to be expected And this his absence was a new opportunity to Henry to play his Game in Scotland Indeed he neglected it not he used all arts imaginable further to advance his own and weaken the French interest he harassed the Borders without intermission that in the Miseries and Desolations of War the Scots might see the Beauties and Felicities of Peace on the one hand resolving as it were to Cudgel them into ane Accord if no other thing could do it And on the other hand he had his Emissaries and Instruments busie at work in the Heart of the Kingdom and about the Helm of Affairs imploying all their Skill and Interest all their Wit and Rhetorick all their Eloquence and Diligence to perswade the Nation to a perpetual Amity with England the Queen being the Chief Actrix Neither did this seem sufficient He sent Ambassadors and wrote Letters and represented things in their fairest Colours and made most charming Overtures c. If they would break the League with France and enter into one with England the world should see and they should find by Experience that it was not Humour or Ambition or Love of Greatness that had moved him to treat them so but Love of Concord and Concern for the Prosperity and Happiness of the Nation That he had but one only Child a Daughter Mary Her he would give to Iames in Marriage hereby the English would become subject to the Scottish not the Scottish to the English Government and a great deal more to this purpose Whoso pleases may see this whole matter transcribed by Herbert from Buchanan I go on The French King was not at leisure it seems to afford Albany such assistances as he required so he was obliged to return without them And returning found the French interest still weaker and weaker and the English stronger and stronger as appears from his Success For Having return'd to Scotland in September 1523 He instantly gave out his Orders That the whole force of the Kingdom should meet in Douglas-dale against the middle of October He found Obedience so far indeed that they met but when he had marched them to Tweed and they found he design'd to invade England they would not move one foot further but sounded aloud their old Carol. They knew by experience what was to be gain'd by invading England It was enough for for them that they were willing to defend their own Country c. Here they stood I mean as to their Resolutions not their Ground for they left that and instantly return'd within their own Borders so hastily and with such strong inclinations it seems to be at home That with great difficulty he got them kept together some days till he should fall on some pretext which might give a fair colour to his Retreat and cover it from appearing downright dishonourable 'T is true his luck was so good that he found it But how By the Art and Interest of the English Faction Thus Queen Margaret to wait her opportunities had come to the Border and lodged not far from the Scottish Camp The Earl of Surry commanded the English Army with whom she kept secret Correspondence and it was concerted betwixt them it seems that the English should by all means avoid Fighting and she should be imployed as a Mediatress to bring matters to some honest accommodation The Plot succeeded a Truce was readily patcht up to the satisfaction no doubt of both Parties Albany had reason to be glad of it for he could make no better of the Bargain and 't was with much difficulty he brought his Expedition to so honourable ane issue And 't is plain the English Faction had reason to be as glad for they had gained two points They had got Albany to understand the temper of the Nation and the weakness of the French interest And they had treated the Scots who were so averse from Fighting so discreetly by shunning all occasions of Engaging and thereby shewing that they were no Enemies to the Scots unless it was on the French account that they could not have fallen on a more successful politick for Gaining King Henry's great purpose which was To disengage the Scots of the French as much as he could And the Success was agreeable For After that Albany's Authority and the French interests decayed so sensibly and the English Faction manag'd their designs so successfully that within a few months Albany was turn'd out of his Regency and the young King then but twelve years of age was perswaded to take in his own hands the Government It was the English Faction I say that wrought this Revolution as is evident from the whole thred of the History And Lesly tells us plainly that Albany was sensible of it and was perswaded it was in vain to endeavour any more to gain them to the French side and therefore he took his leave and departed the Country This was in the year 1524. The King so young all know was not able to manage the Government by himself but stood in need of Counsellors They were English who had got him thus Early to assume the Government in his own person 'T is obvious to collect therefore they were English enough who were his Counsellors And such they were indeed For as Lesly has it a Parliament was indicted to meet in February thereafter wherein a Council was nominated for assisting the King in the Administration of the Government but so as that the Queen was to have the Soveraignty so far as nothing was to be done without her special approbation and allowance Albany the great Opposer of his interests in Scotland thus dispatched King Henry's whole Soul was divided betwixt Gladness and Kindness He was Glad almost to excess that he had got rid of such ane eye-sore He was kind to the highest degree to his Sister and Nephew and the Scottish Nobility He dispatched two Ambassadors with all Expedition for Scotland by whom he offered to establish a Lasting Peace and in the interim agreed to a Truce for a year till a fond for a solid settlement might be maturely considered On the other hand Our Queen without doubt with her Brothers fore-knowledg and allowance having now the Reins in her hands sends three Ambassadors to England The Earl of Cassils the Bishop of Dunkeld and the Abbot of Cambuskeneth to propose to Henry in the name of the Scottish Nation that there might be a firm and perpetual Amity establisht betwixt the two Crowns and to this great End that a Match might be agreed to betwixt Iames and Mary Henry entertain'd the proposition with all imaginable shews of Satisfaction but demanded two things That the Scots might break the League with France and make one of that same Nature with England And That James might be educated in England till ripe for Marriage But the Scottish Ambassadors were not Plenipotentiaries enough for adjusting these Matters Cassils therefore comes home
consequence of this their frankness the Earl of Argyle and the Prior of St. Andrews two first-rate Protestants were the persons nominated to pass into France to honour the Dauphine with that complement And they undertook it cordially But in the very instant almost they were informed that Mary of England was dead and Elizabeth on the Throne and withal professing Protestancy This altered their whole Scheme They presently considered The English Influences so long stopt in their Courses might now begin to Drop again And there were hopes of Assistance from that Female Soveraign So these two Lords no doubt with the advice of the rest of the fraternity gave over thoughts of their French Voyage The Dauphine might purchase a Crown for himself or wait till his Father dyed if he could not do better They resolved to carry him no Matrimonial Crowns from Scotland Indeed their hopes of Assistance from England to carry on the Reformation of Religion were better grounded then than ever For Upon the Death of Queen Mary of England by French advice our Queen as Next Heir to that Crown had assumed the English Titles 'T is not to be thought Elizabeth lik'd this well and resolving to continue Queen of England she had no reason For who knows not that her Title was Questionable But our Queens Descent was Vncontroverted What wonder then if Elizabeth thought herself concerned to secure herself as well as she could And what more feasible and proper way for her security than to have the Affections and by consequence the Power of Scotland on her side And what measure so natural for obtaining that as to cherish the Reformation of Religion in Scotland and weaken the Popish and by consequence the French interests there and get the Rule of that Kingdom put in the hands of Protestants The politick was obviously solid all the work was to set it a going But that difficulty was soon over for no sooner did she employ some private instruments to try the Scottish pulses than they smelt the matter and relisht it immediately The least intimation that she was so inclined was to them as a spark of fire amongst Gun-powder it kindled them in a thought They addrest her quickly beg'd her protection and plighted their Faith that they would depend upon her and stand by her and to the outmost of their power secure her interests if she would grant them suitable assistances Thus the bargain was readily agreed to on both sides and both perform'd their parts successfully For who knows not that our Reformation was carried on by Elizabeths Auspices by English Arms and Counsels and Money in the year 1560 And who knows not that by the Treaty at Leith in Iuly that same year after the French were expelled Scotland when our Reformers by her help had got the upper hand her Crown was secured as far as the Scottish Protestants could secure it Who knows not I say that it was one of the Articles of that Treaty That the Queen of Scotland and King of France should not thereafter usurp the Titles of England and Ireland and should delete the Arms of England and Ireland out of their Scutchions and whole Houshold-stuff By this time I think it may competently appear how much our Scottish Reformation under God depended on English influences But I have two things more to add 10. Then It is considerable that some of our Chief Luminaries of those who had a principal hand in preaching and planting the Gospel in Purity among us had drunk in these principles in England and brought them thence to Scotland with them Thus the excellent Martyr Mr. George Wishart of whom in part before as Spotswood tells us had spent his time in Cambridge and return'd to his own Country to promote the Truth in it Anno 1544. And Mr. Iohn Spotswood that worthy man who was so long Superintendent of Lothian after our Reformation was one of Cranmers Disciples as you may see in the beginning of the Life of Archbishop Spotswood his Son and also in his History And Iohn Willock and William Harlaw had both lived in England before they preacht in Scotland as I have already accounted and perhaps a strict Enquiry might discover some others 11. and lastly On the other hand except so far as Iohn Knox was Calvinist and a Lover of the Forms of Geneva for which perhaps I shall account hereafter none of our Historians give so much as one particular instance of a Scottish Reformer who had his Education in any other foreign Church except Mr. Patrick Hamilton who I think cannot be proven to have been a Presbyterian and tho it could be done it could amount to no more than the Authority of a very young man considering he was but 23 years of age when he died Neither do they mention any Foreigner who came here to Scotland to assist us in our Reformation Lesly indeed says that the Scottish Protestants sent Letters and Messengers to Germany to call thence Sacramentarian Ministers as being very dexterous at fostering Sedition and subverting Religion but no other Historian says so and he himself says not that ever any such came to Scotland Thus I think I have accounted competently for the first thing proposed viz. That our Reformation under God was principally Cherished and Encouraged by English Influences I proceed to the 2. Which was That in Correspondence to these Influences our Reformers were generally of the same Mind with the Church of England in several momentous instances relating to the Constitution and Communion the Government and Polity of the Church wherein our present Presbyterian principles stand in direct opposition and contradiction to her That our Reformers agreed with those of the Church of England in the Common Articles of the Christian Faith in their Creed was never called in Question But it is not my present purpose to consider the sentiments of our Reformers in relation to the Church as it is a Sect but as it is a Society neither shall I be curious to amuse many particulars I shall content my self with two or three of considerable weight and importance And 1. Our Reformers generally or rather unanimously lookt on the Church of England as a Church so well constituted that her Communion was a Lawful Communion For this we have two as good Evidences as the nature of the thing is capable of viz. The constant and uniform practice of our Reformers joining in the Communion of the Church of England when they had occasion as those of the Church of England did with the Church of Scotland and their open profession in their publick deeds that they thought it Lawful 1. I say it was the constant practice of our Reformers to joyn in the Communion of the Church of England when they had occasion as those of the Church of England did with the Church of Scotland Thus we find all such of our Reformers as in times of Persecution fled into England still joyning with the Church
Coronations For I think none other can do it but the King and if so he must do it as King otherwise another might do it But then Tho' I have granted our Author this much that the Rightful Successor is King before he takes the Oath I think no Reason can oblige me to grant what followeth viz. That the same may be said of ONE CHOSEN and Proclaimed by the Supreme Authority of the Nation which is the CASE NOW IN HAND For not to insist on the Liberty our Author hath taken here to call their Majesties Elective Soveraigns in opposition to such as are Hereditary tho' I think it was pretty bold in him to talk so I think this is one of the most notable differences between ane Hereditary and ane Elective Monarchy that in the Hereditary the King never dies i. e. In that same instant that the Regnant Kings breath goeth out the Rightful Successor is King Whereas in the Elective Monarchy the King dies with the Man and there is no King till there is a New Creation This I think makes the Cases pretty wide And I think they are wider yet when he that is to be the Elected King is not to be King at all till he Agrees to such and such Conditions Who sees not a vast difference between the Hereditary and the Elective King in this Case But not to press our Author farther and once for all to end this Controversie about Strachan's Defence take what follows for undoubted Truth Upon that same very eleventh of April 1689 on which the Estates gave out their Proclamation importing that they had Resolved that W. and M. should be K. and Q. of Scotland they enacted their Declaration containing the Claim of Right and their Resolution to Offer the Crown only on the Terms of that Claim and not only so but they made this following Act word for word Forasmuch as the Estates of this Kingdom by their former Acts Declared that they would continue undissolved until the Government Laws and Liberties of the Kingdom should be settled and secured and they having now proceeded to Resolve that W. and M. K. and Q. of England be and be Declared K. and Q. of Scotland And considering that the Nation cannot be without Government until the said K. and Q. of England accept the Offer of the Crown according to the Instrument of Government and take the Oath required before they enter to the Exercise of the Regal Power Therefore the said Estates do hereby Declare and Enact that they will continue in the Government as formerly until their Majesties acceptance of the Crown and their taking of the said Oath be made known to them If this Act doth not make it evident that there was no Material Mistake of the words of the Claim of Right in Dr. Strachan's Defence But that the Doctor pleaded and Reason'd upon the Manifest Principles of the Meeting of Estates If it doth not Demonstrate that the Doctors Plea was Solid and Irrefragable and if it follows not by necessary consequence that it was ane unaccoutable proceeding of the Committee of Estates to deprive the Doctor and near to thirty more for not praying for W. and M. as K. and Q. of Scotland before they were or could be K and Q. of Scotland let the intelligent Reader judge But if these inferences are notoriously just then let him judge again if G. R. by offering to invalidate the Dr. 's Defence was not guilty of a palpable indiscretion in refreshing the memory of such an unaccountable proceeding of the Meeting of the Committee of Estates which had been far better buried in perpetual oblivion and lastly let him judge if it argued not more than ane ordinary Impudence in G. R. to have attempted the Defence of that Procedure And if such ane attempt was not with a Fetch of his Talent peculiar to himself to offer violence to Reason and Law to Iustice and Equity to the Light of Nature and the Common sense of Mankind One would think 't was Impudence enough in all Conscience to have made so bold with common Humanity and particularly with the Universal Convictions of ones Native Country as to a plain Matter of Fact But such is our Authors share of that Daring Talent that assisted by it he could even flee in the face of his Dearer Relations and leave them in the Lurch rather than appear to have been worsted in his Argument Thus e. g. 8. When he was put to it and could not otherwise make his escape he never made scruple to flee in the face of the present Civil Government He tells you indeed in his Preface to 2 Vind. § 6. That one of his Designs in writing his Book was to Vindicate and Justify the Actings of the Civil Government Believe him on many occasions and he is a most dutiful Subject there cannot be a greater Reverencer of Authority He tells you 'T is a sawcy boldness for private persons to meddle with the Designs of Legislators 2 Vind. p. 112 And God knows how frequently he exposes his Adversaries to the Resentments of the Civil Government How zealous is he for stretching necks c. And yet for all this as much as he is obliged to it as great a veneration as he pretends for it it must not only shift for it self but he must run through its sides if he has not another hole to escape by I shall only take notice of two instances of his behaviour this way The first is in his 2 Vind. p. 22 His Adversary had laught at the Presbyterian Address and their protestation of Loyalty to K J. But I would fain know says G. R. by what Topick either of these can be Condemned I think I have hinted at least at Topick enough about that Go we on now with our Author They gave thanks for restoring them to their just Right Neither is this the Matter They Professed and practised Loyalty towards their LAWFUL Soveraign tho' of a different Religion from them Here it is For don't you hear him plainly affirming that K. I. was a LAWFUL SOVERAIGN Now what was this less than striking at the very root of the present Establishment Is it not a direct Contradicting of the Claim of Right which Declares that K. J. had forfeited the Right to the Crown by assuming the Regal Power and Acting as King without ever taking the Oath required by Law i. e. Manifestly for not being a LAWFUL SOVERAIGN If thus to Contradict its very foundation strikes not at the root of the present Constitution let the world judge But so it was that our Author could not otherwise justify the Presbyterian Address c. Again One of his Adversaries had Argued that Episcopacy was abolished by the Parliament as being contrary to the Inclinations of the People and therefore if the People should alter their Inclinations it might be restored by another Parliament One would think there was Reason here and it seems G. R. was sensible of it And
such Members sate there but they had been most unjustly Forfeited in the Late Reign Even Parliamentary Forfeitures you see were most Vnjust Forfeitures and there was no Reason that they should exclude these Gentlemen from their Iust and Antient Rights and Priviledges But when he was pressed by the Author of the Case of the Afflicted Clergy c. with this That many Ministers Benefices were unjustly and illegally kept from them he got his Cloak on the other Shoulder as we say if the Authority of the Nation in the convention or Parliament have Determined otherwise I know not where their Legal Right can be founded p. 96. § 6. It was not so much as Knowable to our Author in that Case that there might be most Vnjust Parliamentary Determinations It were ane endless work to adduce all such little Squabbles as these between himself and himself I shall Insist therefore only on two more which are a little more Considerable And First Our Author was not at more pains about any one thing in his Answ. to D. Still.'s Irenicum than the Inseparableness that is between the Teaching and Ruling power of Presbyters He spent no less than 8 or 9 pages about it Stretching his Invention to find Arguments for it Whoso pleases to turn to page 79 may see the whole Deduction He is as earnest about it in his True Representation c. These are his words prop. 13 There being no Disparity of power amongst Ministers by Christs Grant of power to them No man can make this Disparity by setting one over the rest Neither can they Devolve their power on one of themselves For Christ hath given no such warrant to men to dispose of his Ordinances as they see fit And power being Delegated to them by him They cannot so commit it to Another to Exercise it for them as to deprive themselves of it Also it being not a Licence only But a Trust of which they must give ane account They must perform the work by themselves as they will be Answerable Now it is not possible for one to contradict himself more than he hath done both Indirectly and Directly in this matter He hath Contradicted himself Indirectly and by unavoidable Consequence in so far as he hath owned or owns himself a Presbyterian and for the Lawfulness not to say the Necessity of Scottish Presbyterian General Assemblies of the present Constitution For are all the Ruling Officers of Christs appointment Both Preaching and Governing Elders allowed to be Members of General Assemblies Do they all discharge their Trust and perform their work by themselves there as they will be Answerable to him from whom they got their Trust Doth not every Presbytery consisting of 12 16 or 20 preaching and as many Ruling Elders Send only some Three or Four Preaching Elders and only One Ruling Elder to the General Assembly Do they not Delegate these and Devolve their power upon them and Constitute them their Representatives for the Assembly Let their Commissions be Inspected and let it be Tryed if it is not so Now How is such a Delegation Consistent with our Authors position about the Indevolvibility or Indelegability of such a power It were easy to pursue this farther in its Consequents Now what an ill thing is it for a man thus to sap and subvert all his own Foundations To Contradict the fundamental Maximes of his own Scheme by such unadvised propositions But this is not the worst of it He hath contradicted himself most directly in that same Individual True Representation c. in Answ. to the 10th Objection and in his 2 Vind. p. 154 155. For in both places he endeavors to justify the Taking of all Ruling power out of the hands of the Episcopal Ministers and the putting it only in the hands of the Known sound Presbyterians Reserving to the Episcopal Ministers their Teaching power only 'T is true 'T is evident that he found himself sadly puzled in the Matter and was forced to bring in his Good Friend Necessity and the Old Covenant-Distinction of Status Ecclesiae turbatus and paratus to Lend him a Lift. I have considered his Friend Necessity sufficiently in my Book and thither I refer the Reader for satisfaction about it But what to do with his Praesens Ecclesiae Status I do not so well know Only this I dare say granting it to be so nimble as to break Scot-free through Divine Institutions Yet it can neither by itself nor with Necessity to help it reconcile notorious Contradictions The other Instance I shall adduce is in a very important matter no less than the Presbyterian Separation from the Episcopal Church of Scotland He was put to it to defend it in both his Vindications of his Church of Scotland First Vind. in Answ. to Quest. 4. 2 Vind. in Answer to Letter 2. § 3. All the Reasons he has for that Separation may be reduced to these Three 1. Episcopacy 2. The Episcopal Ministers were Vsurpers or Intruders For 3. They had not the Call of the People and so the People were not bound to own them as their Ministers These are his Grounds I say on which he justifies their Separation from us Now hear him in his Rational Defence c. published as I have told since the beginning of the Late Revolution by Consequence after the Scottish Schism was in its full Maturity Hear him there I say and you never heard Man reject any thing more fairly more fully or more directly than he hath done these his own Grounds Let us try them one by one 1. For Episcopacy turn first to pag. 95. And you shall find these very words Whatever fault we find with the Ministers of the Church and the Hierarchy we do not separate because of these we would joyn with you the English Church for all these Grievances if you would but suffer us to do it without sinning against God in that which is our personal Action Turn next to pag. 150. There he offers at enumerating the Causes that cannot justify a Separation and he talks particularly about Episcopacy thus We are grieved with Prelatical Government and taking away that Parity of Power that Christ hath given to the Ordinary Ministers of his Church This we cannot approve and therefore Ministers ought rather to suffer Deprivation of the publick Exercise of their Ministry than own it And People also ought not to own that their Lordly Authority that they Exercise Yet because this is not Required to be acknowledged as a Lawful Power in the Church by the People I see not that we should withdraw from the Publick Assemblies meerly because there are Diocesan Bishops set over the Church Except our owning them by submitting to their Iurisdiction is Required as one of the Terms of Communion with the Church Who so pleases may find more to the same purpose pag. 157 275 c. Nay So condescending is he in that Book p. 159. that he can allow Bishops their Temporal Honours and Dignities
100. His first Collection is of Accounts that he hath had from his Complices a company of Men avowed and malicious Enemies of all Presbyterians and all this attested by themselves Nay Tho they were not Episcopal Ministers but Laicks who attested if it was done in favour of Episcopal Ministers that was enough to prove them Friends to Episcopacy and so they were no more Boni Legales Homines as he calls his Vnexceptionable Witnesses p. 111. Thus The Account which was sent to London immediately after the Second Tumult at Glasgow which happened on the 17th of Feb. Anno 1688 â— was subscribed by Iames Gibson then One of the Magistrates of the City Iohn Gillhagie who had been a Magistrate the year before and Patrick Bell Son to Sir Iohn Bell a discreet young Gentleman and Merchant in the City These three subscribed it that it might make Faith it was directed to Doctor Fall Principal of the Colledge of Glasgow that he might shew it to the then P. of O. and crave that now that he had taken upon him the Government of the Kingdom of Scotland he would interpose his Authority for discharging such Tumults for the future c. Doctor Fall actually addressed to his Highness and shewed the Account All this was done before the Scottish Estates met in March Now consider G. R.'s Discussion of this Account p. 94. Iohn he should have called him Iames Gibson was a Party and made a Bailie by the Archbishop and all know the Prelates Inclinations towards the present Civil Government Have ye not here a goodly Specimen of both our Authors Law and his Logick Iohn Gillhagie is lookt on by all as a Foolish and Rash Man who little considereth what he doth Now what was his Testimony worth after our Author had given him such a Character Patrick Bell and his Brother were soon after seized for Treasonable Practices were long in Prison and are now under Bail And is not G. R. now a potent Author How easily and readily he can reject Testimonies And these three once thus rejected There was never such a thing as that Presbyterian Tumult at Glasgow No not tho there are Hundreds in Glasgow who can attest that every syllable of the Account was true Again Pag. 109. in Mr. Gellies Case How easily could he reject all the Testimonies that were adduced Why They that testify for him are of his own party And then let them testify that they saw a Nose on G. R.'s own Face and for any thing I know he should cut off his own Nose to have them Liers And now Let the World judge of this way of disproving Historical Relations and Attestations of Matters of Fact Is it not plain that according to this Standard it is impossible to Attest any thing For as I take it the whole Nation is so divided between Prelalatists and Presbyterians or those who favour One of the sides that you shall not find many Neutrals Now who is obliged to take the Testimonies of Presbyterians in Matters of Fact more than the Testimonies of Prelatists Have they any Divine Natural or Municipal Law for the Validity of their Testimonies beyond other Men If they have not as I shall still be apt to believe till G R. produces the Law then I would fain know how G. R. by his own Standard can allow That Presbyterian Witnesses should appear before any Court Ecclesiastical or Civil against Episcopal Ministers Nay may not the Presbyterians themselves reject even G. R. s Testimony Nay I say they ought to do it Why He stands nearly related to Episcopacy How Let it be enquired into and I 'le hold him two to one if he was Baptized at all he was Baptized either by a Bishop or by a Presbyter that submitted to Bishops But if so then good morrow to his Testimony For thus the Argument runs G. R. was Baptized by a Prelate or a Prelatist and all know the Prelates inclinations c. Why this Reasoning should not hold in G. R.'s Case as well as in Iames Gibson's Case I desire to learn of G. R. when he is at Leisure But this is not all As he rejected all the Attestations in that Book without any shew of Reason so he did some in Despight of the Common Sense of Mankind For setting this in its due Light it is to be Remembred that in that Book there are Accounts of the Insolencies committed by the Rabble upon such and such Ministers in the Presbyteries of Glasgow Hamilton Irwing Air Paisley Dumbarton c. Now these Accounts were occasioned thus When the Rabble was in its fury and making Havock of all the Clergy in the Western Diocess of Glasgow some of them met at Glasgow upon the 22 of Ianuary 1688 9. to consider what might be proper for them to do for their own Preservation and Protection against the Rage of their Persecutors And the best Expedient they could then fall upon was to send Doctor Scot Dean of Glasgow to London to represent their Condition to his Highness the P. of O. who had then assumed the Government of the Nation and crave protection according to Law And that the Doctor might be the better instructed it was resolved that particular Accounts of the Violences had been done to the Clergy within the abovenamed Presbyteries should be digested by such Ministers as lived within these Presbyteries respectively This was done The Account of the Violences done to those who lived within the Presbytery of Air was digested and signed by Mr. Alexander Gregory Mr. William Irwine and Mr. Francis Fordyce that for Paisley by Mr. Fullerton and Mr. Taylour Ministers at Paisley that for Glasgow by Mr. George and Mr. Sage c. And that the Truth of these Accounts might be the more unquestâ—onable the Subscribers in some of them at least undertook to make all the particulars appear to be true upon the greatest peril if they should get a fair Hearing What greater Evidence of Truth and Ingenuity could have been expected or required of People in such Circumstances Yet Even these accounts G. R. rejected as readily and conâ—idently as he did any other he rejected them I say indiscriminately and without taking notice of any difference between them and such as were not written upon any such Occasion such as were only vouched Teste Meipso Was this like either the Sense or the Discretion that were proper for the Vindicator of a Church I do not incline so much as in the least to insinuate that any of the Accounts contained in The Case of the afflicted Clergy were false I am satisfied they were all very true All I intend is to represent G. R.'s impudent Rashness in rejecting all Accounts with the same facility And certainly whosoever considers this seriously cannot but reckon of his Book as written with as little Wit or Discretion as Truth or Ingenuity And all this will appear more evident still if it be considered that All this did not content him but he
against Prelacy it was not according to much Knowledge Mr. Petrie mentions only two of our Reformers as Divine Right-of Parity Men The Earl of Murray who was Regent and Mr. Knox Calderwood insists on Knox but doth not mention Murray Petries Evidence about Murray is That he hath read of him that by his Letter he did inform Queen Elizabeth of the Honor and Happiness that would attend her Crown and State upon the Establishment of Christs Government And of the profitable Vses whereunto the Rich Benefices of Bishops might be applied But I. He tells not in what Author he read this And none who knows Mr. Petries Byass will think it unreasonable to require some other thing to rely on than his own Bare Authority 2. If we should rest on his Authority and allow that Murray wrote so because Mr. Petrie said it yet how will it follow that his Lordship was for the Divine Right of Parity Might not he have been against the Temporal Dignities and the rich Benefices of the English Bishops without being against Prelacy How many have been so Indeed 3. There is all the Reason in the world to believe That if Murray did write so to the English Queen this was all he aim'd at For had he been for the Divine Right of Parity would he ever have so much countenanced Imparity in the Church of Scotland Was not he one of the Subscribers of the First Book of Discipline wherein Imparity was so formally established Was not he Regent in December 1567 And did not he then give the Royal Assent to some Acts of Parliament made clearly in favour of Imparity Or did he extend the Royal Assent to these Acts in Despight of his Conscience 'T is true indeed Time has been when some Men have had such Ductile Consciences that picq't the one year for not having so much favour at Court as they thought they deserved they could boldly stand up in Parliaments against iniquous Laws and tell their fellow Members That such Laws reflected on the Iustice of the Nation and what not And yet the next year when the Court smiled on them and gave them Preferments and Pensions to satisfy their Ambition or their Avarice they could retract all their former Niceness so much that if they had got the management of the Royal Assent they would have made no scruple to have Applied it for the Ratification Approbation and perpetual Confirmation of the same Laws in their whole Heads Articles and Clauses which seemed to themselves so scandalous and wicked But the Earl of Murray while Regent had no such temptations I believe he had no such yielding Conscience if he had I don't think his Authority was much to be valued Once more I think 't is very strange that he should have been for the Divine Right of Parity and yet should never have spoken so much out considering his occasions except in his private Letters to Queen Eliz. The only person now to be considered is Iohn Knox. He was certainly a prime instrument in the Advancement of our Reformation His Authority was great and his Sentiments were very influential And it is not to be denied but it is of some weight in the present question to know what was his judgment I shall therefore endeavour to account for his principles a little more fully and â— shall do it by these steps 1. I shall shew the insufficiency of the arguments that are adduced by our Brethren to prove him Presbyterian 2. I shall adduce the Arguments which incline me to think he was not The great Argument insisted on by the Author of the Course of Conformity and Mr. Petrie is taken from a Letter of Knox's directed to the General Assembly holden at Stirling in August 1571. The words are these Vnfaithful and Traitors to the Flocks shall ye be before the Lord Jesus if that with your consent directly or indirectly ye suffer unworthy men to be thrust in within the Ministry of the Kirk under what pretence that ever it be Remember the Iudge before whom ye must make an Account and resist that TYRANNY as ye would avoid Hell fire So the Author of the Course of Conformity without the least attempt to let the world see where the Argument lay Mr. Petrie is indeed a little more discreet He tells us where it lies Iohn Knox in his Letter to the Assembly by the word Tyranny meaneth Episcopacy So he but without any fuller deduction And is not this a Demonstration that Knox was Presbyterian And yet after all this it is not possible to make more of the Letter when it is narrowly consider'd than That Knox deem'd it a pernicious and Tyrannical thing for any person or persons whatsoever to thrust unworthy men into the Ministery of the Church and Ministers who would make Conscience of their Calling and Trust must resist such encroachments with all possible concern and courage No man I say can make more of the Letter And who doubts but Mr. Knox was so far in the right But then let any man who looks not through Mr. Petries Spectacles tell me what this has to do with Parity or Imparity The next argument is insisted on both by Petrie and Calderwood It is that Knox was at St. Andrews in Feb. 1571 2 when Douglas was advanced to that See That he refused to inaugurate him Nay that in the Audience of many then present he denounced Anathema to the Giver and Anathema to the Receiver And if you ask Calderwoods Evidence for this he tells you He found it in a certain Manuscript than which what can be more Apodectick To be short tho we had reason to give credit to Calderwood and his uncertain Certain Manuscript and to believe that the Matter of Fact is true and that Knox said and did so yet by what consequences will it follow that he was for the Divine Right of Parity To deal frankly 't is like enough that Knox said so and 't is very probable he had reason to say so in that instance For at that time dreadful Invasions were made upon the Patrimony of the Church None more deep in that Iniquity than the Earl of Morton then Chancellor by whose influence Douglas was preferred to that Archbishoprick And so 't is like enough that Knox who all his life was singularly Zealous for the Rights of the Church upon suspicion if not certain knowledge of some dirty Bargain between Morton and Douglas expressed suitable Resentments But that it was not from any perswasion he had of the Unlawfulness of Prelacy is clear even from what Calderwood and Petrie themselves have recorded within a pag. or two For both tell us that when the next Assembly continued Douglas in the Rectorate of the University of St. Andrews a Station he had been in before he was raised to the Archbishoprick Iohn Knox Regrated that so many Offices were laid on one Old Man which scarcely 20 of the best gifts were able to bear For as
Policy and Government Indeed to make Governours subject to the Censures and Sentences of their Subjects what is it else than to subvert Government to confound Relations to sap the Foundations of all Order and politick Establishment It is as King Iames the sixth has it in his Discourse about the true Law of Free Monarchies and I cannot give it better to invert the Order of all Law and Reason to make the commanded command the Commander the judged judge their Iudge and them who are governed to govern their time about their Lord and Governour In short to give a just account of such a Constitution it is very near of Kin to that bantering Question I have sometimes heard proposed to Children or Ideots If you were above me and I above you which of us should be uppermost I add further 2. That as I take it our Reformers put this in the Constitution that they might appear consequential to a principle then espoused and put in practice by them about Civil Government which was that the King was superior to his Subjects in their distributive but inferior to them in their collective Capacity This principle I say in those days was in great Credit Knox had learned it from the Democratians at Geneva his Authority was great and he was very fond of this principle and disseminated it with a singular zeal and confidence Besides our Reformers were then obnoxious to the civil Government the standing Laws were against them and the Soveraigns perswasion in matters of Religion jumpt with the Laws This Principle therefore had it been a good one came to them most seasonably and coming to them in such a nick and withal meeting in them with Scotch Mettal they put it in practice and being put in practice God suffered it to be successful and the success was a new Endearment and so it came to be a Principle of Credit and Reputation Indeed they had been very unthankful to it and inconsequential to boot if they had not adopted it into their Ecclesiastical as well as their Civil Systeme and the Superintendents having had a main hand in reducing it to practice against the Prince could not take it ill if it was made a Law to themselves it was but their own measure This I say I take to be the natural History of this part of the Constitution Nay 3. So fond it seems they were of this principle that they extended it further so far as even to make Ministers accountable to their own Elderships So 't is expresly established by the First Book of Discipline Head 8. The Elders ought also to take heed to the Life Manners Diligence and Study of their Minister And if he be worthy of Admonition they must admonish him if of Correction they must correct him and if he be worthy of Deposition they with the Consent of the Church and Superintendent may depose him Here was a pitch of Democracy which I think our Presbyterian Brethren themselves as self denied as they are would not take with so very kindly And yet I am apt to believe the Compilers of the Book never thought on putting these Elders in a state of parity with their Ministers tho this is a Demonstration that they have not been the greatest Masters at Drawing Schemes of Policy But to let this pass 4. Tho this unpolitical stroke to call it no worse was made part of the Constitution by that Book as I have granted yet I have no where found that ever it was put in practice I have no where found that De Facto a Superintendent was judged by his own Synod whether it was that they behaved so exactly as that they were never censureable or that their Synods had not the insolence to reduce a Constitution so very absurd and unreasonable to practice I shall not be anxious to determine But it seems probable it has been as much if not more upon the latter account than the former for I find Superintendents frequently tried and sometimes censured by General Assemblies and there was reason for it supposing that General Assemblies as then constituted were fit to be the supreme Judicatories of the National Church For there was no reason that Superintendents should have been Popes i. e. absolute and unaccountable so that if I am not mistaken our Brethren raise Dust to little purpose when they make so much noise about the Accountableness of Superintendents to General Assemblies as if that made a difference between them and Bishops For I know no man that makes Bishops unaccountable especially when they are confederated in a National Church But this by the way That which I take notice of is That seeing we find they were so frequently tried by General Assemblies without the least intimation of their being at any time tried by their own Synods it seems reasonable to conclude that it has been thought fit to let that unreasonable Stretch in the first Constitution fall into Dissuetude But however this was I have all safe enough For 5. Such a Constitution infers no such thing as parity amongst the Officers of the Church Those who maintain that the King is inferiour to his Subjects in their Collection are not yet so extravagant as to say he is not superior to every one of them in their Distribution They acknowledge he is Major Singulis and there 's not a person in the Kingdom who will be so unmannerly as to say that he stands upon the same Level with his Soveraign But what needs more These same very Presbyterian Authors who use this Argument even while they use it confess That Superintendents and ordinary Parish Ministers did not act in parity and because they cannot deny it but must confess it whether they will or not they cannot forbear raising all the Dust they can about it that unthinking People may not see clearly that they do confess it And had it not been for this reason I am apt to think the world had never been plagued with such pitiful jangle as such Arguments amount to Neither is the next any better which is 3. That Superintendency was never established by Act of Parliament This is G. R.'s Argument in his learned Answer to the first of the ten Questions for there he tells us That Superintendency was neither brought in nor cast out by Act of Parliament And what then Doth he love it the worse that it was established purely by Ecclesiastical Authority How long since he turn'd â—ond of Parliamentary Establishments I wonder he was not affraid of the Scandal of Erastianism But to the point 'T is true indeed it was not brought in by Act of Parliament but then I think he himself cannot deny that it was countenanced allowed and approven by more than half a Dozen of Acts of Parliaments which if our Author understands any thing either of Law or Logick he must allow to be at least equivalent to a Parliamentary In-bringing I have these Acts in readiness to produce when
Stipends be assigned to them Ane Article visibly levell'd as the former 5. That Doctors may be placed in Vniversities and Stipends granted them whereby not only they who are presently placed may have occasion to be diligent in their Cure but other learned Men may have Occasion to seek places in Colleges Still to the same purposes viz. the finding reasonable Uses for the Patrimony of the Church 6. That his Grace would take a General Order with the poor especially in the Abbeys such as are Aberbrothoick c. Conform to the Agreement at Leith Here not only the Leith-Agreement insisted on but farther pious Vse for the Churches Patrimony 9. That his Grace would cause the Books of the Assignation of the Kirk be delivered to the Clerk of the General Assembly These Books of Assignation as they call them were the Books wherein the Names of the Ministers and their several proportions of the Thirds were Recorded It seems they were earnest to be repossessed of their Thirds seeing the Regent had not kept promise to them But The Eighth Article which by a pardonable inversion I hope I have reserved to the last place is of all the most considerable It is That his Grace would provide Qualified persons for Vacant Bishopricks Let the candid Reader judge now if Episcopacy by the Leith-Articles was forced upon the Church against her Inclinations If it was never approven when Bishops were thus petitioned for by a General Assembly If it be likely that the Assembly in August 1572. protested against it as a Corruption If the Acts of the last Assembly declaring Bishops to have no more power than Superintendents had and making them accountable to the General Assembly proceeded from any Dislike of Episcopacy If this Assembly petitioning thus for Bishops believed the divine and indispensible institution of Parity If both Calderwood and Petrie acted not as became Cautious Pretbyterian Historians the One by giving us None the other by giving us only a Minced account of this Petition Well! By this time I think I have not intirely disappointed my Reader I think I have made it competently appear That the Agreement at Leith was fairly and frequently allowed approven and insisted on by not a â—ew subsequent General Assemblies I could adduce some Acts more of the next Ass which met at Eden March 7. 1575. But I think I have already made good my Undertaking and therefore I shall insist no further on this point Only One thing I must add further It is this After the most impartial narrow and attentive Search I could make I have not found all this while viz. from the first publick Establishment of the Reformed Religion in Scotland Anno 1560. so much as One Indication of either publick or private Dislike to Prelacy But that it constantly and uninterruptedly prevailed and all persons chearfully as well as quietly submitted to it till the year 1575. when it was first called in Question And here I might fairly shut up this long and perhaps nauseous Discourse upon the Second Enquiry which I proposed For whatever Men our Reformers were whatever their other principles might be I think I have made it plain that they were not for the Divine Right of Parity or the Vnlawfulness of the Superiority of any Office in the Church above Presbyters No such principle was prosessed or insisted on or offered to be reduced to practice by them Before At or full fifteen years After the publick Establishment of the Reformation And if this may not pass for sufficient proof of the truth of my Resolution of the Enquiry I know not what may However because THE SECOND thing I promised to shew tho not precisely necessary to my main design may yet be so far useful as to bring considerably more of Light to it and withal give the world a prospect of the Rise and Progress of Presbytery in Scotland I shall endeavour to make good my Undertaking which was that after Episcopacy was question'd it was not easily overturn'd Its Adversaries met with much Resistance and Opposition in their Endeavors to subvert it I shall study brevity as much as the weight of the matter will allow me In short then take it thus Master Andrew Melvil after some years spent at Geneva returned to Scotland in Iuly 1574. He had lived in that City under the influences of Theodore Beza the true parent of Presbytery He was a Man by Nature fierce and fiery confident and peremptory peevish and ungovernable Education in him had not sweetned Nature but Nature had sowred Education and both conspiring together had trickt him up into a true Original a piece compounded of pride and petulance of jeer and jangle of Satyr and Sarcasm of venome and vehemence He hated the Crown as much as the Mitre the Scepter as much as the Crosier and could have made as bold with the Purple as with the Rochet His prime Talent was Lampooning and writing Anti-tami-Cami-Categorias's In a word He was the very Archetypal Bitter Beard of the Party This Man thus accoutred was scarcely warm at home when he began to disseminate his sentiments insinuate them into others and make a party against Prelacy and for the Genevian Model For this I need not depend on Spotswoods Authority tho he asserts it plainly I have a more Authentick Author for it if more Authentick can be I have Melvil himself for it in a Letter to Beza dated Novem. 13. 1579. to be found both in Petrie and in the Pamphlet called Vindiciae Philadelphi from which Petrie had it of which Letter the very first words are we have not ceased these five years to fight against Pseudepiscopacy c. Now reckon five years backward from Novem. 1579. and you stand at November 1574. whereby we find that within three or four Months after his arrival the Plot was begun tho' it was near to a year thereafter before it came above-board Having thus projected his work and formed his party the next care was to get one to Table it fairly He himself was but lately come home he was much a Stranger in the Country having been ten years abroad He had been but at very few General Assemblies if at any his influence was but green and budding his Authority but young and tender It was not fit for him amongst his First Appearances to propose so great ane Innovation And it seems the Thinking Men of his Party however resolutely they might promise to back the Motion when once fairly Tabled were yet a little shy to be the first Proposers So it fell to the share of one who at that time was none of the greatest Statesmen Iohn Durie one of the Ministers of Edenburgh was the person as Spotswood describes him A sound hearted Man far from all Dissimulation open professing what he thought earnest and zealous in his Cause whatever it was but too too credulous and easily to be imposed on However that I may do him as much justice as
Majesty to suppress such as fight against his Glory Albeit that both NATURE and GODS MOST PERFECT ORDINANCE REPUGNE to such Regiment More plainly to speak If Queen Elizabeth shall Confess that the EXTRAORDINARY DISPENSATION of Gods great Mercy makes that LAWFUL unto HER which both NATURE and GODS LAW do DENY unto all Women Then shall none in England be more willing to maintain her Lawful Authority than I shall be But if GODS WONDROUS WORK set aside She ground as God forbid the justness of her Title upon Consuetude Laws and Ordinances of Men then I am assured that as such foolish presumption doth highly offend Gods Supreme Majesty so I greatly fear that her Ingratitude shall not long lack punishment This was pretty fair but it was not enough He thought it proper to write to that Queen her self and give her a Dish of that same Doctrine His Letter is dated at Edenburg Iuly 29. 1559. In which having told her He never intended by his Book to assert any thing that might be prejudicial to her Iust Regiment providing she were no◠found Unfaithful to God he bespeaks her thus Ingrate you will be found in the presence of his Throne if you transfer the Glory of that Honour in which you now stand to any other thing than the DISPENSATION of his Mercy which ONLY maketh that Lawful to your Majesty which NATURE and LAW denyeth to all Women to command and bear Rule over Men In Conscience I am compelled to say that neither the consent of People the Process of time nor Multitude of Men can Establish a Law which God shall approve but whatsoever he approveth by his Eternal word that shall be approved and stay constantly firm And whatsoever he Condemneth shall be Condemned tho' all Men on Earth should travel for the justification of the same And therefore Madam The only way to retain and keep the Benefits of God abundantly of late days poured upon you and your Realm is unfeignedly to render unto God to his Mercy and undeserved Grace the whole Glory of all this your Exaltation Forget your BIRTH and all TITLE which thereupon doth hang It pertaineth to you to ground the JUSTICE of your Authority not on that LAW which from year to year doth change but upon the ETERNAL PROVIDENCE of him who CONTRARY to the ORDINARY course of NATURE and without your deserving hath exalted your Head If thus in Gods presence you humble your self I will with Tongue and Pen justify your Authority and Regiment as the Holy Ghost hath justified the same in Deborah that Blessed Mother in Israel But if you neglect as God forbid these things and shall begin to Brag of your Birth and to Build your Authority and your Regiment upon your own Law flatter you who so listeth your Felicity shall be short c. Let Contentious People put what Glosses they please on Bishop Overal's Convocation Book sure I am here is the Providential Right so plainly taught that no Glosses can obscure it Here it is maintain'd in plain terms and Resolutely in opposition to all the Laws not only of Men but of God and Nature Thus I have given a taste of such principles as the Prelatists in Scotland profess they disown tho' maintain'd by our Reformers It had been easy to have instanced in many more But these may be sufficient for my purpose which was not in the least to throw dirt on our Reformers to whom I am as willing as any man to pay a due reverence but to stop the mouth of impertinent clamour and 〈◊〉 the world have occasion to consider if it is such a scandalous thing to think otherwise than our Reformers thought as our Brethren endeavour on all occasions to perswade the populace For these principles of our Reformers which I have mentioned in Relation to Civil Governments are the principles in which we have most forsaken them And let the world judge which set of principles has most of Scandal in it Let the world judge I say whither their principles or ours participate most of the Faith the Patience the Self-denyal c. of Christians Whither principles have least of the love of the world and most of the image of Christ in them Whither principles have greatest affinity with the principles and practices of the Apostles and their immediate successors in the most afflicted and by consequence the most incorrupted times of Christianity Whither principles have a more natural tendency towards the security of Governments and the peace of Societies and seem most effectual for advancing the power of Godliness and propagating the Profession and the life of Christianity I further subjoyn these two things 1. I challenge our Presbyterian Brethren to convict us of the Scandal of receding from our Reformers in any one principle which they maintain'd in Common with the Primitive Church the Universal Church of Christ before she was tainted with the Corruptions of Popery And if we have not done it as I am Confident our Brethren shall never be able to prove we have our receding from our Reformers as I take it ought to be no prejudice against us I think the Authority of the Catholick Church in the days of her indisputed Purity and Orthodoxy ought in all Reason to be deem'd preferable to the Authority of our Reformers especially considering that they themselves professed to own the Sentiments of the Primitive Church as a part at least of the Complexe Rule of Reformation as I have already proved 2. I challenge our Presbyterian Brethren to instance in so much as one principle in which we have Deserted our Reformers wherein our Deserting them can by any Reasonable by any Colourable construction be interpreted ane approach towards Popery I think no Man who understands any thing of the Popish Controversies can readily allow himself the Impudence to say that to dislike Tumultuary Reformations and deposing Sovereign Princes and subverting Civil Governments c. upon the score of Religion is to be for Popery Or that the Doctrine of Submission to Civil Authority the Doctrine of Passive Obedience or Non-resistance or which I take to be much about one in the present case the Doctrine of the Cross are Popish Doctrines Or that to Condemn the Traiterous Distinction between the Person and the Authority of the Civil Magistrate as it is commonly made use of by some People and as it is Condemned by the Laws of both Kingdoms is to turn either Papistical or Iesuitical Let our Brethren if they can Purge their own Doctrines in these matters of all Consanguinity with Popery And now after all this 3. I would desire my Readers to remember that this Artifice of Prejudicating against principles because different from or inconsistent with the principles of our Reformers is none of our Contrivance Our Presbyterian Brethren not we were the First who set on foot this Popular tho' very pitiful way of Arguing By all the Analogies then of equitable and just Reasoning they ought to