was as needless as when it is appointed a Tree shall be cut up by the Roots another injunction be given that the Tree shall fall Was not Episcopacy effectually rooted up in Scotland when all Church Power was put in the hand of Church Judicatories where all Memberâ— acted in Parity That a Bishop baptized Prince Henry is an odd Argument to prove that Episcopacy was the Government of the Church of Scotland If the King was pleased to chuse a Man who oncâ— exercised Episcopal Jurisdiction for that service especially when Ambassadours were present some of which lived where Episcopacy was exercised it doth not follow that either this Bishop or any other of his Character did govern the Church It is said without all warrant p. 63. That when three Lords were tried the Ministers would needs order the Process and stirred up the Rabble to back them nor would they disband tho' prohibited by Proclamation from King and Council The true History is some Popish Noblemen were known all the Nation over to be guilty of dangerous plotting against the Reformed Religion and designs to ruin the Professors of it They had Friends at Court so that they had too much advantage to carry on their designs All the found Protestants in the Nation observed this and saw the danger that they and the true Religion was in wherefore a Meeting of Barons Ministers and Burgesses which when challenged by the King for their meeting offered to make it appear that it was with sufficient warrant and advice from his Majesty did petition the King that those Lords might be brought to Tryal which was appointed to be done the Protestants resolved to meet before hand to appoint some to prosecute the Criminals which they did Neither can it be made appear that any violence was offered to any Person and all that Spotswood saith of it is p. 399. that great Companies came to Edinburgh without mention of Arms or Violence And indeed the danger was such as it is no wonder that they who had Zeal for the true Religion were forward to cry for Justice when they evidently saw that all Methods were used for palliating the matter land protecting these Criminals to the manifest hazard of Church and State The Issue was the Convention called by the King for trying these Lords referred the matter to a Commitee where they allowed some Ministers whom they named to be present and to propose what they should think fit Here is nothing of Ministers ordering the Process nor of a Rabble in Arms. § 55. After all this our Author doth still maintain that in the years wherein Presbytry had moâ—â— the ascendent yet Bishops did exist by Law enjoyed their Rents and Preached in their Churches foâ— which he produceth many passages out of the Records of Parliament It is well our debate is come to this issue if this be all that he would prove he shall not find us to oppose him Our question is only whether the Protestant Church after her Reformation was governed by Bishops or by Presbyters acting in Parity I know that long after the Reformation even Popish Bishops sat in Parliament enjoyed their Temporalities And that in 1572 an image of Bishops was restored and also oâ— Abbots and Priors but even their pretended Power that they then got was soon taken away Anâ— that many States-men who reaped most of the profits of these places made a great stickle to hold up that image yea and to give them more power in the Church than was due But that in these times Bishops had ruling Church power except in 1572 as is said I utterly deny Wherefore most of his Citations are wholly beside the purpose I shall then only examine such of them as seem to make against what I have asserted He saith p. 64. That the Authority of the Bishops is owned by Act 63. Parl. 5. Jac. 6. Ann. 1575 of which none of our Histories do take any notice And the Act it self is anent the visitation of Hospitals all that is said of Bishops is that they and other Commissioners of Diocesses shall visit Hospitals I hope here is no Church power allowed them In the year 1579 Act 71 Parl. 6. Jac. 6. there is no more said but that young Noblemen or others who had been out of the Country for their breeding shall at their return go to the Bishop or Superintendent or Commissioner of the Kirk Neither is this any governing Authority over the Church The two following Citations are only to shew that Bishops continued 1581 so that of 1587 and several others of his Quotations design no more but that Bishops existed by Law sat in Parliament some were presented to rich Benefices All which is wide from the purpose He saith that 1584 Act 132 Parl. 8. Jac. 6. the Bishops Authority is fully owned It is indeed said in that Act That Ministers may be deprived by the ordinary Bishop of a Diocess or others the Kings Majesties Commissioners to be constituted in Ecclesiastical Causes Where it is evident that Church power is placed in the King rather than in the Bishop Who can by this Act do nothing but as he is the King's Commissioner even in censuring of Ministers If this be a full owning of Episcopal power let him enjoy it This making them the King's Bishops not Christ's nor is there any thing beside in that Act which alloweth them any Church power But we have another Answer to this Quotation That Parliament saith Spotswood p 333 was declared Current at that time for the more speedy dispatch of business whereas the former was in October 1581 and is called in the Records the seventh Parl and this is called the eighth Parliament which is inconsistent with its being Current or the former Parliament yet subsisting But some things were to be done that could not pass in a full Parliament and therefore as Calderwood hath it p. 155 there was no intimation by Proclamation before the meeting of it nor reasonable time granted according to the accustomed order It was almost ended before it was heard of The Lords of the Articles were sworn to keep secret the matters to be treated One of whom tho' he would not reveal particulars wrote to a Minister that the whole intent of that Parliament was against the Kirk and the Discipline of it These are the Methods by which Episcopacy and Erastianism behoved to be supported in these times when they could have no Countenance from the Church nor from the Nation § 56. He next citeth a Conference at Falkland 1596 where some Articles were agreed on about some Ministers having Vote in Parliament and that these were confirmed by an Assembly at Montross 1600 and there some Bishops Elected for Diocesses It is not to be denyed that there was a working toward Prelacy among some Courtiers and Ambitious Churchmen about that time And one of their Methods was to get some Ministers to Vote in Parliament the tendency of this was seen and the thing opposed
Vindicâ—tor insinuateth all along his Book that most part of the Clergy were wicked men It had been fair dealing in the Apologist to have mentioned some onâ— place or other where this was Insinuated Supposed or asserted I know no such place It is like he said so of many of them but if ever he said they were generally so or did proportion the number oâ— them to those Who were of a good Conversation which he never did in that case he will 〈◊〉 peccavi For he professeth that he doth not think it is so Some of them have been charged with Crimes and these Crimes proved against them and they censured acâ—ordingly And more of that kind shall be proved when ever he pleaseth Tho I am far from thinking all is true that is said of them more then that all is true that he and his friend who wrote the Presbyterian â—loquence have written of the Presbyterians I think what men write they should be able to give evidence for it But we are not obliged to prove what is the talk of the Town of any Person He asketh who made them the Presbyterians Judges of the Scandalous Clergy A. 1. Christ hath made his Church judge of them And we are able to make it appear that the Presbyterian Ministers and Elders are the Church of Scotland Representative 2. The Law settling Presbyterian Government hath given its sanction to that judicative Authority that they have from Christ. I approve of what he saith p. 14. That the Scandalous Ministers are rather to be lamented then insulted over Yet it does not hinder but that the scandal may be mentioned when a reason is given of the Peoples Aversation from them or may be charged on them tried and censured by these in Authority If any be glad as he feareth when they can discover the trippings of their Adversaries We look on that as not a Christian Temper which rejoyceth not in iniquity but rejâ—yceth in the truth I do solemnly profess and I hope none of my Brethren will say otherwise that I wish they all were holy and good men If any ever looked on the immoralities of the Clergy as a sufficient Argument against Episcopacy and that it should therefore be overturned tho as he supposeth it had continued since the dayes of the Apostles I conclude such a Person to be no good Logician yet I cannot shun to averre that if it can be proved that there are other good grounds for laying it aside and withal it do appear that immorralities have much flourished under its wings among the People and among the Clergie this is a good commulative Argument for its abolishment If any of the Presbyterians have gathered stories against the Clergie which they could not prove let them bear their Blame We dislike such practices as much as he doth All who have been libelled have either had their Crimes proved or they have been acquitted which is a sufficient vindication of the Church and a clearing of them who were so libelled and where any by mistake have been Censured by Presbytries without sufficient ground the instances of which are very few as the Church took care to prevent it so she hath done to redress any grievance of this kind that was complained of We know the People in the North were more pleased with Episcopal Ministers then they in the West were but not that but the Commission of the General Assembly being hindred to sit in the North was the cause why scandalous Ministers there were not tried and censured The Apologist had more consulted his own credit as a Christian if he had forborn such unmannerly mocking at serious Religion as to insinuate that we look on sniveling as necessary to make a good saint what a temper of mind this passage with many others in his Book doth signifie I am not willing to name but rather to lament it and wish that he may be convinced of the evil of it What he mentioneth of Recrimination we shall not decline provided they will affirm nothing but truth and what they can make appear by rational evidence And iâ— they will delate and prove what Scandals they can find among us that they may be censured wâ— shall reckon itea good Work but this is far from that Authors conduct while he is expresly condemn in imputing Scandals to the Clergy as a scurilous way of writting yet with the same breath he saith if tâ—â— thing were allowable he could tell that many of the Presbyterian Ministers were very Scandalous â— some them Adulterers some Fornicatâ—rs some Blasphemers some whole Presbyterian Families 〈…〉 Here is little either Wit or Honesty or of that good Nature that he chargeth his Antagonist with the want of What Wisdom is it to say that we question the allowableness of an Act when we are resolutely and deliberately and openly doing it Is he not charging some Presbyterian Ministers with the horridest of Crimes and that in the basest manner without giving occasion to the Church to try them or them to vindicate themselves their Names being concealed he can neither vindicate his Honesty nor good Nature in this matter unless he name the Persons and prove the things and when he has done that if they be not duly censured let him reproach us at his pleasure If I knew any such Persons among the Presbyterians I should have little peace in concealing their Faults If he which he asserteth know not five of the Clergy of Scotland who could not undergo the severest Examinations I hope he will not blame others because their knowledge is more extensive than his Many more have been orderly convicted of Immoralities and more are notoriously of a bad Conversation But I dislike this subject as much as he pretendeth to do and therefore leave it We do not envy or derogate from any good that any of them have done or designed to do nor his Joy and Gloriation that he speaketh of in his Suffering Only I cannot well reconcile this strain with the rest of his Book I am sure if I should be guilty of so many false Imputations and bitter Speeches and Reflections against any body of Protestants as he venteth against the Presbyterians without discrimination I should have little Peace or Joy § 16. Our Author bringeth us another Topick used to vindicate the Presbyterians That the Clergy pressed the Consciences of the Presbyterians and that the People could not own them as their Ministers because they were obtruded on them and not invited by Popular Elections And for this he citeth p. 52. and 87. in neither of which places there is one word to that purpose I have taken some pains to find that passage for I believe it is some where in that Book tho' may be not to the purpose that it is here brought for but cannot find it Not being at leasure to read every Line of the Book for the sake of this Citation What I hold in this matter is That it is the Peoples right to
chuse their Pastors and it is a grievance to have a Pastor set over them by the Bishop or Patron without their Consent And that tho' it is their Wisdom to consent a post facto if the man be qualified yet till they consent explicitly or implicitly they are under no tye to own that Man as their Minister However they may lawfully receive the Ordinances from him Let us now hear what our Apologist hath to say on this Head He first bringeth some argumenta ad hominem As that Popular Elections could not be had for a Presbyterian in the North. A. This is not universally true But where it is so the Church will not obtrude a Pastor on that Flock unless they neglect to chuse a person whom the Presbytry on tryal may find to be qualified and this neglect continueth for the time appointed by the Law And then the Election in all reason as well as by the Law of the Nation devolveth into the hands of the Presbytry And when the Presbytry hath set a Man so over a People such of them as will not own him as their Minister I see not how he is obliged to own them as his Flock further than to do what he can to perswade them to good and to restrain them from Sin Next he tells us of many Remonstrators inducted by Cromwell's Troopers A. I never thought that a Pastoral Relation could be founded on such induction where no consent of the People was either antecedent or consequent to it He 3 dly mentioneth That the same was done in the old Colledge of Aberdeen without regular and Collegiate Election and without Tryal or Examination A. It is a wise Argument from a Colledge to a Church The Affairs of the one are to be regulated by the Laws of the Nation the other by the Institution of Christ. In that Colledge by a Visitation in a Legal and Orderly way the Principal and Sub-Principal and two of the Regents were deposed To supply the two Regents places all who would offer themselves were invited by a Program to dispute six or seven appeared after several days disputation two of them were chosen as having fairly won these places by the Masters of the Colledge with some who were by Publick Authority to assist them The Principal and Sub-Principal did notwithstanding Officiate till two years after by the Authority of Oliver Cromwell who then was owned as having the Supreme Authority de facto A Visitation was appointed and these two Places were found Vacant and a Minister of Aberdeen was put into the Principal 's place and one of the two Regents who had entered as abovesaid and had taught Philosophy two years was made Sub-Principal What is there in all this that can be blamed further than that it was the general Calamity of the Nation to be under a Forreign Power by whom all the places of the Nation were then disposed of I know our Author would not have so impertinently digressed but that he would have a fling at a Person for whom he seemeth to have no kindness and whose having a Room in a Colledge is an Eye-sore to him § 17. Now the Author will no more trisle as hitherto he hath indeed done let us then hear his solid and serious Reasons He giveth a long account of the way of Admission in the Episcopal Church against which I could object several things but I shall only take notice of what is to our present purpose viz. That an Edict is served and the People allowed to object against the Candidate whom the Patron hath chosen for them Even this is often so done that it were as good it were not done as when Mr. Mckenzie's Edict to be Minister at Kirklistoun was served at St. Andrews about twenty six Miles distant But supposing it were always duly managed it doth not sufficiently answer the right that the People have to chuse their own Pastors His Argument from disorders happening upon popular Election is fully answered Rational defence of Nonconform Part 5. § 6. p. 207 208. But it is like the Apologist cannot read such Books as that without the Indecency of Passion Tho' he is pleased to bring a passage out of it when he fancieth he can expose the Author by it It is his way here and elsewhere to assert strongly the conclusion without taking notice of Reasons against it That this as all Christs Institutions managed by sinful Men may be abused we deny not Hath not Prelatical Power often degenerated into Tyranny and yet I suppose he would not have it abrogated It is denied which he saith cannot be denied That the methods of Election differed often in divers Ages and Countries since the first plantation of Christianity Unless he understand this of the more degenerate Ages of the Church after the eighth Century Before that it was uniform and constant viz. It was done a clero populo as it is abundantly proved in the Book cited p. 201. c. It is also false That no Christian Church came nearer the Apostolick Method than the Church of Scotland under the Episcopal Constitution For it is evident that in the Apostolick and Primitive Church there was no Election made by a Patron The Act of the General Assembly depriving a disaffected Parish of the Power of Eâ—ection maketh nothing for his design For it is without question that Peoples Rights and Church Priviledges may for some Causes be Suspended by Authority of the Church His account of the Election of Leith is most false Mr. Gray had not one of the Legal Eldership for him nor the Magistrates of Leith who represent the Heritors and a great body of the People did oppose him with what Brow then can our Author say That this Election was unanimous For Muslebrugh and Tranent none hath to this day been Elected in a Legal way that is by the Heritors and Elders That Patronages were not taken away in Scotland till 1649 proveth no more then that Presbyterians think it not unlawful to own a Man who is not antecedently Elected by the People and this was never denied by us Only it was pleaded that when the People had other objections against a Minister this might fortify their aversion from him that he had not entered in a due way Presbyterians did always think Elections by Patrons to be a great Grievance Yet they bare it till it could be removed by Law The reason of his following discourse I cannot comprehend viz. How it should come to pass that so many Artifices are needed to promote a Clergy Man if Popular Election take place And that it is otherwise where the Patron chuseth Nothing is more evidently false then are both parts of this Assertion For our way is when a Parish is Vacant the Presbytry sendeth two or three or more by turns to preach among them if the People desire to hear yet others it is granted And the People chuse whom they like best Where doth the Artifice lie that the Candidate
in concurrence with the King and Estates of the Nation whether the King did really think what he expressed or what he acted was the effect of his restraint it was not their part to consider He quarreleth also with the Ministers appointing a Fast when the King desired the Magistrates of Edinburgh to Feast the French Ambassadours These Ambassadours came to overturn what the States of the Nation called by the King had concluded and were odious to the Nation The King was moved to appoint this Entertainment by some Merchants who Traded with France The Fast was appointed by the Session of Edinburgh the Presbytry was free of it as was afterward publickly declared § 53. Mr. Andrew Melvil's declining of the King as Judge in prima instantia of what is preached by Ministers in publick which he bringeth as an accusation against the Presbyterians p 61. is as far from the purpose as what was formerly observed It doth not shew any step of the prevalency of Presbytry and Episcopacy per vices which is pretended to be the design of the Manuscript For the thing it self I shall not give my Opinion but only relate the Grounds all edged by him on which he built this his practice which were not only the word of God but Acts of Parliament and a late Conference betwixt some Lords of the Privy Council and some Ministers and the practice ensuing thereupon that when a Minister is delated for any thing spoken in Preaching or Prayer he is first to be tryed by his Ordinary whether Provincial or General Assembly Also he pleadeth the Priviledge of the University of St. Andrews lately confirmed by his Majesty that when Offences were committed in the University by Masters or Students the Rector and his Assistants should be Judges in prima instantia p. 61.62 He heapeth together a great multitude of reproaches against Mr. Andrew Melvil and others of the faithful Servants of God who could not comply with the actings of the Court nor designs of some about it to overturn the Religion setled in the Nation but he giveth so indistinct an account of things and so partially that there is no other way to answer what he saith but by a full History of these times which it is needless for me to transcribe The Reader may be satisfied of this Authors unfair dealing even out of Spotswood's History though his account of things might in some things be examined But more fully out of Calderwood and Petrie I do not deny but that in the years 1585 and some that followed there were great Animosities in Church and State one Party endeavouring to preserve the reformed Religion and the Discipline of the Church that had been used in Scotland from the Reformation and was practised in almost all the Reformed Churches The other Party labouring to overturn the one and to weaken and undermine the other And it is like these heats did drive both Parties to some Excesses and undue Practices But unbyassed Men will see that the Presbyterian Party shewed all respect to Authority even when they could not comply with its Injunctions and what they did that is by some constructed Unpeaceableness was from the aw of God obliging them to appear in their Stations for his Ordinances I except the imperfections and overlashes that sinful Men are liable to in managing that Zeal which is for God I never thought that good Men did always manage a good Cause with that perfection of discretion that is to be wished He concludeth this Accusation of the Brethren p. 62. with an account of his design which is to shew the ground of their dislike of Parity And as before setteth in opposition to it Scripture Apostolick Practice Fathers Councils and all well established Christian Churches and that there is no imaginable warrant for it from any of these This is partly answered above For what he addeth to what he had said before of well established Churches he doth wisely in putting the Emphasis on Well and therefore putteth that word in another Character For if we object most of the Churches of the Reformation he will deny them to be Well Established because they want Bishops Whatever they have beside to commend them If we should muster up all the miscarriages of the Episcopal Party and the Immoralities of Ministers and People that hath been among them and the Pride Tyranny and Oppression of the Bishops and the steps by which that interest hath been managed in Scotland and should give a just Character of the States-men and Church-men by whom it hath been carried on It is like we might give a ground of our dislikes of Episcopacy not inferiour to what he mentioneth and much more weighty with all the true Lovers of serious Religion but this way of Arguing is not what we lay much weight on in debate with our Adversaries Tho' I doubt not but that there is reason to think that that which is Christs Institution is usually found to be a more effectual mean for advancing true Religion in the Church than that which is a device of Man § 54. Our Author near the end of p. 62. maketh a great Concession as he seemeth to imagine when he telleth us that in 1591 1591 and 1602. The King being so often brought into danger and trouble by the Seditions of Mr. Andrew Melvill and his fiery Complices did consent to grant a great deal of Jurisdiction to Presbytries Synods and General Assemblies Here I take notice 1. That when he cannot get the Truth denied he endeavoureth to smother it for not only a great deal of Jurisdiction was granted to the Presbyterian Church 1592 but all Church Power that any Presbyteriaâ— did lay claim to was by Law settled on the Presbyterian Church Judicatories and none at all wiâ—â— either given or left to Bishops For what else can be understood by ratifying all immunities and Freedoms whatsoever given and granted by his Highness his Regents in his Name or any of his Predecessours and at the same time ratifying and approving General Assemblies appointed by the saiâ— Kirk and Synods and Presbytries and particular Sessions as the words of the Act of Parliamenâ— are Moreover that Act is conceived in a stile that supposeth Presbytry to be then and to have been before the Government established in the Church of Scotland while it giveth those Libertieâ— to the True and Holy Church presently established within this Realm His pretense that this was a force on the King to prevent Seditions is a groundless assertion For the King had often shewed dislike of the one way and the other and was for either of them as his interest led him not being convinced of the Jus Divinum of either way The story he telleth of Chancellour Maitland's advice to settle Presbytry in hope that they would make themselves odious was but his Opinion anâ— in this he proved no true Prophet That there was no Act for the abolishing Episcopacy as p. 63. iâ— was no wonder for it
Statum Regni signifieth the state and condition of the Nation or the present constitution or settlement of it And can no ways be put for Ordines Regni But that our Author or his Informers knew the Speaker's mind that he so intended it as they would have it But of this too much He mentioneth also the same Author asserting a docretum praeteritum praedamnatum which I confess were it truly chargeable upon him he ought to be ridiculed for Nonsence and censured for Blasphemy But because our Author fond of this occasion of triumph over his Adversary insisteth again and more fully on this p. 51.52 I shall reserve my answer to this Charge till I come at that place of his Book Whether he hath shewed that good nature and Christian Modesty that he speaketh of p. 37. in hiding and extenuating the weaknesses of others or the contrary temper in false accusations in needless exposing and aggravating these supposed defects and in most bitter lashes of his Pen on occasion of this his apprehension let the Reader judge § 31. He chargeâ—h his Adversary most injuriously p. 37 with apparent Shufflings and Tergiversations And for proof bringeth this Instance That when some of the Clergy were beat on the Head and Legs and others made to go through deep Waters in the midst of Winter he looketh on these as no great Injuries If he had pointed the Reader to the places where these Histories are mentioned his own Eyes might have informed him that this is not true It is neither said nor insinuated that these were no great Injuries Tho' may be some of the aggravating Circumstances with which they are told are said to be false Another thing in the same and the next page he maketh a hideous out-cry about viz. That Ecclesiastical Judicatories that enquire into Scandal are not obliged to follow the forms of other Courts This is not fair dealing to say no worse my Assertion was neither so Universal nor so Positive The words were For the former two it is questionable whether these things viz. Telling who was the Accuser and hearing the accused before the Validity of the Libel be sustained be required in a Process about Scandal before an Ecclesiastical Judicatory But whether it be so or not I am sure it was otherwise done for the most part then he affirmeth As I then spake doubtingly of this matter so I am not like to be determined by the force of the Apologist's Arguments That forms are appointed to prevent Forgeries and Combinations That they are the External Fences of Justice and Equity That this is the most intolerable slavery of the Inquisition There are indeed some forms which may have such use But that all the forms of Civil Courts are such or that these mentioned are of that consideration he will find it hard to prove Without which nothing is said to the purpose If the Crime charged on any person be indeed of weight to infer a Censure and if it be sufficiently proved I see not how Forgery Combination or the Slavery of the Inquisition where a Man must be his own Accuser and Witness against himself can have place That this is no singular Opinion of the Vindicator he had given opinion about it nor of the Scotch Presbyterians he may see â—ho will read Synodic in Gall reformat Discipline cap. 5. Can. 12. All possible care shall be taken that these Formalities and terms that are used in Courts of Law may be avoided in the exercise of Church Discipline One may often meet with this same Principle in the History of these famous Churches There are some modes of managing Affairs which are built on Reason common to all Societies These no doubt the Church also is obliged to observe Others tho' Reasons may be alledged for them yet these are such as respect especially the preservation of Mens Civil Rights and of these I understand the above mentioned Canon And these many Judge needless if not unfit to be used in Church Discipline Where the design is to convince the Sinner and preserve the Purity of the Church If a strict adherence to Law forms were necessary in Church Discipline it were needful that all Ministers and Elders should study a Stile Book and the practick of Civil Courts Which I think few will averre Next p. 38. He layeth to the Vindicator's charge shameful shuffling a Metaphor taken from playing at Cards which he useth ad nauseam because he saith p. 50. That they the Presbyterians expressed as much as they were capable their dislâ—ke of the Toleration granted by King James to the Papists when mean while their Agents at Court wrote Books for repealing the Penal Statutes against Papists This were indeed blame worthy if he could make it appear that any who wrote such Books were Agents for the Presbyterians or had allowance from them for what they did But the Vindicator and Presbyterians too are clear if it appear as it is certainly true that this was generally disliked by the Presbyterians What he addeth out of p. 6. of requiring that they to whom we will allow Toleration can shew as good warrant for their way is disingeniously and lamely represented For it is not said we will allow Toleration to none else And no more was meant but that there are some ways so apparently absurd and unreasonable that we think they should not be Tolerated It was also added Who use their liberty with the same moderation and peaceableness On both which accounts we think Papists ought not to be tolerated to exercise their Idolatries and teach their Heresie He concludeth this part of his Book with the same Charity and Civility that hath often been observed in it viz. He the Vindicator is so deeply tinctured with the sullenness of his Faction that he 'll rather question whether the Body of the Sun be Luminous than admit the least scruple concerning the Divine Right of Presbytry I have no answer to such talk but leave it to the Reader to judge whether this be Disputing or Railing § 32. The next thing that the Apologist thinketh fit to take notice of is the Theological Reasonings that he findeth here and there in the Vindication not insisted on but occasionally touched And that as occasion was given by the Adversaries If he had pleased to argue closely and fairly on these heads I should like better to enter the Lists with him on such subjects than on what he hath hitherto led me into The venemous Squibs that he blameth me for I should have examined whether they deserve that name and have craved pardon for them if they indeed were such But neither of these I can do for he hath neither told us what they are nor where to be found The first Controversie that he engageth in is about the observation of Christmass p. 39. on which he discourseth to p. 41 The most difficult part of my task in answering him is to pick out of his long Harangue what hath any shew
efficacious working on the Soul If this be not what the Pharisees are reproved for making void Christs Ordinances for Mens Traditions I know not what can be so represented 5. If the neglect of Fasting among Protestants hinder the Reformation of the Greek Churches why doth not the frequent Fasts in the Popish Church with which they have more occasion to converse than with Protestants contribute to advance that Reformation 6. Seeing he is pleased to digress from Feasting to Fasting he might know that real Fasting used to be more frequent among the Presbyterians than among the Prelatists for their set Fasts of Lent and Good Friday how few among them do observe them § 36. He telleth us next of Anniversary Holy days among the Jews besides these which God appointed and yet not reproved p 41. and 42. and he instanceth in the Fasts mentioned Zech. 7. and the Feast of the Dedication at which Christ was present Joh. 10.22 That these Fasts were not reproved is said without all warrant God disowneth them if he say they were only disowned on account of the neglect of seriousness in managing them this must be proved Again Christ and the Prophets had so many things of greater moment to reprove and insist particularly upon that they contented themselves to comprehend such things as these under general reproofs which were not wanting and might by a thinking Man be applyed to all such Observations As when Jeroboam is reproved for devising Holy days that God had not appointed 1 Kings 12.33 And Christ condemneth Humane Devices in Worship Mat. 15 9. And the Propheâ—s condemned some Worship that was in it self most abominable on account that it was not commanded Jer. 7.31 Christ's presence at the Feast of Dedication was no more but his walking in the Temple while the People were Celebrating that Feast Which can no ways be strained to signifie either Joyning or Approbation He talketh of shaking off all Externals of Religion p. 42. and calleth it the Errour of Dissenters That is palpably false We have the External administration of the Word and Sacraments among us But it seems he will not only have his Humane Devices to make a great Figure in External Religion but to be the ALL of it Such loose talk is unbecoming a Divine That which followeth is an odd fancy It is certain that nothing preserveth the knowledge of Christian Religion among the body of the People more than the Festivals of the Church What Not the Word and Sacraments Whether this looketh rather like raving than like disputing let the Reader judge He saith also that we teach the People to despise all Forms That is false we keep the form of Baptizing and Celebrating the Lords Supper that we find in the Scripture It is another horrid Falsehood and I know not how it could fall from one who hath regard to the God of Truth that it is rare to find a Presbyterians Child in the West of Scotland who can repeat the Commandements or the Creed and he complaineth that by this means Atheism is promoted and that the Clowns laugh when a Curate recommendeth to their Children the Creed the Lords Prayer and the ten Commandements None are more careful to instruct their Children in these and other Principles of Religion than Presbyterian Parents are both in the West and other places And it is the constant practice of Ministers when they Catechise the People to examine them on all these three and to require the People to get them by heart and to make them understand them It is also false that we have no Opinion of a Mans understanding unless he entertain us with discourses of Gods unsearchable decrees These are very seldom the subject of our Preaching But it is beyond all his other reproaches that he imputeth to Presbyterians that they Preach Justification before Conversion I know not a Presbyterian in Scotland that is of that Opinion If sometimes Ministers instruct their People how the Convictions of Natural Conscience may be distinguished from the Convictions that proceed from the Spirit of God I think that is not to be exposed to ridicule nor made a reproach by any who is acquainted with the deceit of the Heart and the danger of delusion about the truth of Grace in the Soul What he discourseth p. 43. of the ancient Discipline of the Church being conducive to Reformation I heartily close with But am far from thinking that that Discipline lay in Festivities or Fasts appointed by Men but in censuring of Sin according to the appointment of Christ. § 37. He beginneth a new head p. 43. near the end which is a large discourse about the Schism that he alledgeth the Presbyterians to be guilty of And all this he foundeth on a word occasionally and transiently written by the Vindicator if our Author cite his words true which we cannot know seing he doth not direct us viz. That he knoweth no Schism but such as was caused by his Opposites If I knew on what occasion this was said I could the better judge whether it was well said or not But he hath left us here as often elsewhere to guess as he also citeth Scriptures without Chapter or Verse And it is not easie to find out one short Sentence which may be hath no more joyned to it on that subject in a large Book Before I consider his Refutations of this Assertion I shall shew in what sense this may be maintained 1. In England the Presbyterians are not guilty of Schism nor do they desert the Church but are driven away by Her because she Excommunicateth them unless they wil practise some Ceremonies that they cannot use with a good Conscience This hath been proved against Bishop Stillingfleet Rational Defence of Nonconformity And if our Author please to debate â—t his Reasons shall be considered 2. In Scotland the Presbyterians who had freedom to hear the Conformists and yet had Meetings wherein they heard their own Ministers who were unjustly Eâ—ected could not be guilty of sinfull Separation Because they still owned the Episcopal Church of Scotland as a True tho' Corrupted Church and did not shun to partake in the Ordinances with Her but were under no obligation to cast off their own Ministers who were orderly called and settled among them and not removed from them by any Church Authority but only by the Civil Power which however it might forcibly hinder the publick exercise of a Mans Ministry could neither make him no Minister nor not the Minister of that People And these Presbyterian Ministers and People were â—ately not only by the Gospel but by the Law the Church of Scotland and the ceasing of their Legal Right by the change of the Law could not take away their Gospel Right And any thing that might look like Separation was caused by our Opposites in that they had violently thrust us from our Places 3. Even they who did so separate from the Episcopal Church of Scotland as to deny all Communion
with her and to refuse to joyn with Her in any Ordinances could be charged with no Separation but what was caused by our Opposites For their overturning the settled and found Church of Scotland and driving away the Pastors that those Persons could freely hear did tempt them to this Course Tho' I do not approve of their Principle of not Hearing yet the blame lay not only on them but on them who had driven them on this precipice § 38. Let us now hear with what weighty Arguments he will refute the Assertion that he levelleth his Discourse against A great part of his Discourse is not fit to be answered such as That the Universal Church is not to strike Sail to the Novelties of Upstarts p. 43. This is true but wholly Impertinent Unless he can prove that the Scotch Episcopalians are either the Universal Church or in this maintained the Cause of the Universal Church And that Presbyterians are Upstarts Which we maintain have been since the Apostles days And were in Scotland since the Reformation from Popery and before the entrance of Popery But of this after That by our Baptismal Vow we are bound to keep the Unity of the Catholick Church we willingly confess But at the same time we affirm that the same Vow obligeth us not to tempt others to break it His Arguments to prove the Presbyterians of Scotland Separatists have this general fault that they touch not the Conclusion Nor contradict the Assertion that he would refute For if I should grant them to be Separatists yet this Separation may be culpably caused by our Opposites They have also another Fault that they make no distinction of the Separation on whose side soever the Crime of it was between one sort of Presbyterians and another Whereas it is certain that some did live in the Communion of that Church tho' they did not approve of all her ways and others did not His first Argument is p 44. They separate from all Churches Ancient and Modern Nor is there a Church on Earth with which they can Communicate without fear of being polluted This is false None of us refused to Communicate with the Churches of Holland France when they had liberty Geneva and many others But many of us did cheerfully Communicate with them His proof of this his Assertion is all other Churches have some things we dislâ—ke This is not concludent for we never thought it unlawful to Communicate with a Church which was not as pure as we could wish What we dislike in any we abstain from the practice or approbation of it but do not for that deny Communion with the Church where it is found He again argueth p. 44. and 45. That the former Presbyterians did not separate from the publick Worship in the Episcopal Church A. Neither did all the present Presbyterians and they who did were tempted yea driven into that Course by his Parties Apostacy and overturning the settlement of the Church by force without either any Act of Church Authority or indeavour to satisfie the Consciences of the People I do not approve more than he doth of all that is contained in the Apologetical Relation That Presbyterian Ministers made use of the Lords Prayer we deny not nor did we ever condemn it The same we say of using the Creed in Baptism Nor did we ever separate from the Church on these grounds For the Doxology we know it was used but I know no warrant for the constant use of it when the several parts of the Songs composed by the Spirit of God to be Sung in the Church were more seldom used It seemeth to be too great deference to humane composure and therefore we think it is better to lay it aside For the Apostolick Benediction we have Scripture Examples for it which is sufficient warrant If he can bring the same for these that he calleth Christian Forms we shall use them It is our Authors strain to talk high on slender Grounds that the use of these Forms is the Spirit and Practice of the Church and that tho' thâ— Canonical and Universal Methods of the Church are tempered with regard to our Infirmities yet they the Presbyterians love to flie in the face of their Mother We deny the Episcopal or Popish Church to be our Mother and we deny these forms to be imposed at least perpetually and universally by the Catholick Church So as we flie never in the face of our Mother by disusing them After he had taken notice of the distinction of occasional and fixed Communion p. 44. he falleth on it again p. 46. His Argument against it is Why may not that fixedly be done which may occasionally since the common ties of Christianity oblige us A. That there are ties on us to Communicate with the Episcopal Congregations we deny and what may be pretended in favour of such obligation is above answered The Reason that be asketh is plain because I may have other obligations which hinder me to do that constantly which I may do sometimes I may lawfully Preach in another Mans Pulpit when he calleth me to it but it is not fit I should do it fixedly and desert mine own § 39. His 2 d. Argument to prove us all Schismaticks is If they had lived saith he fifty years before the first Counsel of Nice they behoved to have separated For then were practised by the Universal Church all these things they scruple at many things he nameth Here were a large Field for Disputation if he had proved what he saith but that he confidently asserteth and we confidently deny That the Hierarchy was then in the Church However some of the Names might be the Church Power and Dominion that now is signified by them was not then in being Argument 3 d. is from the Doctrine and Practice of our Predecessors which he used before and I did answer before Arg. 4 th He requireth us to name any Schismaticks in ancient History to whom that name is more agreeable than to Presbyterians If this can be done he is mistaken The strength of this Argument seemeth to be in his Infallibility Certainly if we be not the worst Men of the World he is mistaken The Donatills separated from the Church because She admitted the lapsed on their Repentance and cast off their lawful Pastors and all Communion with the Church we do not cast off all Communion with the Church nor reject we our Pastors but cleave to them rather than to Intruders Arg. 5 th Cyprian's notion of Schism is when one separateth from his own Bishop This the Presbyterians do Ergo. A. All the strength of this Argument lieth in the sound of words A Bishop in Cyprian's time was not a Diocesan with sole Power of Jurisdiction and Ordination if he prove that we shall give Cyprian and him leave to call us Schismaticks A Bishop then was the Pastor of a Flock or the Moderator of a Presbytry if he can prove that we separate from our Pastors or
extraordinary Meetings whether of Church or State That Meeting did indeed Vote it self a General Assembly For in the second Session it was concluded that this Meeting should have the force and strength of a General Assembly and that all things may be treated and ended therein that use to be treated and ended in a General Assembly Also that the Moderator of the last Assembly shall continue till the next ordinary Assembly in March And that all present should be there also So both the Historians last cited All this sheweth that this was no Assembly cloathed with the Authority of the Church of Scotland and therefore its Acts were Null and not binding Besides that it is expresly told us That they who there met were only Commissioners from some Towns and Churches with the Superintendents and Commissioners for Visitation 3 What was there concluded was not by that Convention of Church men but seven of them were delegated who or any four of them should meet with such of the Secret Council as the Regent should appoint and these were they who made this Innovation in the Church by the Articles above mentioned I hope none will say that this was a Church Meeting or what they did was the deed of the Church 4. It is certain that this was not lookt on by the Church of Scotland as one of her General Assemblies Not only because the General Assembly appointed by the former Assembly met at St. Andrews a few Weeks after that Convention at Leith viz. March 6. but likewise they took no notice of the Arch. bishop of St. Andrews tho' he sat among them but chused Mr. Robert Hamiltoun Minister of St. Andrews to be their Moderator Which they could not have done had they owned a Prelacy in the Church 5. It is known that this Act at Lioth was disliked and witnessed against by such as were not influenced by the Court and by some Noble Men who were making their own Gain by this new Constitution And that it raised great Division Patrick Adamson in a Sermon distinguished My Lord Bishop viz. Such as were in the Popish Church My Lords Bishops viz. Such as the Lords had now devised for their own advantage And The Lord's Bishop that is every Minister of the Gospel Mr. Knox having preached in St. Andrews the Earl of Mortoun being present refused to inaugurate the new chosen Bishop of St. Andrews Mr. John Doâ—glas And he denounced Anathema to the Giver and also to the Receiver On this occasion Beza writ to Mr. Knox his Epistle is extant among his Epistles it is dated April 12. 1572. applauding The pure Religion and good Order that were settled in Scotland and beseeching that they would hold fast these two and to remember that if the one be lost the other cannot long continue The following words of that Epistle are remarkable As Bishops brought in the Papacy so false Bishops the Relicts of Popery shall bring in Epicurism to the World They that desire the Churches good and safety let them take heed of this Pestilence And seing ye have put that plague to flight timously I heartily pray you that ye never admit it again albeit it seem plausible with the pretence or colour of keeping Unity which pretence deceived the ancient Fathers Yea even many of the best of them 6. The Bishops that then were set up had little more than the Title and therefore were called Tulchau Bishops For the Church had the power The Bishops power being expresly made no greater than that of the Superintendents and being subject to the Church And the Noblemen had the better part of the Benefices 7. At the same time were brought in also Abbots and Priars as well as Bishops and for the same end viz. That some Great Men under their shadow might reap the profits only the Name and some small Rent remaining to them So that this whole contrivance was purely and evidently a piece of State Policy not any inclination of the Church of Scotland to cast off Presbyterial Government altho' some Church Men were drawn into it 8. This Constitution never obtained in the Church of Scotland For not only the names of Arch-bishops and Deans were protested against in the Assembly March 6 1572. But never a Bishop was suffered to Moderate in any of the subsequent General Assemblies and in several Assemblies Acts were made against Bishops till at last the General Assembly at Dundee which begun July 12 1580 did absolutely condemn the Office of Bishop as then used and commanded all Bishops to forbear the exercise of such Power And to this effect appointed them to appear before the several Provincial Synods where they lived And afterward Ann. 1592 Presbyterial Government was fully settled 9. The Account given of Mr. Melvil is not fair not only in that his opposition to Bishops is imputed to his not being preferred For he was zealously opposite to Episcopacy before and when he came to Scotland he refused Preferment at Court when offered But also that the opposition that Mr. Dury and others made to Episcopacy is abscribed to his instigation These Learned and Worthy Men acted from their own light and were not Tools to be used by another Aâ— opposition was made to Episcopacy before Mr. Melvil came to Scotland as is clear from what is above said Wherefore it was not the first starting of that Debate when Mr. Dury appeared in the Assembly 1575. § 50. I could not have expected from a Person of Honour and Learning such an account of the Book of Policy made in the year 1578 As That it was stuffed with the Spirit of Mr. Andrew Melvil himself it was rather a proposal for overthrowing of all Just Authority than an Establishment of a Religious Government That it could not even in these distracted and furious times obtain approbation of any Authority But was lookt on as a Rapsody of groundless Assertions and full of mischievous Novelties This is not to write like an Historian His Author Spotswood speaketh with more modesty of this matter That the Book of Policy being presented to the States they had not then leasure to peruse it but gave a Commission to some of their number to conferr with the Commissioners of the Church And if they did agree to insert the same among the Acts of Parliament So he p 289. That it was not rejected with such disdain as his Lordship is pleased to express is evident not only in that nothing of such resentment of it when proposed is left on Record by any Historian but is the fierce Zeal of a new set of Episcopalians not the temper of the old Protestant Church of Scotland but Archbishop Spotswood p. 289. to 302. Setteth down all the Articles of that Book at length and on his Margine noteth what was agreed to what was referred to farther reasoning and what amendements of it were desired by the other Party It is also observed by Calderwood p. 116. That the delay of ratifying the