must not choose any to be Commissioners to a General Assembly that teaches Doctrine contrary to the word of God and Constitution of the Kirk agreeable thereunto and therefore if a Commission of the Gen. Assembly or any other Kirk Judicatory according to their interest perceiving Ministers throughout the Kirk teaching contrary to the truth or practising to the prejudice of the true Religion should writ to Presbyteries desiring them not to choose any such Commissioners to a Generall Assembly this were no undue pre-limitation or prejudging their Liberty in election but a necessary and lawfull warning puttting them in minde of and stirring them to a duty whereunto they were bound though no such direction were sent to them This laid down in generall as to that Act and Letter of the late Commission sent to Presbyteries we say first That the Commission did nothing therein but that which other Kirk-Meetings and Commissions had done before them in the same matter in relation to the election of Commissioners to the Generall Assembly all which must fall unto the ground as null unfree and unlall if the late Generall Assembly be unfree and unlawfull in its constitutions Vpon this accompt We must look back to the Generall Assembly at Glasgow 38. it self what directions were sent from the Tables then at Edinburgh in relation to electing Commissioners thereunto Next we must refer also to the Letters sent to Presbyteries by the Kirk Commission annis 1639. 40. 41. concerning Commissions to Brethren to these Generall Assemblies all which are yet extant in Presbytery Books but we shall content our selves to hold near hand the late Commission did nothing but what the Commission did in the year 48. wherein the chief Protesters had a chief hand and yet maintain the lawfulnesse of that deed and the freedome and lawfulnesse of the constitution of that Assembly that followed thereupon To this the writer of the large Paper replyeth sundry things in answer to Objection 1. But nothing to take away the force thereof First he hints at two differences between the one and the other as he would have the reader think he might make use of but passeth by as having to say beside To say nothing saith he of the difference of reference and citation neither yet of the difference of a Letter and Act importing that there is a considerable difference between these things and that the Commission 48. appointed persons dissentient from them onely to be referred and did send a letter onely whereas the Commission 50. made an Act also and appointed Persons also to be cited to the Generall Assembly to which we oppone first the difference between a citation and a reference when the reference of a person to be tryed and judged on a fault and the person is present at the reference is just nothing see Assembly 1643. Session 2. Aug. 3. Overtures anent Bils c. And I desire the Writer to say if it was not the purpose of the Commission 48. when they did require Presbyteries to refer such to the Gen. Assembly that there should be laid on them an obligation legal to compear personally before the Gen. Assembly for tryal and sentence upon them and what else is the end of a citation and summonds nor yet is the more difference betwixt the Act of the Commission and persons to be referred or cited by Presbyteries and a Letter requiring it to be done for is there not an Act for such a Letter and the matter of it and hath the Letter it self the force of an Act would not the refusing of what is desired be counted disobedience to the Commission But it seemeth the Writers memory hath failed here behold an Act in terminis as it stands registrate in the Commission book the 5. of June 1648. The Commission of the Generall Assembly recommends earnestly to Presbyteries to take speciall notice of every Brothers carriage in the Publict business that if any be found that do not declare themselves a-against the present Malignant course nor joyn with their Brethren in the Common Resolutions thereof they be referred to the next Generall Assembly and if any of them have already declared for it that they be presently censured fic sub Andrew Ker. This may make us doubt the more of alledgances of this kinde afterwards in matters of fact when we see not clear and circumstantiat testimonies of Registers brought forth REVIEW IN answer to what is here said by the Author I acknowledge that the elections of Commissioners in Presbyteries ought not to be such as is bounded with no limitations and that if any Commission of a Generall Assembly or any other Church Judicatory according to their interest perceiving Ministers throughout the Church teachâ—ng contrary or practising to the prejudice of the Truth should write to Presbyteries desiâ—ing not to choose any such Commissioners to a Generall Assembly this were no undue pre-limitation or prejudging their liberty in election I believe that none of the Protesters will differ from the Author in this That Presbyteries ought not to choose any to be Commissioners that teaches doctrine contrary to the word of God and Constitutions of the Kirk agreeable thereto and if the Commission in their Letter and Act had terminated themselves within these bounds no Protester would have controverted with them about it and I think neither will he controvert with them in this that if a Commission or any other Kirk Judicatory teach doctrine contrary to the word of God and to the constitution of the Church agreeable thereunto and write to Presbyteries to choose none to be Commissioners to the General Assembly who doth oppose such doctrine that this is a pre-limiting and prejudging of Presbyteries in the liberty of their elections according to these condescentions The Commission in the 51. having sent to Presbyteries a Letter and Act before their elections relating thereto It seems unavoidably to follow that some limitation and direction there was in that Letter and Act concerning the elections But all the question is whether it was a limitation warrantable or unwarrantable Now if so why hath the Author so cautiously and so much wrastled to deny that that letter and Act had any influence upon the elections in Presbyteries if it was nothing but a necessary lawful warning putting them in mind of and stirring them up to a duty whereto they were bound though no such direction had been sent unto them then there was no cause to be affraid of the loosing of any ground by acknowledging of its influence the Authors long wrangling about that doth either seem to say that he is suspicious of the limitation contained therein as not being warrantable or else that he hath too great goodwil to dispute seing this would have been a short and satisfying answer The Commission in their Letter and Act did put no bonds on Presbyteries in the election of Commissioners but such as are well warranted by the word of God and Acts and Constitutions of this
to the generality of them did then and do at this day agree in this That the publick Resolutions are not agreeable to former principles and proceedings There was cause of stumbling given also to the Godly in regard of the Commissioners their maner of proceeding because a Quorum very few moe of the Commission did lay the foundation of these resolutions not only without the rest of their number but also without advertising a great many of them And so many being absent and not advertised they did in a day or two determine that most grave case which had often before that time been determined in the negative and sent abroad their Determinations to Presbyteries requiring obedience and upon mens offering the grounds of their dis-satisfaction and professing their adherence thereto till satisfaction should be given did issue such Warnings and Acts as we have formerly spoken of I appeal the Author himself whether at the time of the giving of the Answer to the Quaere it was not known to the Commission that many godly and faithfull Ministers and Professors in the Land were averse from employing these men in the Army and had great scruples about it and that many Members of the Commission who were not to be despised had often profest their dislike of it albeit the matter had been lawful surely there was great precipitancy and rashness in the first Resolution which is acknowledged by sober men even of the same judgment but such was the zeal and forwardness of the Court and of some Parliament men on the one hand and the readiness of sundry of the Commission who had before that time declared themselves for that way on the other hand to hearken unto them and the faintness of any that were present to oppose it that hold was taken of the opportunity to do it quovis modo whereby real offence was given to the godly in the Land Si quid importuna levitate aut lascivia aut temeritate non ordine nec suo loco facias quo imperiti imbecillesque offendantur scandalum abs te datum dicetur quoniam tua culpa factum fuit ut ejusmodi offensio suscitaretur ac omnino scandalum in re aliqua datum dicitur cujus culpa ab Autore rei ipsus profecta est are the words of a great Divine speaking of scandals very applicable to this case Next he doth a wrong in making them so ignorant simple and facile as in these things to be led away with the mis-representations and mis-informations of others Many of the most judicious decerning Christians in the Land were stumbled at the Commissions proceedings upon the first hearing of them before the Protesters did make either right or wrong Representations of them I will not say but they were confirmed in the dislike of these proceedings by conference with the Protesters other Ministers of that judgment as they also were mutually edified and confirmed by them but that all the stumbling and dislike did arise from the suggestions and practisings of some or all of the same persons whom the Author calls the Alleadgers and Accusers is not true yea I dare say that albeit all the Protesters and all the Ministers in Scotland had been of one mind with the Commission in the matter the Publick Resolutions yet many of the godly in Scotland would have stumbled thereat It would have been in this case as in the business of the Treaty wherwith many of the godly in Scotland were dissatisfied notwithstanding that there seemed to be a harmony and consent amongst the Ministry there anent That there were more Testimonies for the Commissioners from Presbeteries and Synods then were against them is no great wonder multitudes commonly inclining to the worst side in the day of tentation and they being but few who keep their garments pure yet did not the strength of the Testimonies upon the one hand or on the other ly in the number of the Witnesses but upon the truth and clearness of their Evidence what was testified by the opposers of the Commission was confirmed by clear Evidence from the constant Doctrine of this Church grounded upon the Word of God and set down in the Covenant and Solemn Acknowledgment of Sins and Engagement to Duties and Publick Warnings Declarations Remonstrances c. but not so much as a tittle of these for Evidence on the other side It is acknowledged by the Author himself That the Publick Resolutions was a case not formerly determined by any Publick Judgement of this Kirk and if so there could no evidence be brought from the Doctrine of this Church for clearing and confirming of these Resolutions The Author is pleased to call the Testimonies given against the Publick Resolutions really and in themselves Scandals tending most evidently to the exposing of the Kingdom and of the Cause to the power of the Invaders He was pleased a little above to call them Slanders and so all the godly in Scotland who speak against these Resolutions are upon his accompt Slanderers But these Testimonies were neither Slanders nor Scandals they did contain real Truths and were Duties to which the givers of them were obliged in a backsliding time for delivering of their own souls and preserving the Cause of God from being overborn with a spate of defection and though in many things they acknowledge themselves to be amongst the most sinful yet in this they were so far from exposing of the Kingdom Cause to the power of the Invaders that they hold themselves bound to bless the Lord while they live who gave them mercy to be kept free from that carnal sinful course that did provoke the Lord to give so great a stroak to the Kingdom and the Cause in those dreadful Rods wherewith he hath smitten us since these Resolutions What was the sense that the Invaders themselves had of this I do not well know but this it 's like enough they rejoyced in our Divisions But it was not the opposing of the Publick Resolutions wherein they did directly rejoyce Nothing from us-ward would have been matter of so great terror to them as to have seen us unanimous in separating from and opposing of all Malignant Interests As it was upon the other hand the matter of their confidence and joy that their former quarrel seemed to be justified by the Publick Resolutions which did so much strengthen and promove Malignant Interests if we may beleeve their own Expressions and Letters written from some of the Chief of them to the Higher Powers in England He tels us That for that cause some of the Testimonies were sooner put into their hands then communicated to the Commissioners and they in thankfulness were very thankful to cause print them This is a crimination of no smal consequence to the Name and Fame of these of whom the Author speaks and therfore if he had dealt candidly and spoken truth upon perswasion and evidence he should have told us of what Testimonies he meaned and who
Publick Judicatories The latter part is evident by Mr. John Carstaires Letters written to the Lord Register about the time of the contriving that Remonstrance from Edinburgh and intercepted at the Ferry of Airth or thereabout REVIEW I Shall say nothing of the charity he alloweth many and of the perswasion that he hath of some that they are far from doing any thing intentionally or formally and directly intending to overthrow or wrong any of the Ordinances of JESUS CHRIST setled in this Church or the peace thereof he hath reason to allow them that and somewhat more but this allowance of his to some doth leave others under a hard construction not onely in regard of their work but also in respect of that which is their formall and direct intention another years proof of them may haply force better thoughts both of their intentions actions in the hearts of some who now for along time have mistaken them because they could not join in the Publick Resolutions which to them was to be found in the way of Egypt and to drink the waters of Sihor in the mean while they are comforted in this that their own hearts doth not condemn them neither in their intentions or actions what he saith of a zeal not according to knowledge and of mistakes about midses and of a good intention that it is not enough to make a mans actions good or imitable by others but that is to be considered what good ground or reason they have for their course and of the applying of common principles which are better known then made use of In all these things I do agree with him and wishes that they may be blessed of God unto his Readers and all others But let us come to examine the things whereby he endeavours to render the Professions of the Protesters suspected as not agreeing with some of their principles and actions for making out of which he desires the Reader to compare the professions made in the Narrative of the Protestation with some late principle of some that had hand therein and these not of the lowest note Firâ— saith he they professe that while they live c. I acknowledge that I have no great skill of School tearms but I conceive that when in this place he speaks of the Ordinances in concreto and as they are in actu exercito actually existing and as they are exercised in Judicatories constitute accordingly he means not of every kinde of concretion and exercise of Ordinance quovis modo for they may have an honest and honourable estimation of Ordinances who bear testimony against the corruptions and mal-administrations of the abusers of them otherwayes these who have been most zealous and straight-hearted for the Ordinances in all Ages should be found among the despisers of Ordinances and none more then many of the gracious Worthies of this Land who were ready to lay down their lives for the Ordinances and yet did bear publick testimony both against the corrupt constitution and corrupt Acts of Assemblies and all male-administrations that were of any importance to the prejudice of the Kirk or any of the Ordinances of Christ therein which was so far from rendering their professions suspected that it was a reall evidence of the truth and sincerity thereof But I think he means of such a concretion and exercise of Ordinances though it had been fit to expresse it more clearly as is agreeable to the rule of Gods Word for so he seems to hint when he sayeth as they are Judicatories constitute accordingly and in this sense the carriage of the Protesters doth well stand with their Professiors in reference to the Ordinances Having laid down this ground and distinction of Ordinances not onely in the abstract and dogmate but also in concreto and as they are in actu exercito he comes in the next place to give some instances of some practices of some of the Protesters in setting down of which he hath been very industrious to gather and put together a bundle of such things as he thinks may bring their Professions in suspicion and contempt I shall not meet him with the like measure if it were Christian and seasonable work more haply might be holden forth of the practices not of some only but of many sticklers for the Publick Resolutions that goes cross their Profession to the Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government of the Church of Scotland then the Author can or will answer but because to recriminate is not to answer I come to the particular instances which he gives The first is their condemning Acts and Constitutions of the supream Judicatories of this Church which he aggravates by many circumstances First that these Acts were most unanimously concluded Secondly that themselvs were present and did not contradict Thirdly that they were positively consenting thereto by their Votes Fourthly that they condemned these Acts not in a private way but in a Remonstrance publickly emitted to the World and presented to the State Fifthly that all this was done without having so much respect to these Judicatories as first to have recourse to them by supplication and desire to re-examine or take to consideration again these Acts and Constitutions yea refusing to apply themselves to them in such a way when advised and earnestly pressed thereto as orderly by some to whom they had communicated the design of the Remonstrance To all which I return that the Argument taken in its strength doth not seem to conclude much for evacuating the Professions of the Protesters to the Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government of this Church unlesse we lay this for a ground that whosoever represents and remonstrates his judgment against any one of the Acts of the Assembly of this Church belyes the Profession which he makes of respect to the Doctrine Worship Government and Discipline thereof Secondly the Assembly was not sufficiently informed concerning these transactions with the King but severall important particulars which would have contributed much for clearing of the businesse were keeped up from and not reported to the Assembly to wit the first invitation given to the King the Act appointing him to be restored to the exercise of his power the Kings Letters to James Graham the Kings taking the Sacrament after the order of the Service Book kneeling from an Episcopall Doctor and an Irish Bishop notwithstanding that he had signed the Treaty and that intercessions were made to him both by word and write to forbear the bringing to sea with the King all the English and Scots Malignants that were with him at Breda after the Commissioners had received the Letters and Acts both of Church and State disapproving the Treaty at Breda The way how the King was induced to subscribe the Covenant and how immediatly before his taking it being ready to land in Scotland he was about to have made a Protestation but that some of the Commissioners would not tender him the Covenant upon these terms How lame the accompt
as their Commissioners then some sort of election there behoved to be as indeed there was both to that Assembly at Lithgow 1606. and that of Glasgow 1610. For clearing of which it would be remembred that there is an election materiall when persons are instructed and authorized by us as our Commissioners though we have not nominate and formally chosen them for that effect and an election formal when we do formally nominate and choose an election materiall there was at Lithgow because those who were nominate by the Kings Letter were instructed and authorized by the Presbyteries as their Commissioners and therefore in the 4. reason for nullifying of that Assembly there is mention of the power which these Ministers had and of the limitation thereof by their Presbyteries but there was no formal nomination of these men by the Presbyteries therefore it is said in the 2. reason that they were not at all elected by their Presbyteries but at Glasgow 1610. there was both a materiall and formall election though not free but pre-limited because the King and the Bishops had designed the persons whom they would have them to send and let it be considered whether upon the matter there be not the like and as realll a pre-limitation by the Act and Letter of the Commission In the year 1606. and 1610. the King and the Bishops nominate who shall come and design whom the Presbytery shall send without leaving them to choose such of their number as they thought fit and in the year 1651. the Commission designes who of their number they shall not send to wit none that were opposite to the Publick Resolutions for this much their Act wherein they require them to be cited to the Assembly doth import as afterwards shall be cleared not leaving Presbyteries to their own freedome choose such of their number as they thought fit and is not the one of there a pre-limitation and hinders a free choice as wel as the other Doth not he pre-limite who saith that you shall not choose such men of your number as well as he who saith you shall choose such men of your number in the mean while it is to be observed that the Assembly 38. hath no such distinction as that of active and passive solicitations but infers the last Presumption juris de jure from and upon the first and not without good reason because none doubt of the influence of commands of Superiors when the desire is granted and the direction is followed by the inferior especially when the effect is contrary to the former custome and practise when they were free Because the Author hath endeavoured to darken as much as he can the pre-limiting of the elections in Presbyteries by the Letter and Act of the Commission by his distinction of active and passive pre-limitation therefore upon supposall that the Letter and Act of the Commission did contain a pre-limitation of the elections which shall be afterwards cleared I reason thus For proving that Presbyteries were passively pre-limited in their elections by that Letter and Act who so in their elections accepts of and yeelds obedience unto a Letter and Act containing a pre-limitation of their elections are passively pre-limited in their elections But the Presbyteries did accept of and yeeld obedience to such a Letter and Act ergo c. The first Proposition is a clear truth and agreeable to the Authors own words when he is explaining passive pre-limitation active solicitation of Judges and members of a Judicatory saith he proves not a Judicatory corrupt unlesse it can be evidenced that they have accepted and yeelded unto the solicitation The second Proposition to wit That the Presbyteries did accept of and yeeld obedience unto that Letter and Act because it was not onely received and read in the most part of Presbyteries before their elections without any testimony given against it but also appointed to be put upon record in their books in testimony of their approving thereof and as the ground and order of their proceedings in the things contained therein and obedience was given thereto in most places by forbearing to choose any such as appears by the Rolls of the Commissioners in same places ranversing former elections and appointing new ones to be made up on that ground as appears in the elections of the Presbytery of Dunkell in some places opposing the choosing of such as were opposite to the Publick Resolutions and dissenting from and Protesting against their being chosen as in the Elections of Glasgow in such places intimating to such as were choosing in their absence that they might not admit them unlesse they did declare themselves satisfied with the Publick Resolutions as in the presbytery of Mearnes for verifying of which I desire it to be taken notice of that that Presbytery having chosen the Lord Arburthnet to be Ruling Elder to the Generall Assembly they did afterwards writ unto him a Letter and sent by some of their own number in which Letter are contained these words We have sent two of our number who will take your Lordships Declaration when you accept and give your oath to discharge your trust faithfully whether your Lordship is satisfied with the Publick Resolutions but if you have any hesitation and scrouple therein as we hope you have not we must make choice of another and in some places refusing upon that accompt to subscribe and approve the Commission of these who were sent from Burghes as in the Presbytery of Kirkaldie who after the reading the said Act and Letter of the Commission did refuse to subscribe the Commission given by the Burgh of Bruntiland to Magnus Aitoun because he compeared not with the Commission himself to declare his minde anent the Publick Resolutions These may be instances enough to prove their obedience If it were needfull to take up time in so clear a businesse we could bring sundry moe which we now delay because they may be subjoyned to the end of this Paper but to say no more of this purpose the Synods and Presbyteries citing of such to the Generall Assembly as did oppose the Publick Resolutions by the order of the Letter and Act which order for citation did by necessary consequence incapacitate them to be Commissioners is an undenyable testimony that they accepted of and yeelded obedience thereunto VINDICATION BVt let us prove it further in the discovery of the nullity of the first reason and for that purpose consider the other particular thereof which concerns the Commissions Act and Letter As to the matter in Generall the Protesters themselves nor any other judicious or sound Christian will say and think that the election of Commissioners in Presbyteries ought to be of such a lax liberty as is bounded with no limitations at all this was the loose way pleaded for by the Arminians at the Synod of Dort and which would tend to the subversion of true Religion certain it is that Presbyteries are so far limited in this that they
scandall of carrying on a câ—urse of defection he saith that it is manifest not onely from common report the first whereof is made Deut 13.12 A ground of search and the other a ground of proceeding against the incestuous person 1 Cor. 5. we may see by this what doom the late Commissioners likely might have gotten had the Writer of this Paper been judge excommunication summary from this Church and destruction by the sword from the Civill Magistrate such considering the crime he charges on them and the place cited is not only hinted at but blessed be GOD that so illwilled a Cow had so short hornes But also from those four 1. The stumbling and sad complaints of the godly against their Proceedings 2. The testimonies and Letters of many Presbyteteries bearing their stumbling and dissatisfaction with the same 3 The clear standing Acts Remonstrances and Declarations of former Assemblies unto which these were diametrally opposite 4. The testimony of sundry Brethren in the Assembly offering to prove it REVIEW BEfore I come to the discusâ—â—â—g of the Authors Answers to this reason I cannot but take notice of a few interludâ—s of his in repeating of these things which the Writer brings in for clearing and conâ—â—rming of it First these words of hâ—s for the former he alleadges first that it is without controversie and next he brings four things for the proof of it the light of Nature and the Word of God but names not one passage of it The Writer said not that it was without controversie but his words be these albeit as we conceive no great controversie will be about it And although he had said that it is without controversie was it a fault to bring something for strengthening assent to the truth of it That he named no passage of the Word of God was because he took it to be lippis tonsoribus notum amongst Christians that an Elder should be blamelesse and of good report A second is That it is good that the writer yea even in this heat of disputation finds something right in the Commissioners Papers out that he tells not all the truth The Writer desires not at any time to be so hot against the Commission as not to acknowledge and commend what is right in their Papers and actings and why should it be made a matter of challenge against him that he tells not all the truth seeing he had not to do with any more then he tells his point was to tell that the persons under scandall ought to be removed from the Assembly and not the positive qualifications to be required in these who are to be admitted to fit a Members If the Author think that that can contribute any thing either for strengthening what the Writer intends to prove or for clearing of the Commission he doth well allow it to be told Thirdly These words of his The Writer magno hiatu bids any man in the world bring a reason his magno hiatu are not words very beseeming that sobernesse and gravity that becomes a man of his place and parts he may remember that he useth the like expressions himself all the world saith he in a certain place of his Vindication shall not be able to clear this from usurpation and is there not need of as wide a mouth for the one of these as for the other But that which is most observable is the strange inference which he drawes from the Writer citing Deut. 13.12 to prove that common report is made a ground of search 1 Cor. 5. to prove that it is made a ground of proceedings we may see by this what doom the late Commiss likely might have gotten had the Writer of this been Judge Excommunication summarly from â—his Church and destruction by the Sword from the Civill Magistrate considering the crime he charges on them and the place cited is not onely hinted at but blessed be God that so ill-willed a Cow had so short horns but also from the 2. Thess 3.11 The Author told us above that he is not given to be jealous but this favours too too much of jealousie and of the want of Charity which thinketh not evill I would fain know from what Topick he wil from all that the Writer hath said frame a probable argument that it is like that if the Writer were Judge the Commissioners doom would be summar Excommunication from this Church and destruction by the Sword from the Civill Magistrate I know him to be a man that hath good ability in argumentation but it will surpasse all his ingyne by any probable consequence to infer this conclusion from the Writers citing of these places of Scripture to prove that common report is made a ground of search and proceeding and I am confident that as he shall not be able to bring any probable evidence of what he hath alleadged so also that it did never enter into the Writers heart to have such a thought VINDICATION THus far the Writer So we have now before us at one view this Argument so operous and large as full and strong as it could be made to which a very short answer might be made for all hangs upon this that the late Commissioners were under a scandall of carrying on a course of defection and this hangs necessarily upon the third particular last mentioned which the Writer onely dictats magisterially we deny which alone layes the whole argument in the hollow and suspends assent to the conclusion thereof untill the Writer shall in a new Edition follow out his Argument and make that particular good which he shall never be able to do But for clearer satisfaction to all honest Christians about this matter we present this consideration in answer to this argument 1. The very like accusation exception came into the Assem 48 from the very Parliament against the Members of their Commissioners who were Commissioners to the Assembly and yet after a long and serious debate it was found by none more then our present Protesters and concluded that none of them could be removed from sitting in the Assembly and voting in other matters untill their proceedings were first heard and tryed when the Writer shall shape an answer to justifie the Constitution of that Assembly notwithstanding this that was â—one then we doubt not but it shall _____ the late Assembly so we see that it is contrary to the truth which the Writer alleadgeth in answer to the first Objection against this Argument when he sayeth that though it be true that the Members of the Commission have been allowed to sit untill their Proceedings were tryed and judged yet that is as true that such Objections and exceptions being proponed was never rejected We have given a fresh and recent instance to the contrary what he addeth there viz. that since the late Reformation there was no cause to propone such thing the Commissioners til this year having carryed themselves faithfully we grant the former did carry themselves faithfully and
provision That none should be admitted to places of power and trust but such as are qualified positively according to the rule of the Word of God in that case holden forth in our Solemn Engagement To passe by the way of carrying of it which was palpable and obvious to the whole Land was not added until the Forces were almost compleatly leavied and the bulk of the Malignant Party brought into employment and places of power and trust in the Army The second Item ordaining Presbyteries to proceed with persons formerly guilty of malignant courses for admission of them into Publick repentance in a way conform to the rules set down by the Generall Assembly for admitting such upon testimonies from Presbyteries bearing satisfaction given by then conform to these rules was not at all included in the Commissions answer neither was there so much of it as one word in that large Warning of the 7. of Jan. 1651. emitted by the Commission for strengthening of that Answer and when anything of that kind in latter Warnings Acts and Letters came to be added was alwayes holden forth but as expedient in order to the employing of these men but never was pressed in any of these Papers as a necessary duty to exclude all these from being employed for defence of the Cause and Kingdom who did not give evidence of their repentance according to the Acts of the Generall Assembly nay it could not be so pressed unlesse they had destroyed the foundation which they had laid in their answer to the Quaere and in that Warning The truth is what was done in the matter of repentance in order to the employing these men was upon the stumbling and out-crying of many against the Publick Resolutions as they came first forth and yet so as the first ground was alwayes holden fast as to the matter of judgment and for practice the businesse was hereby rather made worse before the Lord and to the point of guiltinesse then it was before The Commission not only ranversing former Acts made by themselves for excluding these from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper who were in the rebellion after Dumbar till the next Generall Assembly and making new Acts for receiving of them but receiving promiscuously such as came unto them and by their example teaching Presbyteries to do the like by which was produced a fearfull mocking of the Ordinance of God in publick Repentance which no doubt hath been one of the provoking causes of the Lords wrath to draw on these dreadfull stroaks wherewith he hath again smitten our Armies and our whole Land But to the hypothesis it self granting to the Author that which he alleadges that this hypothesis was not clear at the time of the Protestation because as yet there was not any particular determination thereanent in former Generall Assemblies First I doubt of that assertion of his That when an imputation of scandall depends upon a particular hypothesis which at least is questionable and the very point in controversie betwixt them and their accusers it is against all reason and equity that they should be holden to be under a presumption of scandall untill that particular hypothesis be discussed and cleared and therefore untill that be done the adversaries alleadgeance against them is to be held but as a meer alleadgeance upon which they are not to be excluded from sitting as Members in the Assembly until their cause be judged and tryed I suppose that some Commissioners to the Assembly should object against other Commissioners that had comitted murder and should offer instantly to verifie the same and desire that the persons against whom it is propounded should be removed from sitting as Members until it migbt be tryed and they in the mean time should say that it was true they had taken the life of such persons but in their own just and necessary defence and therefore they could not be holden under a scandal of murder nor be thereupon removed from sitting in the Assembly till that particular Hypothesis were first determined Would the Author think it a wrong done to these persons or rather a duty in reference to the constitution of the Assembly to remove them tâ—â—l the matter should be cognosced upon 2. I do affirm That not only former Assemblies but the Assembly 1651. did remove Commissioners upon Exceptions propounded against them the grounds wherof was not yet clearly determined in Law for instance The Commissioners of the first Election of the Presbyterie of GLASGOVV who were laid aside as for other Reasons so also for this as one in foro controdictorio sustained to be relevant because of the Exception of the opposing of Publick Resolutions propounded against them Next Mr. Robert Cauden Commissioner from the Presbytery of Dunce was removed upon the propounding of this exception that there were but three or four Ministers in that Presbyterie to chuse Commissioners all the rest of the Churches thereof being vacant and can any Determination of this Kirk be produced that three or four Ministers in a Presbytery where the rest of the Churches of that Presbytery are vacant cannot chuse Commissioners to the General Assembly 3. I do upon the ground which the Author himself laies down prove the carriage of the Commissioners to have been scandalous and such as did minister just ground of excepting against them why they should not sit as Members in the Generall Assembly till their carriage should be first tried my Argument is this Whosoever Commissioners of the General Assembly being in their trust and carriage in the Publick Affairs of the Kirk limited and tyed to proceed according to Acts of former General Assemblies does upon the accompt of the discharge of their trust declare many godly Ministers in the Church of Scotland till then of unquestionable integrity and faithfulness in the work of GOD to be Malignants and unfaithful in the cause c. and requires Presbyteries to censure them and to refer and cite them to the General Assembly because of their opposing of Resolutions taken and issued by them concerning which there is no particular Determination in any former Assembly They give scandal and offence in the discharge of their trust and may justly because thereof be excepted against as not fit to sit in the General Assembly as Members thereof before their carriage be tryed But the Commissioners of the Assembly 1651. who were Members of the Commission were such Ergo c. The assumption is clear the matters of fact contained therein being evident from their own Papers and that they were not warranted by any Act of the Assembly so to do is the Authors own ground The first Proposition I prove thus Whosoever so far transgresses the bounds of their Commission as upon the accompt thereof to declare many formerly faithful to be Malignants unfaithful and ordains them to be censured and cited when they have no warrant thereby so to do gives scandal and offence in the discharge of their trust But the Commissioners by
indeed to be determined not relevant in that circumstance of time when it was proponed It is no answer at all First Because the Assembly could have judged thereof before the choosing of the Moderator other Assemblies severall times having so done and this same Assembly did judge the relevancy of sundry exceptions as to the laying aside of the Commissioners yea the irrelevancy of this same exception by the Authors own concession in these very words by what authority they could judge the relevancy of one exception by the same authority they might have judged the relevancy of another and by what authority they could reject it as irrelevant by the same authority they could have discussed it relevant or not relevant Secondly Because it was also urged after the choosing of the Moderator but was not then condescended unto but the Commissioners against whom it was proponed were still allowed to sit as Members of the Assembly without having any regard to that exception which gave probable grounds to think that the rejecting of it before the choice of a Moderator upon that pretext was but a meer pretext because a Moderator now being chosen it was still rejected and therefore rejected as simpliciter irrelevant without reference to any circumstance of time as appeareth by condemning it in the Protestation But it may haply be said That by the circumstance of time when it was proponed he means all the intervall of time that was between the proponing of it and the judging of the Commissioners proceedings If so it was relevant in no circumstance of time it being proponed meerly in order to their removall for that intervall of time when their proceedings were now approven and condemned it would have been very impertinent and uselesse to propone any such exception He would let his Readers know in what circumstance of time it was relevant As to the removing of the Commissioners before judging of their proceedings for if any circumstance of that time it was relevant the Assembly did wrong in not finding it to be so and if in no circumstance of that time it was relevant as to that effect he doth but triffle with his Readers in telling them that it was not relevant in that circumstance of time it was proponed it had been candide and fair dealing to have told them that it was relevant in no circumstance of that time or not relevant at all but this would not have been well digested VINDICATION SO we shall now passe to the next ground of the Protestation what is contained in the Writer of the second Paper his replyes to the first objection or other Objections is either nothing to the infringing of our answer or cleared by what hath been said already only this much I adde These men who he saith hath fallen from their stedfastnesse and made defection at which others could not wink because of their former integrity some of them have been stedfast in the truth and Cause of God when others that accuses them knew it not some of them we doubt not will by Gods grace give testimony of their stedfastnesse in it in their suffering condition when some that accuses them may be will be found or already are tampering about and devising glosses how they may with some colour shuffell themselves loose from Articles of the Covenant And the Writer shal never be able to instance that they have made defection in their late Resolutions either from any Article of the Covenant or from the truth of Religion in any head thereof Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government received and established in this Kirk or from practising according to that truth I mean by any Publick allowed practise or course contrary thereunto for as for person all failings add short commings in particular duties they know themselves to be but men compassed with a body of death and we doubt not but they are as far from Pharisaicall justifying of themselves as others As to the other partculars mentioned in the Protestation ' that they stirred up the Civill Magistrate against such as were unsatisfied with their Proceedings It s contrary to truth as shall be cleared afterwards there alleadged prelimitating of the Assembly is cleared before as it formed and inlarged in the second Paper The Meeting at St. Andrews had no liberty nor freedome to vote in matters agitated and debated therein which is alleadged to be manifest from the particulars that the Commission had in their Remonstrances and Papers stirred up the Civill Magistrate against such as did differ from them in their Resolutions and Proceedings and accordingly the Magistrate had confined some Ministers viz. those of Sterline upon that accompt and had made Laws and Acts of Parliament ordaining all such to be proceeded against as enemies to Religion and the Kingdom 2. The Commissioners had by their Warnings and Papers to Presbyteries stirred up the Presbyteries to censure such and cite them to the Generall Assembly and accordingly the Presbyteries did cite many of them 3. The Kings Majesty wrote to the Assembly a Letter moving and stirring them up to punish and censure those who differed from the Publick Resolutions and the Commissioner did second the same by his speech to the Assembly intimating that he hoped such a course should be taken with them that all others may be deterred from the like thereafter none of these things that Meeeing did resent but were silent thereat and afterwards did approve I Answer To the first particular it is contrary to the truth that the Commission had in their Papers stirred up the Civill Magistrate against such as did differ from them about their Resolutions and Proceedings the Writer if he would have dealt ingenuously and faithfully either with the Commissioners or with such as was to read this Paper he should have instanced or produced some at least one or two for he speaks as if this had been done in sundry Papers passages out of their Papers bearing this 2. That the Civill Magistrate did confine as the Writer termeth their requiring them to stay at Perth for a space untill their businesse should be cognosced the Ministers of Sterlin being stirred up thereunto by the Commissioners and that he confined them upon that accompt viz. That they differed from the Publick Resolutions both are affirmed wrongfully and contrary to the truth the real story of that businesse was this in summe The Committee being informed that the Ministers of Sterlin were in their publick Doctrine and otherwise practising the hindering of the Leavies according to Publick Resolutions and moving sundry persons in the Garrison of Sterlin to quite and desert their charge which tended to the endangering of the whole Land and particularly that Garrison the only Bulwark of the whole land under God the Committee represented the matter to the Commission of the Generall Assembly shewing them that they could not permit that Garrison to be endangered yet in regard they were Ministers they desired the Commission to take a dealing with them first
Judges and Condemns the Exceptions contained therein as irrelevant they must upon supposal of the truth of the Facts which are manifest and acknowledged find these Exceptions irrelevant either because these Facts upon which they are founded are consonant to the law by which they are to be judged to wit The Word of God and Acts of the General Assembly or because they are not condemned therby If they judge them consonant to the law they caÌ„not afterwards find them wrong by that law because they have already by the same law found them right If not condemned neither can they find them wrong because that were to find them condemned by the law by which they have already found them not condemned If it be said which for any thing my weakness reaches is the only thing that can with any colour be said That they might find these Facts as to the relevancy or irrelevancy of them not condemned nor determined by any Act of any General Assembly and so no grounds of relevant Exception when they were offered unto the Assembly and yet might afterwards find them condemned by the Word of God and so find them wrong I return 1. That by this Answer it is granted That these could never be found wrong by any Act of the Assembly which then was in being 2. That the Commissioners and the Assembly when they judged of them in order to the relevancy of the Exception founded upon them did not only neglect to give a judgement on them according to the just and infalible rule by which they are bound in the first place and by their oath to square all their proceedings to wit the Word of God but also gave a judgment of them contrary to the Word of God to wit That they were not relevant grounds of Exceptions which is a judgment contrary to the Word because the things being in themselves wrong by the Word cannot but be relevant grounds of Exception If it be said That all that they judged was that it was not yet manifest by the Word that they were relevant grounds of Exception That still iâ— but a poor shift to defend an ill Cause because this follows That they did condemn them before they knew whither the Word of God did condemn them or approve them and this is indeed to my understanding the up-shot of the business That it must either be yeelded that the condemning of these Exceptions was the approving of these proceedings or else that men in condemning of them went on blindly not knowing whether they did therin judge according to the Word of God or against it Because what I have already said doth cleer and take in what is material and of consequence to this businesse Therefore I shall be the shoâ—ter upon his Answers to the other two Particulars mentioned by the Writer He doth not deny but the Protestatian was judged before the approbation of the Commissioners proceedings and surely if so this was no handsome work not only because the Commissioners sate as Judges to condemn the Exceptions propounded against themselves but also because a part of the Protestation was that the Commissioners proceedings should not be approven as involving a conjunction with the malignant party c. And it is somwhat strang that they should condemn a Protestation against the approving of these Resolutions before they find these Resolutions approvable that the men who were under tryal in order to these Resolutions should sit as Judges in condemning a Protestation against the approving of them The Author thinks that the Argument will be found by any indifferent judicious men in the World to bear little weight and to be a meer Paralogism in the whole probation of the assumption to win That the Commissioners did sit as Judges in the very thing for which they were under tryal I hope before this time judicious men may see something in it that will bear weight and that there is no Paralogism in the probation of the assumption The first part of his Answer to the First Particular â—s à posse ad esse that the Assembly might have done so therefore they did so that the Assembly might have judged the Protestation before the approbation of the Commission and yet in judging of it not judged the matter whereof the Commissioners were yet under tryal yea verily they might saith he for why they might as to that part of it which is alleadged in this Argument viz. That the Commissioners proceedings should not be ratified have judged that they should go on to try them and if they did find them right and agreeable to the Word of God and Constitutions in this Kirk in that case to ratify them whether they might have done this is not now the Debate It seems by what is said That they could not have done it but he dare take it on him That if they did judge the Protestation before the approbation of the Commission they did no other thing in relation to that particular Now saith he that they should go on in the tryal of the Commissions to approve them if it should be found as said is and to judge in the thing wherin the Commission was under tryal c. are not the same but very different things as any man that hath half an eye may see and dâ—scern This seems to suppose that when the Assembly did first condemn the Protestation they did not condemn it all but only a part of it to wit That part that was against the lawfulness and freedom of the Assembly leaving a reserve for the other part against the ratifying of the Commissions proceedings until these proceedings should be tryed but I cannot take this for granted until he verify it by the Act it self which doth condem the Protestation whereof I doubt exceedingly if it do contain any such limitation if it had it is like that he would have told us directly of it but upon supposal that it did yet that doth not take off the difficulty nor Answer the Argument because as we have already shewen the CoÌ„missioners by judging the relevancy of the exception proponed against themselves which they judged of when they condemned the first part of the Protestation against the lawfulnes freedom of the Assemb they judged their own proceedings wherof no such instance can be given either in the 48. or any other lawful free Assem of this Kirk As to that of the 48. we have often shewed that in al that busines he goes upon mistakes to wit That the Parliament did except against such Members of the Assembly as were Members of the Comission As to his judgment of the Writers reasoning it is such as doth make it appear that he had rather chuse to allow to him the testimony of some ability then not to fasten the imputation of a foul miscarriage upon him For he saith he cannot tell whether the VVriter hath reasoned this loosly out of mistake or of purpose he can hardly suppose the former considering