by good Men And even in Parliament it met with such opposition that they hardly carried it Yea the making the Voter in Parliament for the Church perpetual and that he should not be chosen yearly was carried but by three Votes However this was the beginning of that Apostacy that afterward came to a greater height and the design of setting up Bishops did soon appear however they for a time did labour to cover it That which I chiefly observe here is that this stickle that then was made for setting up some Ministers to Vote in Parliament is an evidence against the whole of this Manuscript viz. That Bishops did not then nor always exist in the Reformed Church of Scotland For if they had they were the Men who should have sat in Parliament to represent the Church and there needed not such steps for bringing them into the Church The story of Mr. Dury's Recantation at his Death and owning Episcopacy I find not in any of the Historians that I can meet with neither hath our Author directed us where to find it And if it were true it proveth no more but that all and every one of the Presbyterians were not faithful to the end For the General Assembly at Brantisland 1601 which he mentioneth I have nothing to observe about it For he alledgeth nothing there done toward the advancing of Episcopacy Next he telleth us of an Assembly at Holyrood House and of the Kings Clemency to some Ministers And his proposals for Provisions both for Bishops and Presbyters this was 1602. Here is a great mistake The King did not mention Bishop in his Proposals as they are set down by Spotswood p. 468. The overtures about this were made by the Assembly at the Kings desire Neither are Bishops there mentioned The words are Thaâ— Prelacies should be disponed to actual Ministers Churches annexed thereto being provided sufficiently and the tenth of the Superplus paid to the King or otherwise that all the great Benefices be dissolved thâ— Prelate enjoying the Principal Church and Temporal Lands and the Churches annexed disponed to Ministers Both they and the Prelate paying a yearly duty to the King Where I take notice 1. That Prelate in the Dialect of that time did rather signifie an Abbot or Prior than a Bishop At least when ever it is used in the History of that time especially by Spotswood it comprehendeth all the three Wherefore 2. It cannot be gathered from this passage that Bishops did otherwise exist than Abbots and Priors That is that some Church-men had the Titles and some States men had the Revenues but neither of both had Church Authority above ordinary Ministers And 3. This is clear that before this Men had these Prelacies who were not actually Ministers Which maketh plainly against the existence of Diocesan Bishops with Governing power at that time 4. The dissolution of all great Benefices that is there propounded by way of Alternative doth shew that it was not the mind of that Assembly that either Bishops or Abbots or Priors should continue so much as to enjoy the Temporalities that formerly they possessed so far is it from designing that Bishops should be provided for and advanced as such It only provideth for the Minister of the place where a Lord Bishop once ruled § 57. His Assertion of the activity of hot headed Presbyters in stirring up prejudices against the Church of England And his high Elogies of that Church which he insisteth on p. 66. I shall not stand upon seing he hath neither mentioned particulars nor given any ground for what he affirmeth If Presbyters were then active to preserve the Government of the Church then established it was a seasonable and necessary duty that every one was bound to make Conscience of in his station For then might they rationally fear that the King who had been influenced by some Corrupt Men to oppose the settling of Presbytry would now be more bent and had more advantage to overturn it as indeed it fell out In the business of the Assembly at Aberdeen which he aggravateth with all his Rhetorick I shall not interpose my Opinion I find it diversly represented by divers Historians I am sure whatever he make of it he cannot draw from it this conclusion that Episcopacy then took place in Scotland which is the design of his Manuscript The tale that concludeth the Manuscript about the Chancellour and the Ministers I find not in History nor are we directed where it is to be sought for and therefore I neglect it being assured that these Men who had appeared so much and with so much hazard against Popery would not be guilty of conniving at it § 58. The Apologist having transcribed this Manuscript from p. 67. maketh a number of Inferences from it All which do fall to the ground by the answers already given to the Paper it self which is the foundation of them And most of them are particularly obviated in what hath been said The 1. is answered § 47. where it is shewed our Martyrs had no occasion to consider the Government of the Church being exercised about greater points that needed Reformation That the first Reformers submitted to the Episcopal Jurisdiction of Protestant Bishops is absolutely false For he cannot make it appear that any such Jurisdiction was exercised at or soon after the Reformation The 2 d. That Episcopacy was never legally abolished is disproved § 54. That Presbyterians always watched the difficult Circumstances of the King which is the third is not true They did in all Circumstances endeavour to settle the Discipline and Order of the Church His fourth asserting the Presbyterians pleading exemptions from the Secular Powers as the Papists is not only false but shamelesly affirmed The 5 th is answered § 54 The 6 th Episcopacy was not quarrelled as unlawful in it self in these times Not only is no way deducible from any thing said in the Manuscript But is false and affirmed against the clearest light that such a matter is capable of Doth not even the Book of Discipline in which all the Presbyterians of these times agreed declare Episcopacy to be contrary to the word of God while cap. 2 d. it saith He God willeth that they should rule with mutual consent as Brethren with an quality of Power every one according to their Function And there are four ordinary Offices in the Kirk of Christ the Office of Pastor Minister or Bishop the Doctor the Presbyter or Elders and the Deacon And after no more Offices ought to be received or suffered in the Church of Christ established according to his word § 59. For the Eighth Whatever he fancy of the Royal Authority being forced to all that was granted to the Presbyterians Let him answer for this Imputation of Hypocrisie and Dissembling in the King that then was It is enough to us that the Church Power was granted to Presbyterians by King and Parliament and that they declared they did it willingly and sincerely The Tenth according to his wonted Charity and Candor maketh the Vindicator's Book to be one intire shuffle from top to bottom And his ground is the Presbyterians of old did some very ill things And yet the Vindicator would perswade the World that Presbyterians are not capable of such Villanies as the rabbling of the Clergy I wish he would learn to speak Truth and to use a little more Reason in his Discourses The Vindicator hath said nothing of the Capacity of Presbyterians They are sinful Men and capable of very bad things if the Lord leave them All that was asserted and it is made evident against all hâ—s attempts is that the Presbyterians did not do such things as he and others of his Gang charge them with For these odious things that he chargeth the Presbyterians of the former age with Enough hath been said for their Vindication by others tho' I had been silent Let him read Mr. Baillies pieces and answer them if he can His impugning of the distinction between Cameronians and Sober Presbyterians hath been answered before but he loveth to repeat rather than to say nothing The Eleventh Inference is That Presbyterians have no principle of Unity because the lesser number may remonstrate against the greater so as to stop the course of Discipline This last Clause is groundless For the greater part of a Church meeting may go on in the exercise of Discipline whatever be remonstrated to the contrary by the lesser part nor doth the Manuscript give any ground to think that Discipline could not be exercised because some did remonstrate against it For the former part of his Inference I gladly would know whether that principle of Unity be owned among his Party that none may remonstrate against what the Bishop or the greatest part of the meeting doth If so then the Consciences of Men like Issachar's Asse must tamely couch under the burden of whatever is imposed And if my Lord Bishop and the plurality of his Clergy decide all the Controversies between us and Papists on the side of the Romish Synagogue no man may mutter or reclaim It was an ancient Maxim even in the Canon Law Cuivis supplicare protestari licet To deny this is to banish Conscience or to bring in that Atheistâ—cal Principle that our Actions must be directed not by our own but by the publick Conscience The last Inference doth not differ from the former but to make up the round dozen he hath put it in other words which labour under the same evil that he there chargeth others with viz. General words which at the bottom have no particular signification For he chargeth us with Tyranny Disobedience poisonous Principles that we slie in the face of Authority c. And all this made out by the protestation against the General Assembly 1651 which he setteth down at length We have now through the mercy of God buried that unhappy difference And the Revivers of it should reflect on the Builders of Jericho I shall only say as before that to condemn all Protestations and Remonstrances against any company of Men who pretend to Church Authority or against whatever a Lawful Authority doth is to take from Ministers and People the liberty of professing and owning the Truth of God I have now done with this Apology The Postscript I meddle not with it is in answer to a Paper The Author of which can make a Reply if he thinketh fit FINIS
to the Sense that commonly it is taken in And this he insulteth upon as a sign of the most unparalelled Ignorance But as wise as he will think even supposing it to be a mistake and that it cannot be defended that it is consistent with more Learning than ever Mr Rule pretended to or than our Apologist is Master of Some Learned men have had odd apprehensions of some things and which easily might be refuted Grotius the wonder of his Age for Learning and for Critical Skill in particular yet will have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Cor. 12.28 to be Diocesan Bishops So also Dr. Hammond but he giveth a ground for his Opinion that is very singular 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith he Significat curam rei alicujus gerere And so also he expoundeth that word Luke 1.54 which is contrary or at least without Countenance from all Lexicographers Criticks and other Expositors If such a great Light may have a Spot why may not also Dim Tapers without being a meer Snuff Again if Mr. Rule were answering for himself it is like he would say that Veneration for this Learned Father did drive him into that untrodden path who cannot otherwise be defended from contradicting by that expression the whole of that Epistle in which it is found For if Ordination of Presbyters be not in the power of Presbyters but only of the Bishop as the sentence now in debate doth plainly import if it be expounded in the ordinary way This destroyeth the Identity of Bishops and Presbyters Which he had been largely and of purpose proving Or we must say which is also mentioned in the place cited that Jerome wrote sometimes his own Opinion and sometimes that of others and that so intermixed as that it is hard for the Reader to discern them as himself confesseth in a passage there also cited And if he use such Liberty in matters of Opinion why not in taking the same word in divers significations And it is certain that not only all Lexicographers give the signification of ordinare but in the Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is turned ordino 1 Cor. 7.17 And that signification of it is not unknown in Antiquity Cent. Magd 1 lib. 2. c 4. p. 205. Edit Basil 1564. Evangelium non tollit politicas ordinationes per se non impias I hope this is not meant of ordaining Persons to Office but ordering and appointing the due management of Affairs The Reasoning by which he maketh Mr. Rule 's Exposition to be inferred is ridiculous enough But it is none of his but the Apologist's own From what is said all the instances of the use of that word for potestative mission appear to be inconcludent for they only prove that that is the more usual signification of it Which none deny And the Ridiculous Sense that he putteth on this place of Jerome from the use of the Word elsewhere is Inconsequential For the Sense given may and doth quadrat here tho' it do not in some other places Ye may either take Jerome's word Ordinatio in the more Grammatical and proper tho' less usual Sense and make the passage Congruous to the whole of his discourse in which it is Or in the more frequent but less proper Sense and look on this Sentence as none of his own but what others said and he had set down in his Adversaria And so it cannot derogate from his Opinion about Bishops expressed in that Epistle The Reader hath his Option The Cause that Mr. Rule pleadeth and his Reputation are safe either way § 30. He lasheth the Vindicator very severely with all Rods that his Invention and the help of Latin Authors that he had read can afford because when his Adversary complained of the Desolations of Colledges by the late Change and of the Insufficiency of them who were put in the room of such as were Ejected he very modestly denied that they had any thing to brag of did appeal to the esteem of Impartial Men and to the Indicia of Learning any had given this is wound up to the high degree of Thrasonical Boasting As if his Party were Modest and Humble Men when they Monopolize all Learning to themselves and would make the World believe that it will dye with them But Presbyterians are proud if they Mutter and do not tamely assent when they are trampled on with the greatest Insolency I doubt not but the Apostle's Enemies said the same of him when he maintained his Zeal and Diligence nor that Job's angry Friends did the like when he pleaded for his Wisdom and Understanding He should also have considered that there was no Comparison made of any one Man with another but of one Party with another and that he cannot fix Self Commendation on any Man so that his Citations to that purpose are wholly impertinent but one Man commending those of his way And I am still confident to say let him make what use of it he will that tho' the Person he sheweth his great displeasure against were as insignificant as he imagineth yet the rest who enjoy Places in Universities in Scotland need not be ashamed of their Sufficiencies whether considered with respect to their Work or with comparison to their immediate Predecessours His three Instances of Mr. Rule 's speaking false Latine as himself calleth them Impertinencies p. 36. so do I judge them If they were all true they are nothing to the determination of the debate between the two Parties of the Church now in Scotland and tho' he doth not think himself above a possibility of such escapes and hath heard some who pretend to more Volubility in the Latine and in the English too and value themselves upon it lapse into as sensible blunders for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet he doth positively deny that to his knowledge or what he hath ever heard from any Person there is truth in any one of these Instances and that this Apology gave him the first notice of them Beside it is evident that the Apologist's Eye and Ear Witnesses have misinformed him as to the first Instance For he having had Praelections for some time de Idololatria hath insisted on the Idolatry of the Heathen of the Jewish Church in her degenerate times and of the Papists ◠but hath not meddled at all either with the Superstition or Idolatry of the Church of England Only the Contriver of the Story was pleased thus to circumstantiate it For the other two Instances our Apologist sheweth as little Skill in Critical Learning as he thinketh others to have in speaking of Latine tho' he could not forbear the pedantry of trying it by a sought occasion For if he consult his Lexicons he will find that Requiro doth signify to require or demand Whatever it signify beside tho' I deny not but he who is accused might and I am perswaded did express the thing in other terms more common than this His Criticism on the third Instance is also Childish For
them p 58. a company of Arbitrary Presbyters That on it the debate about Parity followed much Blood Confusion Rapine and other Mischiefs And then and since every fiery Faction did lay hold on this Schism as a Fond whereon to build all Rebellion and Treason p. 60. He calleth the General Assembly a Famous Conventicle ibid. And he speaketh of the Presbyterians new Gospel ibid. Mr. Andrew Melvill and his fiery complices p. 62. What fair History can be expected from a Person of whatever Honour and Learning he be who hath formed to himself and representeth to others such a monstruous Idea of the Men whom he designeth to Expose He beginneth his Discourse with a Remark which it seems either the Author of the Manuscript or the Apologist or both taketh for a concludent Argument against Presbyterians that none of our Martyrs spake or wrote against Bishops But all who write of them praise them for dutiful submission to their Bishops and Superiours A. 1. They had so many great abominations in the way that they opposed to insist on that it is no wonder they over lookt this We know Luther opposed but few things in Popery at first now if he had been cut off by Martyrdom in the beginning of his Reformation as these Worthy Men were would his silence have been a good Argument for all these points of Popery that afterward fell under debate 2. He confesseth the Martyrs spake against Popish Tyranny which I hope he will acknowledge was exercised by the Bishops I ask then when they did thus condemn Tyranny in Bishops did they own any Lawful Authority they had Which might have been expected if they had been of this Writers Opinion Yea it can be made appear that some of them said the Pope hath no more power than another Man and if this be said of the Chief Bishop it may with better reason be said of his Underlings 3. Where any Historian gave an account of the dutiful submission of these Martyrs to their Bishops I do not find except it were while they were still in the Church of Rome which is not to the purpose in hand Another Argument he seemeth to bring from Cromwell who turned off Presbytry at the Barrow-moor being wearied with its Confusions and Insolencies This needeth little answer I hope this Author will not now own Cromwell's Actings as Exemplary and Instructive Beside that this Act is invidiously and unfairly represented For the place nor the Cause of the Act was not as here said Cromwell was no Friend to Episcopacy more than to Presbytry § 48. He saith he will next come to positive Evidences all which are taken out of Spotswood's History except a very few from the History that goeth under the name of John Knox a few Animad-versions on such Passages as seem to question Presbytry being the first Church Government among the Scotch Protestants is all that I need here to mind He saith p. 58 at the end that five Superintendents were named for the Diocesses where the Bishops were Popish For there are no Superintendents named for Galloway and Argile because the Bishops of these Diocesses were Protestants This is the Author's conjecture no such Reason of that Conduct is given by Arch-Bishop Spotswood out of whom he taketh his History And indeed it is contrary to Reason as well as without Ground for there were more Diocesses than six or seven in Scotland and but two of the Bishops were Protestants exore túo why then did they not place Superintendents in the rest of the Diocesses which behoved by his own account either to be Vacant or furnished with Popish Bishops Further He it seems hath read the Author that he citeth very carelesly for Spotswood saith expresly that one of the five Superintendents viz John Kerswell was placed in Argile and the Isles And yet my Antagonist maketh Argile one of the two Diocesses in which the Bishops were Protestants There must then be some other Reason for appointing these five Superintendents and no more than that the Bishops of these Diocesses were Popish And it is evident from this very passage that the Protestants did not own Episcopal Jurisdiction in any Man even though he were Protestant seing they set a Superintendent in Argile where the Bishop was Protestant and tho' the Bishop of Argile did then sit in Parliament as Spotswood hath it p. 149. near the end yet the Protestants set another over the Church in that Diocess And it is also clear from this passage that they did not look on a Superintendent and a Bishop as the same nor as having the same Authority in the Church The material and great differences that are between a Superintendent which the Protestant Church in Scotland in that case of necessity did for a time allow at the Reformation and a Bishop may be seen at length in Calderwood's History p. 26 27. whom I hope I may without blame quote as well as he doth that of Arch-bishop Spotswood If it may be done without giving him offence which he seemeth to take at my referring to mine own little Books I would tell him that all the weight that here and after he layeth on Superintendents being set over large districts is taken off by what the Apologist might have read and should have answered if he had dealt fairly 1 st Vindic. p 10. § 49. The next thing that the Manuscript taketh notice of is p. 59. That a Commission of the Assembly met at Lieth 1572 in January and agreed that vacant Bishopricks should be supplied That Spiritual Jurisdiction should be exercised by Bishops And that Ministers should be Ordained by them or by Superintendents where there were no Bishops And that in August after a General Assembly at Perth approved of all these Articles And that Mr. Andrew Melvil because not made a Bishop stirred up one Mr. Dury 1575 to impunge the Episcopal Order and all Imparity and that this was the first time that this Debate was tossed in our Church which divided Church and State c. I shall with all due respect to his Lordship examine this History And 1. I observe that he bringeth no Vouchers for these passages but we must take on his own single Testimony things that were beyond the memory or knowledge of his Father of much more than a hundred years standing 2. Arch bishop Spotswood expresly saith p 260. That these Articles were admitted by the Assembly at Perth only for an interim till a more perfect Order might be obtained from the King Or Regent And what that Order was time did try for not Episcopacy was afterward settled but Presbytry 3. It is a great mistake that they who made these Articles were a Commission of the Assembly for that Meeting at Lieth was no General Assembly of the Church of Scotland tho' Spotswood is pleased to call it so Both Calderwood p 49. and Petrie Cent. 16. p 372 witness that in the Register it is called a Convention which word is always used for
was as needless as when it is appointed a Tree shall be cut up by the Roots another injunction be given that the Tree shall fall Was not Episcopacy effectually rooted up in Scotland when all Church Power was put in the hand of Church Judicatories where all Memberâ— acted in Parity That a Bishop baptized Prince Henry is an odd Argument to prove that Episcopacy was the Government of the Church of Scotland If the King was pleased to chuse a Man who oncâ— exercised Episcopal Jurisdiction for that service especially when Ambassadours were present some of which lived where Episcopacy was exercised it doth not follow that either this Bishop or any other of his Character did govern the Church It is said without all warrant p. 63. That when three Lords were tried the Ministers would needs order the Process and stirred up the Rabble to back them nor would they disband tho' prohibited by Proclamation from King and Council The true History is some Popish Noblemen were known all the Nation over to be guilty of dangerous plotting against the Reformed Religion and designs to ruin the Professors of it They had Friends at Court so that they had too much advantage to carry on their designs All the found Protestants in the Nation observed this and saw the danger that they and the true Religion was in wherefore a Meeting of Barons Ministers and Burgesses which when challenged by the King for their meeting offered to make it appear that it was with sufficient warrant and advice from his Majesty did petition the King that those Lords might be brought to Tryal which was appointed to be done the Protestants resolved to meet before hand to appoint some to prosecute the Criminals which they did Neither can it be made appear that any violence was offered to any Person and all that Spotswood saith of it is p. 399. that great Companies came to Edinburgh without mention of Arms or Violence And indeed the danger was such as it is no wonder that they who had Zeal for the true Religion were forward to cry for Justice when they evidently saw that all Methods were used for palliating the matter land protecting these Criminals to the manifest hazard of Church and State The Issue was the Convention called by the King for trying these Lords referred the matter to a Commitee where they allowed some Ministers whom they named to be present and to propose what they should think fit Here is nothing of Ministers ordering the Process nor of a Rabble in Arms. § 55. After all this our Author doth still maintain that in the years wherein Presbytry had moâ—â— the ascendent yet Bishops did exist by Law enjoyed their Rents and Preached in their Churches foâ— which he produceth many passages out of the Records of Parliament It is well our debate is come to this issue if this be all that he would prove he shall not find us to oppose him Our question is only whether the Protestant Church after her Reformation was governed by Bishops or by Presbyters acting in Parity I know that long after the Reformation even Popish Bishops sat in Parliament enjoyed their Temporalities And that in 1572 an image of Bishops was restored and also oâ— Abbots and Priors but even their pretended Power that they then got was soon taken away Anâ— that many States-men who reaped most of the profits of these places made a great stickle to hold up that image yea and to give them more power in the Church than was due But that in these times Bishops had ruling Church power except in 1572 as is said I utterly deny Wherefore most of his Citations are wholly beside the purpose I shall then only examine such of them as seem to make against what I have asserted He saith p. 64. That the Authority of the Bishops is owned by Act 63. Parl. 5. Jac. 6. Ann. 1575 of which none of our Histories do take any notice And the Act it self is anent the visitation of Hospitals all that is said of Bishops is that they and other Commissioners of Diocesses shall visit Hospitals I hope here is no Church power allowed them In the year 1579 Act 71 Parl. 6. Jac. 6. there is no more said but that young Noblemen or others who had been out of the Country for their breeding shall at their return go to the Bishop or Superintendent or Commissioner of the Kirk Neither is this any governing Authority over the Church The two following Citations are only to shew that Bishops continued 1581 so that of 1587 and several others of his Quotations design no more but that Bishops existed by Law sat in Parliament some were presented to rich Benefices All which is wide from the purpose He saith that 1584 Act 132 Parl. 8. Jac. 6. the Bishops Authority is fully owned It is indeed said in that Act That Ministers may be deprived by the ordinary Bishop of a Diocess or others the Kings Majesties Commissioners to be constituted in Ecclesiastical Causes Where it is evident that Church power is placed in the King rather than in the Bishop Who can by this Act do nothing but as he is the King's Commissioner even in censuring of Ministers If this be a full owning of Episcopal power let him enjoy it This making them the King's Bishops not Christ's nor is there any thing beside in that Act which alloweth them any Church power But we have another Answer to this Quotation That Parliament saith Spotswood p 333 was declared Current at that time for the more speedy dispatch of business whereas the former was in October 1581 and is called in the Records the seventh Parl and this is called the eighth Parliament which is inconsistent with its being Current or the former Parliament yet subsisting But some things were to be done that could not pass in a full Parliament and therefore as Calderwood hath it p. 155 there was no intimation by Proclamation before the meeting of it nor reasonable time granted according to the accustomed order It was almost ended before it was heard of The Lords of the Articles were sworn to keep secret the matters to be treated One of whom tho' he would not reveal particulars wrote to a Minister that the whole intent of that Parliament was against the Kirk and the Discipline of it These are the Methods by which Episcopacy and Erastianism behoved to be supported in these times when they could have no Countenance from the Church nor from the Nation § 56. He next citeth a Conference at Falkland 1596 where some Articles were agreed on about some Ministers having Vote in Parliament and that these were confirmed by an Assembly at Montross 1600 and there some Bishops Elected for Diocesses It is not to be denyed that there was a working toward Prelacy among some Courtiers and Ambitious Churchmen about that time And one of their Methods was to get some Ministers to Vote in Parliament the tendency of this was seen and the thing opposed
a Rabble of such as were the likeliest to be the Executioners of what they feared Also it were the way to excite men to make a Massacre as also to give some colour for Justifying it thus to assault them who were living in peace 3 That there was a Night spent in such confusions or that there were such Screeching and Terrour in the City on this occasion I cannot find by the best Information Only such a fancy is Subservient to our Authors design and it seems he can serve himself with truth or untruth as need requireth 4. That a report was spread that some were Killed who were not Killed is not denied but that this Report was the contrivance of the Presbyterians to animate the People to rifle the King's House is one of the grossest of Falsehoods And that few of the Students of the Colledge were there is not true 5. That this Tumult was concerted by the Presbyterians he endeavoureth to prove Because the Master of F. and several others whose Names he thinketh fit to conceal were present I know that many Men of good Note did appear after the killing of the Boyes and that by Authority Wallace was ordered to remove with his Guard The acting of these Men was not concurring with the Rabble the one acted without Authority the other with it but that any such Persons either appeared with the Rabble and without Command from Superior Powers or had any hand in defacing any part of the Abbey he shall never be able to prove If he can either by confession of Party or any probable Evidence make it appear that G. S. or Mr. M were the Contrivers of this Tumult or that they glory in it as he would have us believe he shall have the better in this particular but if there be no Truth in this as indeed there is not then the Reader may know who best deserveth to be thus branded that the spirit of Lies and Vanity runneth through his Book The Plea of an Advocate at the Tryal of Mr Wallace is a ridiculous Argument to prove what it is brought for every Body knoweth that in their Pleadings they consider only what may make for the Cause which they are Patrons of He unwaâ—ily and ominously maketh this Essay at Edinburgh but the Preface to what they intended to the Clergy in that place As insinuating that the Popish Clergy whom the Rabble had spoiled of their Superstitious Trinkeâ—s and the Episcopal Clergy of Edinburgh were to be considered alike were managing the same designs and had the same Friends and Foes If the Ministers at the Trone Church thanked God for a glorious Reformation he had many other Causes for so doing then this Rabbling and it is evil surmising to ascribe such a sense to his words unless he had either named the Rabbling or by Circumlocution particularized it § 11. He maketh p. 10. the Vindicators next Plea to be that there was an interregnum when these things were acted It had been some Candor if he had pleased to tell his Reader to what end and how far this Plea was used It was never brought to justifie what was done by the Rabble But on the contrary it is expresly said 2 d Vindic. p 26. where that Plea is mentioned that what they did was not allowable but that it was not to be wondered at considering what provocations the People had by their former Sufferings and saw no way of Legal Redress How impertinent then are his Reasonings against this Plea that these Men were not loosed from the Law of God which should have restrained them Did his Antagonist ever say so or did he use words to that effect And that he is pleased to impute these Rabblings to Saints and to Godly and Zealous Presbyterians is no sign of that regard to Truth that is fit nor of that respect to serious Religion which might be expected from every Christian much more from a Minister and Doctor of Divinity The Peoples being injured and provoked by the Clergy he bringeth as another Plea used by the Vindicator And the same is to be observed concerning it which is said of the former Plea it was never used to justifie the Actors of these disorders We think they should have committed their Case to him who judgeth Righteously and that in the use of Orderly and Legal means for redressing their Grievances Undeâ— this Hâ—ad our Apologist maketh a saint denyal of matter of Fact He knoweth not what the Clergy did in the West though al Scotland know that many of them did severely persecute their People and did stir up the Magistrate to ruin them But he never knew one that presecuted the Dissenters without great reluctancy but many that did them kindnesses Others can â—ell of some in the City where he lived who delated Meetings and them who came not to Church with great forwardness and zeal and multitudes of Instances in most parts of the Country of their persecutions against Dissenters are in Print That to deny it deserveth other words then I lift to use even such as himself liberally bestoweth on them who affirm what disliketh him We never did Charge all with this practice nor did ever deny but that some of them did shew kindness to Dissenters § 12 Next he defendeth the Clergies prosecuting Dissenters according to Law p. 11. and that with a Haâ—anguâ— pretending to somewhat of Argument but cloathed in words becoming this Authors Genius and of some other Pamphleteers of the Party But of which I am sure Sober Episcopal Men will be â—shamed Such as Dark and Enthusiastical Principles a Career of insolence and Villany Bouâ—efeues and incendiaries who were to be lashed with greater Severities Speaking evil of Dignities took place of the ten Commandments c. His first Argument for the persecution by the Clergy is The Peace of the Nation endangered the Government by frequent shakings in hazard to relapse into a Civil War c. If this Argument have any force it is only for the Clergies discovering such as had risen in Arms or were acting or contriving what was of that tendency But many of our Clergy were instrumental in persecution long before there had been any Insurrection or before they were injoyned to delate the People to the Circuit Courts And they did â—veâ— many who never had hand in any of these Risings against the King And indeed it was the intollerable Oppressions the People suffered which caused these Tumults and Troubles which might seem to shake the Government wherefore here is non causa pro causa Another Argument is the Souls of People were poisoned with dark and Enthusiastick Principles I wish he had named them It is true some wild Principles were taught by some who separated themselves from the generality of the Presbyterians as well as from the Episcopal Church But with what Brow can he impute this to Presbyterians without exception and set the Dogs on them all to worry them because of these mens Principles And
efficacious working on the Soul If this be not what the Pharisees are reproved for making void Christs Ordinances for Mens Traditions I know not what can be so represented 5. If the neglect of Fasting among Protestants hinder the Reformation of the Greek Churches why doth not the frequent Fasts in the Popish Church with which they have more occasion to converse than with Protestants contribute to advance that Reformation 6. Seeing he is pleased to digress from Feasting to Fasting he might know that real Fasting used to be more frequent among the Presbyterians than among the Prelatists for their set Fasts of Lent and Good Friday how few among them do observe them § 36. He telleth us next of Anniversary Holy days among the Jews besides these which God appointed and yet not reproved p 41. and 42. and he instanceth in the Fasts mentioned Zech. 7. and the Feast of the Dedication at which Christ was present Joh. 10.22 That these Fasts were not reproved is said without all warrant God disowneth them if he say they were only disowned on account of the neglect of seriousness in managing them this must be proved Again Christ and the Prophets had so many things of greater moment to reprove and insist particularly upon that they contented themselves to comprehend such things as these under general reproofs which were not wanting and might by a thinking Man be applyed to all such Observations As when Jeroboam is reproved for devising Holy days that God had not appointed 1 Kings 12.33 And Christ condemneth Humane Devices in Worship Mat. 15 9. And the Propheâ—s condemned some Worship that was in it self most abominable on account that it was not commanded Jer. 7.31 Christ's presence at the Feast of Dedication was no more but his walking in the Temple while the People were Celebrating that Feast Which can no ways be strained to signifie either Joyning or Approbation He talketh of shaking off all Externals of Religion p. 42. and calleth it the Errour of Dissenters That is palpably false We have the External administration of the Word and Sacraments among us But it seems he will not only have his Humane Devices to make a great Figure in External Religion but to be the ALL of it Such loose talk is unbecoming a Divine That which followeth is an odd fancy It is certain that nothing preserveth the knowledge of Christian Religion among the body of the People more than the Festivals of the Church What Not the Word and Sacraments Whether this looketh rather like raving than like disputing let the Reader judge He saith also that we teach the People to despise all Forms That is false we keep the form of Baptizing and Celebrating the Lords Supper that we find in the Scripture It is another horrid Falsehood and I know not how it could fall from one who hath regard to the God of Truth that it is rare to find a Presbyterians Child in the West of Scotland who can repeat the Commandements or the Creed and he complaineth that by this means Atheism is promoted and that the Clowns laugh when a Curate recommendeth to their Children the Creed the Lords Prayer and the ten Commandements None are more careful to instruct their Children in these and other Principles of Religion than Presbyterian Parents are both in the West and other places And it is the constant practice of Ministers when they Catechise the People to examine them on all these three and to require the People to get them by heart and to make them understand them It is also false that we have no Opinion of a Mans understanding unless he entertain us with discourses of Gods unsearchable decrees These are very seldom the subject of our Preaching But it is beyond all his other reproaches that he imputeth to Presbyterians that they Preach Justification before Conversion I know not a Presbyterian in Scotland that is of that Opinion If sometimes Ministers instruct their People how the Convictions of Natural Conscience may be distinguished from the Convictions that proceed from the Spirit of God I think that is not to be exposed to ridicule nor made a reproach by any who is acquainted with the deceit of the Heart and the danger of delusion about the truth of Grace in the Soul What he discourseth p. 43. of the ancient Discipline of the Church being conducive to Reformation I heartily close with But am far from thinking that that Discipline lay in Festivities or Fasts appointed by Men but in censuring of Sin according to the appointment of Christ. § 37. He beginneth a new head p. 43. near the end which is a large discourse about the Schism that he alledgeth the Presbyterians to be guilty of And all this he foundeth on a word occasionally and transiently written by the Vindicator if our Author cite his words true which we cannot know seing he doth not direct us viz. That he knoweth no Schism but such as was caused by his Opposites If I knew on what occasion this was said I could the better judge whether it was well said or not But he hath left us here as often elsewhere to guess as he also citeth Scriptures without Chapter or Verse And it is not easie to find out one short Sentence which may be hath no more joyned to it on that subject in a large Book Before I consider his Refutations of this Assertion I shall shew in what sense this may be maintained 1. In England the Presbyterians are not guilty of Schism nor do they desert the Church but are driven away by Her because she Excommunicateth them unless they wil practise some Ceremonies that they cannot use with a good Conscience This hath been proved against Bishop Stillingfleet Rational Defence of Nonconformity And if our Author please to debate â—t his Reasons shall be considered 2. In Scotland the Presbyterians who had freedom to hear the Conformists and yet had Meetings wherein they heard their own Ministers who were unjustly Eâ—ected could not be guilty of sinfull Separation Because they still owned the Episcopal Church of Scotland as a True tho' Corrupted Church and did not shun to partake in the Ordinances with Her but were under no obligation to cast off their own Ministers who were orderly called and settled among them and not removed from them by any Church Authority but only by the Civil Power which however it might forcibly hinder the publick exercise of a Mans Ministry could neither make him no Minister nor not the Minister of that People And these Presbyterian Ministers and People were â—ately not only by the Gospel but by the Law the Church of Scotland and the ceasing of their Legal Right by the change of the Law could not take away their Gospel Right And any thing that might look like Separation was caused by our Opposites in that they had violently thrust us from our Places 3. Even they who did so separate from the Episcopal Church of Scotland as to deny all Communion