Selected quad for the lemma: power_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
power_n bishop_n call_v presbyter_n 3,415 5 10.3134 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A29746 An apologeticall relation of the particular sufferings of the faithfull ministers & professours of the Church of Scotland, since August, 1660 wherein severall questions, usefull for the time, are discussed : the King's preroragative over parliaments & people soberly enquired into, the lawfulness of defensive war cleared, the by a well wisher to the good old cause. Brown, John, 1610?-1679. 1665 (1665) Wing B5026; ESTC R13523 346,035 466

There are 31 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

In this Chap. the Apostle speaketh to them all alongs in the plurall number Mr Stillingfleet who is no friend to the independent way will easily acknowledge that what is there said was spoken to the Church Governours So then Mr Stillingfleet must say that these Governours were Presbyters of that one Church ruleing it together communi corsilio And that they can not so well be understood of Bish. for one Church should have but one Bishop So then here is a place which cannot be understood alike of both but must of necessity be understood of a Presbytery of a Presbytery having full Episcopall power in the matter of jurisdiction what Mr Stilling fleet will reply to this can hardly be conjectured A second passage is Phil. 1 v. 1. where mention is made of Bishops Deacons now these Bishops could not be Bishops properly so called in opposition to as distinct from preaching Presbyters Because of such Bishops there can be but one in one Church at once therefore they behoved to be Presbyters endued with Episcopall power having the thing as well as the name Presbyters of that one Church So that this passage cannot be equally understood of both with any shew of reason A third passage is 1. Thes. 5 12 13 14. Where there are some mentioned who were labouring among the people were over them in the Lord these were to warne the unruly c. So that in this one Church there were severall Presbyters Presbyters endued with power of warning the unruly Mr Stillingfleet cannot imagine any colurable pretence whereby without much apparent incongruity this passage may be understood of either of the different formes And seing this ground faileth here we may for all which he hath said to the contrary arrive to such an absolute certainty of that course which the Apostles took in setling Churches So much for this observation 6. It may be observed That Presbyterians have more then the practice of the Apostles even their positive institutions in these few particulars 1. In ordaining instituting such such Officers as Pastours Doctors Elders Deacons as may be seen Rom. 12 v. 6 7 8 1 Cor. 12 28. Ephes. 4 v. 11 12. In all which places there is no mention made of a Bishop distinct from a preaching Presbyter If Mr Stillingfleet say according to his principles that there was no necessity of making mention of him particularly because he is no distinct officer from a Presbyter but only impowered by the rest as their Commissioner Beside what hath been replyd to this formerly this may be added here That if this be truth which Mr Stillingfleet affirmeth he hath wasted much paper and paines in vaine when he went about to prove that no certanety of the practice of the Apostles could be come at whether they did set up episcopall or Presbyterian Governement for these should not be two distinct Governments And he had a shorter cut for Answering all the places of scripture then the way was which he took Yea he might have spared his whole book given out this one Thesis for all viz Though Presbyterian Governement be Iuris Divini yet the Presbyters may lawfully intruste one of their number with some speciall piece of the exercise of jurisdiction ordination And then he might have had more to say upon the ground of prudence or the like for himself then now he hath But it is not good to be wise above what is written it is best wisdome prudence to follow the rule of the word But more over 2. They have the Apostles institutions concerning the qualifications of these officers as is to be seen in Paul's epistles to Timothy Titus 3. These officers are commanded to such such pieces of work Some to rule some to teach also some to take care of the poor 4. These officers are commanded to attend that work of theirs with all diligence in their own proper persons without rolling it over on others Rom. 12 6 7 8. The Minister is to waite on his Ministery he that teacheth on teaching he that giveth is to do it with simplicity he that ruleth is to rule with diligence 5. In matters of discipline juridiction they are commanded to Act joyntly for the officers of the Church of Corinth were appoynted to conveen together that they might deliver the incestuous person unto Satan 1 Cor. 5 4 5. So the brethen the officers of the Church of Thessalonica were exhorted to warne the unruly Now lay all these together Such such officers set to such such work appoynted to attend the same ordained to Act joyntly in matters of government there is a species of Government a species warranted by Divine institution viz by Apostolick commands for these positive commands are of a lasting nature till God repeale them againe Himself giveth some 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Marks whereby to know when positive lawes binde immutably the first whereof mentioned Part. 1. c 1. § 6. Part. 2. c. 2. § 2. Is usefull here viz. when the same reason of the command continueth still Now let Mr Stilling fleet show if he can what reason could plead for Ministers acting collegiatly in matters of discipline then which will not be of force now was there lesse of the spirit then nor is now Or was there fewer able fit men for to be Bishops then nor is now Or was there lesse care to have things done orderly exactly or shall we say that all these commands were for that age of the Church only If so there is an easie way found to cast all the commands injunctions of the Apostles though they were induced with the spirit Shall it be thought that the command given to the Church officers of Corinth to conveen to excommunicat did binde them only at that time if so there should be a wide door opened to much evil a way prepared for laying aside all the injunctions instructions of the Apostles as now uselesse as an almanack out of date Enough of this consideration Obs. 7. It would seem to be a great reflexion upon Iesus Christ who was faithfull to him that appoynted him that as a sonne so beyond Moses who was faithfull as a servant Heb. 3. 2 5 6. To say that he hath not appoynted a standing forme of Governement in his house Mr Stilling fleet replyeth Part 2. c. 4. § 1. 1. That then it must be made appear that the setling of this forme was a part of his mediatory work Ans. This may easily be made to appear for it did belong to his Kingly office so was a part of his mediatory work as well as his instituting of officers in his house as Mediator the Government is laid on his shoulders Isa. 9. 6. And all power in heaven earth was given to him Mat. 28 18. He addeth I grant he is King of the Church doth
of the church by Prelats is overturned church Sessions are established the way of Election tryall of Ministers contrary to the Episcopall way is appoynted severall other things tending to the right governing of the church are determined is drawne up presented to the conncell May 20. 1560. Whereupon there is an act of councill to this effect We who have subscribed these presents having advised with the Articles therein specified as is above mentioned from the begining of this book thinke the same good conforme to God●… word in all points conforme to the notes additions here to eeked promise to sett the samme forward to the uttermost of our Power providing that the Bishops Abbots Priors other Prelats Beneficed men who else have adjoyned them to us bruik the revenues of their benefices during their life times they sustaining upholding the Ministry and ministers as herein is specified for the preaching of the word and administrating of the Sacraments and this act is subscribed by twenty six Noblemen among the rest by Mr. Gordon who was Bishop of Galloway by the Dean of Murray Spottswood in his History is so convinced that this book was directly against the Prelats that he sayeth pag. 174. it was framed by Iohn Knox partly in imitation of the Reformed Churches of Germany partly of that which he had seen at Geneva nather of which Churches did favoure Prelats It is true the late Historian the Archprelate would make the world beleeve that the Superintendents which are spoken of in that Book of Discipline were nothing else but Bishops But his fondo mistake in this will appear to any who will but consider these particulars 1. What the thoughts were which this Archprelate had of this book which treateth of those Superintendents as 1. That it was framed by Iohn Knox famous Knox first nor last was never a friend to prelats or prelacy 2. he sayeth that it was done in imitation of reformed Churches such as Geneva and those of Germany these Churches knew no prelats 3. He sayeth it was no better nor a dreame so could never take effect but had it been an establishing of Prelacy it had been no dreame in his accompt and he would have said that it had taken effect 4. He willed wished that Iohn Knox had retained the old Policie so this book contained a policie distinct from the old policie a Policie which was not the same with Prelacy 2. What the thoughts were which such as were for the Reformed Religion had of it Now they looked on it as the Discipline of the ancient Church therefor after it was drawn up they did supplicate the Parliament for the restauration of the Discipline of the ancient Church for the discharging of the Popes usurpation of all that Discipline which did flow there from as being inconsistent with the Discipline of the ancient Church with the Discipline contained in that book But 3. It cannot enter into the heart of any rationall man to think that these Reformers were so inconsiderate as●… to sett up Prelats with the one hand when they were doing what lay in their power to pull them down with the other It was not popish Prelats alone which they were labouring to turn out of the Church of Christ for when some of those who had been popish Prelats before had relinquished Popery embraced the Reformed Religion and had subscribed unto the book of Discipline as Mr Gordoun in Galloway yet they would not suffer such to exerce the power of superintendents Mr Gordoun with all his moyen could not obtaine that power so that Spotiswood when he sayeth in his Latin Pamphlet called Refutatio libelli de Regimine Ecclesiae Scoticanae pag. 4. also in the Epistle Dedicatorie that the former Bishops who joyned with the Reformers keeped still their full power jurisdiction bewrayeth his impudence falshood His words in his Epistle are these Et prasulibus pristi●…s modo ●…idei orthodoxa non restitissent nec adempt●… dignitas nec imminuta fuisset jurisdictio quod ita liquet ut hoc vel in●…iciari sit n●…gare Solem in ipsa meridie lucere in the book he sayeth quotquot autem a puriore cultu non ab●…orrebant ●…is j●… utendi fruendi Episcopatuum fructibus privilegiis omnibus jurisdictio etiam quam ante usurpabant quat●…nus Religionis incolum●…t as pateretur continuata This is the height of impudency thus to avow palpable untrueths that the faithfulness of this Historian may for ever after be suspected let it be observed that in his History which he wrote in English which every one might have more easily understood so discovered his falshood he durst say no more but that these Bishops enjoyed the rents of their benefices See pag. 175. Moreover 4. The book of Discipline it self giveth the clear ground of their appointing of these Superintendents in these words We consider that if the Ministers whom God hath ●…ndued with his singular graces among us should be appointed to severall places there to make their continuall residence that then the greatest part of the Realm should be destitute of all doctrine which should not onely be the occasion of great murmure but also be dangerous to the salvation of many and therefor we have thought it expedient at this time by this means the simple and ignorant who perchance have never heard of Iesus truelie preached shall com to some knowledge and many that are dead in superstition and ignorance shall attaine to some feeling of godliness by the which they shall be provoked to seek farther knowledge of God and his true Religion and worship and therefor we desire nothing more earnestly then that Christ Iesus be once universally preached throughout the Realm c. From whence it appeareth that these Superintendents were onely chosen for that present exigent when there were so few learned able Ministers so many places of the countrey destitute of Ministers so that the harvest was great the labourers very few Superstition popery was remaining in many places of the countrey people were in hazard to continow therin having either no Minister to clear the trueth to them or such onely who were ready to harden them in their superstitious courses therefor there was a necessity at that time while the Church was but in si●…ri that some of the most able of the Ministry should be appointed to travell through such such places of the countrey to preach the Gospel to see to the planting of faithfull able Ministers according to the rules sett down in the book of Discipline But 5. so cautious were the Reformers that they would not acknowledge those to be Bishops either in name or thing for as their worke was extraordinary so they gave them an extraordinary name They would not suffer any who had been Bishops before in time of popery to
year 1649. cannot altogether be condemned partly because then the evill of it was not so fully seen perceived partly because that evill had not been reformed there was no other way of entry practised o●… practicable by law so though they might groan under that burden yet they could no●… get it helped so their fault was lesse then the fault of such would be who have now seen this evill reformed have seen or at least might have seen the evill of it have been called orderly duely conforme to the way of Election set down in the new testament for imitation how great should the guilt of such be if they should now againe lick up that vo●…ite submit unto that yoke More may be said for the justifying of those who submit unto a yoke under which they were borne from which neither they nor their forefathers were delivered then of those who have been delivered yet consent againe to goe under the yoke thereby do betray the precious interests of Christ's Church with the rown hands wreeth that yoke about the neck of the Church under which she had been groaning many a year before It will be objected againe That they have already the consent of the people being called by them before so the Churches liberties are preserved their entry is valid enough Ans. It is true they have had the call of the people but that will not make their complyance with this course of defection the lesse sinfull but rather the more for by their taking presentations now they do upon the matter declare that they were not duely called before and so they condemne the way of entry by election as not lawfull say that the way of entry by presentations from patrons is the only lawfull way for the patrons presentation is not cumulative unto but privative destructive of the peoples liberty of free election because where patrons do presente the peoples suffrages are never asked where people have power to elect patrons have no place to present so that the one destroyeth the other therefore if any who have been called by the people freely chosen should now take presentations it would import that in their judgment they were never duely called till now this were to annull their former election which they had from the people Next which was to them of greater moment they could not with freedome of conscience goe to the prelate seek collation for these reasone●… 1. Because there is no war●…and in all the word of God for any such thing no command for it no precedent or example of it Christian Ministers must walke by the ●…ule of the word now the scripture sheweth no difference betwixt a call a mission but both are one Rom. 1 1. Luk. 6 13. Act. 15 25. their ministry being a work 1 Thes. 5 12 13. 1 Tim. 5 17. 1 Cor. 3 6 7 8 9 10. 2 C●…r 6 1. they called workmen Mat. 9 37 38. stewards 1 Cor. 4 1. Wachmen Ezek. 3 2. Isa. 52 8. Shep●…erds Ephes. 4 11. Overs●…ers the like 〈◊〉 1 5 7. Act. 20 28. Heb. 13 17. Act. 15 22. their very c●…ll conferreth the power layeth an expresse obligation on them to performe the work otherwise by their call ordination they should only receive a disposition for the work See much more to this purpose in Voetij desperata causa papatus against jansen the papist lib. 2. Sect. 2. Cap. 17. 2. By this meanes they should have condemned themselves as not being lawfull ministers before or at least not such ministers as might lawfully exerce the office of a minister 3. They should in effect have annulled the ordination which they had by the imposition of the hands of the presbytery because by their deed they should have said that not withstanding of that ordination they had no power to exercise the office thus 4. They should have mocked this ordinance of Iesu●… Christ of solemne setting apart one for the work of the ministry by saying in effect that it is but a meer blinde for notwithstanding that one be solemnely ordained by the presbytery according to the primitive paterne yet the persone ordained must have his recourse unto another in a superiour order for liberty to put in exercise what he hath gotten in potentia or in Actu signato the like whereof cannot be showne in all the scriptures where read we that ever any who was ordained by a presbytery might not exerce the office without a new license from some other to what end serveth ordination if it be not for seting of one apart for the work That office or power is a cyphre altogether uselesse which cannot be exercised is not like an office or power granted by Iesus Christ. 5. By this meanes they should fully acknowlege the power authority of prelates over presbyters so subscribe unto their jurisdiction acknowledge them to be lawfull officers of Christ's house upon that account submit unto them which were poynt blancke co●…ary to their vow Covenant It is objected against this by the author of the seasonable case pag. 15. That thereverend persones instructed by law to call for that promise from ministers do not search into mens apprehensions concerning the grounds of their power all they seek of them is obedience to them in things lawfull and honest as being presently in power being by law ordinary overseers of the ministry in their duties and chief ordainers of them who enter into the ministery Ans. There is enough here to deterre any from this bussinesse for 1. There is no warrand in the word to owne them as chief ordainers there are no chief inferiour ordainers mentioned in the word this then must be a fiction a humane invention which no minister must acknowledge for all must goe to the law to the testimony 2. nor is there any such power known to appertain to any man to be an overseer of the ministry It is true the spirit of the prophets is subject to the prophets but there is no warrand for a Bishop over Bishops or for such an officer as is to oversee the ministers No officers must be owned in Christ's house but such as are of Christ's own appoyntment 3. And any other law cannot be owned in those matters Though the law of the land should give to any such a power subjects are not for that obliged to acknowledge approve of them as such The municipall lawes of a land will not warrand any new office or officer in Christ's house It appertaineth alone to Christ as King head of his owne house Church to institute his officers And it is a fearfull incroaching upon the privileges of the crowne of Christ for any state or potentate to take upon them to appoynt such offices officers as Christ hath not appoynted Therefore whether those persones reverend or irreverend all
is one that are so intrusted by law to call for such promises engadgments do search into mens apprehensions concerning the grounds of their power or not yet the very promiseing of obedience in things lawfull for in things unlawfull obedience must not be promised to any lawfull power under heaven is an acknowledgment of the lawfulnesse of their power of subjection as due unto them an owneing of them as lawfull officers lawfully installed authorized because this could not be done therefore neither could the other be done He replyeth 1. It is not obedience under a reduplication and as formally obedience they call for If it be obedience materiall they are satisfied Ans. And what more doth the most lawfull power under heaven ask do they search into the principles of mens doing such such acts do they examine the reduplications under which they act But. 2. Whether they call for it under that reduplication or not It is reall obedience they call for and. 3. The promiseing of obedience under whatsoever reduplication hath in its bosome an acknowledging of the lawfulnesse of the authority calling for such obedience He replyeth 2. Suppose it were so that obedience as formally obedience were required yet it were hard to say it could not be promised or that it could not be acknowledged that they have any la●…full authority for looking upon them as the Kings Maj. commissioners in causes ecclesiasticke for regulating the externall order of the Church in their severall bounds and impowered by the law of the land so to do the strickest presbyterians will not finde ground to disowne their office in that consideration Ans. Then 1. Prelats are nothing else but the Magistrats commissioners have no power or authority jure divino by any warrant of Gods law more then any other of the Magistrat's commissioners 2. whence had the prelats in the first three hundered yeers if so be there was any such as this author is bold enough to affirme but faileth in his undertaking to prove it their commission had they it from Nero the rest of the persecuting heathenish Emperours and if they had no commission from them whence had they their power or by what commission did they act or how could they be Bishops without such a commission How will this advocat extricate himself out of these difficulties evite a contradiction But. 3. If they be the Magistrat's commissioners in causes ecclesiasticke their power must reach no further then the Magistrats power doth in Church causes viz the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or his externall order If he streach it no surder How then cometh it to passe that they meddle with more then what concerneth the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or will h●… say that all the causes which prelats as prelats meddle with are but such ecclesiasticke causes As are for the regulating the externall order of the Church Then he must say that their chief power in ordination their chief if not only power in jurisdiction floweth from the Magistrat by vertue of his commission they act in that sphaere capacity and if he say so he speaketh plainely but without any ground in the word for then Magistrats might ordaine alone at least have a chief hand in ordaineing with others for what they may commissionate others to do in their name they may do themselves But how or what way shall we see this proved Where will he shew any example of any Magistrat as such ordaineing or deposeing Ministers censureing or excommunicating Offenders since the World began What a wilde notion must this be then And if this be the Basis which is so rotten let any judge what the superstructure must be It were tedious here to lanch forth into this debate concerning the Magistrats power in Church matters But sure it was never the doctrine of the Church of Scotland no●… of any reformed Church that what power the Prelats challenge to themselves as such did primarily belong unto reside in the hand of the civill Magistrat might be derived by commission from him unto them And this must be granted as a truth if it be once said that prelats Act in Church matters by vertue of a commission from the supreme Magistrat for a commission is distinct from a command the supreme Magistrat may command ministers to preach baptize do what himself cannot do for the doing whereof ministers borrow no power from him but he cannot propperly give them any commission for that effect The giving of a commission importeth the conveyance of a power for effectuating that which is to be done by the commissioner and that the person granting the commission might himself do that which he commissionateth others to do See this consequence fully cleared by famous Voctius Polit Eccles. pag. 146. arg 12. But now if there were no more to hinder any from acknowledging such a power in the prelats this is sufficient that it is granted they have all that power over presbyters by being his Maj. commissioners that they have all that power derived from him consequently that they have no such power at all because he from whom they derive that power by a commission hath no such power himself The confession of faith of the Church of Scotland acknowledgeth no such power in the civill Magistrat The scripture●… by which all are to regulat their actions in the Church of God giveth warrand for no such power No reformed divine except Arminians Erastians doth acknowledge any such power nor any confession of faith of any of the reformed Churches Behold then Reader see what monsters the Prelats are swollen up to that bignesse with mere winde phancies observe by what art they ascend They make the supreme Magistrat beleeve that all the power belongeth unto him to the end he may devolve it back againe over on them by a commission so authorize them according to that Tu facis hunc dominum te facit ille deum Thus you see they derive their power a non-habente potestatem from such as have it not to give therefore their commission is simpliciter null cannot be acknowledged by any faithfull minister or Christian Nor can their power be submitted unto And hence also it is clear what reason these honest Ministers had to refuise this acknowlegment not to take the canonicall oath which was so contradictory unto the oath of the Covenant But he replyeth That there is no contradiction betwixt the covenant and that canonicall oath or promise of obedience to the prelate because Timorcus who is tender in the matter of oaths maintaineth that the ministers who of old took the canonical oath did not swear the contradictory there to when they took the covenant wh●…nce it will follow necessaryly that they who have taken the Covenant do not contradict that oath if they should take the oath of canonical obedience Ans. Though this canonicall oath should not contradict the second
congregations But where shall a Magistrat be found for establishing this one forme of Government Is it not then saifest to say That Christ hath set down such a forme which all Churches all the world over are obliged to follow imitat for he is only head of the Church Obs. 3. When he stateth the question Part. 2 c. 3 § 1. He limiteth the disput unto two sorts or species of Government thus Whether the Church should be Governed by a colledge of presbyters or by a superiour order above the standing ministery having the power of jurisdiction ordination belonging to it But under favour this is not faire dealing in stateing of a controversy for his bussinesse is to shew that there is no forme at all setled by a Ius divinum That there is no warrand in the word for any one forme more then for all the rest that there is no one forme so determined by a positive law of God that all the Churches of Christ are bound to observe it but that it is left to the prudence of every particular Church to agree upon its own forme which it judgeth most fit for the ends of Governement in it self if this be his drift scope may not every one see how he prevaricateth here in limiting the disput to these two formes seing there are moe formes pretended unto The independents will grant that there is no warrand in the word for either of those two formes mentioned yet will allaidge that there is another forme allowed of God determined The Papists have a forme of Government it may be the prelats think that their forme differeth from that The Morellians have another forme distinct from all these the Erastians have a sixt it is possible that Mr Baxter shall give him a seventh made out of presbyterian episcopall independent Erastian now if his principles exclude all these why was the disput limited to two or doth he think that these other formes are expresly excluded by the word that Churches are not left at liberty to make choise of any of them but only of either of the two which he mentioned Then the scripture is expresly determinatly against severall formes of Governement if this be true his principles are overturned for if the law of God be expresly against some formes it must be more for other formes then for these all formes are not indifferent nor are men left at liberty to pitch upon what forme they please Obs. 4. He granteth Part. 2. c. 2. § 1. That the Government of the Church ought to be administred by officers of divine appoyntment And now what shall become of that Government by a superiour order above the standing ministery for a prelat as a superiour order is a distinct officer from presbyters so must have a divine appoyntment if he hath a divine appoyntment he must be a standing officer as well as presbyters if so men must not as they please lay him by but the Government by prelats must be juris divini if upon the other hand he be really a distinct officer hath no divine warrant or appoyntment the Government of the Church by prelats must be utterly unlawfull But what sayeth he to this objection Part. 2. c. 4. § 11. These officers are only said to be new that were never appoynted by Christ the Church may appoynt none such but if such be meaned as have a Charge of more then one particular congregation by the consent of pastours themselves such an officer is not ne●… for beside the generall practice of the Church from the first primitive times which have all consented in the use of such officers we finde the foundation of this power laid by Christ himself in the power which the Apostles were invested in which was extended over many both pastours Churches this power must be proved extraordinary before it can be said to cease that must be done by some arguments proper to their persones for if they be of a morall nature they will prove the office to be so too I say not but that the necessity of the office as in their persons for the first preaching propagating the Gospell did cease with them but that after their death it became unlawfull to take Charge of di●…ecesian Churches I deny for to make a thing unlawfull which was before lawfull there must be some expresse prohibition thus he To which it is answered 1. It appeareth then that a Bishop is a distinct officer from a Presbyter for the Apostles were distinct from Presbyters their office by Mr Stilling fleet is the same upon the matter with that of the Apostles viz a power over both Churches pastours for he will not grant that that power in the Apostles was extraordinar for he sayes that the foundation of this power was laid by Christ himself in that power which the Apostles were invested in therefore that power of the Apostles the power of Prelats must be one upon the matter and so Prelats must be distinct from Presbyters as the Apostles were 2. It is strange how he can so confidently say That it was the practice of the Church of God from the first primitive times to consent to the use of such officers s●…ing himself is at so much paines to prove that antiquity is most defective in the times immediatly after the Apostles that none dar with confidence beleeve the conjectures of Eusebius at 300 yeers distance from the Apostolicall times when he hath no other testimony to avouch but the hypotyposes of an uncertaine Clement the commentaries of Hegesippus c. Pag. 296. 297. 3. To let this passe Mr Stilling sleet would do well to shew whether the office of Apostles which is a distinct thing from their extraordinary immediat mission which he is pleased to make the maine distinguishing note of an Apostle also from the power of working miracles to confirme the truth of what they preached did cease by God's warrand and approbation or not if not how could any be so bold as to lay this office aside by which persons should be invested with power over many both Churches and pastours how can any say that it is not still necessary Mr Stillingfleet seemeth here to plead for the divine right of prelacy And indeed if the office power of Apostles be the same with prelacie if that power or office be not laid a side with God's warrand approbation it must still be an office allowed of God if so Mr Stillingfleet's notion will fall to the ground His saying that the necessitie of the office as in their persons for the first preaching propagating the Gospell is ceased is nothing to the purpose for he must speak of the office as it is the same with the office of Prelats It is certaine the necessity of the office as in their persons must cease because they are gone
the work of first preaching propagating the Gospell could be done by none after them when they had done it themselves but that was not their ordinary office if Mr Stillingfleet speak truth here If this office did cease by God's warrand then how can any raise it up againe without his expresse warrand for either it was the Lord's will when he caused it to cease that it should cease till he was pleased to make use of it againe or till men pleased to raise it up at their owne pleasure This last cannot be proved therefore seing God thought fit to lay is aside gave no signification of his minde when the Chur●… should be at liberty to make use of it againe It must now be a●… new office unwarranted of God so unlawfull 4. That rule th●… to make a thing unlawfull which was before lawfull there must be some expresse prohibition for bidding any furder use of such power will not alwayes hold in this case because some oth●… thing may be equivalent unto an exprese prohibition 〈◊〉 when God removeth the speciall propper work of such an office the speciall proper qualifications with which such officers were endued when those cease the office ceaseth God thereby declareth that the office work was extraordinary therefore should not continue As for Example in the primitive Church there were some Prophets these were distinct from Apostles Evangelists Pastors c. so were there workers of Miracles such as had the the gift of healing of speaking with tongues And when God withdrew those gifts fiting those off●…cers for the work unto which they were then called did he not therby declare that it was his will that that office should cease was there a necessity for any other expresse probition And because of the want of this expresse prohibition will it be lawfull now for any to set up such officers offices in the house of God when God giveth not the qualifications so giveth not the call thereunto So is it in this case of the Apostles when their qualifications their speciall work ceased their office ceased there will be no call for such officers till there be fit work God give fit qualifications without a call warrand it must be unlawfull to set up such an office againe This will be clearer if it be considered what was the speciall work of an Apostle It was this A planting of Churches setling of the Gospell government in them by ins●…nteing the standing officers thereof that by an eminent power immediatly granted by Christ to them solely This was their speciall work this ceased with them so did their office with it As also the qualifications And therefore it would be unlawfull now for a Church at here own hand to set up such an officer againe though there be no expresse probition By this it is clear 5. That the power office of Apostles laid no foundation for prelaticall power the work belonging to them as such being altogether extraordinare It is true their power did extend over many Churches pastours but yet 1. They were not fixed to such such particular dioecies as propper to themselves but sometimes moe of them were to gether in one place following their work Nor. 2. Did they account themselves the sole pastors of such or such a Church after other ministers had been ordained there 3. ●…or did they ordaine alone in Churches constituted nor 4 Did they exerce jurisdiction alone but alwayes they joyned others with them in Churches setled 5. They assumed to themselves no negative voice either in ordination or jurisdiction so in them there could be no foundation for prelacy laid even as to their common work or work of a lasting nature which did not properly peculiarly appertaine to them as Apostles 6. Neither finally were they consecrated ordained after the manner that prelats are now consecrated being first made Deacons next Presbyters then Bishops so that there is a vaste disparity But distrusting this answer he giveth a second § 12. to this purpose The extending of any Ministeriall power is not the appoynting of a new office because every Minister hath a relation Actu primo to the whole Church of God the resiraint enlargment of which power is subject to positive determinations of prudence conveniency in Actu secundo The exercise and execution of the power of order belongeth to every one in his personall capacity but as to the power of jurisdiction though it belong habitually and Actu primo to each presbyter yet being about matters of publicke and common concernment the limit ation and exercise of it belongeth to the Church in common such is the power of visiting Churches of ordination and censures and when this is devolved to some particular persons by the rest of the pastors or by the Magisrat quoad executionem it belongeth to them Ans. 1. This contradicteth the former answer for the former answer did suppone that these were distinct officers from presbyters because their office was such as the ordinary office of the Apostles and the Apostles were distinct from other Church officers even by their office not in respect only of their extraordinare mission or power of working miracles But this answer affirmeth them to be one the same with presbyters But. 2. By this answer he might plead for the Pope for every Minister in actis primo hath a relation to the whole Church so might be a Pope if the supreme Magistrat or the rest of the Ministers would devolve upon him the execution of the power of jurisdiction so the Pope is no new officer but a mere presbyter only his power of jurisdiction is enlairged So may he plead for Cardmals Patriarchs Primats Archbishops as well as for Bishops But it will be objected that the Pope pretendeth to some other thing as the warrand of his power even to a jus divinum Ans. so do prelats but with Mr Stillingfleet all is one whether that be pretended unto or not for it is no matter what they say of themselves but what any may feigne of them to the end they may both deceive others be deceived themselves This is as if one would defend a man who had taken upon himself to be a King of such or such a common wealth contrare to the fundamentall lawes of the land and would alledge that he were no distinct officer from any other member of Parliam because for sooth the power of Government as to its execution is subject to positive determinations Parliaments may do commissionat some of their number to some eminent piece of work as to be a Generall or the like he who calleth himself King is nothing else notwithstanding that he rule the commonw with as absolute power unlimited as ever King did Sure any man of understanding would smile at such a defence and just
such an one is Mr Stillingfleet's prelats rule domineer with as absolute unlimited power as ever any did when it is alledged that they account themselves distinct officers from superiour to other presbyters that there is no warrand for any such officers Mr Stillingfleet their new advocat cometh in sayeth They are no distinct officers let themselves say what they will you may take them up as no distinct officers so suffer them to domineer still if you look upon them as no distinct officers there is no hazard all is saife be they Pope be they Prelat let them pretend to never so high speciall commissions as speciall distinct officers yet they may be submitted unto obeyed this mentall conception will make all right 3. When any are disputing against an intruder in the house of God whether is it saifest to take him up in his own colours to look upon him as he holdeth forth himself or to paint him as any think best If any disputant would take liberty to paint him as he pleaseth he should not dispute for truth but deal deceitfully Let Mr Stillingfleet answere this question Whether is it possible that a man may give out himself for a new officer or not or whether is there any hazard that such an one may be acknowledged countenanced as an officer as such an officer as he giveth himself forth to be in the house of God or not If Mr Stillingfleet be consonant to his principles he must answere that it is not possible for really there can be no new officers warranded of God every one is at liberty to take them up under a right notion there is an end then let all the popish rable ten times moe come in they may be submitted unto for really there can be no other officers in God's house but pastours deacons with Mr Stillingfleet every one may look on all the rest as having their power either restricted or enlairged according to the determination of prudence 4. It may be asked whether the Apostles were distinct officers from presbyt yea or not If they were distinct what was it which made them distinct It could not be their different way of mission for Matthias had not such a mission as Iames Iohn Peter the rest had yet all of them were Apostles Matthias no lesse then the rest It could not be their extraordinary qualifications for Prophets workers of miracles speakers with tongues had extraordinary qualifications yet they were not the same with Apostles further distinct qualifications make not distinct officers Or was it a larger extended power Then it is certane that prelats upon the same account must be distinct officers from other presbyters for they have a larger extended power then other presbyters have 5. Doth Mr Stillingfl think that there is no difference betuixt a man who acteth as commissionated from a judicature having his power particular commission from them a man who doth all of himself by his own power having a commission from none that there is no difference betuixt one who receiveth commands from others as accountable to them one who taketh upon him to command them as he thinkest best betuixt the generall of an army sent forth by the Estates of a land ruled without a King having power commission from them a King making use of the Estates or of the Parliament of the Kingdome as his counsellours whose advice he will follow or not follow as seemeth him good commanding all of them a●… pleaseth him best If he think that there is no difference betuixt these then indeed he cannot be much blamed for thinking that the prelat whom he busketh is one the same with the prelat of whom the controversie is But in sober sadnesse let it be asked of Mr Stillingfleet If he did satisfie himself with this his fiction notion There is no controversy now about what may be or of a man in the moon but of the prelats who are now in being concerning these it would be asked whether he thinketh that they ar●… chosen by the Church over which they are that they are impowered by that Church or by the officers of that Church for that effect that they are accountable unto them so that their power may be restrained at the Churches pleasure Or not rather that they choose ordaine the presbyters commissionat them calling them to an account punishing as they think sit usurping useing this power as their owne not borrowing it from the presbyters in whole or in part as being themselves solely invested with all Church power from Christ letting out the same to presbyters as they think meet Now it is of these that the controversy is it is such as are understood when it is said that they are new Church officers there is no controversy concerning Mr Stillingfleet's supposed Commissioners for whether such as he speaketh of be new distinct officers or not it is no matter so long as these of whom the disput is are such without all question for any thing which Mr Stillingfleet hath said to the contrary for the persons he speaketh of are not the same with the persons concerning whom the controversy is Commissioners having all their power derived from others are one thing such as have all the power from with in themselves are another thing But. 6. To put the matter more out of doubt let it be considered that a distinct proper work with a distinct ordination for that effect is enough to make a distinct officer What distinguisheth Presbyters Dea●…ns Let ruleing elders be laid a side seing Mr Stillingfleet will not owne them as Church officers but their distinct peculiar work ordination so since prelats assume to themselves as their peculiar work the power of jurisdiction ordination to speak nothing of the power of order they do account themselves so must all take them to be distinct officers All the prelats that ever were yet in the world did look upon themselves as distinct from presbyters all who ever wrote of prelats took them up as such whether Iure Divino or Humano all is one as to this bussinesse of their being distinct till Mr Stlling fleet did vent his new notions 7. That a judicature which acteth joyntly in matters of jurisdiction may in some particulars for facilitating their execution impower one or moe of their number for that effect is easily granted but that they may so Impower them as to denude themselves wholly of the power so enlarge the power of others as to null their owne must be otherwayes proved then by Mr Stilling fleet 's bare assertion Christ's commission taketh in both the power of order jurisdiction alloweth his servants no more to denude themselves of the one then of the other They themselves must answere for
persecution is another question Elders are ordained appoynted to Churches Act. 14 23. Tit. 1 5. But enough of this in this place The first particular then must be a little more narrowly examined he sayeth That in some places at first there were noneplaced but only a Bishop Deacons for this he citeth Clement's Epistle saying The Apostles preaching through countreyes and cities ordained the first fruits of such as beleeved to be Bishops and Deacons But by Bishops here he cannot understand such Bishops as are now spoken of that is such as had power over Presbyters and Churches for himself doth abundantly cleare the contrary And what can be allaidged to prove that he meaneth only one Bishop in one place is not yet apparent only he referreth his reader to other testimonies which must also be looked upon examined But it is certaine the place it self speaketh as much for one Deacon in a place as for one Presbyter or Bishop for both are one as himself will acknowledge as clearly for moe Bishops as for moe Deacons in villages or cities 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here are as well Bishops in cities villages as Deacons But then he citeth Epiphanius contra Ae●…m Haeres 75. saying That at the first there were no Bishops appoynted then the Apostle writteth to Bishops Deacons for the Apostles could not setle all things at first for there was a necessity of Presbyters Deacons for by these two Officers all Ecclesiastick offices might be performed for where there was none found worthy to be a Bishop the place remained without one but where necessity required one there were some found fit some were ordained Bishops but for want of convenient number there could be no Presbyters found out in such places they were contented with the Bishop Deacons But what can Epiphanius or any other writter in his time do as to the clearing of what was the practice of the Apostles concerning which is the present discourse must their testimony be beleeved without a word of Scripture to warrand the same Yea must they be beleeved when they speak contrary to the word Be it so that there was a time in which there were Presbyters Deacons againe a time in which there were Bishops deacons what will this say so long as nothing is said to prove that these Bishops Presbyters were distinct officers not one the same as is supposed of the Bishops presbyters now under debate all this will never prove a distinct species of Government but alwayes one the same whether the presbyters be called presbyters or Bishops 3. Be it so that in some places there were only one Bishop or Presbyter deacons appoynted of which there can no warrand be seen in scripture for scripture sayeth that there were presbyters ordained 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 14 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tit. 1 5. for it was to cities whither the Apostles did most resort to plante Churches not to countrey villages where gentilisme did long thereafter continue whence these of that religion were called Pagani what will this speak for Episcopall Government so long as this one Bishop could not be a Bishop properly so called not having presbyters under him Or doth he think that it is inconsistent with presbyterian Government that one preaching presbyter be set over a parish or a village that he others joyn with the presbyters one or moe of a Neighbour city in things of common concernment or must he rule in that village independently Mr Stillingfleet will not acknowledge this Nor can he say that he can exerce Episcopall power Therefore though this were granted to him the Government may still be presbyteriall 4 How can Epiphanius say that the Apostles could not setle all things at the first if they could not do it who could do it else had they not the Spirit in great measure to prompt them to do what was fit expedient either they could not get men fit to be Bishops or a sufficient number to be presbyters But this will suppone that at that time presbyters Bishops were destinct which Stilling fleet will not acknowledge Epiphanius cannot give one instance of a Bishop distinct from superiour unto preaching Presbyters setled in a Church alone with some few deacons The reader may see this passage more fully examined by Wallo Messalinus pag. 102. pag. 277. c. The next author which he citeth is Clemens Alexandrinus out of Eusebius saying That Iohn after his ret●…n from Pa●…mos went abroad into severall places in some constituting Bishops in some setting in order whole Churches in other choosing ●…ur one among the rest whom he set over the Church But of this the 〈◊〉 is utterly silent therefore it cannot be received as an undo●… ed thing what would Mr Stillingfleet gather from 〈◊〉 He seteth it down in the words of Walo Messalinus Pag. ●…25 In majoribus urbibus plures i. e. it is probable that there were mo●… presbyters ordained in greater townes and fewer in lesser tow●… b●… villages or litle parishes one only especially when there was no 〈◊〉 number of beleevers And now let any ●…dge it there c●… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thing gathered thence for Episcopall Government 〈◊〉 thing for this end he must prove out of this passage 〈◊〉 doth nothing He must prove out of it that the 〈◊〉 some places did setle presbyterian Government 〈◊〉 places Episcopall otherwise he is but beating the winde for no asserters of Presbyterian Government did ever yet finde them selves necessitated to maintaine that the Apostles did set up an equall number of Presbyters in every Church or yet a plurality of preaching presbyters in each village or countrey place or such as the Greeks call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so that though all this were granted his poynt would not yet be proved At le●… he citeth Ambrose or rather ●…ilarius in Eph. 4. saying primum enim c. i. e. at first all did teach all did baptize at any time or on any day but when the Church took in all places about there were conventicles instituted there were Governours other offices appoynted that so none might assume to himself that office which did not appertaine to him not being as yet ordained therefore the writtings of the Apostles do not in every poynt agree with the ordination which now is in use in the Church c. But how this can speak home to the poynt i●… not discernable For the author is to give the ground why the writings of the Apostles were not suiteable to the times in which he lived viz because matters were other wayes setled in his time then in the dayes of the Apostles and will any hence inferre that the Apostles setled Churches with distinct formes o●… models because after ages did so who will beleeve this consequence 2. There is no mention made
function any more within the Kingdome If the objection goe upon this supposition it is sufficiently answered above But next suppone there were such a command expresly prohibiting them they were not bound to give obedience Because to inhibite discharge the Actuall exercise of the function of the ministry is a spirituall censure it is reall suspension which is a sentence that can lawfully be passed only by a Church judicature the civill Magistrat can no more suspende from the exercise then he can depose from the office for the one is a degree unto the other See Apollde jure Maj. circa sacra pars 1 pag. 334 335 336. And Rutherfurd's due right of presbyteries pag. 430 431. And therefore though the civill Magistrat should passe such a sentence conscientious Ministers ought not to obey because the civill Magistrat in passing such a sentence is not keeping within his sphaere but transgressing the limites of his calling when the civill Magistrat is usurping the power that doth not belong unto him obedience is not to be yeelded neither is he to be countenanced or encouraged in that Therefore though there were no more this is sufficient to call all Ministers to give testimony against such an usurpation by refuseing to obey any such Act or by preaching when God giveth a call in his providence in any place they come●… unto though there were never such an expresse Act to the contrary They m●…st not by their silence And obedience unto such commands gratify the civill Magistrat make him another pope See Apollon ju●… Maj. circ●… sacra par 1 pag. 338. SECTION XVII It is lawfull for Ministers to preach after the pretended prelate hath either suspended or deposed them BEing now speaking of the trouble that Ministers are put to for preaching of the Gospell it will not be amisse to speak h●…e of another case And it is concerning such as either are or shall be suspended or deposed by the prelats or their Synods And it may be some may think that though they be not bound to be silent upon the sentence of banishment passed against them by the civil Magistrat Yet being formally silenced or deposed by the Bishop or his Synod they cannot lawfully contraveen that Act sentence it being the act sentence of a Church judicature or of such as have formally Church power authority But the serious pondering of these six things will cleare that notwithstanding thereof they are bound to look upon themselves as Ministers so not only may but ought to exerce their Ministery as God shall put opportunity in their hands 1. Submission unto such a sentence would be an acknowledging of the prelate of his power this is contrary to their oath covenant Such officers as prelats were cast out of that Church abjured now submission unto their sentence would be an expresse owneing of them acknowledging them to be really cloathed with Church power particularly with power over preaching presbyters so they should acknowledge another officer in the Church then Christ hath instituted which no true Christian ought to do If the 〈◊〉 should take upon him to depose or suspend any Gospell Minister would not that Minister acknowledge the power of the Pope if upon the receiving of such a sentence he should leave off the exercise of his Ministery And when the civil Magistrat taketh upon him to depose a Minister immediatly if that Minister should upon such a sentence be silent submit would he not thereby acknowledge that the Magistrat had power to depose Ministers formally Sure none could doubt of this So then it is beyond all question that to submit unto such a sentence would be a clear acknowledging of their power this is diametrically opposite unto an endeavour to extirpat them 2. If it were lawfull to submit unto their sentence it were undoubtedly lawfull to compeer before their court 〈◊〉 before a lawfull court answere unto any accusation given in against them for if one may acknowledge the lawfulnesse of the sentence of such a court they may also acknowledge it lawfull to answere before them so lawfull to owne them as a lawfull court Now seing conscientious Ministers could not have clearnesse to compeer before the prelat or his Synod when summoned can it be expected that they should counter-act their own testimony condemne themselves by submitting unto their sentence 3. Such a submission would prove very stumbling unto the godly for 1. It would encourage them to owne the prelats as lawfull Church officers to compeer before them to obey their acts so to owne acknowledge them as lawfully impowered for if they be owned acknowledged in one particular why not in all 2. it would wronge the peace of the godly who have hither●…ill keeped a distance give a check unto their conscientious walk ing when they should see ministers submitting to their sentence as to the sentence of any uncontroverted lawfull Church judicature 4. Who ever condemne this non-submission sure such as of late thought they could not in conscience submit also all such as did approve them in that particular unto the sentence of deposition or suspension passed against them by a controverted assembly because they looked upon it as no lawfull Generall assembly being not lawfully constituted cannot condemne this but according to their principles must preach for no doubt the power of prelats is much more to be questioned then the power of such assemblies even many who will stand to the justifying of that assembly will never justifie the power of prelats therefore it cannot but be expected that such as thoughte the sentence of that controverted assembly null should now look on the sentence of a prelat as null and of no effect and therefore as little if not lesse to be regairded submitted unto 5. Beyond all question it is a sentence proceeding from such as have no power therefore ought not in conscience to be submitted unto A minister who is called of God must not lay aside his office or the exercise of his office power upon every man's desire But if he be exauctorated at all it must be by such as have lawfull authoritie for that effect unto whom he is bound in conscience to subjecte himself And so he shall have peace though the sentence be passed clave errante unjustly There will no man quite any of his goods upon a sentence comeing from an incompetent judge And shall a Minister quite with his Ministerie which should be dearer unto him then any thing else upon a sentence proceeding from an incompetent judge ora privat person this in reason cannot be expected 6. If so be they should submit unto this sentence account themselves no Ministers It would follow that though the prelats were all away they might not preach nor exerce any ministeriall Act untill a Church judicature would take off the sentence againe then not only they
governement was which by this covenant they were bound to owne to continue in consequently what governement was abjured thereby Therefore all the difficulty is to know what that government was which the Church did owne yet there is no difficulty here for it is as clear as the sun at noonday that it was Church governement by presbyteries Synods assemblies which they both before at after that time did owne defend till it was violently taken away And if the citations of the assembly 1638 will amount to this they will sufficiently declare that Episcopacy was abjured at that time And whether their citations shall do so or not the indifferent reader may judge when he hath considered laid together these two twenty particulars into which the citations shall be branched forth 1. When the Church had been wre●…ing could not prevaile against Bishops from the yeer 1571 unto the yeer 1575 being continually wearied with complaints given in against them they entered at last into a search of the office it self did agree in this that the name Bishop was common to every one who had a particular flock to which he preached administrated the sacraments so it could not designe a distinct officer 2. Anno 1576. the assembly did censure such prelats as had not betaken themselves to some particular flocks 3. In the assembly 1578 the second book of discipline was unanimously agreed upon 4 At another assembly that same yeer the moderator told Montrose Chanceler Seaton Lindsay That they had drawn up out of the pure fountaine of God's word such a discipline as was meet to remaine in this kirk 5. At that same assembly it was ordained that such as were called Bishops should be content to be pastours of one flock should usurp no criminall jurisdiction should not vote in Parliament without a commission from the kirk should not Empire over their particular elderships should not usurpe the power of presbyteries 6. An. 1579 The assembly judgeth that every meeting for exercise might be accounted a presbytery 7. An. 1580. after deliberation it was found that the office of prelats was pretended had no warrand in the word And they ordained that such should dimit Leave the samine as an office unto which they were not called of God this was before as was said above the subscription of the Covenant 8. The same assembly sendeth some commissioners to his Maj. desireing that the book of policy might be established by an Act of Councell untill the meeting of a Parliament 9. In the assembly 1581. At Glasgow the Act of the former assembly at Dundee was explained i●… was showne that thereby the Church did condemne the whole state of Bishops as they were then in Scotland 10. At this assembly the confession of faith was presented the plot of presbyteries with the King's letter to the noblemen gentlemen of the countrey for furthering the erection of presbyteries thus at the very presenting of the confession to the assembly to be subscribed the King the assembly agree in one judgement as to the governement of the Church viz. That it should be presbyteriall according to this harmonious desire presbyteries were erected in severall places 11. In that same assembly The second book of discipline was insert in the registres of the Church immediatly after the Covenant was insert That all posterity might see that the governement which they swore to maintaine owne in the confession or Covenant was the same which was contained in the book of discipline thus that book of discipline the confession or Covenant did harmoniously accord 12. Anno 1581. The assembly would not suffer Mr Montgomery Minister at Sterlin to become bishop of Glasgow but commanded him to waire on his Ministery at Sterlin under the paine of excommunication 13. In the same assembly it was acknowledged that the Estate of Bishops was condemned by the kirk a commission for erecting of moe presbyteries was granted and a new ordinance made for subscribeing the Covenant can any man now doubt what that government was which the Church in those dayes owned by that Covenant 14. Anno 1582. a new commission was granted for erecting of moe presbyteries Mr Montgomery for usurping the place of a bishop was ordained to be excommunicated for presbytery prelacy are incompatible 15 In another assembly that same yeer commission was given to some presbyteries to try censure such as were called bishops and some were sent unto the Councill to desire their approbation of an Act for establishing of presbyteries Synods assemblies did the Church incline any thing to prelacy then 16. Anno 1586. It was determined at an assembly that there are no other Church officers set down in the scripture beside Pastors Doctors Elders Deacons that should be in the Church now 17. Anno 1587. It was ordained at an Assembly that the admission of Mr Montgomery suppose but to the temporality of the bishoprick of Glasgow should be annulled with all possible diligence that slander might be removed from the Church 18. In the same Assembly there was a letter drawn up unto his Maj. shewing that they found the office of bishops not agreable to the word of God but damned in diverse assemblies 19. Anno 1590. when the confession or Covenant was subscribed universally of new the assembly desired a ratification of the liberties of the Kirk in her jurisdiction discipline in presbyteries Synods and generall assemblies 20. It was ordained also that all intrants should subscribe the book of discipline especially the heads controverted also all who were presently in office under the paine of excommunication 21. In the assembly 1591. the forementioned Act was renewed 22. Anno 1592. commissioners were sent to attend the Parliament to desire a rescindeing of the Acts of Parliament Anno 1584. made in prejudice of of the Church a ratifying of the discipline of the Church both which were granted now the reader may judge from these particulars what was the sense of the Church of Scotland at that time of the confession or Covenant whether these citations amount to any thing or not And whether or not this author had any reason to slight undervalue so far as he doth the paines taken by that reverend Assembly to cleare the oath according to the sense of those who first took it But he addeth That Episcopacy was not accounted unlawfull even in the judgment of the assembly of the Church within Six yeers after where it was declared That the name bishop hath a speciall charge function thereto annexed by the word of God and that such may be admitted to a benefi●…e Ans. It is true Anno 1586. there was a conference drawn on at Haly rude house by the King betwixt some Ministers some whom he did commissionat which did conclude that the Bishop should have a care of one flock That he
had to write so I know not except he did build upon that which Iohannes Major sayeth But from the instruction of the Scots in the faith to conclude that the Church after it was gathered had no other for me of governement will not stand with reason for be it as they speak that by the travelle of some pions monks the Scots were first converted unto Christ it cannot be said that the Church was ruled by monks seing long after those times it was not permitted to monks to medle with the maters of the Church nor were they reckoned among the Clergy thus he To which it is easily answered 1. That the sole word of a late Historian of an Excommunicated forsworne Prelate speaking in his own cause will have lesse weight with every rationall man then the Testimony of so many famous eminent Historyographers known through the world 2. All the Prelat's logick will not conclude from these words of Boetius that there was Episcopall governement among the Culdees if Boetius himself may be heard whom all are bound to beleeve better then this Prelate who reasoneth according to his skill for he lib. 7. c. 28. sayeth erat Palladius primus omnium c. i. e. Palladius was the first of all who did bear holy Magistracy among the Scots being made Bishop by the great Pope thus he affirmeth clearly that Palladius was the first who had Episcopall Power or exercised a Magistraticall domineering power in Church maters 3. Could Buchanan a man many stages beyond the Arch-prelate know no reason or ground for what he said but what this Archprelat could perceave who had no will to open his Eyes 4. As this Archprelat doeth wrong his own credite as an Historian when without warrant he contradicteth so many famous Historians so doeth he discover much weakness in reasoning for to say that the monks did not governe the Church befor Palladius landed in Scotland because after Palladius came they were putt out of all accompt got not liberty to do so is such a ridiculous consequence as can hardly be paralleled as if one should reason now say the Church of Scotland was not governed by Ministers befor the year 1661. becaus after Bishops got all the power into their hands the Ministers had no power of governement in the Church Much more might be said here against the reasoning of this late Historian were it sitt to insist upon every such frivolous argument of his So then from these forocited Historians from Baronius in his Annal it appeareth that the Church of Scotland was severall hundereths of years without a domineering Prelate after this time that this Palladius came she was still in a decaying condition through the increase of popery which at length did overspread the whole land in which Romish darkness she did ly untill about the year 1494. About which time the Lord began to visite that poor Church with his salvation to cause some light of the Gospel to break up in severall places of the land but no sooner did the light appear but as soon did those Antichristian Prelats vassals of the Pope begin to rage to raise persecution against the young professors of the truth followers of the lamb so with fire faggot they sought to destroy all who prosessed the true Religion untill about the year 1550. when notwithstanding of all this rage cruelty of the Beast his followers the knowledge of the trueth did spread through the land a farther worke of Reformation began to he caryed on by worthies whom the Lord raised up such as famous Mr Knox others who were singularly owned of God in that work Though Mr Spotiswood according to his usuall maner of mistaking the works of God of venting his enmity to piety purity is pleased in the 60. page of his history to say that this Reformation was violent disorderly And albert at that time the Queen was endevouring by all means possible to keep up the Idolatry of Rome to suppresse the Reformed Religion so powerfully did the Lord in his goodness assist these worthves that in the year 1560. there was a large Confession of Faith drawn up at the command of the Parlament which did conveen that year in which Confession all the Popish errours were renounced after it was exhibited to the Parliament there read when it was read the Prelats who were there present had not one word to speak against it which when the Earle of Marshall did perceave he said Seing the Bishops who by their learning can for the zeal they should have to the truth would gain say if they knew any things repugnant say nothing against the said Confession I cannot but thinke that it is the very truth of God Thus this Confession was openly avowed professed by this Parliament as is clear by the act 6. parl 1. King Ja. 6. Au. 1567. act 86. par 6. An. 1579. where these words are found in both acts and decerns declairs that all sundry who either gainesayeth the word of the Evangell receaved approved as the heads of the Confession of faith professed in parliament of befor in the year of God 1560. At this Parliament there are severall acts made against popery as against the Masse against the Popes authority jurisdiction for such as were for the Reformation or the Congregation as they were then called did supplicate that they would condemne the Antichristian doctrine would restore the Discipline of the ancient Church discharge the popes jurisdiction accordingly as was said there is an act made ordaining that the Bishop of Rome called the Pope have no jurisdiction nor authority within the Realme in any time coming and that no Bishop or other prelate of the Realme use any jurisdiction in time coming by the said Bishop of Romes authority under the pain c. which was afterwards ratified by severall acts in the dayes of King James And thus by act of Parliament the Reformed Religion is established the church governement by Prelats is virtually discharged because Prelats then had no power but what they had from Rome when the current is cut off at the head it must needs cease in the streams But this will be the more clear if we consider how the Reformers were dealing for the establishment of Discipline together with the Doctrine knowing that the doctrine would not be long keeped pure if the Popish discipline governement were still retained upon this the great council giveth a charge dated April 29 1560. requiring commanding them in the name of the Eternall God as they would answer in his presence to committ to writing in a book deliver their judgements touching the Reformation of Religion which heretofore in this Realme as in others hath been utterly corrupted According unto which charge the first Booke of Discipline as it was called in which book the governement
enjoy the place power of a Superintendent least the power place might be abused at length degenerate unto the old power of Prelats but even in those bounds where such lived did appoint others to Superintend as Mr Pont in Galloway They would not divide the bounds of those Superintendents according to the Prelats Dioceses but after another manner They devided the land into ten parts having respect to the edification advantage of the poor people These Superintendents were chosen by the consent of the whole bounds which they were to visite They were not consecrated but onely sett apart to that worke by preaching prayer as is to be seen in the order prefixed to the old Psalme-books They were tryed examined by the Ministers of these bounds They had other Ministers conjunct with them when they ordained any Nather had they sole power of Excommunication for Reformed Churches had power by the Book of Discipline to excommunicate the contumacious the tractate of Excommunication prefixed to some old Psalme-books sheweth that they might do it without the advyce of the Superintendent They were subject to the censure of the Ministers Elders of the Province who might depose them in some cases Their maine worke was preaching for they were to preach at the least thrice every week They had their own particular flocks beside with which they stayed always save when they were visiting the bounds committed unt●… them They might not try any Minister their alone but we●… commanded to have the neerest reformed Church oth●… learned men conjunct by an act of the fourth Nationall Assembly An. 1562. They might not transport a Minister without the consent of the Synod as is elear by act fourth of the f●… Nationall Assemblie 1562. They might not discusse any important question their alone as is clear by act first of the ninth Nationall Synod An. 1564. All were at liberty to appeal from them to the Nationall Synod as is clear by act fifth Assembly sixth They were to be subject to the Assembly as is clear by th●… fourth Assembly an 1562. They never did Moderate in Generall Assemblies unlesse they had been chosen by votes Who can be so foolish then as to beleeve Mr. Spotiswood saying in his H●…story pag. 258. that the power of Superintendents was Episcopall for they did elect ordaine Ministers they did praeside in Synod●… and direct all Church censures nather was any excommunication pronunced without their warrant seing the publick acts of the Nationall Assemblies are of more credite then this prelate who knew as litle what it was to be a faithfull Historian as he knew what it was to be an accurate Logician Beside that An. 1562 at the Nationall Assembly there were some Ministers chosen to assist the five Superintendents for no moe could be gotten setled for want of maintenance had equall power with them were commanded to give accompt of their diligence unto every Nationall Synod there to lay down their office And Mr. Spotiswood hath not the face to say that these Commissioners had Episcopall power yet their power was equall with the power of Superintendents When thus the Church had shaken off so far as lay in her power the yoke of Prelacy she beginneth to exerce that power which Christ had given to her that same year 1560. there is a Nationall Assemblie keeped which did make severall Canons concerning the ordering the affairs of the church and yearly there after once or oftener prore nata according to by vertue of her intrinsick power she did keep her Courts notwithstanding that in the meane time the Queen the court were but smal friends to the Protestant cause Anno 1564 the Nationall Assemblie did send some Commissioners to the Queen to desire among other things that ●…o Bishoprick c. having more Churches then one annexed there unto should be disponed in time coming to any one man but that the Churches thereof being dissolved should be provided to severall persons so as every man having charge may serve at his own Church according to his vocation Anno 1566 at the eleventh Nationall Assembly the second Helvetian Consession of Faith was presented approven in all points except in the particular concerning festivall dayes by which Confession prelacy is accompted ane humane devyce no ordinance of Christ. But Satan envying the faire beginnings of this Infant Church stirred up some of the Statesmen against her who having possession of Church rents Prelats Benefices fearing to lose the same did therefor devyse a way for establishing themselves in the possession of those Church rents by getting in some Tulchan Bishops as they were called who might have the name of the whole Benefice but rest contented with a small part to themselves leaving the rest in the hands of these Nobles and accordingly the Earle of Morton stirred up the Earle of Marr then Viceroy to convocate an Assembly at Leith by the means of the Superintendent of Angus who when they did meet Jan. 12. 1571 did nominate six of their number to meet with six appoynted by the councill these twelve did condiscend to severall things tending to the setting up of Prelats And according to these resolutions the Earle of Morton getteth one Mr. Douglas made Bishop of Saintandrews Mr. Boyd of Glasgow Mr. Paton of Dunkel Mr. Grahame of Dumblaine This was a very sad stroke but God did not leave that poor church in that case for within two moneths thereafter A national Assembly did meet who finding that these resolutions gave such offence did appoint some of their number to examine the same but the acts of this Assembly were there after taken out of the Registers And in August 1572. at the Nationall Assembly there was a Protestation made against these inuovations 〈◊〉 that whatever condescension should be yeelded unto should be onely for the Interim till a more perfect order might be obtained So at the Assembly in Aug. 1573. it was decreed that Bishops should have no more power then the superintendents had Mr Paton of Dunkell is accused for taking more Mr Gordon of Galloway is condemned And in the nixt Assembly it is concluded that every Bishop should be subject to the Assembly should conferr no Benefice without the advyce of three Ministers Spotiswood the false Historian thought that because of his silence the world should never have gotten notice of this which these Assemblies did of purpose to heme in the power of these prelats whom the Court was setting up with such violence at such a time when they could do no more At length the day breaketh up clearer about the year 1575. the Lord stirreth up his servants putteth spirit courage in them so that in the Assembly it was debated whether these new Bishops Superintendents Commissioners were a honour or a burden to the Church Mr Iohn Dury protested that they should do nothing in prejudice of
professeth repentance with such solemne obtestations as affected the whole Assembly Upon this the sentence is delayed the presbitery of Glasgow is appointed to advertise the provinciall Synod of Lothian who were ordained to excommunicate him in case he relapsed And as they feared so he returned to his vomit with violence intended to enter the pulpit when the presbitery according to the appointment of the Generall Assembly were beginning a processe against him the Laird of Minto provost of the Town presented a warrant from his Maj. to stay the processe when they were going on he pulleth forth Mr. Iohn Howeson minister at Cambuslang Moderator imprisoned him in the Tolbooth But for all this Mr. Montgomery is excommunicated by Mr. Iohn Davidson the same was intimated in all the Churches The council declareth the sentence null against this the Ministers of Edenburgh give open testimonies in their preaching for this cause they are commanded to remove out of the Town within the space of twenty fowre houres At this time there was an Assembly sitting at Edenburgh who send some of their number with a supplication to his Majesty wherein they shew That indeed he was the Head of the Commonwealth but onely a member of the Church as a ch●…f member he should have the chief care thereof but now it was not so th●…r decrees are res●…inded they are forced by his servants Ministers are draw●…e out of pulpits that he was playing the pope usurping both the swords and when they come present it unto the Council the Earle of Arran cryeth out if there were any that durst subscribe the same where upon Mr. Andro Melvin answereth we dare taking a penne out of the clerks hand sayeth to his brethren who were commissionated with him comeforward so he they did subscribe the same This storme is not yet blowne over for the next year 1583. Mr. Andro Melvin is summoned before the Council for saying in his preaching That ministers should presente to princes the example of their predecessours as Daniel did the exemple of Nebuchadn●…zar to Belteshar But now if any should hold forth what evill King James the third got by a company of flatterers it would be presently said that he had gone from his text must be accused of treasone But when he compeareth he declineth their judgement aff●…ming that what was spoken in pulpit ought first to be tried by the presbytery that they could not in primâ instantià medle therewith But they proceed though they could get nothing proven for his declining he is commanded to the Castle of Edenburgh then to Blackness but being advertised of his danger by his friends he retireth unto Berwick Ann●… 1584. the storme groweth to a height for in May there is a parliament suddainly conveened which dischargeth all Church judicatories giveth the King power over all causes civil and ecclesiastick dischargeth all declining of the King his Council in any mater civil or ecclesiastick under the paine of treason also all Ministers to meddle in sermons with the affairs of his Highness his Estate see act 129 130 131 134. of the 8. parl of King James sixt when Mr David Lindsay Minister at Leith was sent by his br●…thren to intreat●…the King to pa●…e no act in prejudice of the Church he is committed to Blackness there detained prisoner 47. weeks And Mrs Andro Polwart Patrick Galloway Iames Carmichel are denounced rebels are forced to flee into England So are the Ministers of Edinburgh forced to retire leaving an Apology behinde them But for all this when the acts of this Parliament were publishing Mr Robert Pont protested taking Instruments that the Church should not be obliged to yeeld obedience thereunto being denounced rebell he fleth into England Now is Mr Montgomery established Bishop of Glasgow one Mr Adamson as naughty vicious as any is setled in St Andrews no sooner get they up their head but as soon they execute their tyranny rage against the rest of the Ministry compelling them to promise obedience to them as their ordinaries under the paine of banishment confinement imprisonement deposition sequestration of their stipends Whereupon many in this day of trial did faint subscribe thinking it a sufficient salvo to adde according to the Word of God but afterward mourned for it Now none durst pray for the Ministers who had fled under the paine of treason so dark a day was this But neer the end of the next year there is a change as Court the Ministers returne a Parliament is called at Lithgow but nothing is done in favours o●… the Church At length 1586. the King was desirous to have some setling in the Church appointeth a Conference in February at Haly●…od house where some articles were drawne up referred to the General Assembly As 1. That the Bishop should have a care of one flock 2. That some Ministers should be added to him without whose counsell he should do nothing 3. His doctrine should be examined by the meeting 4. His power should be of Order not of Jurisdiction 5. Beside his own Church he might have the inspection of moe when the Assembly meeteth in May they could not assent to all these articles yet at length seeing they could not have all which they desired they accorde to this that both Bishops and Commissioners should be subject to the triall of the Generall Assembly that where they did reside they should moderate provinciall Synods Presbyteries in the meane time the order of the Presbyteries was sett down they proceed to examine the processe of Mr Adamson who had declined the provincial Synod of St Andrews he submitteth And the next year Anno 1587. Mr Montgomery resigned his place so was absolved from the sentence of Excommunication by the Assembly When the Parliament doth conveen this year Anno 1587. there are some Prelats who would sit there in name of the Church but when the Church perceived this Mrs David Lindsay Robert Pont were sent to desire that they might be removed as having no authority from the Church the most of them no function in it at all The prelats finding themselves now in a staggering condition thought it was their best to ingratiate themselves in his Majesties favour thereby secure themselves in their places therefore condiscended unto the Act of Annexation of all the Temporalites of benefices unto the Crown which was a dilapidating of the Church rents It is true Spotiswood putteth another face upon this busines in his History but the man could change with the times speake another thing in his English History then he durst speak in his Latine refutation for there he sayeth In summâ Ecclesiasticorum persidià proximis Comit●…is Anno 1587. transacta decreto ordinum actibus intervenientibus insinuata Nam Episcopi durissima quaeque à fratr●…bus
passi non aliud perfugium ha●…bant quam ut A●…licorum libid●…i se deder●…nt he sayeth The Bishops were so hard put to it that they had no other refuge but thus to satisfie the Court give away their revenues to their lusts Anno 1590. The Generall Assembly doeth abrogate the power of Commissioners devolveth the work on Presbyt●…ries Anno 1591. The Recantation of Mr Patrick Adamson is presented unto the Assembly where among other things he confessed he had e●…red in thinking the governement of the Church was like other civil governements in labouring to have the Church in maters Ecclesiastick subject to the Kings lawes And with all he confesseth that the Earle of Arran had a minde to have burnt the Registers of the Assembly Anno 1584. that at Falkland before they were delivered to his Maj. a Bishop Mr Henry Hammilton took out some leaves which spoke against the Governement by Bishops that he had consented thereunto Anno 1592. in May the Generall Assembly doth meet resolveth on some propo●…itions to be presented to the ensuing Parliament As 1. That the Acts of Parliament made Anno 1584. against the discipline liberty authority of the Church be annulled 2. That the Discipline of the Church be ra●…isied 3. That the Act of Annexation be repealed and 4. That the Abbots P●…iors other Prelats bearing the titles of Church-men giving voice in Parl. in name of the Church without her consent be discharged to vote any more When the parliament conveeneth in June The liberties of the Church are ratified all her Courts Generall provinciall and presbiteriall Assemblies Church Session●… the Ju●…sdiction Discipline thero ●…s declared to be just good godly in it self in all time coming not ●…anding of whatsoever s●…atutes acts canons ●…vilier municip●…ll lawes made in the contrare All acts fomerly made for establishing the Popes authority are abolished It is likeways declared that the 129. act Anno 1584. anent the Kings Supremacy against declining of the King his Councill in Church maters shall be no wayes prejud●…iall nor der●…gate any thing to the previledge that God hath given to the s●…rituall office-bearers in the k●…k concerning heads of Religion maters of heresy Excommunication collation or deprivation of Ministers or any such like 〈◊〉 ●…all censures specially grounded having warrant of the word of God Item they abrogate annull that act of parl 1584. which did grant Commission to Bishops other Iudges constitute i●… Ecclesiasticaell causes to receive his Highness presentations to benefices to give collation there upon to put order to all causes Ecclesiasticall And they ordaine that all presentations to Benefices be directed to the particular Presbiteries in all time coming with full power to give Collation thereupon to putt order to all maters causes Ecclesiasticall within their bounds according to the Discipline of the Kirk Thus did the Lord cary on his work unto this period notwithstanding of much opposition which was made thereunto by men of corrupt principles wicked lives who loved not to part with the Church rents the sweet morsell which they desired alwayes to enjoy now is the Chur●…h there become a shineing Church being reformed both in Doctrine in Discipline now is she become a pleasant vineyaird well dressed hedged about defended from the wilde boars of the forrest King Iames himself was convinced of this when he gave this reason to an English divine why that Church was not troubled with heresie viz because if it spring up in a parish there is an Eldership there to take notice of it suppresse it if it be too strong for thē the psesbitery is ready to crush it if the presbitery cannot provide against the obstinate heshall finde moe witty he ads in the Synod if he be not convinced there the Generall Assembly will not spare him yea seldome or never did any errour trouble all those Courts for usually it was crushed by presbiteries except what some Bishops did maintaine And thus that Church was indeed as an army with banners terrible to the adversaries of the truth Then were there endevours to have a through worke of Reformation caried on the iniquities of the land were searched out corruptions in Ministers other ranks of people were taken notice of effectuall courses were laid down for preventing such abuses in time coming Publick Fasts were indicted keeped whole eight dayes together And thus the Lord created upon every dwelling place of Mount Zion upon her Assemblies a cloud smoak by day the shineing of a flaming fire by night for upon all the glory was a defence Isai. 4. 5. But this faire Summer Suneshine did not long last The infinitely wise God saw it sitt to bring that Church unto a wilderness againe to cause her meet with a dark dreadfull long lasting winter night Satan stirreth up Papists upon the one hand who saw that if this hedg of discipline were keeped up they could not enjoy the liberty peace they desired prophane politicians Courteours upon the other hand who saw that by this Discipline their licentiousnes would be curbed to bestirre themselves against this established discipline And accordingly they use their power with the King at length prevaile to get him to oppose the discipline to prosecute that designe piece piece till at length Prelats were established in all their power as the following discourse will clearly evince When Anno 1596. the Popish Lords who had conspired with Spaine against the countrey and had been upon that acount banished viz Huntly Arrol Angus were called home the Church saw Religion in danger ordained that particular flocks should be advertised hereof indicted a Fast appointed that some out of each Presbitery should concurre with the Presbitery of Edenburgh in considering of the most expedient way for securing of Religion and now because the Church would not consent unto the Kings calling home those popish Lords he is stirred up by his popish Courteours against the Church incroacheth dayly more more upon her liberties For Mr D. Black minister at St Andr. is cited before the Councill for some alledged expressions in his sermon The ministry seeing that the spirituall Governement of the house of God was intended to be quite subverted thought it best that he give in a Declinatour there in shew that though he was able to defend all that he spoke yet seing his answering to that accusation before them might import a prejudice to the liberties of the Church be taken for an acknowledgement of his Maj jurisdiction in maters meerly spirituall he was constrained to decline that Judicatorie 1. because the Lord Jesus had given to him his word for a Rule so he could not fall under any civill law but in so farr as he should be found after triall to have passed from his Instructions which triall belongeth
them concerning the day which was the second not the fifth that so such as would meet the second day being so few might easily be moved to dissolve before the rest came who would intend onely to keep the fifth day But the honest party perceiving how their liberties were now in danger did resolve to meet at Aberdeen accordingly there cometh from parts neerby some against the second of July unto whom Lawreston his Maj. Commissioner presented a letter from the Councell desired an answer They replyed that they behooved first to constitute themselves after he had withdrawn they choosed a moderator Clerk then read the letter wherein there were two things desired first that they would dissolve the meeting next that they would appoint no other day untill his Maj. were advertised As to the first they answered that they were ready to dissolve the meeting there being so few present To the next they answered that if Lawreston as his Maj. Commissioner would name a day they would aggree thereto if not they behooved to preserve their liberty so seeing Lawreston refused they appointed the next Assembly to be at Aberdeen the last Tuysday of Sept. advertised Presbiteries therof When Lawreston seeth this he protesteth against them as no lawfull Generall Assembly giveth his reasons which were answered they protest to the contrary thereupon by a messenger of armes he chargeth them to depairt under the paine of treason because as he alledged he had discharged them the night before by open proclamation at the mercat Crosse to conveen under the paine of treason he causeth denounce them rebells Whereupon in Septr Mr Welsh Mr Forbes were imprisoned by the Councill in Blackenesse in Octr. others were incarcerat In the mean time there is a Declaration dated at Hampton Court Septr 26. indicting an Assembly at Dundy the last Tuysday of July next Now the imprisoned ministers petitioned that the triall of that Generall Assembly might be referred to the indicted assembly at Dundee but are not heard And therefore when they are sisted before the Councill Octr 24. seeing that certainly the Assembly would be condemned they give in this Declinature following please your Lo The approbation or disallowance of a Generall assembly hath been should be a matter spirituall alwayes cognosced judged by the Church as Judges Competent within this Realme seing we are called before your Lo to hear see it found declared that we have contemptuously seditiously conveened assembled our selves in a Generall assembly at Aberdeen the first Tuysday of July last the said assembly to be declared unlawfull as an more length is contained in the summonds executed against us We in consideration of the premisses other reasons to be given in by us have just cause to decline your Lo. judgement as no wayes competent in the Cause above specified by these presents we simpliciter decline the same seing we are most willing to submit our selves unto the triall of a Ge nerall Assembly which is onely the Judge competent When the King heareth of this Declinature he lent down directions to the Councell to proceed against them according to the lawes sent down the Earle of Dumbar for that effect Whereupon six of them viz Mrs Iohn Forbes Iohn Welch Andrew Duncan Iohn Sharp Robert Dury Alexander Strachan are endited of high treason upon the act of Parliament 1584. sisted before an Assise at Lithgow and what by illegall procedures threatenings with fair promises used by the Earle of Dumber unto the Assisers some of whom were his own near kinssolk particularly by assurances that the king would not take their life they are declared guiltie of treason by nine of the fifteen Assisers so sent back to their prisons Then doth the king send for Mrs Andro Melvin Iames Melvin Iames Balfour William Watson William Scot Iohn Carmichel Adam Colt detaineth them long at London seeking to intangle them with questions at length Mr Andro Melvin is imprisoned in the Tower till the Duke of Bulloigne three years thereafter procureth liberty to him to go with him Mr Iames Melvin dieth at Berwick the rest are confined to severall places of the countrey While these ministers are at London the king signifieth his minde that the six condemned ministers should be banished out of his Dominions the other eight should be consined as followeth Viz Mr Farme in Bute Mr Monro in K●…ntire Mr Youngson in Arran Mr Irvine in Orkney Mr VVilliam Forbes in Yetland Mr Gray in Caitnesse Mr English in Southerland Mr Rosse in Lewes In this same year Anno 1606. there is a parliament conveened in July which acknowledgeth his Maj. soveraigne authority princely power royall prerogative priviledge of the Crowne over all Estates persons causes promiseth to maintaine the same with their lives lands goods restoreth the bishops to their ancient accustomed honour dignities Prerogatives Previleges livings lands teinds rents thirds estates rescindeth the act of annexation Unto this Parliament the Commissioners from Synods presbiteries gave in a protestation desiring them to keep within their due bounds reserve unto the Lord that glory which he will communicate neither to man nor angel viz to prescribe from his holy mountaine a lively patterne according to which his own tabernacle should be framed that they would not bring into the kirke of God the Ordinance of man which hath been found the ground of much evill of that Antichristian Hierarchie That they would not build Iericho againe contrare to their oath subscription nor suffer that Estate of Bishops to arise which they offered to prove to be against the word of God the ancient Fathers Canons of the Church the moderne most learned godly Divines the Doctrine Constitution of the Church of Scotland the lawes of the Realme the well honour of the kings Maj. the peace quyetness of the realme the well of all every one of the subjects and then In the name of the Church in generall of their presbyteries in their own name of all other pastors for discharging of their duety consciences they did protest against bishopry bishops against the Erection Confirmation or Ratification thereof requireing the famine to be Registrated This protestation was subscribed by many ministers among others by Mr Adam Banatine Mr Iohn Abernethy Mr VVilliam Couper who afterward became bishops themselves When prelats are thus advanced to their civill dignities there are wayes essayed for advancing them in their spirituall power and this same year there is an assembly indicted at Lithgow the 10 of December but onely some presbyteries in whom the king confided most were advertised hereof the businesse was carried so closely that the moderator of the last assembly knew nothing of it Here after some debate the overture propounded by his
Maj. in his letter viz that there should be constant moderators in presbyteries chosen that where the bishops did reside they should moderate both in Synods presbyteries is concluded some cautions added but to no purpose for there was a clause annexed which did cast all loose viz that if either upon his Maj. advyce proposition to the assembly or upon their own supplication the Generall assembly were moved to grant a relaxation of any of the Caveats that then their promise should make no derogation to their liberty Synods presbyteries refused to owne this Act but at length were charged to obey under the paine of treason Anno 1608. There was another Assembly at Lithgow July 26. but did no good thereafter there were some conferences at Falkland Sterlin but to no purpose the intended businesse was still carried on Anno 1610. Juny 6. There is a meeting at Glasgow unto which resorteth all the constant Maderators who had their hundreth pounds per annum and they bring with them other two ministers such as they liked whom the king desired by his letters The king had three Commissioners there The Earle of Dumber was sent thither with a strong guard to affright the ministers so as severall ministers coming out of the west with a purpose to protest were forced to returne back againe There was also money brought thither to hire votes Mr Spotiswood sayeth it was to pay the constant Moderators their due But Mr Lawder in Coberspath was no moderator yet he came to the Earle complained that though he travailed furdest and had least to live upon though his vote was as good as the best yet he was neglected to whom the Earle replyed that he was too late in coming asking his purse-master what was left he findeth there was nothing but seventeen Shillings Sterlin to give him Come sayeth Mr Lawder let me have it it will help to bear my charges homeward And the Non-liquets got nothing At this corrupt meeting it is concluded 1. That the indiction of all Generall Assemblies belonged to the king by the prerogative of his Crowne without his license all such meetings were unlawfull 2. That Synods should be moderated by the Prelats or some appointed by them 3. No excommunication or absolution without the Bishops approbation direction who is answerable to God to his Maj. for his proceedings 4. All presentations must be directed to the Prelats 5. That he with some associated should silence depose ministers 6 That every minister at his entry should swear obedience to his Maj. to his ordinary as it was ordained Anno 1571. 7. If any minister absente himself from the Bishops visitation he shall be suspended if he amend not deposed 8. That the exercises or quondam presbyteries should be moderated by the bishops or whom they will appoint And 9. That no minister speak against any of the foresaid acts in publick nor dispute about the equality or inequality of ministers This yeer also was the High Commission instituted proclamed by a Herald giving power to the Archbishops to depose excommunicat imprison fine confine for causes Ecclesiastick whether in Doctrine or manners whether in Noblemen ministers or common people When the meeting at Glasgow is dissolved Mr Spotiswood of Glasgow Mr Lamb of Brichen Mr Hamilton of Galloway go to London there are consecrated the 21 of Octob. when they returne they consecrate the rest then all of them domineer over the people over the faithfull ministers Anno 1612. a Parliament conveened which ratified all the acts of that meeting at Glasgow inserted in their Registers the oath which every minister at his admission was to swear thus I A B. admitted to the Kirk of D. testify declare in my conscience that the right excellent right High mighty Prince Iames the sixth by the grace of God King of Scotland c. is the onely lawfull supreme Governour of this Realme as well in matters Spiritual Ecclesiastick as in things temporall that no forraigne Prince State nor Potentate hath or ought to have any Jurisdiction Power Superiority Preheminence or authority Ecclesiasticall or Spirituall within Realme And therefore I utterly renunce forsake all forraigne Jurisdiction Power Superiorities authorities promise that from this forth I shall will bear faith true allaidgeance to his Highnesse his aires lawfull successours And to my power shall assist defend all Jurisdictions Privileges Preheminences authority granted belonging to his Highnesse his aires lawfull successours or united annexed to his Royall Crown And furder I acknowledge confesse to have to holde the said Church possession of the same under God of his Maj. his Crown Royall of this Realme And for the saids possessions I do homage presently to his Highnesse in your presence to his Majesty his aires lawfull successours shall be true So help me God And also I A B. now admitted to the Church of C. promiseth sweareth to E. F. Bishop of that Dioecy obedience to his successours in all things lawfull So help me God Anno 1616. There was a meeting of the ministers at Aberdeen appointing that a book of Common Prayer be made that children should be confirmed by the bishops or visitors in their name But the year before this the former commission for the High commission was renewed instead of the two Courts in the two Provinces of Saint Andrews Glasgow there is one appointed consisting of 55 or 56. one of the Archbishops is sine quo non he other five may do all Such as refuse to compeer are sisted by force by the Sherifs other magistrats They meddle with blasphemie heresy schisme errour Idolatry simony lotry absence from the Liturgy on holy Dayes perjury incest adultery fornication rapes clandestine marriages stricking of clergy men speaking against their meetings They have power to excommunicat silence depose sine imprison confine as long as they please the Secret Councell must pursue the contumacious as rebells Anno 1617. A Parliament conveeneth at which the King himself is present maketh an act That whatsoever his Maj. should determine in the externall governement of the Church with the advyce of the archbishops Bishops a competent number of the ministry should have the strength of a law when the honest ministry hear of this see thereby a door opened for bringing in all the English-popish Ceremonies they give in a Protestation against the same which when the king heareth he causeth the Clerk passe by that act when he was to read all the rest And now the king is violent for the Ceremonies chideth the Archbishops for not receiving the five articles as he commanded the former year and they promise to do it if he would indict a Generall assembly And upon Mr Galleway's undertaking the king indicteth a meeting at St
Edinburgh who were to communicat it unto the rest of Presbyteries of the Kingdom a gracious letter as it was called wherin he promised to owne to countenance the government of the Church as it was established by law wherby many took him to meane Presbyterian government But others feared a designe to overturne Presbyterian government to introduce Prelacy as afterward it came to passe when the Parliament did rescinde all acts statutes made in favours of Presbyterian government did devolve the power of setling the government of the Church upon his Maj. they did by their Act. 16. allow the present administration by Sessions Presbyteries Synods for a time But at length Mr IamesSharpe a man who had formerly been intrusted by severall of the Ministry confided in as one who would prove most faithfull unto the Presbyterian interest but now had betrayed his most intimat brethren laid down a course for overturning his mother Church therby declared that he was a most unnaturall childe of that Church other three Ministers with him went up to London w●… first being made ordained Deacons after that Presbyters they are consecrated Bishops upon the day of 1661. with all there is a proclamation from his Maj. of the date at Whitehall the 6 of September Anno 1661. declareing His Royall pleasure to be for restoreing of the government the Church by Archbishops Bishops as it was exercised in the year 1637. that he had nominated presented persones to the severall Bishopricks of the Kingdome of Scotland of whom some have been lately consecrated invested with the same dignities Church power authority which was formely competent to the Archbishops and Bishops in the Reignes of his Royall grand Father and Father of blessed memory and that the allowance of Presbyteriall government is now of itself void and expired as being only for a time c. And so the jurisdiction and exercise of Church government should be ordered in there spective Synods Presbyteries and Sessions by the appointment authority of the Archbishops and Bishops according to their privilege practice In obedience to which proclamation The Privy Councell Ian. 9. 1662. did make publick intimation thereof discharge all ecclesiasticall meetings in Synods presbyteries sessions untill they be authorized ordered by the Archbishops Bishops upon their entry unto the government of their respective seas which is to be done speedily Wherupon at the time of the meeting of the provinciall Synods noblemen others were sent to raise them by force But therafter when these foure returne from London consecrat the rest there were acts made in the second session of Parliament viz. Anno 1662. redintegrating them to the exercise of their episcopall function to all their privileges dignities jurisdictions possessions due formerly belonging thereunto as also there is an act ordaincing all ministers to repaire unto the diocesian assembly concur in all the acts of Church discipline as they should be therunto required by the Archbishops or Bishop of the diocese under the paine of being suspended from their office benifice till the next diocesian meeting for the first fault if they amended not to be deprived the Church to be declared vacand But notwithstanding of this act all such ministers as resolved to keep a good conscience did forbear to goe unto these meetings or unto the other meetings which they call exercises in which meetings the prelate such as he named did not only preside but ruled as they pleased Not only because the privileges of the judicatories were encroached upon wronged by the Prelate presideing at his own hand without the consent of the rest contrary to the constant practice of that Church because a constituent member of these judicatures viz the ruleing elder was excluded contrare to the principles of presbyterian government the practice of that Church from the begining the practice of all other reformed churches of the primitive Church contrary to the judgment of many eminent divines both there and abroad who have clearly made it to appear out of the scriptures that Christ hath instituted such officers and these should have more weight then those three mentioned by the author of the Seasonable case pag. 11. as of another judgment But also because these meetings now differ from the meetings judicatories which the Church had before not only in name they being now called do●…sian meetings not Synods Presbiteries but also in thing The former judicatories are razed overturned these new meetings are erected upon a new Basis the Kings power perogative to setle what forme of Church government he thinketh best they are now authorized ordered by the prelates so they are pieces partes of the prelaticall government therefore they are distinct from what they were before So that no minister that made conscience of his covenant vow for presbyterian goverment against prelaticall could with peace freedome keep or countenance these meetings It is replyed by the prelates procurator the new casuist in his pamphlet called the seasonable case etc. pag. 12. That the meetings now before are of the same constitution nothing altered nor any more holding of Bishops now when the Kings Maj. hath taken off the restraint which for a time he putt on then if he had not at all restrained them But this is no satisfactory answere his meet deny all will not availe much with indifferent men of understanding for the difference is clear because 1. formerly Church judicatories had power within themselves to nominat appoynt their own moderator now it is not so 2. Formerly Church judicatories Church power did flow from the Lord Iesus Christ immediatly as being the only head of his Church now they flow from another fountaine viz the King as the fountaine of all Church power therefore is the goverment called his majesties governement ecclesiasticall in the Act of councell Iuly 10. 1663. the prelats in the discharge of their office are said to do service to his Maj. in the Church in the act of councell Ian. 9. 1662. 3. Formerly Church judicatories did meddle with every scandal now they must meddle with no more then the prelat pleaseth 4. Formerly presbyters had power to voyce to determine by their decisive suffrage now they are but the prelates counsellours of whose counsell advice he maketh what use he thinketh fitt 5. Formerly there was none in those judicatories who had a negative voyce now the Bishop hath it the rest are but cyphres 6. Formerly in these judicatories ther were ruleing elders but now that constituent member is not admitted which particular alone will sufficiently evidence that the face frame of the judicature is altered And since it is so any man of understanding may easily perceive such a difference as maketh those meetings now to depend upon
the King upon the prelat who hath a negative voice in them whose dioecesian meetings they are being now modelled conforme to the number of prelats whileas before in some dioecies there were three provinciall Synods Moreover the passage which was cited before out of the Proclamation Ian. 15. 1662. cleareth this aboundantly for there it is said expresly that the administration of the Church in the way it had been that is the administration of presbyterian goverment is inconsistent with that which is now established or Episcopall goverment and the councell is better to be beleeved then this man who speaketh without ground againe why did King Councell discharge those meetings but because they were making way for the setling of Episcopacie and finally why is the jurisdiction and exercise of Church discipline which was allowed for a time set in opposition to the jurisdiction exercise of Church Goverment ordered in the respective synods presbyteries sessions by the appoyntment authority of the Archbishops Bishops thereof according to their known privilege practice conforme therto If not to clear this difference He objecteth pag. 8. sayeth That the supreme Magistrat hath undowbted power to convocat synods when he seeth it needfull no protestant minister would refuise to come at his comand nor is there any ranke or degree of subjects that can without the staine of sinfull disobedience refuise to meet upon his Maj. command and ministers cannot plead exemption from the common duties of subjects It is answered 1. It is true ministers are subjects no lesse then others are obliged in conscience to subject themselves Unto the civill Magistrat in the Lord no lesse then others But. 2. Neither ministers nor others are bound at the Magistrat's command to sin against God it being alwayes better to obey God then man here in obeying this command Ministers should have hainonsly sinned against God for 1. They should have therby acknowledged upon the matter that the Magistrats power in Church matters is such as that he may appoynt what forme of Goverment he will which no presbyterian in conscience could yeeld to without wronging of Christ the head King of his Church as shall in due time be made furder to appear 2. They should have therby testified acknouledged their approbation of Episcopall Goverment contrary to their oath subscription for this was pressed as a badge of conformitie signe of subjection unto Episcopall Goverment as the Proclamation of the Privie Councell before mentioned doth abundantly clear these meetings are meer episcopall meetings as is showne 3. Ans●…as to the ground of the objection viz. That the Magistrat hath power to convocate synods It would require a longer time then can be now allowed to discusse the same to try how in what cases it willhold good But this is certane that the judgment of the Church of Scotland as to this particular as may be seen in the Act of Assembly Anno 1647. approving the confession of faith prefixed therunto is that in Churches constituted such as the Church of Scotland was the Magistrats authority is not sufficient to call a Synod without any other call that is without delegation from their Churches that 〈◊〉 is free to Ministers to Assemble together synodically as well prorenata as at the ordinary times upon delegaetion from the Churches by their intrinsecall power received from Christ as often as it is necessary in case the Magistrat deny his consent But be it granted as in some cases it may Yet it will not follow that therefore Ministers were bound in conscience to have countenanced those meetings and that for these reasons 1. Because these were no extraordinary Synods called by his Maj. prore nata Nor. 2. Were they any of the former Synods used while presbyterian Goverment was in force But. 3. They were new meetings upon new principles having their rise from a new spring fountaine constituted otherwise in a new forme and so they were no meetings consonant unto the principles of presbyterian Goverment but wholly dissonant meetings complying with flowing from Episcopall power jurisdiction ordered by prelaticall authority appoyntment 3. Countenanceing of these meetings upon the matter would have been an assenting consenting unto the pulling down of presbyterian Governement which they were sworne to maintaine 4. Yea it would have been a fearful matter of offence stumbling unto the godly truely tender a hardening of others who had complyed withall a dangerous casting of themselves into temptation as experience doth abundantly prove dayly and therefore this comand could not be obeyed for no command of a Magistrat can warrand any to sin by doing that which is in it self sinfull yea or what is a reall ground of offence unto others provideing the matter be not absolutely necessary antecedently unto the command of the Magistrat But he addeth Is this rationall that where two commands of the Magistrat are joyned the one undowbtedly lawfull the other dowbted of that subjects should disobey the Magistrat in that which is clearly lawfull because ●…ey have a dowbt or unclearnesse anent obeying him in the other command had they come to the place it would protanto have shewed their respect unto authority Ans. It is a great question if this man speake rationally here doth he thinke that the civill Magistrat did intend two commands in that one he may as well say that he did intend twenty will he so metaphisically anatomize the commands of councells Parliaments as to render them ridiculous would he have had ministers sporting jesting in such a serious matter with the supreme Magistrat if the Ministers had come't to towne seen what of the cloke it was then returned home would this casuist have cleared them either protanto or prototo Nay he would without all doubt have exaggerated that crime as the height of contempt as an open preaching proclameing of their contempt unto the world But in such a sad declineing time the faithfull ministers of Christ had some other thing to think upon then thus to sport themselves mocke authority by halveing orquartering the commands and injunctions thereof therefore would neither get on horse backe nor come half the way not to the place appoynted because they might not in conscience concurr with the prelat there in that dioecesian meeting which was the onely thing commanded their coming to the towne was no more commanded save as subservient thereunto then their riseing out of their Bed that morning or their taking horse c. In the 3 place he addeth What ground could they have for separation from the Synod is it the want of liberty to choose a moderator or is it that he who presideth is a Bishop and claimeth more power then they can allow-as of a negative voyce or is it the want of unpreaching elders in the meeting It is Ans Neither any of these
now presbyterian government is quite overturned all presbyterian assemblies are discharged under the highest paine after prelats are advanced never till then there cometh forth a new order for new meetings upon new principles meetings otherwise constituted then formerly in a word such meetings as did but serve to approve of confirme prelats in their place power therefore all were commanded by the Estate to concur with the prelats in their meetings under a penalty So that it is but a meer falshood to say that the meetings then now are of the same constitution nothing altered for then they were hedges standing in the prelats way though much weakened by reason of the civill power opposeing but now they are props to support strengthen the hands of the prelats as being wholly ruled guided by them By what is said it is hoped that tender Christians will see that there was no small ground of scrupleing at these meeting that they will be loth rashly to condemne such as feared to transgresse in the least resolved rather to suffer then to sin seing it is now beyond controversie that their concurring in those meetings had been upon the matter a consenting unto an approving of prelaticall government upon which account alone the faithfull servants of Christ did refuise to concurre SECTION IX The reasons why Ministers refuised to seek presentations collations cleared defended THus the Lord was pleased to keep his servants out of this snare which the prelats had caused plet for their consciences but there are others stronger following The Parl. in their second session An. 1662 made an act ordaineing all Ministers who had entered to the cure of any parish within brugh or land in or since the year of God 1649. to have no right unto nor uplist the rents of their respective benefices modified stipends manse or gleib for this instant year 1662. nor for any year following unlesse they should obtaine a presentation from the lawful patro●… and have collation from the Bishop of the dioecy where he liveth before the 20 of Sepr next for understanding of this It would be considered That before the year 1649. the Church was groaning under that sore oppression of laick patrons having power to presente Ministers unto benefices and then the Parliament was pleased to discharge all presentations of Kirks patronages whether belonging to the King or to any laick patron upon good weighty grounds as the narrative of their 39 act March 9. 1649. sheweth in these words The Estates of parliament being sensible of the great obligation that lyeth upon them by the nationall Covenant by the solemne league covenant by many deliverances mercies from God by the late solemne engadgment unto ties To preserve the doctrine and maintaine and vindicate the liberties of the Kirk of Scotland and to advance the work of reformation therein to the utmost of their power considering that patronages and presentations of Kirks is an evill and bondage under which the Lords people and Ministers of this land have long groaned and that it hath no warrand in God's word but is founded only on the commonlaw and is a custome popish and brought into the Kirk in time of ignorance and superstition and that the same is contrary to the second book of discipline in which upon solide and good ground it is reckoned among abuses that are desired to be reformed and unto severall acts of the generall assembly and that it is prejudiciall to the liberty of the people and planting of Kirks and unto the free calling and entering of Ministers unto their charge And after this Ministers entered by the call of the people of whom they were to have charge Now this Parliament will have this piece of reformation undone the Church brought back unto her old state of bondage so will have Ministers to seek for these presentations thereafter to go to the Bishop for his license approbation to officiat exerce the Ministeriall function But the faithfull zealous servants of Christ had not freedome nor liberty to do either of these therefore resolved to suffer rather then to sin They had not freedome to go to seek a presentation for these reasons 1. Because they saw no warrand for such a way of entering into the Ministery allowed of Christ or his apostles nor practised many hundereds of years thereafter and therefore toapprove of such a way had been a sin 2. The Church had been long groaning under that oppression bondage was desireous to be rid thereof at the very beginning but could never obtaine it untill An 1649 Now if they had obeyed this act submitted unto this oppression they had consented unto the spoileing of the Church of her privileges and had condemned that worthy renowned Parliament who were graciously moved of God to take off this Yoke off her necke 3. They should in so far have consented unto the defection now carryed on for this was a piece thereof The restoreing of the Church unto her rights privileges was a part of the work of reformation yea no small part thereof when this privilege is taken away the work of reformation is in so far overturned therefore such as would have sought presentations should have made defection themselves have consented unto approved of the Parliament in carrying on the worke of defection in so far 4. By the 36 act of the first Session of this Parliament It is ordained that the person to be presented shall in presence of the patron or his atturney and of the sheriffe of the shire Stewart of the Stewartry or heretable baily or commissar of the bounds of it be in the countrey and of the Magistrats of the brughs within the brugh before the granting and their accepting of the presentation Take and subscribe the oath of alleagiance otherwise his presentation is null and void of it self Now as shall be showne hereafter no man could with a saife conscience take that oath as it was tendred by this Parliament 5. They should have thereby condemned the manner of Elections by the people consequently themselves as being hitherto intruders because entering into the Ministery without a lawfull call viz without the presentation of the patron But it will be objected That all the ministers of Scotland who entered before the year 1649. should by this meanes be condemned as intruders entering without a lawfull call Ans Though patronages cannot but be condemned as sinfull tending to ruine the Church to defraude her of much advantage beside the spoiling robeing her of her privileges liberties which are purchased to her by the blood of Christ because the patron who sometime may be a prophane person a persecuter either hath not understanding to discerne the spirits or will not make choise of the best most able minister Yet such as entered that way before the
which the tenderers thereof do put upon it must be searched sought for out of their acts for though it could have been wished both reason religion would have required it that after the example of Abraham they had made the oath as plaine easie as might be so that the sense meaning of it had been obvious to all or had annexed such a glosse meaneing as the words in ordinary construction would bear tender Christians might saifly assent unto yet there was no such thing done yea not being desired to do it would they do it yea nor would they suffer any to enquire at them in what sense they would have the oath taken yea which is more they made an act dischargeing all to offer any sense of the oath under the paine of treason So that there is no way now left to finde out the meaning of the oath as to this part but by their acts actings which when considered together with some other things usefull in this bussinesse will help to cleare the true sense thereof Three things then must be spoken to 1. The rise progresse of this bussinesse which is imported by this part of the oath viz the Kings supremacy over persons ecclesiastick in ecclesiastick causes in England 2. The rise progresse of it in Scotland 3. Some acts deeds of the King Parliament who now tender it As to the first of these It is notour enough what King Henry the Eight did when upon some privat discontents he shook off the Pop's supremacy Anno 1530. for having caught the Clergy in a Premunire for countenanceing some way or other the Pop's legat he would not be satisfied with their payment of 100000. lib unlesse also they would acknowledge him for the supreme head of the Church on earth which after some debate in their Synod both in the upper lower house of convocation was condescended to in forme as followeth cujus c. of which Church viz the Church of England we recognosce his Maj. to be the singular protectour the only supreme Lord so far as Christ's lawes will permitt the supreme head This was subscribed unto by all put into their publicke acts or instruments presented to the King afterward Parl. 24. c. 12. upon this ground it was statuted ordained that all ecclesiasticall suites controversies should be determined within the Kingdom all appeals to Rome were prohibited and Parl. 25. c. 20. The manner of electing of Archbishops Bishops was altered that power given granted to the King and upon this same foundation Parl. 26. c. 1. it was declared that the King is supreme head of the Church of England that he should have all honours preheminences which were annexed unto that title after this there followed another act c. 3. for Tenths first fruits as appertaineing to that head-shipe supreme authority Hence also Anno 1532. The convocation submitting unto the King's Maj. promiseth in verbo sacerdotis That they would never from thence forth presume to attempt allaidge clame or put in ure enact promulge or execute any new canons constitutions ordinances provinciall or others or by whatsoever name they shall be called in the convocation unlesse the Kings most royall assent may to them be had to make promulge execute the same that his Maj. do give his most royall assent authority in that behalfe Which deed of theirs the Parliament did shortly thereafter ratifie in these termes That none of the said clergy from thence forth should presume to allaidge clame or put in ure any constitutions or ordinances provinciall or synodall or any other canons nor should enact promulge or execute any such canons constitutions or ordinances by whatsoever name or names they may be called in their convocations in time coming which alwayes shall be assembled by the Kings write unlesse the same clergy may have the kings most royall assent license to make promulge execute such canons constitutions ordinances provinicall synodall upon paine of evry one of the said clergy doing the contrary to this act thereof convicted to suffer imprisonment and make fine at the king's will 25. Parl. c. 19. So Parl. 35. c. 1. There was another oath devised ratified which was to be imposed upon the subject for the more clear asserting of the King's supremacy By these Particulars any may see that Peter Martyr had good ground to say as he doth on 1. Sam. 8. That King Henry took all that power to himself which the Pope challenged atque ho●… fortasse est quod Rex Angliae voluit se secundum Christum appellari caput ecclesiae putavit enim camp●…testatem quam sibi Papa usur paverat suamesse in reguo suo ad se pertinere i. e he would there fore be called head of the Church next under Christ because he thought that all that power which the Pope did usurpe did belong to him within his own dominions and he had good ground to say that it was a proud title which gave much offence unto the godly Nor was it without reason that judicious Calvin did inveigh so much against that title in his commentary on Amos 7. saying qui juitio tantopere etc. i e. They who at the first did so much extoll Henry king of England were no doubt inconsider as men they gave unto him the supreme power over all and this did alwayes wound me They were blasphemous when they called him supreme head of the Church under Christ. So that Peter Heylyn must not be beleeved when he telleth the world in his discourse of the reformation of the Church of England pag. 13. That th●…se statuts which concerne the kings supremacy are not introductory of any new right that was not in the crown before but only declaratory of an old againe pag. 48. 49. That when the supremacy was recognized by the Clergy in their convocation to king Henry 8. It was only the restoreing of him to his propper and originall power invaded by the popes of these later ages for that title of supreme head not only seemed to have some what in it of an innovation as himself is forced to acknowledge in the following words but really had an innovation in it of no small consequence as shall appeare But this title of supreme head gave offence both at home abroad therefore Queen Elizabeth did change it into this of supreme governour over all persons as well in all causes ecclesiastick as civill in these tearms it was keeped is to this day But all this change did not much help the matter for many were offended even there at and what wonder seing it seemed to attribute to her Maj. no lesse spirituall jurisdiction power then what the former oath did importe Whereupon the Queen in the first year of her reigne after the Parliament had condescended on the forementioned oath published an
admonition in her injunctions of purpose to explaine interpret the sense meaning thereof gave it this sense That nothing was is or shall be meant or intended by the same oath to have any other duty alleagiance or bond required by the same then was acknowledged to be due to the most noble kings of famous memory King Henry 8. her Maj. father King Edward 6. her Maj. brother That her Maj. neither doth nor ever will challenge any other authority then that which was challenged lately used by the saids noble kings which is and was of ancient time due to the imperiall crowne of this realme That is under God to have the soveraignity rule over all manner of persones borne within these realmes dominions countreyes of what estate either ecclesiasticall or temporall soever they be so as no other forraigne power shall or ought to have any superiority over them And this was confirmed by Parliament 5. Eliz. cap. 1. But neither did this remove the offence for still the oath did import more then soveraignity over all persones even over all causes also and it was certaine that King Henry 8. did both challenge use more power then that therefore the convocation of the clergy meeting Anno 1562. took notice of the offence saw a necessity of declareing another sense for the satisfaction of all this they did Artic. 37. declaring signifying That there was no authority in sacred matters contained under that title but that only prerogative which had been given alwayes to all Godly princes in holy scriptures by God himself viz That they should rule all Estates and degrees committed to their charge by God whether they be Ecclesiasticall or temporall and to res●…raine with the civil sword the stbb●…rn and evildo●…rs as also to exclude thereby the Bishop of Rome from having any jurisdiction in the realme of England this Article was assented unto by the Parliament 13. of Eliz. c. 12. is insert in the statute book But under favour any may see that this covering was not sufficient to hide the deformites of that oath as worded for all the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome was hereby excluded now the Bish. of Rome's power was more then civil for it was ecclesiastick also the oath gave unto the Queen that which was taken away from the Pope more over supreme governour in causes ecclesiastick importeth more then this explication doth And therefore it had been much better if no more had been intended then this explication saifly taken doth hold forth to have changed the words of the oath made them more conformable to the glosse for every one who readeth seeth this sense will not be able to discerne an harmony betwixt them the oath as worded holding forth more then the glosse hence it was that for all this glosse the English divines were put to much trouble to defend themselves when sorely pressed with the words of the oath they seemed to be at some losse disadvantage were constrained to run from the words of the oath unto the glosse which is a sufficient proof that if no more be intended by the oath then what is held forth in the glosse givē the oath ought to be otherwayes worded hence also it is that all the followers of Erastus to this day do look upon the Church of Engl. as wholly of their judgment this puteth such divines as write against Erastianisme to great paines to search out the meaning of the English divines to answere that objection certanely these divines would have wished that the oath had been otherwise worded So that adversaries might have had lesse ground to boast of the Church of Englands being of their judgment Yea Triglandius in diss●…rt de Civil Eccles. pot Waveth the English divines in this poynt fearing possibly that he should not be able to extricate himself out of the thicket of difficulties which he might see before him therefore sayeth Cap. 8. Pag. 154 155. Controversiam Anglorum i. 〈◊〉 We owne not the controversie of the Englishes with Papists upon this subject a●… owrs for we are not of the judgment of Papists nor are we necessitated to defend our judgment by the judgment of the English divines And again in his Amapologia Pag. 726. Col. 2. Quamvis non di●…eamur c. Though we cannot deny but they i. e. the Englishes in respect of the usurped hierarchie there and the King's power over it have extended the King's supremacy furder then it ought to have been And Apollonius in his Ius Majestatis Part. 1. Pag. 11. telleth us that Some reformed divines in the heat of disput against the Papists out of hatred to the Roman hierarchy did turne a little out of the right way that they spoke according to the lawes of that Kingdome common-wealth in which they lived This especially is to be noted in those divines who wrote of the King's supremacy in the Kingdome of England The learned have seen the writtings of Lancelot Tooker Burchill Thomson and Salcobrig c. And the writtings of their adversaries who debated with them concerning the King's supremacy all who are not slaves in their judgments unto the great ones of the World may see clearly that there are failings on both hands And againe out of Didoclave Pag. 43. he telleth us That albeit they did blote out the metaphoricall title of the head of the Church lest it should give offence put in its place the Supreme Governour Yet the sense was the same for Henry of Salisburry sayeth That the King of England is the primat of the Church of England that he is a mixed person having both Ecclesiastick temporal Jurisdiction that in a supreme way proveth from the statute I. Eliz that the jurisdict Eccl. which was or might have been exercised by any spirituall or Church power for visiting the Ecclesiastick state order for reforming bringing into order punishing Churchmen all sort of errors schismes abuses offences enormities within the Kingdome is for ever annexed unto the Crown So that it is too too apparent that severall of the English divines run a furder length give a larger exposition of the supremacy So dangerous a thing is it to admit of oaths which must have strained glosses commentaries for clearing of them which the words will not in a faire construction bear moreover if any consult the later actings of King Parliament there in England they shall see a far other sense put upon it such as plead for the present change of Church government there walk much upon this supremacy particularly the author of the grand case asketh how any man who hath taken or is willing to take that oath can speak against the King's power of setting up what forme of Church government he pleaseth in the Church which whether it may not make Englishmen of a truely tender conscience
scruple now at the taking of that oath let wise men judge Next as to the rise of this power over the Church the occasion of this oath in Scotland seing it may sufficiently be gathered from the short historical narration of the government of the Church set down Sect. 1. a short recapitulation will be sufficient here In the confession of faith which was ratified approved by the Parliament Anno 1560. againe ratified insert in the records Anno 1567 cap. 25. the power in Church matters which is there given unto the civil Magistrat is in these words That to them chiefly and most principally appertaineth the conservation purgation of religion and they are appoynted for the maintenance of the true religion and for suppressing of idola●…ry and superstition in that same Parl. An. 1567 Act 2. there is an act which was made Anno 1560. ratified ordaineing that the ●…ishop of Rome called the Pope have no jurisdiction or authority within this realme and that none of his Maj. subjects suite or desire title or right of the said Bishop of Rome or his sect to any thing within his realme under the paine of banishment c. and that no Bishop use any jurisdiction in time coming by the said Bishop of Romes authority under the paine forsaid whereby the Popes authority was quite rejected not only in civil matters but in Church matters yet there is no expresse word of the Kings being invested with any such power Anno 1568. There was one Thomas Bassenden Printer in Edinburgh who did printe a book intituled the fall of the Roman Church and in that book the King was called the supreme head of the Church This gave great offence moved the generall assembly to cause call in these books to delete that title of the Kings But all this did not preserve the Church from incroachments for when Montgom pretended Archb. of Glasgow was proceeded against the king summoned the whole synod of Lothian before him afterward when this same Mr Montgomery was summoned before the Nationall Assembly there came a Messinger of armes from his Maj. to discharge the Assembly under the paine of rebellion of puting of them to the horne to proceed any furder whereupon the assembly did complaine of this incroachment April 27 Anno 1580. as such the like whereof had never been made before But this availed not for Mr Balcanquell Mr Dury were summoned before the Councell for some freedome which they had used in preaching Of this the Assembly did complaine againe which occasioned a conference betwixt the King some Ministers the result whereof was That in all time coming the tryal of Ministers doctrine should be referred to Church Iudicatories as the only competent Iudge But this was soon forgotten for Anno 1581. Mr Balcanquell was againe accused the privileges of the Church were incroached upon which did put the Church to supplicat Anno 1582. complaine that His Maj. by advice of some consellours was about to take the spirituall Power authority upon himself propperly belonging unto Christ as the King head of his church of the ministery the execution thereof unto such as bear office in ecclesiasticall government so that in his person some men presse to erect a new Popedome as if his Maj. could not be full King head of the commonwealth unlesse the spirituall as well as the temporall power should be put into his hand unlesse Christ be bereft of his authority the two jurisdictions confounded which God hath divided which tendeth directly to the wrecke of all true relig it their next assembly there was an article drawn up to be presented unto his Maj. to this affect That seing the jurisdiction of the Church was granted by God the Father through our Mediator JESUS CHRIST given to those only who by preaching overseeing bear office within the same to be exercised not by the injunctions of men but by the only rule of God's Word That an Act of Parliament concerning the liberty jurisdiction of the Church be so plainely declared that hereafter none other under whatsoever pretence have any colour to ascribe or take upon them any part thereof in placeing or displaceing of Ministers of God's Word in spirituall livings or offices without the Churches admission or in stopping the mouthes of preachers or taking upon them the judgment or tryall of doctrine or of hindering or disannulling the censures of the Church or exeeming any offendour there from By the endeavours of these faithfull worthies any may see what a Spirit was stirring then when the King would assume to himself spirituall power authority so rob Christ of that which belongeth to him as King head of the Church make himself a Pope the fountaine of all power jurisdiction both civill ecclesiastick challenge power to give commission for deposeing ordaineing of Ministers hinder free preaching to try censure doctrine to anull all Church censures as he pleased This was the Spirit that was then stirring at court this is the supremacy to the life this was it which court parasites said did belong unto the crown let the Church say do to the contrary what she could Hence a little after this Mr Melvin was accused for his sermon after he had declined the King his Councell as incompetent judges in that cause was forced to withdraw to Berwick for fear of his life Anno 1584. The Parliament which was suddainely convocated did put the copestone upon this bussinesse gave the King in forme what he had assumed to himself formerly upon the matter in their very first Act give him Royal power and authority over all Estates as well spiritual as temporal within the realme And Statute and ordaine that he and his heires or successours be themselves and their Councels in all time coming judges competent to all persones of whatsoever Estate degree function 〈◊〉 condition they be of spiritual or temporal in all matters that none decline their judgement in the premisses under the paine of treason From this supremacy flowed the impowering of Bishops with Church jurisdiction as commissioners from the King so that when the King wrote unto a Prelat he stilled him Our beloved Clerck Commissioner in Ecclesiastical causes So that by this supremacy the power of Church jurisdiction was made propper to the King the exercise thereof was committed by him to whom he would After this blast was something blown over Anno 1592. Papists others at court stirr up his Maj. against the government of the Church so that when the commissioners of the Generall Assembly had met had sent some of their number to shew the King what offence was taken at his calling home the Popish Lords he was offended asked how they durst meet without his warr●…nd But Mr Andrew Melvin answered That there were two Kings two
the duties of the one as well as for the duties of the other And every Presbyter hath the Ius to both as well in actu secundo as in actu primo judicious V●…etius Polit. Eccl. Pag. 224. Quaest. 15. doth abundantly cleare this particular shewing that such a delegation is not lawfull out of Mat. 18 18. 16 18. 1 Cor. 5. Act. 20 28. 1 Tim. 5 17. 1 Thes. 5 12. 1 Pet. 5 1 2. comp with 1 Tim. 3 5. Ioh. 20 20. 1 Tim. 3. 4 13 14. 2 Tim. 2 2. 4 2. Tit. 1 3 5 7 8. Whatever may be done in case of necessity for dispatching of some particular Act which is transient And how or what way the limitation exercise of the power of jurisdiction belongeth to the Church in common more then the limitation exercise of the power of order is not yet clearly demonstrated by any thing which Mr Stillingfleet hath said And it is known that Prelats arrogat to themselves a speciall or sole interest in the power of order as well as in the power of jurisdiction therefore they stile themselves the only Pastors of the Dioecies say that the Presbyters are but their Substitutes Vicars And it is certane that they assume to themselves the sole power of ordination And though here in this place which is now under consideration Mr Stillingfleet is pleased to rancke up ordination under the power of jurisdiction yet else where viz. Pag. 273. he sayeth that The collation of orders doth come from the power of order not meerly from the power of jurisdiction 8. How cometh the Christian Magistrat in here to appoynt the constant limitation exercise of the power committed by Christ unto Church Officers This is a very great power granted unto the civill Magistrat some warrand would be seen for it But this is not the proper place to examine his notions concerning the power of the civill Magistrat in Church matters Enough of this observation Obs. 5. With Presbyterians the practice of the Apostles of the Churches in their dayes following their appoyntment command is of much weight It is true their examples as examples do not binde But when the Lord hath sent them forth for this end errand to plante Churches to ordaine new offices officers immediatly under him and to appoynt unto these officers their proper work to show them how what way they should goe about their work when in all things they delivered nothing to the Church but what they received of the Lord 1 Cor. 11 23. as Tertull. said de praeser adv haereses Apostoli nihil ex suo arbitrio elegerunt quod inducerent sed acceptam à Christo disciplinam fideliter nationibus assignaverunt Sure then their practice example ought to be followed Seing they were sent forth for this end especially viz. to reforme setle Churches in doctrine worship discipline governement according to a new Gospell modell can any think that we are not obliged to follow their practices It it true there can be no duty without a law making it a duty But Christ's sending them forth for this end giving them a speciall commission for this work sending them forth as the Father sent him breathing the Holy Ghost upon them commanding them Math. 28 v. 19 20. To goe teach all Nations all things which he had commanded them Act. 1 2 3. Speaking to them of the things pertainting to the Kingdome of God By which sayeth Calvin on the place Is signified that Christ would not goe away till first he had seen to the governement of the Church carry a law in their bosome say that their example is obligeing And when there is a law or warrand for following such an example it is but in vaine to dispute whether it be the example which bindeth or the rule making it our duty to follow such an example But moreover he will grant that examples in actions that are morall naturall are obligeing whether as examples or by reason of the morality of the action needeth not be anxiously enquired after will not actions done by them upon morall grounds that are of perpetuall concernement become actions morall naturall so obligeing Is not their example in observing the first day Sabbath obligeing And why He sayes because there was a morall law standing in force concerning the observation of one day in Seven Why then shall not their example in observing such or such a forme of governement be obligeing seing there was a morall law standing in force concerning the governement of the Church in generall Is there any rule extant making their example in the one case obligeing not in the other If the Apostolicall practice in the one case make an Apostolicall tradition so a divine institution so will their practice do in the other case yea the examples of the Churches practise in the Apostles times hints from their writtings do sufficiently evidence an institution we read of elders in Ierusalem hence we saifly argue that they were ordained though we read not in terminis terminantibus of the manner how they were ordained sayeth one But he hath foure things to object against this ground taken from the practice of the Apostles though acted by the Spirit Part. 2. cap. 6. § 20. As 1. That the Apostles did many things without any intention of obligeing others as preaching without maintenance c. Ans. 1. The consequence is null Because they did many things without such an intention will it follow Ergo they did nothing with such an intention 2. The disput is about such actions as were done by them by vertue of their speciall office calling of which kinde this is none to preach at some Churches without wages 3. Yea this same action of preaching without wages is to be imitated in the like cases that is when Ministers have a competent livelyhood otherwise as Paul had who said he robed other Churches 1 Cor. 11 ver 8. when there is no other way to stope the mouthes of false teachers who thereby take occasion to hinder the good of the Gospell for this was the thing which moved Paul to take ●…o wages from Corinth That he might cut off occasion from them that desired occasion and these were the false Apostles 1 Cor. 11 v. 12 13. 2. He sayeth The Apostles did many things upon particular occasions emergencies circumstances which things so done cannot binde by vertue of their doing them any furder then a parity of reason doth conclude the same things to be done as Paul's celebat communitie of goods their preaching from house to house absteaning from blood c. Ans. this is still to argue a particulari because such such particular practices oblige not Ergo no practice obligeth is a weak consequence 2. Actions done upon particular occasions emergencies are of another nature then such actions as are done
of any change in the Apostle Paul's time for the author mentioneth here his Epistle to Timothy which was writen near to the end of his dayes 3. Though there had been some change alteration even in the Apostles dayes as to the manner of going about the work of preaching and baptizing these are all the particulars which the author mentioneth some order setled thereanent which had not been setled before what will this speak to the matter of Government which is the only thing now under debate will it follow that because there was a setled order condescended on in preaching and baptizeing which at sirst was not followed therefore the Apostles in some Churches erected presbyterian Government and in others Episcopall By what Medium will this consequence be proved 4. But how how shall it beleeved that things were better setled afterward then they were in the Apostles dayes or that the practice of after ages is as obligatory as the practice of the Apostles It is but a dream then to think that the Apostles did not observe any setled forme in Governing Churches but only Acted according to the principles of humane prudence according to the necessities occasions of the severall Churches which they had planted for neither this author nor any other which he hath cited to this effect doth prove it And though they should all say it we were not bound to beleeve them seing the law the testimony showeth the contrary as may be seen in the writings of such as plead for Presbyterian Governement where they shew that the Church of Ierusalem Ephesus others were Governed by the common consent of Presbyters that the manner of the governement of all Gospell Churches mentioned in the new Testament was uniforme But he hath another thing to say against the practice of the Apostles viz. That we cannot have that certainety of Apostolicall practice which is necessary to constitute a divine right This notion he prosecuteth at great length Chap. 6. as a ground thereunto he Prefixeth § 4. That the Apostles in the forming of Churches did observe the customes of the jewish synagogue And thereupon proceedeth to cleare both what the Governement of the jewish synagogues was how the forme set up in the Christian Church did correspond thereunto all which concerneth the bussinesse in hand litle or nothing there fore may be passed seing it is not very materiall to consider whether or not jewish synagogues were so Governed whether or not the Apostles did follow that copy for that which is now sought for is such a Government as was practised by the Apostles instituted as the forme of Church Government which was to continue such a Governement as had the stamp of divine authority or of a divine institution But now no jewish Governement as such could have this but only such a Governement as these by their practice did institute who were thereunto appoynted of God extraordinarily called qualified And moreover if the jewish Synagogues were Governed uniformly if the Apostles did set up a Governement in the Gospell Churches in a way correspondent there unto It will inevitably follow that the Apostles did take an uniforme way in setling the Governement of all the Churches this crosseth what he said of late confirmeth what was Answered But leaving this The proposition now under consideration is a question of fact the certanety of which is doubted of as he allaidgeth viz what course the Apostles took in Governing Churches or after what manner did they setle a Governement among them The uncertanety of this matter of fact he thinketh to evince by three arguments The last of which viz the defectivenesse ambiguity partiality repugnancy of the records of the succeeding ages which should inform●… 〈◊〉 what Apostolicall practice was which he prosecuteh largely satisfactorily From § 16. to § 19. may be passed as concerning the bussinesse in hand nothing as to Presbyteriaus for if they be not able to prove the practice of the Apostles out of the sacred write they dispaire as much as he can do of proving the same from humane records that for the same reasons which he there giveth But as for the other two reasons or grounds they must be examined The first then is this The equivalency of the names the doubtfulnesse of their signification by which this forme should be determined now there is a fourefold equivalency of names Bishop Presbyter 1. That both should signifie a Presbyter as Theodor in 1. Tim. 3. 1. 2. That both should signifie a Bishop 3. That both should signifie promiscuously some time a Bishop and sometime a Presbyter and. 4. That the name Bishop alwayes imports a singular Bishop but the name Presbyter doth promiscuously signifie both equivocall words can never of themselves determine what sensethey are to be taken in all that can be inferred from the promiscuous sense of the words is that they may be understood only in this sense but it must be proved that they can be understood in no other sense before any one particular forme of Governement as necessary can be inferred from the use of them Ans. 1. This is a ready way to cast all scripture as unable to determine any controversy for if adversaries may be beleeved all these passages which are made use of against them do carry another sense must be otherwise interpreted so all scripture must goe under the name of equivocall sentences must be laid aside 2. Presbyterians do not lay the stresse of their bussinesse upon the name They have other things whereby to prove their poynt then either the one name or the other And so this doth not concerne them much 3. The question betuixt Presbyterians their adversaries is this whether there be such an officer as a prelat having superiority of jurisdiction over Presbyters people sole power of ordination instituted by Christ or not not whether these two words signifie one thing or another for it is granted by all the Episcopall party except one who in his Annot on act 11. sayeth that there is no evidence whereby these inferiour presbyters may appear to have been brought in the Church so early That there were presbyters ordained in the Apostles dayes and all the question is concerning bishops as distinct from presbyters whether or not they were ordained Presbyterian divines do demonstrat that even in those places where the name Bishop is no such officer can be understood As to that which some fathers say who writting some centuries of yeers after the Apostles dayes speaking of the state of the Church in the Apostles dayes after the forme manner in their times concerning the promiscuous use of the two names it doth no way wrong the cause in hand untill it be proved that there was indeed such an officer in rerum natura this is not yet done 4. Whatever these names may signifie is not
in all ages who through persecution being thrust from one place went preached the gospell in another both in the time of the first ten persecutions through occasion of which the Gospell was spread far thorow the world at severall times since The honest servants of Christ in Queen Mary her dayes went abroad preaching the Gospell So did the zealous servants of Christ in Scotland when banished or compelled to flee preach in England ●…rance Holland without any new ordination or any thing like it 7. There is some necessitie lying upon them to preach as occasion offereth that they may not stumble the poor ignorent people who upon their silence are ready to think that the civil Magistrat hath power to depose Ministers formally And therefore if there were no more but this it were enough to provoke them to preach that the world might see that they put a difference betwixt the power of the Magistrat the power of the Church And that when they submit unto the Magistrat keeping within the compasse of his calling exerciseing that power which formally agreeth to him though he should mistake as to the application They will not submit any further to the wronging of the privileges of the Church And so will let the world see that they are still Ministers of the Gospell though banished from their particular flocks 8. Their silence in such a case would be stumbling unto others who look upon it as an evidence of fainting fear in them who dar not open their mouth nor appear for Christ speak to the edification encouragement of sufferers least it offend the Magistrat And when such are so faint-hearted how doth it discourage others strongly prevaile with some to goe over the belly of their own light conscience yea moreover it hardeneth the wicked in their evil courses encourageth them to persecute more more when they see such fainting discouragment among the followers of Christ. So then when these particulars are considered It will be found that such Ministers do but their duty that they would come short in their duty if they did not so preach the Gospell If it be Objected here That to preach in such a disorderly way would be a breaking of the established order of the Church viz. a preaching within such a Bishops dioecy without his license so it would be a course not approved by the God of order It is Answered 1. That ceremonies or matters of mere order must be passed by in times of necessitie such as this is 2. Such an established order as tendeth to the ruine of religion is but iniquity established by law for that is not an order of God's appoyntment which is destructive to the maine bussinesse viz. the edification of souls therefore such an order which is to destruction not to edification is not to be regairded 3. Where is there any warrand for such an order or appoyntment in all the Gospell Did the Apostles ever aske liberty from the corrupt Clergy among the Iewes to preach Christ in such or such a place Where is there any warrant for such as are Ministers called of God orda●…ned to suspend the exercise of that function till they have the license good will of a prelate This is that popish leaven which the former English Prelats had from Rome preaching the Gospell is immediatly commanded to all who are Ministers there is not the least syllabe for their going to a Bishop who is nothing else but a creature of man to seek license And certanely none can think that these Ministers might have gone to the prelat to obtaine liberty seing that would have been a cleare acknowledging of them their power contrare to their vow covenant So then it was better to take the way of the Apostles c to obey God rather then men to preach at God's command when man forbiddeth as well as to preach truth when man commandeth the contrary seing he hath no power from God for that effect more in the one case then in the other 2. It may be possibly further objected That how ever they remaine Ministers so may preach as they have a call yet to seek corners hideing places to preach in to separated congregations cannot be allowed in a constitute Church Ans. If they be Ministers of the gospell they may lawfully preach the gospell where God in his providence giveth them a call to preach 2. Since they cannot have liberty to preach the gospel in publick they may must do it in private when the necessity of the people calleth for it Christ his Apostles did not alwayes get the publick places to preach in but were content of privat roomes Many a time did Christ preach by the sides of mountaines by the sea side in such by-wayes And so did the Apostles Paul could get no better at Ephesus then the school of Tyrannus and two full yeers he preached in his own hired house at Rome Act. 28 30 31. therefore this practice of theirs cannot be condemned for 3. As the Church was then in fieri so is it now in a decaying condition therefore though it were granted which is not yet clearly proved that in a Church rightly constituted such private preachings were not lawfull yet when a Church is fallen from her right constitution is upon the decaying hand at without all doubt the Church of Scotland is this day many things may be allowed as they are in a time when the Church is but in fieri as to this particular in question a time of persecution as this is is alwayes excepted so that it is lawfull enough now so long as this persecution lasteth to preach the gospell in private when no liberty can be had to do it openly 4. These Ministers are gathering no separated congregations but only preaching to all who will come hear the word of truth in such quiet retired places where they may get it done most saifly may be most free from distraction trouble of their enemies who are waiting to finde them out that they may haile them to prisons Who then can condemne their cariage in this 3. If any should further object say That this would be an open contempt of the Magistrat's lawfull authority disobedience to his lawfull commands For though it be true that he cannot take away the office of a Minister or the power of order so degrade him yet he may take away the exercise of his Ministeriall function at least he may discharge the exercise of the same within any part of his Kingdome or dominions Ans. Whether there be such an expresse prohibition or not is not certanely known nor whether or not the objection doth suppone that the Magistrat's Act of banishing of them out of their own parishes or out of the bounds of their respective presbyteries doth include a discharge of ex●…erceing the Ministeriall
Scotland in this is consonant to the profession of the Parliament Anno 1648. which did Act most for the King his interest preferring it to the interest of Christ who in their declaration Aprile 29. insert in their Registres Act 17. say That they resolve not to put in his Maj. hands or any others whatsoever any such power whereby the forsaid ends of the Covenant or any of them may be obstructed or opposed Religion or Presbyterian government endangered But on the contrary before any agreement or condition be made with his Maj. having found his late concessions offers concerning religion not satisfactory that he give assurance by his solemne oath under his hand seal that he shall for himself his Successours give his Royall assent agree to such act or acts of Parliament or bills as shall be presented to him by his Parliaments of both or either Kingdoms respectivè for enjoyning the League Covenant fully establishing presbyteriall government directory of worship confession of faith in all his Maj. Dominions And that his Maj. shall never make any opposition to any of these nor endeavour any change thereof What this Author sayeth more in the three last Pages of his pamphlet is but partly a repetition of what he said before so is answered partly obviated by the preceeding discourse SECTION XXIII The nationall Covenant vindicated from the exceptions of the author of the seasonable case caet HIs plea against the Solemne league Covenant being thus examined In the next place his exceptions against the nationall Covenant pag. 30 31. c. must be considered This Covenant is not abjured in the declaration simply in it self but as it was sworne explained in the year 1638. thereafter And so the maine ground whereupon this Covenant is cast off is because of that explication which was then added in which therewas mention made of some things which were referred unto the Generall assembly in these words forbearing the practice of all novations already introduced in the matters of the worshipe of God or approbation of the corruptions of the publick governement of the kirk or civil places or power of kirkmen till they be tryed allowed in free generall assemblies in parliaments And then after the generall assembly had examined these particulars explained the true sense meaning of the Covenant this conclusion was added The article of this Covenant which was at the first subscription referred to the determination of the generall Assembly being determined And thereby the five Articles of Perth the government of the Kirk by Bishops the civill place power of Kirk-men upon the reasons grounds contained in the Acts of the generall Assembly declared to be unlawfull within this Kirk we subscribe according to the determination foresaid Theforesaid pleader for Eaal when he is produceing his grounds against the validity of this oath pitcheth only upon one of these three particulars mentioned viz. the government of the Church by Bishops in reference to this he attempteth two things in his confused discourse 1. He would if he could prove that by this oath as it was at first conceived Anno 1580. 1581 renewed Anno 1590. the governement of the Church by Bishops was not abjured And 2. That the Assembly Anno 1638. did wrong in giving such a glosse sense as they did But he must be followed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lest any thing should escape first what he bringeth to prove that Prelacy was not abjured by this Covenant must be examined He sayeth That if the Ministers who reasoned with the Doctors of Ab●…rdeen be to be beleeved they were the prime promotters of the Covenant carryed with them the sense of the body of the Covenanters they who subscribed that Covenant knight with great liberty voice in an Assembly concerning Episcopacy without prejudice notwithstanding their ●…ath upon this ground would perswade the Doctors to subscribe the Covenant because in so doing they should not be taken as abjureing Episcopacy as the Doctors thought And he referreth his reader unto their answer unto the 4. 10. demands Unto which it is Ans. 1. That this is but the old answere brought on the field againe for it was alledged by the Prelats in a pamphlet ●…n 1638. emitted under the name of his Maj. commissioner as most if not all which he here alledgeth is borrowed out of that pamphlet what answers were then given may now suffice Viz. That these Ministers who reasoned with the Doctors of Aberdeen denyed indeed that Episcopacy was expresly specifically abjured in the later part of the Covenant which was the addition containeing the application unto the present times But did never say that it was not abjured in the negative confession or nationall Covenant Now it was about that application addition that the debate arose betwixt these Ministers the Doctors The Doctors never refused to subscribe the negative confession as it was called or the Covenant drawne up Anno 1580 1581. for when the privy Councell did emit a declaration enjoyning all to take the Covenant as it was taken Anno 1580 1581 1590 1591. as others did not so neither would they have scrupled at the same But they alwayes refused to subscribe to that part which was added and one of the grounds why they did scruple at the subscribeing of that was this They thought that by that addition they should be bound expresly directly specifically to abjure Episcopacy the ceremonies of Perth which as they sayd they could not in conscience do Because then they should not have liberty to vote freely according to their judgments Concerning those things in the Generall Assembly And unto this the Ministers answered that the words of that addition were purposely so contrived as none might scruple upon that account And indeed as to Prelacy the words run thus that they should forbear the approbation of the corruptions of the publick Government of the Kirk And the reason was because there were severall honest well minded people in the land who could not distinctly clearly see that the ceremonies the Government of the Church by prelats were directly contrary to the confession of faith abjured therein But were waiting for light in those matters from the ensueing Generall assembly who they knew could give most clearnesse in the matter of fact And could best show what was the Government of the Church at that time when the nationall Covenant was first subscribed And also what was the meaning of the reformers as to severall particulars in that Covenant So then though it be true that by taking of the oath or swearing that additionall explication Anno 1638 No man was bound up from reasoning debateing nor from free voteing in the matter of prelacy in the nationall Assembly Yet it will not follow that prelacy was not abjured by the negative confession or nationall
Covenant for though the sense meaning of the oath Anno 1581 Was not alike clear unto all Anno 1638. Either as concerning prelacy or ceremonies Yet the Covenant did strick against those as was afterward cleared The Covenant hath still one sense meaning though such as did live fifty eight yeers after it was first drawn up could not alike see it discerne it It was but little wonder that at such a distance of time after so many revolutions the true sense meaning thereof could not be so obvious unto all As to overcome all doubts scruples And therefore it was prudently resolved to suspend their approbation of those particulars till they were tryed in free assemblies And indeed so soon as the Assembly 1638 Did search into the businesse cleare the true meaning of the Covenant according to the sense of the reformers all scruples were loosed the people did chearfully assent unto the Assemblies determination For then they saw that by that Covenant The Ceremonies of Perth Assembly the Government of the Church by prelats were abjured And it may be supposed that this author will not be so bold as to say that ever after that assembly wherein that businesse was cleared any said that such as took that Covenant were left at liberty to vote for prelacy or for the ceremonies So then this author bewrayeth much ignorance or maliciousnesse or both when he thus argueth as he doth Let him read the answers of those Ministers in these places cited by himself he shall be able if he will to see his mistakes One of the grounds whereupon the Assembly 1638. did determine that Episcopacy was abjured by the Covenant which was sworne Anno 1580. c. was taken from these words in the Covenant his wicked hierarchy as may be seen at the end of their act sess 16. And to this he answereth thus This imports not the abjuration of the office of a Bishop more then the office of a presbyter or deacon which are parts of the hierarchy as well as Bishops but only the abjuration of the hierarchy so far as it was the pop's as it abjureth the five bastard sacraments So far at he maketh them sacraments So then the dependence of these offices on him as the head of the Church under Christ is abjured also the corruption adhereing to these offices and as they flow from him and are his as is his blasphemous priesthood And not the offices themselves And therefore the office of a Bishop among protestants Bishops being now loosed from that dependence upon the sea of Rome is no part of the pope's hierarchy This is the summe of his long discourse and it may be shortly answered thus That if the abjureing the hierarchy import the abjureing of the offices which are parts of the hierarchy in so far as they depend on him are corrupted by him then it will fully import the abjureing of prelats Because prelats depend on him as well in esse as in operari therefore they must be abjured with this wicked hierarchy It is well known that at the Councell of Trent the Pope would not suffer it to be debated whether Bishops were juris divini or not the Historian Peter Suave addeth the reason viz. lest if it should be determined that they were juris Divini they should not so depend upon him as they did he would have them continueing to do So that hence it is clear that the Pope acknowledgeth that they depend upon himself alone even in their being have no other ground to stand upon therefore when his hierarchy is abjured they in their essence being are abjured It is true if he or any of his fraternity had ever demonstrated out of the word of God that Christ or his Apostles did ever institute such an officer distinct from a preaching presbyter as in the prelate as may be done concerning the Presbyter c the deacon as himself will readily grant Then indeed it would follow that the abjureing of the pope's hierarchy would import no more then the abjureing of those corruptions which Attend those officers as these which attend presbyters deacons as they depend on him as the abjureing of his five bastard sacraments importeth not the abjureing of marriage in it self being an ordinance of God but only as it was abused by him to be a 〈◊〉 But seing it is not yet proved nor undertaken by this author to be proved nor was ever asserted by the reformers o●… that Church no not by Mr Craig the penner of the Covenant That Prelats as superiour unto distinct from preaching presbyters are officers of God's appoyntment certanely when they are abjured they are simply abjured So that till he demonstratively cleare That Christ or his Apostles did institute Bishops distinct from preaching presbyters he must acknowledge a difference betwixt them presbyters deacons as to the matter of abjureing them And so when all those three are abjured they cannot be abjured after one the same manner But the office of presbyters deacons are abjured in respect of their abuse that is the abuse corruption which adhereth to these officers as they are made parts of the hierarchy is abjured But when prelats are abjured not only is their abuse or the corruption adhereing to them abjured but the very use is abjured for the use of an officer not appoynted of Christ is an abuse and Prelats as to their being depend only on the pope But sayes he Bishops now being loosed from that dependence from the sea of Rome the Pope who as head of the Church claimed a plenitude of power over the whole Church made all Christian Bishops and Ministers but as his slaves vassels portioning out to them such measure of jurisdiction as he thought sit as their stiles in this countrey imported of old Ego N. Dei Apostolicae sedis gratiâ Episcopus the office of a Bishop is no part of the wicked hierarchy Ans. This was sufficiently answered by the nationall assembly 1638. in the forecited Act where they said And howbeit this hierarchy be called the antichrists hierarchy yet it is not to distinguish betwixt the hierarchy in the popish kirk and any other as lawfull but the hierarchy wherever it is is called his as the rest of the popish corruptions are called his viz. Invocation of saints canonization of saints dedication of altars c. are called his not that there is another la●…full 〈◊〉 and canonization of saints or dedication of Altars So that the Bishops their casting off the Pope as the head of the Church will not bring them out from among the officers parts of that wicked hierarchy In so far as protestant Churches admit of prelats in so far they are unreformed from popery this being one 〈◊〉 betwixt papists protestants It was the prelates their depending on the Pope that made the scottish reformers condemne them as his
Hierarchy otherwise they should have condemned all the other articles of popery only in so far as they did depend on him no otherwise And so should have yeelded that if the King by vertue of his headshipe over the Church should command enjoyn the practice of any of those articles condemned in the Covenant they might be done in obedience unto him if they were abjured only as they had dependence on the Pope came from him But this is false for they are condemned as being a part of a contrary religion and doctrine damned and confuted by the word of God and Kirk of Scotland so upon the same account are the Prelats abjured whether they depend upon an ecclesiastick Pope or upon a civill Pope whether they be Apostolicae sedis gratiâ Episcopi or Iacobi or Car ligratiâ Episcopi they are damned confuted by the word of God are not Christigratiâ Episcopi And so are abjured as unwarranted officers in the house of God even as ordination marriage are degraded from being sacraments so are they from being Church officers But to put a close to this second particular it would be considered that in the Covenant the office of prelats is abjured when the hierarchy is abjured the same way that confirmation extreme unction are abjured when the five bastard sacraments are abjured that is to say both the use the abuse is abjured for they both want warrand in the word therefore ought not to be to maintaine either is to maintaine false Doctrine poynts of Popery condemned in the word Might not a Papist pleading for extreme unction for orders includeing their septem sacramentula or inferiour orders as their ●…stiarii Le●…ores 〈◊〉 Ac●… 〈◊〉 Diaconi Sacerdotes which they meane by their sacrament of order not mere ordination as this author seemeth to take for their meaning if judicious Calvin hit right in his institutions say that when the Pope's five bastard Sacraments were abjured the use being of all these officers there is no disput about two of them upon the matter was not abjured But only in so far as they were Sacraments And extrem unction only in so far as it was a Sacrament And what this author would reply in this case for defence of the protestant reformers though it may be this author would swallow downe all those poynts of Popery many more Yet he will not have the boldnesse to say that such officers as to their esse being were not abjured by the reformers the same may now be answered in the case under consideration But he goeth on pag. 32. would make his reader beleeve That King Iames the enjoyner of that Covenant did never intend the abjuration of the office of Episcopacy that for these reasons 1. Mr John Craig who penned the same did but nine yeers before viz. Jan. 12. 1571. consent at Leth that commissioners might be appoynted to joyne with these whom the Councell should appoynt for setling of the policy of the Church whereof he was one The resolution of which meeting was that some of the most eminent Ministers should be chosen by the chapters of the cathedrall Churches to whom vacand Archbishopricks may be disponed and they to have power of ordination and to exerce spirituall jurisdiction in their severall dioecies and at the ordination of ministers to exact an oath of them for acknowledging his Maj. authority and for obedience to their ordinary in all things lawfull and accordingly it was done Against which the next assembly at St Andrews March 1571. take no exceptions and at the next Assembly 1572. These articles are received with a protestation that it was only for the Interim So then the learned penner allowed of Bishops a few yeers before and we see no evidence of the change of ●…is minde How could he the●… mean protestant Bishops in that draught Ans. These are pretty demonstrations to prove the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of a thing to say first Mr Iohn Craig was for Bishops Anno 1571. Ergo he was for Bishops Anno 1580. as if a man's minde could not change in Nine or Ten Yeers time specially it being a time of reformation when light was breaking up more clear dayly But next this is a more pregnant demonstration to say King Iames intended no such thing Anno 1580. because Mr Iohn Craig had no such intention Nine Yeers before Is not this well argued But to the matter It is true there were such things concluded at that meeting but whether with the unanimous consent of all or not who can tell But be it so that this honest man was oversweyed with the rest by the violence of the court some nobles who designed the Tulchan Bishope a●… they were called yet it is very improbable that he did persist in that judgment full Nine Yeers thereafter considering how much all that time the honest Ministers were setting themselves to oppose that act For the Assembly which did meet at S. Andrews two moneths thereafter took notice of these articles did appoynt some of their number to examine them so great was the exception which they took at them And Anno 1572. there was a protestation against these innovations 1573. the Assembly determined that whatever Bishops there were they should have no more power then the former superintendents had censured some as the Bishops of Dunkell Galloway And to this same purpose were there acts made Anno 1574. And Anno 1575 the office both of Bishops of superintendents came to be questioned debated a little thereafter they signified to the Regent that they would not agree unto that polity condescended on at Leth but some of their number were appoynted to draw up the second book of discipline which book Anno 1577. 1578. Was fully approved having proceeded thus far they caused severall of the Bishops subscribe severall articles denudeing themselves of their episcopall power Now when the Church is at all this work shall it be thought that this honest man even supposeing he had been of that judgement which cannot be proved was still of a judgement contrary to the judgement of the Church And did not all this time alter his minde especially seing the Church did look upon him as a faithfull friend for presbyterian government therefore did appoynt him with other five to consult with Mr Alexander Hay about the modell or plot of presbyteries But it is not much matter to debate what was the penman's judgment at the time the Covenant it self the words thereof are to be considered the meaning of the land in taking that oath is much to be regairded what that was shall be showne by by But. 2. He sayes pag. 33. as to King Iames. It could not be his intention to put away Bishops Because at that time Anno 1580. there was no other Government known 〈◊〉 the Church all ordination and
The grounds ends of this undertaking SECTION 1. Pag. 5. Sheweth When the Christian religion began first in Scotland That Palladius was the first prelate in Scotland No prelats among the Culdees How when reformation from popery began Superintendents no prelats Nationall Assemblies from the beginning of the reformation How the Tulchan Bishops came in over the Church her belly The Church wrestleth till these be put away presbyterian Government be setled in all her judicatories Anno 1592. The King thereafter incroacheth upon the privileges of the Church Prevaileth with some of the Ministers who betray the Church yeeld to parliament-Parliament-Bishops hinder the Church from enjoying her privileges liberties in her free Assemblies The faithfull Zealous are persecuted Parliaments carry on the King's designe with violence Corrupt Assemblies are convocated to further his Maj. designe to give Church power unto these Parliamentary Prelats Parliaments ratifie all The Church protesteth striveth against all this what she can The prelats being now inthroned tyrannize over oppresse the faithfull laboure to have ceremonies imposed upon the Church with force acts made in Parliament for bringing in the surplice Corner cap unto which some worthy nobles could not assent Anno 1633. Who are therefore accounted rebels traitours And Balmerino is condemned The prelats rage without all law draw up a service book book of canans c. SECT 2. Pag. 44. Sheweth How the use of the service book was hindered in Edenburgh Ministers people from all parts of the Kingdome petitioned against it The King favoureth not the petitioners They not withstanding continue in petitioning against the service book high Commission prelats c. Renew the nationall Covenant thorow the whole land The King intendeth a war An Assembly is indicted at Glasgow Nov. 21. And opened up This Assembly condemneth anulleth severall pretended Assemblies the book of common prayer the book of canons the book of consecration ordination the high commission court the ceremonies excommunicateth some deposeth all the prelats War is prepared against them They defend themselves A pacification is concluded another Assembly promised a Parliament thereafter The Assembly is opened up The Parliament is convocated but quickly adjourned Commissioners are sent to London imprisoned A new war is raised by the King Scotland prepareth for defence A new pacification The Parliament meeteth ratifieth all which the Covenanters had done Those acts are againe ratified The Parl. of Engl. beginneth a work of reformation entereth into a Covenant with Scotland the two nations joyntly proceed in the begun work of reformation A party in England strengthen themselves alter the judicatures take away the King's life Scotland bringeth home the prince who sweareth the Covenants is overcome by the Englishes in battell keeped in bondage ten yeers till the exiled King returned Anno 1660. SECT 3. Pag. 69. Sheweth Why these Ministers others who met Agust 23. 1660 were incarcerated what their supplication was And how unjustly they suffered upon that account SECT 4. Pag. 77. Sheweth What were the grounds upon which the Marquise of Argil●… suffered how insufficient in poynt of law from severall considerations SECT 5. Pag. 83. Sheweth What were the grounds upon which the life of precious Mr Guthry was taken how insufficient Either in law or conscience SECT 6. Pag. 86. Sheweth Upon what account other Ministers were persecuted And how unjustly Some banished for righteousnesse sake some indictâ causâ An extract of the sentence was refused to thos●… to all others SECT 7. Pag. 88. Sheweth The grounds why conscientious Ministers could not observe the anniversary day SECT 8. Pag. 91. Sheweth The reasons why Ministers could not observe the prelat●… meetings The author of the seasonable case c. Answered SECT 9. Pag. 101. Sheweth The reasons why ministers could not seek presentations from patrons nor collations from prelats The author of the seasonable case answered SECT 10. Pag. 114. Sheweth The true sense of the oath of alleagiance which was tendered Anno 1661. c. Compared with the former how it holdeth forth a great civil supremacie in the King cleared by the act 11 parl 1661. Which at least is much to be questioned from nine severall grounds And cannot lawfully be acknowledged because of ten dreadfull consequences which shall necessarily follow thereupon The former proceedings of the Church state of Scotland vindicated cleared SECT 11. Pag. 140. Sheweth The lawfulnesse of Scotlands defensive war first from the former practices of Scotland other Kingdomes King Iames King Charles confessions of adversaries next from a true clearing of the state of that war in Six Particulars which obviat all the objections of adversaries And lastly from lawyers adversaries the law of nature the law of nations the law of God sound reason SECT 12. Pag. 169. Sheweth What is the meaning of the oath of alleagiance as to its Ecclesiasticall part What way the King's supremacy over Church persons in Church causes began was carryed on in England How the same was advanced to a great height in Scotland What sense this King the late Parliament did put upon the oath of alleagianee by their Acts Actings How it were sinfull to acknowledge by taking the oath That so much Church power belongeth unto the civil Magistrate cleared by Nineteen particulars SECT 13. Pag. 200. Sheweth The groundlesnesse of Mr Stilling fleet 's notion concerning the divine right of formes of Church governement by making it appear how he overturneth his owne grounds how he misstateth the question the practice of the Apostles ground a jus divinum here Christ's institution the institution of the Apostles is for a particular species Christ's faithfulnesse in his office speaketh much for this The hazard is great in leaving the species undetermined The confession of the faith of severall Churches for a Species How he misseth his pretended end arme And how unseasonable his book is at this time uselesse so long as the league Covenant standeth in force though his notion were true in thesi SECT 14. Pag. 254. Sheweth How weak the Reasons are which plead for the taking of the oath of alleagiance by answereing Sixteen of them SECT 15. Pag. 270 Sheweth How unlawfull it is to owne acknowledge the curats fo●… lawfull Ministers by fourteen reasons Foure objections answered SECT 16. Pag. 298. Sheweth That it is lawfull for Ministers banished from their owne flocks by a sentence of the civil Magistrate to preach in publick or private as God calleth by Eight reasons Thr●… objections are answered SECT 17. Pag 305. Sheweth That it is lawfull for Ministers though censured by the pretended prelate to preach as God giveth a call whether in publick or in private by Six reasons Foure objections are answered SECT 18. Pag. 310. Sheweth That it is lawfull for people to meet together for hearing honest Ministers preach publickly or privately And for other Christian duties notwithstanding of Acts made against it by severall reasons One objection answered SECT 19. Pag. 316. Sheweth How unlawfull it is to acknowledge the high commission court by compeering before it by Eleven reasons Foure or five objections are answered SECT 20. Pag. 327. Sheweth How dreadfull a sin it is to abjure the Covenant a sin aggravated by twelue particulars SECT 21. Pag. 347. Sheweth What judgements perjury hath brought on in all ages out of history sacred prophane SECT 22. Pag. 359. Sheweth The lawfulnesse binding force of the solemne league Covenant notwithstanding of all which the author of the seasonable case c. hath said against it SECT 23. Pag. 391. Sheweth The lawfulnesse of the nationall Covenant as it was sworne subscribed Anno 1638 1639 c. Notwithstanding of all which the author of the seasonable case c. Hath said to the contrary The CONCLUSION Pag. 416. Sheweth What the now afflicted Church of Scotland expecteth from strangers what use they should make of this sad dispensation c. FINIS Whence may not men destruction feare Who with deceitfull hearts do sweare This age wherein we live is void of faith For writes are signed twelue witnesses before The notar writt'th both time place what more Yet come'th a man of words who all deny'th King's words have weight great respect More then all oaths which men exact
was the elders of that Church unto which Paul Barnabas were sent Ver. 2. this was the Church of Ierusalem that they should goe up to Ierusalem to the Apostles and elders 2. When they came to Ierusalem they found the Apostles elders there present what could the Bishops of all Iudea be doing there at that time If it be said that they came together upon this solemne occasion How did they know of this occasion For the Apostles knew not of it themselves till the Commissioners from Antioch told them Ver. 5. That there were certane of the Sect of the Pharisees arisen which beleeved saying that it was needfull to be circumcised c. And then Ver. 6. The Apostles Elders came together for to consider of this matter He who can imagine that these Elders were the Bishops of the severall dioecies of Iudea may easily cast by the plainest fullest passages of Scripture that can be may imagine what he pleaseth But to put a close to this let that passage Act. 16 4. be considered where it is said They delivered them the decrees to be keeped which were ordained by the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elders in Ierusalem or who belonged to the Church of Ierusalem or stayed there The third passage is Act. 21 11. of which he giveth the same dubious sense upon as little ground as before his conjectures may receive the same answers Only where he sayes They might be the Elders of the severall Churches of Iudea he seemeth to prevaricat for the poynt of difference is not betwixt Elders Elders But betwixt Elders Bishops betwixt the Elders of that particular Church of Ierusalem the severall Bishops of the dioecies of Iudea But it seemeth he blushed to name this once therefore thought it best to put in Elders but this was not faire dealing Neither is his conclusion faire when he sayeth There is no certainty of the Church of Jerusalem how that was governed whether by Apostles themselves or other unfixed Elders or only by James who exerced his Apostleshipe most there and thence is afterward called Bishop of Jerusalem For the question is not whether the Church of Ierusalem was governed by all the Apostles or only by one But whether by Presbyters in common or by one Bishop above distinct from Presbyters And by this conclusion he would seem to say that there were no Elders in Ierusalem at all no Governours there but Apostles one or moe Moreover it is sufficiently proved by the Presbyterian divines that the Apostles when acting in governement together with other Elders or Officers did not act as Apostles but as ordinary Officers And also that Iames did not govern the Church of Ierus alone as a Bishop The fourth passage which he citeth is Act. 14 23. upon which he sayeth That no more is imported but that no Church wanted an Elder but not that every Church had moe Elders Ans. whether was this single Presbyter a Prelate or not If not what is this to the present question The governement may be Presbyteriall where one Minister is fixed to one particular flock If he was a Prelat where were his Presbyters under him 2. It is true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will signify no more but Ecclesia●…m Church Church but will 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie no more but one Presbyter Had it been said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it might import but one Presbyter in one Church Or yet if it had been said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must needs import more Theodoret knew the import force of that phrase when he rendereth the like passage in Tit. thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Presbytery in each city The last passage which he citeth is Act. 20 17. There is no certainly sayeth he whether these elders came only from Ephesus or also from the severall Churches ●…f Asia about Ans. Upon what ground can he once think that the elders of Asia may be understood here He hath none other but this that it is said v. 18. that from the first day he came into Asia he had been with them at all seasons because he did not remaine all that time at Ephesus as appeareth Act. 19 20 22 26. But this cannot so much as ground a probability for it is certane the most part of his abode was at Ephesus for full two yeers three moneths are specified Act 19 8 10. the rest of the three yeers if there be not ro●…ndatio numeri here he might now then have visited other parts have most of his residence at Ephesus heither reaching in the Synagogue nor in the School of Tyrannus where he had taught two yeers three moneths so granting that he might have made some visits unto the other parts of Asia dur●…ing these Nine moneths yet he might well say to th●…se of Ephesus That from his first coming into Asia they had known after what manner he had been with them againe it will not hence follow that others then these of Ephesus were there more then from these words v. 25. Y●… all among whom I have gone preaching the Kingdome of God it will follow that all the people he had preached unto both in Ephesus in other places of Asia minor Asia propria were present But whom can we expect to have been there except such only who were sent for viz the Elders of the Church of Ephesus therefore they are called the Elders of the Church not the elders of the Churches as they would have been called if the Elders of the Churches had been there present as we hear of the Churches of Iudea Galilee Samaria Act. 9 31. of the Churches of Galatia Gal. 1 2. Churches of Asia 1. Cor. 16. 19. of Ma●…edonia 2 Cor. 8 1. of Syria Cylicia Act. 15 41. so would we hear of the Elders of the Churches of Asia But there is no such thing only there is mention made of the Elders of that one Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To conclude this himself sayeth cap. 7. § 2. pag. 349. That this flocke Church were the Christians of Ephesus that all these spoken to were such as had a pastorall charge of this one flock Thus it hath been showne how weak the ground is upon which Mr S●…illing fleet walketh how litle reason he hath to conclude his notion from these passages which he hath mentioned furder the groundlesnesse of his conceite will appear if some two or three passages of scripture be but viewed which he hath passed by without once noticeing unto which the answers which he was pleased to give to others will not quadrate as 1. That place 1 Cor. 5. If any look thorow that epistle they shall easilie see that there were many preaching Presbysers in that one Church here Cap. 5. they are about a work of excommunication so are endued with episcopall power
should have some choise brethren added without whose counsell he should do nothing under the paine of deposition That his doctrine should be examined by the meeting if it were sound unsound he should lose his place That his power should only be the power of order not of jurisdiction That withall he should have insp●…ction over moe parishes that every Minister who was to enter should have his approbation the approbation of those Ministers who were to be joyned with him c. But when the assembly did meet in May thereafter these were not assented unto But it was only concluded That the bishop being a pastour as other ordinary Ministers should be tryed by the presbytery Synod in matter of doctrine conversation And be subject unto the Generall assemblies when the commissioners who were sent from his Maj. did hear of this they dissented protested that nothing concluded should stand in force seing th●…y had passed from the Articles And this occasioned a ●…w conference where that was concluded which this author mentioneth withall they did proceed to set down the order of the presbyteries Now lest any should stumble at this change in the Assembly let it be considered That two yeers before this there was a strange change at court for Arran ruled all nobles were banished ministers were forced to flee others imprisoned then the Prelats got up their heads Montgomerie was made Bishop of Glasgow one Mr Adamsone made Bishop of Saint Andrews And Ministers were compelled to promise under their subscription obedience unto them to consent unto many other acts of iniquity under the paine of banishment confinement imprisonm●…nt deposition sequestration of stipends this course continued till near the end of the year 1585. When the exiled nobles returned though a new Parliament was called the King would not repeale any act which was made in prejudice of the Church the yeer before Yet at length he professed some desires to have the Church settled called for that conference at Halirudhouse Now what wonder was it that when all was overturned Prelats established by Parl. in their full power that the Church should take little ere she wanted all should condescend to some things of purpose to get the power of prelats hemmed in hopeing when this furious tempest was fully blowne over that she should be in a better capacity to promove her work And withall it may be seen that she holdeth as much as she can mindeth the work of the presbyteries notwithstanding of the lawes of th●… land as yet unrepealed standing against her So that hence it appeareth that they never once thought of retracting the act at Dundee as he would make his reader beleeve And it would be considered likewise that at this Assembly there were severall of these Ministers present who Anno 1584. had subscribed unto the prelats And further it is considerable That for as great a length as they went Yet Sess. 6. They declared that there were only these Church officers Pastors Doctors Elders Deacons And that the name Bishop should not be taken as in the time of popery but is a name common to all pastours and Sess. 10. 11. They declared that by a Bishop they meane only such as the Apostle doth describe The last thing which he sayeth is this No Assembly can pu●… an obligation upon persons who have taken an oath personally to accept of the sense which they put upon it It is true the assembly at Glasgow could declare their sense of the oath taken by themselves but could not impose their sense upon the takers of the oath before that sense not hav●…g been given to the takers of the oath by the imposers of the same ●…e takers of the oath not having impowered these commissioners at Glasgow to declare their sense of that oath they had taken So then whatever was done 〈◊〉 Glasgow after the Covenant was taken by the body of the land could not oblige all the takers of it to owne their declaration of the sense of the Covenant which was not at first imposeing the oath declared unto them To let passe his bitter refl●…ctions not worth the transcribeing upon that venerable assembly at Glasgow 1638. The like where of would make him all his fraternity to tremble Ans. 1. The Assembly at Glasgow did impose no sense of theirs upon any man either who took the Covenant before or thereafter only because to them as the representative of the Church the publick judiciall interpretation of the Covenant or confession of ●…aith did properly belong they made search after the true sense meaning of the oath did declare make it appear to all by undenyable arguments as hath been showne that they had found out the true sense meaning thereof what was the sense of the Church of Scotland when it was first imposed And was there any wrong here 2. Such as had renewed that Covenant at that time had taken it with the explicatory addition did swear to forbear the approbation of Church Government by prelats untill the Generall Assembly should try whether that Government was abjured by the Covenant or not And was not that a sufficient impowering of the Assembly to declare the true sense thereof But what would this author gather from all thi●… He concludeth that Whatever the Assembly at Glasgow did after the Covenant was taken by the body of the land could not oblige all the takers thereof to owne their declaration of the sense of the Covenan●… Ans. Though their deed could not oblige the body of the land to owne their sense yet the Covenant it self did oblige them the body of the land did then see themselves obliged by the declaration of the true sense of the Covenant which they gave And what necessity was there for more The Assembly never offered to give a sense of their own which had not been heard of before For that had been intolerable but according to their place duty they for the good of theland satisfaction of the Covenanters search out of the ●…hentick records of the Church what was the sense meaning of the Church at that time when the Covenant was first taken which every privat person could not be so able to do which necessity did require to be done because of severall doubts which were raised there about He addeth the body of the land hath not indeed abjured Episcopacy by that nationall Covenant Neither the Covenant nor added interpretation doth import any such thing Ans. This is a strange thing how can this be seing the body of the people of the land took that Covenant by which when first taken by the body of the land prelacy was abjured It is true some who took the Covenant then being unclear in a matter of fact which had been done some fifty or sixty yeers before in trying searching out of which there