had a hand in it Ambitious and Factious the Gentry Priest-ridden and blind Zealots the Preachers Enthusiasticks The War that he mentioneth is by all Posterity to be lamented but Men as able to discern as he have laid the blame of it on Episcopal Tyranny and Usurpation and their making many steps toward Popish Doctrine as well as Discipline He next giveth account of the Solemn League and Covenant entered into without the Royal Authority calling Parliaments c. These things were done by the Body of the Nation met in the most orderly representative that the time and case could permit And I deny not but that they were extraordinary Actings not to consider now the Morality of them But let this Gentleman freely tell us whether his Episcopal party be capable of Courses parallel to these which he so exposeth The Presbyterians under the conduct of the Primores Regni arose against their King in defence of their Religion and Laws did not the Prelatick party the same and on the same account They were indeed all for Loyalty and Non-resistance while the Royal Authority supported their greatness and power over their Brethren but when seven of their Bishops were touched it proved another case like that in Ployden if we be guilty in this they are not the Men who should cast the first Stone at us For Barbarities committed by the Presbyterians in these times I know of none but what are the necessary consequents of a War But this Man and his Associates have no other Dialect whereby to express their dislike of the Actings of the opposite party He accuseth them with a Bloody Mouth of what hath been a thousand times refuted as a horrid Lie That the Scots Presbyterians did persidiously give up their King to the English who Murdered him He was the King of the English as well as theirs and they could not withhold him from them And gave him into their hands on as good security as could be for his safety and if others dealt perfidiously with him they are not to be blamed for it He hath a hint as if Episcopacy had been setled by King Charles the Second because the Presbyterians refused all conditions of peace and pardon And for the Monarchies sake The former of these is a great untruth they never refused peace nor pardon but would gladly have imbraced both Only they could not buy them at the rate of Perjury Tho' they never refused to disown any Principles that were indeed Rebellious Their preaching up Rebellion in their Conventicles is false They both preached and practised Loyalty Only after many grievous and insupportable hardships suffered for their Conscience some few of them were prevailed upon by that Temptation to vent some Principles that the more Sober and Intelligent were not satisfied with That punishing them who were taken in Rebellion is all the severity complained of is a Notorious Falshood as all the Nation know and I have above disproved it § 3. From these so well laid Foundations he proceedeth p. 5. to give His Highness some Advices if they may not more properly be called Directions The first That the Prince being come to support our Laws is in Honour bound to support Episcopacy which is confirmed by twenty Parliaments This is Saucy enough As if His Majesty had Acted against his Honour now that Episcopacy is not supported That Episcopacy is
were sent Now the Government was not by the Act of Parliament setled in the persons of Ministers only but of Ruling Elders also Many of whom are Noblemen and Gentlemen of good Abilities Neither can it be said that they were set up as Bishops or acted with their Lordly domination as will appear from answering his following Objections He next saith Presbyters were subject to them who were no more but Presbyters which hath no President in the Catholick Church Ans It is true it is not presidented in the Catholick Church that one or more Presbyters should be subject to one who is no more but a Presbyter which is not our Constitution nor practice But it hath often been that Presbyters in their single Capacity were subject to them who were no more but Presbyters acting jointly in a Church Judicatory and this is all that is now done The Presbyterian Church doth not subject the Episcopal Church to them Nor doth one Presbyter among us judge one Presbyter among them But the Presbyterian Church combined judgeth every single Presbyter in this National Church And when he shall demonstrate the Absurdity of that we shall yield to his Argument Again he argueth thus They who could not be denyed to be lawful Ministers were excluded from any share in the Discipline and Government of the Church which is contrary to Presbyterian Principles Ans The Presbyterians never held a Principle so universal as what he hinteth about the priviledge of Lawful Ministers to govern the Church They never held that a Popish Minister should be a Ruler in the Protestant Church And they deny not such to be lawful Ministers They maintain that though it belong to all Ministers generally to have a share in the Government of the Church yet there might be some Cases in which pro praesenti Ecclesiae Statu they may be restrained from that priviledge Tho' they are not to be restrained perpetually nor in the setled State of the Church The Presbyterian Church had long been born down and almost exhausted they are now through the Mercy of God restored they find a great many Ministers in Charges who may be useful in preaching the Gospel but disposed to overturn the Government of the Church if it should be put in their Hands is it not rational that they should suffer these to preach for the Church needeth their help And yet not suffer them to rule the Church lest they overturn her Settlement They refuse none of them who will secure the Government and are otherwise qualified for the Ministry Again tho' we own them as lawful Ministers yet we cannot own them as Ministers of the Presbyterian Church They have a right to govern the Episcopal Church to which they had betaken themselves and left the Presbyterian Church tho' their Bishops even in it did not allow them that priviledge yet that they have a right to rule the Presbyterian Church we deny They and we agree in Doctrine and therefore we may teach the Church together But we disagree in Government and therefore we cannot rule together He saith That Presbyterians hold that it is unlawful for a Minister to part with his Right of Governing Ans But the Church may deny him the exercise of that priviledge if she find him inhabile for the exercise of it He pleadeth also That we blamed Bishops that they took this Power generally to themselves Ans We did so because they excluded the rest not on account of any special inhability but as having no right to such a power which we maintain to be in all Presbyters alike If any say that Ministerial power is quid indivisum and the exercise of teaching cannot be allowed where that of Ruling power is restrained I answer this is true with respect to the ordinary and setled State of the Church but such an extraordinary case of necessity as this may warrant such a restraint for a time But if this Argument hath any force it proveth that neither Preaching nor Ruling should be allowed and it commendeth the moderation of the Presbyterian Church which will allow them to serve the Lord as they can when they cannot do it as they should § 4. He proposeth tho' not candidly but doth not answer our Reasons for this conduct One is We could not otherwise make our Government sure And is it not reasonable that that Government which Christ hath setled in his Church as we think and which the Authority of the Nation hath setled should not be rendred unsafe by putting it in the hands of the avowed Enemies thereof when we could exclude them on such rational grounds as have have been mentioned Another Argument he maintaineth as ours The Episcopal Men deserved to be thus treated for their Apostasie Ans I know not who ever brought this Argument We go not to the rigour of all the Censure that that wrong step deserved we would rather consider what the present state of the Church and the promoting of Truth and Holiness and Unity doth require than what Men deserve We are for moderation maugre all the reproaches that he and such as he cast upon us Tho' at the same time we think that the Rigour of Church Discipline might put more force in this Argument than he is aware of He inferreth from what he had discoursed That Presbyterians juggle with God and Man because they hold their Government to be so of Divine Right that they can make no composition with Men about it but when it maketh for the Interest they can make Essential Alterations Ans We hold Parity to be of Divine Right and cannot yield to Imparity But this Parity is not taken away as he alledgeth by excluding them who have rendred themselves inhabile more than it is taken away by suspending a Minister for any Immorality or Negligence in his Work Neither is there here any essential alteration in the Government more than there is in that Case Here is no Jugling but fair and plain dealing What he talketh of nine hundred Ministers excluded is a mistake We exclude none of them but such as persist in their Principles and Inclinations to overturn the Government Neither is there Inconsistency as he would make us believe between making Ruling Power Essential to a Minister and sus-spending the exercise of it for a time We hold that Rationality is essential to a Man tho' some Scriblers be now and then Delirous § 5. From this digression he returneth to his History page 4. And giveth an account of the meeting of the Ministers and Elders antecedent to the General Assembly indicted by the King and Parliament to be held October 16. 1690. In which Narrative he doth in several things mis-inform his Readers and represent things to the disadvantage of truth and of the Presbyterians It is a misrepresentation That the Act of Parliament Committed the Care and Management of the Government to these few surviving Presbyterian Ministers who had not complyed with Episcopacy For it was to them
be put into the hands of Popish Priests while they continued such He is also displeased with appointing greater Presbyteries to send more Ministers as being an unequal Representation of the Church Others will think that this was most equal For the General Assembly is the Representative of the Presbyteries immediately tho' more remotely they represent the whole Church And therefore where Presbyteries are unequal their Representation should be so too But by this means some part of the Nation were not at all represented Ans It could not be otherwise where there were no Presbyterian Ministers that place of the Church could not be represented by Episcopalians for they neither had by Law nor could claim in Reason a share of the Presbyterian Government Neither can this Argument derogate from the Authority of the General Assembly over the whole Church more than the vacancy of a Parish can warrant them to plead exemption from the power of the Presbytery because they have not a Minister to represent them in it 7. The next fault that he findeth is The Meeting appointed a Fast on the Lords Day and saith That it was the Custom of the Old Presbyterians to appoint all their Fasts on the Lords Day This last is notoriously false The reason why that Fast was on the Lords Day it was the time of Harvest when it could not be observed on a Week day without high Inconveniency Neither do we think Fasting inconsistent with the Nature of the Lords Day Religious Joy and Religious Sorrow do very well agree His story about the Licensing the Treatise of Ruling Elders and Deacons is a gross Calumny and hath several Lies in it 1. The Licensing of that Book was not the deed of the Meeting but of the Clerk without their appointment or knowledge And he also alledged that the Printer added the words which imported a Monopoly of it As soon as the Book came out the Meeting were highly offended with the Clerk for this presumption not only because he had done it in their Name without their appointment but because as was said publickly in the Meeting Nemine Contradicente it belonged to the State to License Books and to Monopolize the Printing of them For this the Clerk was severely rebuked and hardly escaped being deposed 2. That the Privy Council checkt this or called in the Books is false For their Lordships understood that it was not the deed of the Meeting and that the Meeting took care to get the License taken from the Copies as soon as they understood it Here then we have an Evidence how gladly the Author would pick quarrels with us and make us odious tho' at the rate of telling lying Stories which every one can contradict He now beginneth page 7. to give an Account of the Actings of the Presbyteries against the Prelatick Incumbents between the General Meeting and the General Assembly which sate in October 1690. He blameth them That they were more careful to Empty Churches than to Fill them This is not true they endeavoured both to purge out the Scandalous and such as were like to do more Hurt than Good and to plant the Churches with qualified Persons and something was done both ways Though we confess planting Work went more slowly on than was wished partly because of the paucity of qualified Men but mainly through the opposition that some Men of this Authors Temper made Viis modis to discourage people from Calling Ministers And to perplex that Affair when ever it was attempted It is false That none were sent to the West where there was most need And that they rather seated themselves in Lothian as being a better Countrey There is neither Truth nor Candour in this Assertion Even Galloway which therefore was most destitute because the Incumbents had generally either been driven away or deserted is now tolerably supplyed tho' not so well as it should be or as I hope in a little more time it may be He giveth a false and malicious Cause of the ejecting of Ministers in the end of page 8. viz. They were conscious of their own Inabilities and thought it not their Interest to tolerate such as accustomed the people to Sense and solid Discourses No other Answer is here fit but to tell the Reader That nothing but a fancy tinctured with Malice and Prejudice can make one so compare them who were cast out with them who were put in His Stories of what this Man or t'other said when a reason was asked of their putting out of Ministers and of their Preaching in Meeting Houses where Episcopal Men were in the Church These I say are not worth our notice We will not defend what every private person saith in Discourse yea not what every particular Minister saith in the Pulpit tho' some Notes of Sermons he talketh of that I never heard of before nor am at leisure to enquire about them We can give better Reasons for both these practices viz. We put out Men because they are Scandalous and unfit to Edifie the People and do rather harden them in Wickedness And we Preached in Meeting Houses because many often the most part of the Parishes would not hear the Prelatical Incumbents § 8. There follows a whole Fardel of Lies and Malicious Representations of the procedure of the Presbyteries Few Lines in pages nine and ten that do not contain some Falshood or other as That Presbyteries sent out Spies to observe Mens publick and private Discourses and Practices Let them give one instance of this as the act of any one Presbytery If any private person did make such enquiry we know not nor can we in all Cases condemn it That they received Libels of old Crimes is not so absurd as he would make us believe If the Church have not been satisfied nor the Scandal of them taken off That a Design was formed to disgrace the Clergy That there was little or nothing made out against them are a couple of falshoods The former no man can prove The latter I have before disproved and could give abundance of Instances That the Scandals of one or a few was charged on the whole party is an impudent and false Assertion He saith That the least defects of Behaviour were heightned to gross Crimes And what was no fault we made one by uncharitable Construction Whether some private persons who had more Zeal than Understanding might not do so I cannot tell But he is now speaking of the Actings of the Judicatories and that any of them did so is false That insignificant Articles were accumulated to a great height Is also said but cannot be proved That some Ministers were charged with Admitting to the Office of Elders or not Censuring Men of Immoral Conversations Is not to be blamed The Apostle giveth express Directions about the Qualifications that should be required of Elders And it is certainly culpable to over-look Scandals in any and more especially in Church Officers That whatever was offered in a Libel by any
stand before their Arguments And I am sure he hath given no proof of either Sense or Learning in his Book but many Demonstrations of Spite and Railing He saith they have lost their Interest in the Nation are deserted That men are ashamed of them they are Dreaded as the plague of Mankind What may be expected from a Tongue set on fire of Hell They are not so lookt on by any but such as he is whose kind respects to any man were indeed a reproach to him Or by a debauched crew whom his faction indulged in their Immoralities to which Presbyterial Discipline is a terrour He saith p. 15. That the most bigotted and hot-headed were chosen for the Assembly And instanceth in two learned men who were not chosen But it was evident to all beholders who were capable to judge and even to the conviction of some of his own Party who had not abandoned all Reason and good Nature as this man hath done That the Assembly was made up of many Grave Learned and Sober men And their Actings will prove it in despight of his reproaches and obloquy against them The two whom he mentioneth are learned and worthy men But all could not be chosen And I know some very fit Persons out of an excess of Modesty shunned it and got others chosen That it was concluded that Mr. George Campbel should be shuffled out of the Assembly is an Assertion Demonstrative of a Brazen Forehead in the Asserter By whom was this concluded Yea or wished For my part I know them not Nor never heard of any such motion His going so near to be chosen Moderator which this Pamphlet taketh notice of sheweth how acceptable he was to most of the Ministers But there is a sort of men who should have good Memories which our Author here wanted His base Reflections on some others that were chosen do shew his own Character viz. Irreconcileable spite against all that bear the name of Presbyterians We could tell of hundreds of his party for one of ours guilty of gross immoralities And even some who were in highest places in their Church of whose repentance we have not heard much But that we should not have mentioned if it had not been in defence of the Interest that he setteth himself to disparage Nothing can escape the Lash of this Authors virulent pen P. 16. He most unmannerly taketh upon him to discourse of the Kings Choice of a Commissioner to represent his Royal Person in the Assembly And to tell who was the fittest Person Where he taketh occasion to Calumniate the Earl of Crawford by telling several gross Lies about his Lordship As that he rejoyced in the expectation of being Commissioner And shewed a grudge at the disappointment Such malapart abusing of any man by judging his inward thoughts for I am sure nothing of that kind ever appeared in his Lordships words or behaviour but much to the contrary but especially to deal so by so noble a Peer of the Nation and who is so deservedly honoured by all good men this I say deserveth a more severe Reprimand than my pen can give His Lordship did what in him lay to shun that difficult Post As also the Noble Lord on whom it was cast was far from designing it That the Earl sat in the Assembly house before he was a Member doth not prove what is intended by it For so did many others both Noblemen and of inferiour quality Some out of Satisfaction they had to see the Church again setled on her ancient foundations others out of Curiosity That his Lordship did officiously meddle in all the concerns of the Assemblies before he was a Member is as remote from truth as East is from West The contrary appeared in his Lordships often refusing to give advice when the Moderator desired it That letters were written to procure a Commission to my Lord is likewise false It was voluntarily sent to him from the Town of St. Andrews He being Lord Provost of that Corporatin We have a further false Imputation upon that Noble Earl That at the Visitation of the Vniversity at St. Andrews he used the Masters Roughly particularly refused to suffer Mr. Weems Infirm through age to lean on the step of a Stair Ans That Noble Earl dealt no otherwise with such as appeared before the Commission than did become his Character His Lordship and the rest of the Commission sat there by Authority of King and Parliament And therefore disrespect to them could not but reflect on the Authority which they represented When Mr. Weems complained that he could not stand he was allowed to remove that he might refresh himself § 11. He cometh now at last p. 17. to his purpose to give account of the Assembly And beginneth with the Sermons that were Preached at the opening of it He quarrelleth that there were two Sermons Saying the Presbyterians can never have their full of Preaching But the Reader may know that it hath been Customary in the Church of Scotland and none but such mockers will reproach them for it to make the first Day of the Assembly a Day of Fasting and Prayer and two Sermons were no superfluity in that case The Sermons he also findeth fault with Mr. Cunningham's Sermon that it was borrowed from Mr. Oliver Bowlis being a Sermon that he Preached Anno. 1643. The reverend and worthy Mr. Cunningham being now at his rest cannot answer for himself nor tell us what to say for him in this particular But this I can say in general and will be believed by all that knew him and are capable to judge that few Ministers of the Gospel did outstrip him in Ministerial Qualifications And he needed be beholding to no Man for a Sermon The other Sermon by Mr. Patrick Symson he saith was course Presbyterian stuff but as Wise Men as he thought it a Solid Pertinent and Useful Discourse to be preferred to hundreds of the Jingling Py-bald Orations that many of his party do spend the short Glass with What Supremacy or Authority he ascribed to the Assembly our Author would fain tell us but sheweth by his Expressions that either his Ignorant Informers did not understand what was spoken or he did not comprehend what they told him What was said on that Head I do not remember but we ascribe no absolute power to the General Assembly That their power is immediately from Christ that is that no Man giveth it we own He falleth p. 18. on the chusing of the Moderator Where he taketh occasion to spit all his Venom against the four Ministers who were put on the List out of which the Moderator was to be chosen All this I might pass over for my business is not to vindicate persons but things And all who have read thus far in this Book will be convinced that his Tongue is no slander and the credit of those Brethren is such as he will not be able to Ruine by his Lies and Reproaches Wherefore I shall touch