and the Elders and such Ministers and Elders as they had received or should receive Another mistake is That the Meeting that preceded the forementioned Assembly was called to lay down methods how a General Assembly should be called and constituted because one could not be had according to their minds after the old manner and standing Rules of General Assemblies Ans This Meeting was not called for that end nor did act any thing to that purpose nor needed they do so For the Act of Parliament had excluded all the Episcopal Ministers from sitting in the General Assembly unless they were taken in by the Presbyterians All that they did that could any way concern the Constitution of the Assembly was that Presbyteries should send three or four of their number to the Assembly where they had sent but two when there were more Ministers in each Presbytery which could no way alter the Constitution of the Assembly He giveth a false account of the Act of Parliament by which Presbyterian Government was setled when he saith That by it none had a share of the Government but such Ministers as had been removed by the restoration of Episcopacy For both Ruling Elders are expresly mentioned and such Ministers as the Presbyterians had received or should receive Hence followeth another mistake viz. That they were over-seen when they admitted others into the Government and were by that means over-voted None were admitted but such as the Act of Parliament reached nor was there any over-voting in the Case for both they who had been turned out by the Bishops and they who were after taken in did generally agree in the same Votes He would revive the old forgotten and Fatal Division that rent and ruined this Church about the Protestation and Remonstrance But through the Mercy of God it is not so much as mentioned among us That some of the Remonstrators who had been under that woful Schism in the Church deposed by the opposite party sate among us is true and we know no reason why it should not be so for their Sentences were taken off long before And what was moved and done in that meeting was that the revoking of these Sentences should be now confirmed by this Meeting as being of more extensive Authority than these which had recalled them That any of them who sate there were deposed for scandalous and gross Crimes Or for any thing but their Opinion in that controverted point and their practice according to it is more than we know and unless he can make it appear he ought to be reputed a Slanderer if he or any else shall prove it we shall acknowledge our Errour at least our Ignorance and shall rectifie what we have done amiss What he saith of Mr. Pitcairn's protesting against their sitting there is a gross mistake That Reverend Brother was dissatisfied with the way of wording the Determination of the Meeting in that Affair which some proposed and was a little hot about it but he was soon satisfied Neither did he enter any Protestation tho' he spoke of it Nor did he object against the recalling of their Sentences In all this our Author giveth his Readers a most false and unfair Idea of our Affairs § 6. Which he doth yet more in what followeth he telleth us of a Debate betwixt the old and the young Men which of the two should Rule A Controversie that never was so much as named in any of our meetings nor for what I know in private Discourse Nothing can be more false than the story that he telleth for instance in this matter of a Contest between Mr. Rule and Mr. Webster No such words were ever spoken And if they had there had been no truth in them For what he talketh in his Marginal Note of the Contribution of the Sisters savoureth more of Spite than Wit Some of the Nonconformists lived on their own Estates others by their Industry in Lawful Callings yet diligently preaching the Gospel others by the Charity of good Women and good Men too as our Lord and his Apostles did And his own party are now brought to that Mortification that I suppose the Contributions of the Sisters are not despised by them He quarrelleth with the Name of the General Meeting that preceded the Assembly as being none of the Names of the Church Judicatories known since the Reformation What if we should say it was an extraordinary Meeting such as that extraordinary Case of the Church did allow And yet it wanted not Authority neither from God it being made up of the Officers that Christ hath appointed to Rule his Church Nor from Man we have then a Liberty granted fot the exercise of our Ministry in all the parts of it We may also defend it to be a General Assembly of this Presbyterian Church which differed in nothing from that which followed but that the one had the countenance of the King and Parliament this other only that of the King directly and of the Parliament indirectly The Parliament having allowed the King a power of granting Indulgence to Dissenters â—…om the Established way as was noted on Letter 2. Sect. 16. In his account of the Work done by this meeting he doth grosly prevaricate while he saith They prescribed Rules for trying Episcopal Ministers They did indeed suppose that Presbyteries have an Intrinsick power of judging the Life and Doctrine of all the Ministers within their bounds and of excluding the unfit and receiving them that are qualified but considering the present paucity of Presbyterian Ministers which yet was not such as he would have us believe They were so far from directing them to try these men that they did wisely caution them and some way restrain them in this Tryal For their appointment was that if in trying these men the Presbyteries should meet with any Libel the Relevancy of which was doubtful or if the sufficiency of the proof were not clear in such Cases they should not proceed to a Sentence but refer the Case to the General Assembly which was soon after to sit What could they do more to prevent Injury to these Men without denying that power of Presbyteries which is their due He instanceth in some Presbyteries where were very few Ministers we deny it not but that was but in some few places and at first There are more now even in these places and in other parts of the Countrey there were even then a competent number in Presbyteries and in some places few or none wanting As in all the Presbyteries of the Synod of Glasgow That there were so few is not to be wondered at The whole Nation being but t'other day under Episcopacy The Youth having been generally so bred and the Presbyterians being almost worn out by a long tract of time and heavy Persecution There were fewer Protestant Ministers in the beginning of the Reformation from Popery and yet it was not thought fit that either the Church should be without all Government or that it should
THE CASE OF THE Afflicted Clergy I Now proceed to examine another of the Pamphlets by which these of the Episcopal Clergy who hate and malign the Presbyterians do load them with reproaches and aggravate their own sufferings beyond all the bounds of Modesty and Truth Its Title is The Case of the present afflicted Clergy in Scotland truely represented Thus we are Treated by Men of a restless Temper who are imbittered in their Spirits by what inconveniency they are fallen into from the Ease and Dominion over their Brethren that they lately had One Book after another we are Lashed with If they would speak Truth and exercise Reason rather than express Rage and Fury we would bear it and clear our selves in the Consciences of all impartial Men. But we must be content to take things as they are and defend the truth and our selves from these assaults that they think fit to make of whatever sort they be Before I come to the Book it self I shall a little consider the Preface He commendeth the Moderation and Integrity of the Author and indeed it was needful For none living could gather either of these two good qualities from this Pamphlet He telleth us of the design of that Book To procure pity from the most Charitable Church of England a begging design as I marked on the other Pamphlet That Men may consider the Fatal Consequences of Papal Supremacy in a Protestant Kirk If he would have his words understood or believed be should shew us wherein such a Supremacy is exercised But railing doth best in general Terms It is also That the Church of England should bethink themselves how to quench the Flames lest it destroy themselves Thus they sow Discord among Brethren and animate England to concern themselves in the Affairs of our Church when we do not meddle in their matters He will have all Scots Presbyterians to be Persecutors and chargeth them with thinking that they do God good service when they kill Bishops Which Facts that he aimeth at the Generality of Presbyterians did abhor as much as he can do This is an early test of the Moderation and Integrity that we are to expect from this piece He further proveth our Persecution by citing some passages out of B. Burnet Whom being a party we are not to admit as a witness against us Yet we acknowledge in his Citations the truth of some rigour that was used in these times of Broils and Contentions which Presbyterians do not Generally allow If we would recriminate we could lessen these excesses almost to nothing by narrating the Barbarity used in Scotland by his party against us But I rather wish that both may study Sobriety and Moderation than defend or practise over again what hath been amiss I commend what followeth His attempting to narrow the differences that are between Presbyterians and Episcopal Men in Scotland In Doctrine we are professedly one but really there is a party among them who differ from us especially about the Arminian points In Worship the difference is very small Only contrary to his design he wideneth it when he falsly saith that some in time of Prayer uncover their heads but by halves Was ever this approved by Presbyterians What he imputeth to us of fulsome Expressions and vain Repetitions is a Calumny if there be some on our side there are more on his who through ignorance or unseriousness may be charged with this It is also false that at Baptism we bind the parties to the solemn League and Covenant May be some might do it in a time when we had no Government but it is thought fit among us to make the Word of God the standard of what we believe and bind our selves to practise § 2. He essayeth to make a parallel also betwixt our and their Discipline but in that he is not so happy For tho' we deny not that they have something that looketh like Parochial Discipline And also the name of Presbyteries yet they have but a shadow of both For not only all that power that any of their pretended Judicatories exercise is derived from the Bishop But the exercise of it dependeth on him and he can supersede it when he pleaseth Which if any of them should deny I can prove by two Instances in one Presbytery Viz. That of Chirnside One for habitual Drunkenness on the Sabbath day being cited before the Session and for disobedience to them being cited before the Presbytery while they were managing the process a prohibition was procured from the Bishop of Edinburgh which stopt the process and the Man Drank on in defiance of both Presbytery and Session Another accused for living with a Woman as his Wife to whom he was never Married and being processed by the same steps as the former by a prohibition from the same Bishop the Presbytery desisted and the parties continued in their former course of Life And yet this Prefacer hath the Forehead to say that their Discipline is the same with that of Geneva and I believe his party will give him little thanks for the condescentions he hath here made as we dislike them because not true nor ingenuous But we know the design of such pretended moderation it is to load the Presbyterians with the guilt of causless Schism as appeareth in the sequel of his Discourse But when they debate with us about the difference betwixt a Presbyter and Bishop they speak in another strain It is also false that they have Elders who are no Ministers these among them who are more ingenuous will not allow them that name much less do they give them the Power of Ruling Elders or own in them the same Authoritative and decisive Power as the Ministers have I know no other design in keeping up Sessions and Presbyteries in Scotland but that the people who have since the Reformation been used to Presbyterian Government and can comply willingly to no other Church way may be deceived with the shadow of it when the thing is cunningly taken away He saith that in Synods all things are carried by plurality of Votes It is so indeed when the Bishop pleaseth but dare they Vote any thing or can any thing be carried by their Authority without his Lordships consent I think none of them will affirm this He confesseth the Bishop hath the power of Ordination in him tho' he useth to take the consent of the Brethren of the Presbytery along with him that this is always to be done he affirmeth but I am sure it is not the Principle of Episcopal Men All this considered let any judge whether he speaketh truth when he saith that the Bishop is but a constant Moderator A Moderator hath no Power more than the least of the Meeting hath only he ordereth the meeting that all may not speak at once proposeth Matters to them pronounceth as their Mouth what is the Mind of the Meeting But nothing is determined by his Authority nor are the Judicatories of the Church his
only the Reader may know that this was never alledged nor given as the reason of their deprivation by any of us Whatever might possibly be talked in England by them who knew little of our Affairs The Council did not consider their Immorality nor freedom from it but only their obedience or disobedience to the Law His story about Bishop Lighton will not Vindicate the Western Clergy from gross and multiplied Immoralities But that is not now the thing under our consideration That Scandals were represented at Court as the ground of their deprivation by the Council is as injurious and false as any thing that can be said The plurality of Episcopal Ministers above the Presbyterians he seemeth to brag of But is it any wonder when twenty eight years ago many had complyed with Episcopacy and all that did not were driven away and in that long time many of them were removed by death Was it not so at the Reformation from Popery How far did the number of Popish Priests exceed that of Protestant Ministers But what he hence inferreth hath no weight viz. That many of the Episcopal Ministers must be removed lest they should over-vote the others For a more rational and sure course was taken to obviate it viz. That the Government should be setled only in the hands of Presbyterians and such as they shall receive which he or his Fellow Censurer of the State had above complained of and we have vindicated He concludeth this Narrative with a warning to the Church of England of the Enmity of Presbyterians against them and their hazard from us And indeed the strain of these Pamphlets is mostly a complaint against the King and Parliament and all the Authority of this Nation and an Appeal to the Church of England for deliverance from this Yoke And I hope our Rulers will consider them accordingly § 9. We now come to consider the Authors several Collections of Papers in which he hath been at a great deal of pains but to little or bad purpose as I hope by Examination of them shall appear His first Collection is of accounts that he hath had from his Complices a Company of Men avowed and malicious Enemies of all Presbyterians concerning their Sufferings from them and all this attested by themselves as I above observed He beginneth with the Story of Mr. Bell of Kilmarnock which I have above answered on Letter second Next he cometh to the Presbytery of Hamiltoun Where it seems he findeth three Mr. John Dalgliesh of Evendal Mr. James Crichtoun of Kilbryd Mr. Angus Mackintosh at Sten-house whose Gowns were torn and they discharged to preach Attested by Dr. Robert Scot Mr. George Leslie and Mr. John Dennistoun To all which I give no other Answer but what hath been said on the like occasion That the Presbyterians are not to answer for such practices which were done by such as Sober Presbyterians do not own nor are owned by them but rather hated and opposed As also that so many lying Stories of this kind have been told by him that it is not worth the while to enquire into the truth of these Men use to slight what is asserted by a common Liar We have next a general account of the Ministers of the Presbytery of Irwin that all their Houses have been assaulted their Gowns torn and they discharged to preach many of their Wives and Children turned out of Doors like to starve by Hunger and Cold in the Winter some forced to fly and lurk that they cannot meet to make known their Grievances Only three or four give these accounts from their own knowledge and certain information Signed Charles Littlejohn Minister of Larg Alexander Laing Minister at Stewartoun One may easily answer all this without particular information Considering the veracity that is to be found in this Pamphlet viz. Here is nothing but Generals and that by report Personal knowledge is pretended but for little of what is Asserted And we have cause to think that these were none of them who are of our Communion who Acted these things Then follows the Sufferings of the Presbytery of Glasgow in the persons of Mr. Russel at Govan Mr. Finny at Carthcart which two Stories are answered and found to be forgeries 〈◊〉 Letter 2. Mr. Blair at Rutherglen Mr. Gilbert Mushet at Cumernâ—… Mr. David Mill at Cumernald which we may rationally judge 〈◊〉 be of the same stamp Neither have we time to search into all the groundless Tales that he thinketh fit either to invent or to take up from them that devise them But that which he laboureth to set off by the Circumstances of it is that January 17. 1689. A Rabble mostly Women came with a design to drag the Minister out of the Pulpit he being warned and forbearing and returning from the Church was assaulted his Gown and other Cloaths torn The same day Mr. Alexander George had his Doors broken and he being upon his Sick-bed they had dragged him out of his Bed if the Provost with ten Men had not come to his Relief Next Sabbath January 20. there was no Sermon in the City on the 22 d they sent a threatning Letter forbidding all Ministers to preach on the highest peril this is attested by Alexander George John Sage the Ministers of Glasgow All this is answered above § 10. Another Paper of History he setteth down page 41. of the Sufferings of the Presbytery of Paislay upon the Bedele of Paislay on the Minister there on the Minister of Kilbarken And how Mr. Houstoun usurped the Pulpit of Eastwood This attested by Robert Fullertoun Moderator and John Taylor Minister at Paislay The answer of all this we take out of the Accusation it self It was done by Mr. Houstoun and his Party A man who not only is disowned by the Soberest sort of Presbyterians but even by the Cameronians as of most unsound Principles and most immoral practices Followeth a Letter Signed by four Ministers George Gregory Francis Fordyce William Irwine Minister at Kirkmichael John Hog Minister at Ochiltry What is not repeated out of the former Stories and answered before is the People of the Meeting-house Battering and Bruising the Minister of Kirkmichaels Man-servant commanding him to remove with what was his Masters from the House Ans It is witnessed under the Hands of David Bell James Cathcart Thomas Craig William Niven all of that Parish That they were present when one Robert Donaldson with some others came to the Minister of Kirkmichlaes House and that they did not beat or use any Violence to the Ministers Man servant But only took the Communion Cups from him and that they two drank together and shook Hands at Parting And that the said Servant lived there peaceably a year after and disposed of the Crop of his Masters Glebe It is also witnessed under the Hand of John Kennedy and George Monaught that the forementioned Robert Donaldson who was said to use Violence in the house of the Minister of Kirkmichael was a common
Robber and had Robbed several Houses in Carrick And that he nor his Complices did belong to no Meeting-House That they apprehended him and carried him before the Baily Deputy of Carrick who sent him to Prison Is it not a malicious Lye to impute this Fact to the Presbyterians of the Meeting-house Followeth the possessing of some Churches Which is above Answered Then we have a large History Signed by the Minister of Livingston Mr. George Honeyman and John Park Clerk to the Synod of Edinburgh How 30 Armed men came to his House Frighted his Wife who had lyen but eight days in Child-bed carried away what they thought fit Took his Horse and the Beddels Horse which they sent back next day a month after they searched the House for the Minister sometime after that they Summoned him to Remove All this we deny to have been done by any of our Communion Yea the Summons given to him and others for removing a Copy of which our Author doth furnish us with doth shew it was done by a party of People who had been enraged by the cruel Persecutions that they had suffered from these Men. We are far from approving such Irregularities but the World will not think it strange that they who instead of feeding their flock had worried them should meet with such things from a People so highly provoked I can produce a large Paper of the manifold Sufferings of that Parish by Mr. Honeymans Malice and influence Attested by about thirty Hands but I forbear to shun tediousness Such another story we have of Mr. Man Minister at Bathgate whose House they searched also a Neighbours House at last found him and with threatning by drawn Swords and Guns presented demanded of him the Vtensils of the Church and Records of the Kirk-Session Tore his Gown and Summoned him to remove This hath the like Attestation with the former Ans The People of Bathgate never owned Mr. Man he being placed there only by the Bishop without the consent either of Patron or People only in time of most severe Persecution many out of fear came to hear him they were highly provoked by his Persecuting of them Of which there are clear and great Instances in his stirring up the Magistrates and assisting the Souldiers to Ruine them Next Mr. Norman Mokenzie Minister at Mid Calder and John Park do witness that January 27. being the Lords day after Sermon Eight Armed Men came to his House but were repulsed by some Gentlemen who were there In which scuffle three were wounded That Feb. 1. They broke up the house frighted his Wife Said they would see all his Bonds One of them Thomas Livingstoun said he behoved to have his Fathers Bond for a Summ that he owed to the Minister Finding no Papers they carried away the Church Vtensils which they commited to the Custody of one in the Town they Summoned him to remove also they testify which is also testified in the former Narrative that none of these were of the Parish Ans As we do not approve any of these things being Acted without Authority so we find this to be a Lying accusation For the Men who Feb. 1. came to the House carried civilly Telling his Wife she needed not fear And that they would do no harm to her or any Person in the House The Bond that Thomas Livingstoun sought for was a Bond that the Minister had forced his Father to give for a Fine imposed on him for Non-conformity Also Mr. George Robertson Minister at Westcalder had his House searched for Arms and an old Sword taken from him and was summoned to remove Witnessed by himself and John Park ut supra Ans if this was done the General answers above given is enough to vindicate the Presbyterians in General from the blame of it and the time of confusion and provocations that that poor suffering People had from most of that Party may make us cease to wonder at it § 11. In his second Collection of Papers p. 50. we have account of the practice of the Rabble after the Princes Declaration against some Ministers who afterward were deprived by the Council by which instances he would make it appear how little the Presbyterians regarded Authority when it tended to restrain their disorders A general answer to all that is said under this may be gathered from what hath been before discoursed viz That much of what is alledged is either Lies or Truth disguised and what was really done was by Persons whose Actions we are not concerned to defend He beginneth with the Tumult at Glasgow Feb. 17. 1689. Which is answered Sect. 5. The next is of Mr. Gideon Brown Minister at Smalholme attested by himself alone But others are offered as witnesses if need be Where it is Narrated that George Dickson a profest Cameronian which is afterward said to be a Preacher in a meeting A Cotter to the Laird of Smalholme first summoned Mr. Brown to remove from the Church and desist from Preaching Afterward forced him out of the Pulpit using violence to his Son who offered to defend him He denieth that he persecuted them as they alledged but that often he saved them from the Lash of the Law This story hath its answer in it self For the man was a Cameronian and the Actions of that party we never approved neither can nor will we defend them besides the parish do witness that he was a violent persecutor and give instances of it under the hands of credible witnesses Which shall be shewed to any who desireth to be informed Our next instance is of Mr. William Bullo Minister at Stobo whom the Rabble used most Barbarously all the Winter and frighted his Wife and Children into Sickness and he was forced to lodge in the Fields in the Winter Weather About the beginning of April as he was riding through a Village in the Parish there came out of the House of the Preacher in the Meeting house his Servant and a Rabble who with Swords and Guns charged him to Stand he fleeing from them they fired Guns after him they mounting on Horse Back pursued and took him they threatned to shoot him and bid him Pray before he should Die. When he told them they were in Passion They said you Damn'd Rogue do ye admonish us so they Beat him with their Swords and said they would spare him for that Night and Sentence and execute him next Morning so they convened many of the Parish caused tear his Gown discharged him to Preach And on the day that he should have read the Proclamation they hindred him by force from entring the Church yet was he after deprived by the Council for not Reading and Praying Ans In this Narrative are many Lies which is attested by Mr. William Russel Minister at Stobo As that his Wife and Children fell sick by fear None of them were sick that year That he lodged in the Fields for he never lodged a night in the Fields only one night two young
men came to his house he was not within but in a Neighbours house hard by His Wife said to them that he was in Edinburgh he withdrew a little and returned as soon as they were gone and said that he would not have fled if he had thought they were so few but have Pistoled them both it is also false that any came out of the Preachers house on him as he Rode but these two young men being provoked with his speaking of Pistoling them came out of another House and called to speak with him He fled the Preachers man came out to see what the Fray was one of the young Men followed him on Horseback did no harm to him but reasoned the Case with him He alledging that all the Honest men in the Parish owned him They brought ten or twelve whom he Named as such who yet disowned him It is most false that he was hindred to read the Proclamation he did read a part of it It is true some moved to hinder him from Preaching but the Presbyterian Minister restrained them It is a gross untruth that he was willing to read and Pray and yet deprived for it For he said before the Council that he had not Prayed for King William and Queen Mary That his Gown was torn is also a gross Lye § 12. The Story of Mr. Little which nextfolloweth is above answered in Answer to Account of Persecution Letter 2. Sect. 13 Next we have account of the Sufferings of Mr. Archibald Ferguson Minister at Kirkpatrick whom the Rabble Men and Women Assaulted in his House When he calmly asked the reason they knocked him on the Head with a Pistol so that he fell His Wife daily expecting the pains of Child-birth they knocked down with the Butt-end of a Musket He received many merciless Blows and was sorely bruised Himself they dragged into a puddle the Women cut and tore off his Cloaths even to the uncovering of his Nakedness be at him on the Shins with a Club commanded him to be gone and forced him in his Wounds to leave his House Family and Church Before I examine the matter of this Story I take notice of the bitter Sarcasms and cruel Mockings against all the Presbyterians with which it is interspersed as if this Fact were to be charged on the Party who yet do abhor such practices as much as any Men can do He saith these Barbarities were committed by the pretended Godly Presbyterians That they have separated themselves from the Society of the Catholick Church because they do not observe Easter with the same superstition as some others do He addeth that the Womens Daggers were prepared for a through Reformation And many such bitter Reflections he throweth out against us all from the irregularities of a wild Party whom persecution from his Party had made mad and in whom we are no further concerned than to Lament their Principles and Practices A further Answer was delayed when this was written expecting Information from such as know the Circumstances of this Story But that Account not being as yet come to Hand when this sheet is printing off by whose fault I know not I can only say that the many Lying Stories that are in this Book may derogate from the Credibility of this If it be true we abhor the Fact and wish that the Actors may be brought to condign Punishment for such Inhumanity § 13. In his third Collection of Papers which concerneth them who complied and yet suffered he beginneth with Mr. William Hamilton who first at Irwin then at Kirk-newtoun was put from his House and Church by the Rabble and very hardly used Ans That these things acted against him were not the deed of the Presbyterians nor approved by the Church is evident from this that Mr. Hamiltoun is in good esteem among the Presbyterians and is now received as one of themselves into a share of the Government with them Wherefore if such things were done against him it was not by the sober Presbyterians but by a sort of Men who are not of our Communion and who have shewed dislike against us also For the Truth of what he alledgeth to have been done I can meet with none who can affirm what our Author saith and therefore have cause to suspect it as of the same strain with others of his Affirmations He telleth us next how Mr. Samuel Nimmo was hindred to Preach by some of the Earl of Argile ' s Regiment If this were true it was the Deed of some Cameronians not approved by the Presbyterians And I hope hindring a man to Preach tho we allow not that it be done in a disorderly way doth not amount to so horrid a Persecution as he crieth out of His next complaint concerneth Mr. Selkirk at Glenholm in Tweddale who Read and Prayed was threatned by some of the meanest of the People to remove from his Dwelling obtained from them a fortnight for that end some put another Lock on the Church door to keep him out Of this he had no Redress This we are far from allowing but still here is nothing like the French Dragooning He saith that he complained and had no Redress But we neither know whom to blame nor how to make enquiry about the Truth of it seeing he is not pleased to let us know who did thus deny Justice to him It is sufficiently attested that this was done by Strangers that they took two of Mr. Selkirks Elders into the House with them who might witness that they used no violence and that he and they parted peaceably And that afterward he dimitted his Charge and the Presbytery gave him a Testimonial Mr. Burgess he doth not tell where he was Minister is the next subject of Complaint His Church was possessed by the Rabble sent by Mr. Walker Preacher in the Meeting-house by the connivance of Mr. Mowat who is Old and Infirm The Heretors were offended that Mr Walker invaded Mr. Mowats right The Rabble hindred Mr. Burgess to Preach and when he objected King Williams Authority they spoke of it with contempt Ans Mr. Mowat and the Parish had called Mr. Walker to his help The people hearing of the Act for restoring the old Ministers not considering that it was only Voted but had not the Royal Assent which it afterward had met in the Church Mr. Walker disswaded them Yet was forced to Preach to them there There was no Tumult the whole Parish was met Mr. Burgess's Bedle opened the Church door to them It is false that any of the people did contemn King William's Authority There were indeed three young Men who some days after discharged Mr. Burgess to Preach But this was not approved by the rest nor was ever any violence offered to him What the Paper saith of Arms and beating a Drum is false The Parish had been at a Rendezvous whence they came to a Burial but that they made use of Arms or Drum at or near Mr. Burgess's House is altogether false The
confirmed by so many Parliaments I much doubt But am not at leisure to cast up the account But if this Argument be good Presbytery should be supported as being confirmed by many Parliaments and now by this Current Parliament Besides its Authority from Scripture which he doth not pretend to for Prelacy His second Inference from his Historical Narrative or rather Railing Accusation is That Episcopacy is necessary for support of the Government And that they oppose Scots Presbytery only as it hath in it many horrid Principles Both these are denied and cannot be proved unless we take malicious railing for proof His 3 d. That what the late Rulers did was done by Law And that these Laws were made for preserving the Protestant Religion Monarchy Humane Society and Self Defence It is an easie thing to make Sanguinary Laws and then Murder and Destroy Mankind according to these Laws But I have shewed in my former Vindication in answer to Query 5. That they exceeded the bounds even of their own Laws In the Horrid Murthers that were in cold Blood committed by Souldiers with allowance on Persons living in peace But that these Laws were made on such necessary grounds as he affirmeth is an Assertion beyond what Jesuitical impudence it self hath as yet arrived at But I shall not wonder if he should assert that the world could not subsist except Laws be made for extirpating out of it all who own the Christian Religion Cannot the Protestant Religion Monarchy c. be safe unless People be forced to wound their Consciences by hearing men who had invaded the Pulpits of their Faithful Pastors Unless Families be ruined who live in peace and pray for their Rulers who hear a Sermon in a Chamber and not in the Church He affirmeth also under this head that we value our Church Government more than the Protestant Religion A most false Imputation But he proveth it by three notable Lies One is That we complied with the Papists upon getting an Indulgence We neither sought it nor approved the Papists being Indulged nor did we join with them in any thing We indeed had our Meetings at the same time when they had theirs and so had the Episcopal men The other is the Church of England and their Party hazarded all rather than comply I gladly would know wherein did we comply and they did not They had the exercise of their Religion under the same Government with us A third is We magnifie the dispensing power which they opposed All this I have touched before This Assertion is false and injurious We never approved it we made use of the Liberty granted because it was our due But never approved of the power that the Giver of it did acclaim How they opposed it may be judged by considering whether the Contrivers and Promoters of these courses who were about the King were Presbyterians or Prelatists § 4. The fourth thing he is now falling from his Inferences and Counsels to the King to proofs of his Accusations against the Presbyterians that their Principles prove what he would say And their Principles he proveth in that he is informed that many of them own that Subjects may force their King to do justice that they are his Judges and may Dethrone him that they approve of former Rebellions that the Monarch being forfeited Kings have no more Power than the People will give them I observe first That all the Grounds that he hath for these Accusations is He hath heard it but from whom or what cause his Informers had to say so we must not know If this be a sufficient Ground to move a Prince against his People as this man designeth let any Judge 2. That he and they who have whispered this to him do not impute those to the Presbyterians as the Principles of the Party but to many of them And no body knoweth how many It may be there are or have been some who call themselves Presbyterians who hold these or as bad things But the Presbyterians did never approve of all that had gone from among them 3. What he saith about forfeiting of the Monarchy tho I do not meddle with things so far above me hath obtained with the Church of England as well as Scotland And his quarrelling at this hath a further tendency against the present Establishment than may be he is willing that every one should observe His fifth effort against us is He taketh notice of Peoples threatning Ministers he addeth also Magistrates which I never heard of before and thrusting them from their places This was the practice of the Rabble in some places I have in answer to the above mentioned Pamphlets sufficiently vindicated the Presbyterians both from abetting and from approving of these practices And therefore they ought not to be charged with them In the sixth place he would perswade the Prince that our numbers are not so great as theirs this I have also above Discoursed but I shall a little consider his proofs one is 27 Parliaments under four Kings have condemned Presbytery Ans If that prove that they were the greatest number the like Argument will prove that we are more numerous now For the Parliament hath very unanimously condemned their way Next he will prove it because they were always easily overcome in their Rebellions Sure it was not so in King Charles the I. time And in King Charles the II. time it was not the Presbyterians but a few of them that appeared He saith that the reason why they appear more numerous here at London 1689 is they are all here That is manifestly false neither all the Nobility nor the Tenth man of the Gentry beside the Vulgar who are the greatest number were then at London His judging of their designs of being there is his groundless Fancy suggested by his hatred and ill will His party forsooth are so modest that they trusted to the Laws the interest of the Monarchy and his Highnesses just sense of things But others thought that they trusted more to King James's Interest and were more moved by their aversion from his Highness Let the Reader judge whether of the two conjectures hath the more probable Foundation He alledgeth that the Presbyterians have raised tumults to fright Honestmen This is denied his party raised or endeavoured it at least more fearful Tumults And hence he would move the Prince to send down Forces under well Principled Officers That is Jacobites But the Prince was wiser than to Listen to such Counsel § 5. He next would represent us as Persons who would submit to no Laws inconsistent with Presbytery on the account of the Divine right of Presbytery and our obligation to it by Oaths Whereas his Party are readier to comply with any thing that his Highness and a Parliament shall think fit for the good of the Kingdom and so pleadeth for a hearing before his Highness or any to be named by Him This last we shall never decline On the former part of this
were sent Now the Government was not by the Act of Parliament setled in the persons of Ministers only but of Ruling Elders also Many of whom are Noblemen and Gentlemen of good Abilities Neither can it be said that they were set up as Bishops or acted with their Lordly domination as will appear from answering his following Objections He next saith Presbyters were subject to them who were no more but Presbyters which hath no President in the Catholick Church Ans It is true it is not presidented in the Catholick Church that one or more Presbyters should be subject to one who is no more but a Presbyter which is not our Constitution nor practice But it hath often been that Presbyters in their single Capacity were subject to them who were no more but Presbyters acting jointly in a Church Judicatory and this is all that is now done The Presbyterian Church doth not subject the Episcopal Church to them Nor doth one Presbyter among us judge one Presbyter among them But the Presbyterian Church combined judgeth every single Presbyter in this National Church And when he shall demonstrate the Absurdity of that we shall yield to his Argument Again he argueth thus They who could not be denyed to be lawful Ministers were excluded from any share in the Discipline and Government of the Church which is contrary to Presbyterian Principles Ans The Presbyterians never held a Principle so universal as what he hinteth about the priviledge of Lawful Ministers to govern the Church They never held that a Popish Minister should be a Ruler in the Protestant Church And they deny not such to be lawful Ministers They maintain that though it belong to all Ministers generally to have a share in the Government of the Church yet there might be some Cases in which pro praesenti Ecclesiae Statu they may be restrained from that priviledge Tho' they are not to be restrained perpetually nor in the setled State of the Church The Presbyterian Church had long been born down and almost exhausted they are now through the Mercy of God restored they find a great many Ministers in Charges who may be useful in preaching the Gospel but disposed to overturn the Government of the Church if it should be put in their Hands is it not rational that they should suffer these to preach for the Church needeth their help And yet not suffer them to rule the Church lest they overturn her Settlement They refuse none of them who will secure the Government and are otherwise qualified for the Ministry Again tho' we own them as lawful Ministers yet we cannot own them as Ministers of the Presbyterian Church They have a right to govern the Episcopal Church to which they had betaken themselves and left the Presbyterian Church tho' their Bishops even in it did not allow them that priviledge yet that they have a right to rule the Presbyterian Church we deny They and we agree in Doctrine and therefore we may teach the Church together But we disagree in Government and therefore we cannot rule together He saith That Presbyterians hold that it is unlawful for a Minister to part with his Right of Governing Ans But the Church may deny him the exercise of that priviledge if she find him inhabile for the exercise of it He pleadeth also That we blamed Bishops that they took this Power generally to themselves Ans We did so because they excluded the rest not on account of any special inhability but as having no right to such a power which we maintain to be in all Presbyters alike If any say that Ministerial power is quid indivisum and the exercise of teaching cannot be allowed where that of Ruling power is restrained I answer this is true with respect to the ordinary and setled State of the Church but such an extraordinary case of necessity as this may warrant such a restraint for a time But if this Argument hath any force it proveth that neither Preaching nor Ruling should be allowed and it commendeth the moderation of the Presbyterian Church which will allow them to serve the Lord as they can when they cannot do it as they should § 4. He proposeth tho' not candidly but doth not answer our Reasons for this conduct One is We could not otherwise make our Government sure And is it not reasonable that that Government which Christ hath setled in his Church as we think and which the Authority of the Nation hath setled should not be rendred unsafe by putting it in the hands of the avowed Enemies thereof when we could exclude them on such rational grounds as have have been mentioned Another Argument he maintaineth as ours The Episcopal Men deserved to be thus treated for their Apostasie Ans I know not who ever brought this Argument We go not to the rigour of all the Censure that that wrong step deserved we would rather consider what the present state of the Church and the promoting of Truth and Holiness and Unity doth require than what Men deserve We are for moderation maugre all the reproaches that he and such as he cast upon us Tho' at the same time we think that the Rigour of Church Discipline might put more force in this Argument than he is aware of He inferreth from what he had discoursed That Presbyterians juggle with God and Man because they hold their Government to be so of Divine Right that they can make no composition with Men about it but when it maketh for the Interest they can make Essential Alterations Ans We hold Parity to be of Divine Right and cannot yield to Imparity But this Parity is not taken away as he alledgeth by excluding them who have rendred themselves inhabile more than it is taken away by suspending a Minister for any Immorality or Negligence in his Work Neither is there here any essential alteration in the Government more than there is in that Case Here is no Jugling but fair and plain dealing What he talketh of nine hundred Ministers excluded is a mistake We exclude none of them but such as persist in their Principles and Inclinations to overturn the Government Neither is there Inconsistency as he would make us believe between making Ruling Power Essential to a Minister and sus-spending the exercise of it for a time We hold that Rationality is essential to a Man tho' some Scriblers be now and then Delirous § 5. From this digression he returneth to his History page 4. And giveth an account of the meeting of the Ministers and Elders antecedent to the General Assembly indicted by the King and Parliament to be held October 16. 1690. In which Narrative he doth in several things mis-inform his Readers and represent things to the disadvantage of truth and of the Presbyterians It is a misrepresentation That the Act of Parliament Committed the Care and Management of the Government to these few surviving Presbyterian Ministers who had not complyed with Episcopacy For it was to them
be put into the hands of Popish Priests while they continued such He is also displeased with appointing greater Presbyteries to send more Ministers as being an unequal Representation of the Church Others will think that this was most equal For the General Assembly is the Representative of the Presbyteries immediately tho' more remotely they represent the whole Church And therefore where Presbyteries are unequal their Representation should be so too But by this means some part of the Nation were not at all represented Ans It could not be otherwise where there were no Presbyterian Ministers that place of the Church could not be represented by Episcopalians for they neither had by Law nor could claim in Reason a share of the Presbyterian Government Neither can this Argument derogate from the Authority of the General Assembly over the whole Church more than the vacancy of a Parish can warrant them to plead exemption from the power of the Presbytery because they have not a Minister to represent them in it 7. The next fault that he findeth is The Meeting appointed a Fast on the Lords Day and saith That it was the Custom of the Old Presbyterians to appoint all their Fasts on the Lords Day This last is notoriously false The reason why that Fast was on the Lords Day it was the time of Harvest when it could not be observed on a Week day without high Inconveniency Neither do we think Fasting inconsistent with the Nature of the Lords Day Religious Joy and Religious Sorrow do very well agree His story about the Licensing the Treatise of Ruling Elders and Deacons is a gross Calumny and hath several Lies in it 1. The Licensing of that Book was not the deed of the Meeting but of the Clerk without their appointment or knowledge And he also alledged that the Printer added the words which imported a Monopoly of it As soon as the Book came out the Meeting were highly offended with the Clerk for this presumption not only because he had done it in their Name without their appointment but because as was said publickly in the Meeting Nemine Contradicente it belonged to the State to License Books and to Monopolize the Printing of them For this the Clerk was severely rebuked and hardly escaped being deposed 2. That the Privy Council checkt this or called in the Books is false For their Lordships understood that it was not the deed of the Meeting and that the Meeting took care to get the License taken from the Copies as soon as they understood it Here then we have an Evidence how gladly the Author would pick quarrels with us and make us odious tho' at the rate of telling lying Stories which every one can contradict He now beginneth page 7. to give an Account of the Actings of the Presbyteries against the Prelatick Incumbents between the General Meeting and the General Assembly which sate in October 1690. He blameth them That they were more careful to Empty Churches than to Fill them This is not true they endeavoured both to purge out the Scandalous and such as were like to do more Hurt than Good and to plant the Churches with qualified Persons and something was done both ways Though we confess planting Work went more slowly on than was wished partly because of the paucity of qualified Men but mainly through the opposition that some Men of this Authors Temper made Viis modis to discourage people from Calling Ministers And to perplex that Affair when ever it was attempted It is false That none were sent to the West where there was most need And that they rather seated themselves in Lothian as being a better Countrey There is neither Truth nor Candour in this Assertion Even Galloway which therefore was most destitute because the Incumbents had generally either been driven away or deserted is now tolerably supplyed tho' not so well as it should be or as I hope in a little more time it may be He giveth a false and malicious Cause of the ejecting of Ministers in the end of page 8. viz. They were conscious of their own Inabilities and thought it not their Interest to tolerate such as accustomed the people to Sense and solid Discourses No other Answer is here fit but to tell the Reader That nothing but a fancy tinctured with Malice and Prejudice can make one so compare them who were cast out with them who were put in His Stories of what this Man or t'other said when a reason was asked of their putting out of Ministers and of their Preaching in Meeting Houses where Episcopal Men were in the Church These I say are not worth our notice We will not defend what every private person saith in Discourse yea not what every particular Minister saith in the Pulpit tho' some Notes of Sermons he talketh of that I never heard of before nor am at leisure to enquire about them We can give better Reasons for both these practices viz. We put out Men because they are Scandalous and unfit to Edifie the People and do rather harden them in Wickedness And we Preached in Meeting Houses because many often the most part of the Parishes would not hear the Prelatical Incumbents § 8. There follows a whole Fardel of Lies and Malicious Representations of the procedure of the Presbyteries Few Lines in pages nine and ten that do not contain some Falshood or other as That Presbyteries sent out Spies to observe Mens publick and private Discourses and Practices Let them give one instance of this as the act of any one Presbytery If any private person did make such enquiry we know not nor can we in all Cases condemn it That they received Libels of old Crimes is not so absurd as he would make us believe If the Church have not been satisfied nor the Scandal of them taken off That a Design was formed to disgrace the Clergy That there was little or nothing made out against them are a couple of falshoods The former no man can prove The latter I have before disproved and could give abundance of Instances That the Scandals of one or a few was charged on the whole party is an impudent and false Assertion He saith That the least defects of Behaviour were heightned to gross Crimes And what was no fault we made one by uncharitable Construction Whether some private persons who had more Zeal than Understanding might not do so I cannot tell But he is now speaking of the Actings of the Judicatories and that any of them did so is false That insignificant Articles were accumulated to a great height Is also said but cannot be proved That some Ministers were charged with Admitting to the Office of Elders or not Censuring Men of Immoral Conversations Is not to be blamed The Apostle giveth express Directions about the Qualifications that should be required of Elders And it is certainly culpable to over-look Scandals in any and more especially in Church Officers That whatever was offered in a Libel by any
this part of his Satyr but lightly Mr. Camphel he saith nothing against and indeed his praise is in the Churches And our Author had met with him before page 15. And had told only of him That to please his Brethren he had been more severe against the Episcopal Clergy than was his Wont Nothing can be more false He is no Man-pleaser and he always had a true Zeal against that way and against the Immoralities of some of them And now sheweth no more of Zeal than is consistent with Wisdom and Moderation Mr. Rule cometh next on the Stage He is called Doctor Rule because he did practise Medicine and took the Degree of Doctor in it likewise when he had no other way to maintain his Family yet never giving over the Work of the Ministry but preaching frequently He was once Independent That is absolutely false At Aberdeen he withstood the Temptation when he had great Offers to take the Charge of an Independent Congregation And in Northumberland where he had his first Charge he suffered no small Loss because he would not fall in with that way His want of Latine and spâ—aking false Latine is false He is ready as he hath done to give proof to the contrary and to compete with this Pretender when he will For His Prayers in Latine they are longer or shorter as the occasion requireth but never so short as he alledgeth neither doth he use to pray very long in publick even in English For the Ignorance discovered in the things he hath written I wish this Sciolist would make it appear by a solid Refutation The passage that he bringeth for instance he is ready to defend with all the probability the subject Matter is capable of And if it were a mistake it is no proof of Ignorance to have a different Notion about a passage in an Author from them who follow as they lead who have gone before them If this Momus will make his Censure on the True Representation of Presbyterian Government it is like Mr. Rule or some for him will give him a fair Answer But lest all this be not enough to disparage him and his Ministry He often venteth himself bitterly against the Episcopal Party Others think quite contrary few Presbyterians do more seldom mention them and an Argumentative way rather than bitterness is his strain If it can be made appear that he hath done otherwise none shall blame him more than I shall do The many particulars he is accused of have obliged me to say more in his Vindication than I intended In the next place he giveth a Character of Mr. Meldrum He spendeth a great many words about him But the whole matter is in short That once he complyed with Episcopacy took the Oath of Canonical Obedience which our Author is told That he denyeth That going out for the Test he left the Episcopal Party because when the Test was taken away he was not permitted to return to his Ministry at Aberdeen The Worth and Integrity of this Man is known to all in Scotland and acknowledged by all except them who prize no Man but for being like themselves That he complyed once was a Token of Humane Infirmity That he hath now left that way is commendable tho' it stir the Choler of this Scribler His fourth Man is Mr. Kennedy who was chosen Moderator he is called Mr. Kennedy by his own party and if any familiarly call him Father Kennedy his Age may bear such a Designation but they who call him Bitter-Beard do mistake his Temper That he was with the Army at Newcastle or received 6000 Marks is most false He was never in England till 1690. when he was sent with others to London with an Address to the King The Causes of his Deposition 1660. are foully mis-represented It was only for his Opinion in the matters that then divided the Church That his Deposition was never taken off till the Penult day of the Assembly is not the least of the Lies that this Paper is loaden with It with others was taken off several years before and this was ratified by the General Meeting some Months before the Assembly and all that had been done in this matter was confirmed by the Assembly a day before it was dissolved § 12. The Moderator being chosen He telleth of a Competition for the Clerkship It may be some of these persons that he nameth might be mentioned in private Discourses but never any such competition appeared before the Assembly And most of them were so far from either petition or competition that they rather declined it when it was mentioned to them by their Friends He accuseth the Assembly as insufficient to represent the Church of Scotland as that of Trent was to represent the Catholick Church But he cannot deny that it represented the Presbyterian Church and was all that could be had of a Presbyterian Assembly And we deny not that the Council of Trent represented the Popish tho' not the Catholick Christian Church as was pretended And indeed there were some from all parts of the Nation even from the Northern Counties of Ross Murray Aberdeen That there wanted from one or two Counties maketh nothing against the Authority of the Assembly For there are places in the Highlands from which seldom or never there have been Commissioners at any Church Assembly What Spirit ruled in this Assembly he determineth with the same malice that hath hitherto appeared in his Book and mocketh at the Prayers that were put up for another Spirit By this and such like passages it appeareth what Spirit acteth this Scribler It is false That the Presbyterians in Scotland have always contested with their Kings about the Power of Calling Assemblies Their Kings never denied their Intrinsick Power in this except when they were influenced by a Prelatical Erastian Crew about them But on the contrary have setled it by their Laws as the Churches priviledge As in the Act 1592. which is ratified by an Act of this current Parliament neither did they deny to the King a Power of Calling Assemblies nor have ever refused to meet when called by him We think it most desirable when the King and the Church agree about this and it moveth this Mans spite that Affairs were so managed in this Assembly The ridiculous Expression in Prayer that he imputeth to Mr. Cunningham calling it a pleasant passage is a meer Forgery That Reverend and Wise Man understood well what he said He is not ashamed to tell Lies in the Face of the Sun and to impose upon our Senses when he not only denieth the Kings Letter and the Assemblies Answer to it to be published both which are extant in the printed Acts of the General Assembly but he falsifieth the Kings Letter most palpably in making the King say That he setled the Government because it was agreeable to the Inclinations of the People Whereas it is That Government which was judged to be so And that He would have them do
Council as Episcopal Assemblies are to the Bishop We do then maintain that there is such a difference between them and us as may justifie our not owning of the Bishops Authority nor the Authority of the Meetings that is derived from it and dependeth on it We never used such an Argument to justifie Rebellions It was not the exercising Episcopal power that caused what he so calleth but their forcing the Consciences of Men and Barbarous Persecutions whereby people were put to the utmost extremities If the Consciences of his party could plead not guilty of the Murthers and Butcheries that have happened as well as the Sober Presbyterians can who had no interest in them but to Lament them and the occasions of them it were well for them If Barbarities be committed now against them we defend them not nor are they chargeable on the Presbyterians but on some few whom their Persecution hath enraged He telleth us of more Histories of the Clergies Sufferings to come out Our Work is to Examine these that now he is pleased to offer If he prove by his Collection of passages all that in his Preface he proposeth to make out by them we shall succumb in the Debate But I am sure some of them cannot be proved other things cannot infer the Consequents that he draweth from them But I will not anticipate What remains of his Preface is a renewing of his begging Address to the Church of England What they get that way we do not envy We wish indeed the Change of Episcopacy though we will take no unwarrantable course to effect even that but not the Ruine of Episcopal Men. § 3. The Book it self is odly methodized We have two leaves called the first Collection of Papers Next a Letter under the Title of the whole Book Then the first Collection of Papers begun again And so to the second third and fourth Collections But we must follow whither he thinketh fit to lead I must here refer the Reader to what I have said in Answer to the first Book and the second Letter Sect. 6. Where it is made appear that the Presbyterians are not accountable for the disorders that are said to have been acted Tho all the Stories that are told were true But because in this Pamphlet we have Attestations added to the Narratives that are brought which is not done in the other somewhat must be observed concerning that Which is that mostly they are teste meipso the Complainant is the witness which is not fair And often one of these Ministers witnesses for another and he doth him the like kindness for requital Which derogateth much from the Credibility of such Testimonies Further all of his Witnesses are the sworn Enemies of Presbyterians and in a Combination to defame them And we have from the Pamphlets now under consideration a taste of the veracity of the Men whom we have to do with If his Witnesses make no more Conscience of speaking truth than the Author or Authors of these Pamphlets do few thinking Men will be moved with what they say I come now to consider his particular Stories He beginneth with the Minister of Cumnock with whom he joineth the Minister of Auchinleck Whom ninety Armed Men forced into the Church-yard discharged them to Preach and tore their Gowns And declared that this they did not as Statesmen nor as Churchmen but by Violence and in a Military way of Reformation Ans It is Attested under the hands of George Logan of Logan William Crawfurd of Dalegles John Camphel of Horsecleugh George Camphel of Glaisknock John Beg of Dornal John Mitchel of Whetstonburn all of the two Parishes mentioned That they who did this were not of either of these Parishes nor was it known who they were Only that they were Cameronians who had suffered severely and were now gathered together on occasion of an Alarum that then was in the Countrey Nor had any in these Parishes any Accession to that practice And it is to be observed that many of these Ministers entred by a Military Force as they were so put out particularly the Minister of Auchinleck had his Edict served with three Troops of Dragoons And that People never submitted to these Mens Ministry but by the force that was put on them by Armed Men And they suffered very hard things and yet the people of these Parishes bore it patiently In the business of Machlin he grosly belyeth them They used no violence to the Ministers Wife only gravely reproved her for Cursing and Swearing which she used He passeth page 4. to the Presbytery of Dumbartoun where first he telleth us What Mr. Walter Stirling Minister at Badernock met with by a Company of Dissenters This is a gross Lie These five Armed Men who assaulted his House having done the like to a Gentlemans House and a Countrey-mans House the same Night seeking Arms or Plunder were no Dissenters of any sort or way but Debauched Men horrid Swearers and Cursers who were of broken desperate Fortunes their Names are John Momillan Patrick Motarged George Tomoch Archibald Ferguson Archibald Shinning This one passage duely considered might discredit all that is asserted in his Book and expose the Author as a malicious Calumniator designing to fix all the Thefts Robberies and other Villanies that are committed in the Country not only on some Presbyterian or other but on the whole party It is also witnessed that Mr. Stirling's Parish gave him all the help and succour they could in this his trouble This Mr. Stirling was afterwards deprived by the State for not Reading nor Praying after which time he behoved to remove from the Church and Dwelling-house but to this day liveth peaceably in the Parish Yea Mr. Stirling himself disowned that account of his Case which is in the Pamphlet as what he had no hand in For the two following Mr. Duncan of Kilpatrick Easter and the Minister that was to preach at Boiall In the Narration of what concerneth Kilpatrick Easter there is a gross Lie None touched Mr. Duncan nor did any personal hurt to him Which is affirmed by them who know that Matter And may be confirmed by considering that that parties Zeal led them no farther than to rid themselves of these Ministers who had been such a burden to them For that Man who was to preach at Boiall the Truth of the Story is A great many came with a Burial to the Church-yard among them not above six or seven had Arms who did always bear Arms None of them made any Opposition Only they sent to the Minister of the Parish to desire him to give them the Keys of the Church seeing he himself could not Preach He promised to do it if the Heritors should demand them which several of them did and offered to suffer him to stay in the house forty days if he would give up the Keys He contrary to his promise refused to give them up but went away that day and carried away his Furniture except some Lumber