2 6. 1 Tim. 5 20. Them that Sin rebuke before all that others also may fear I hope the Learned Assembly will acknowledge that Sin must be confessed and forsaken or else the Lord cannot in justice forgive and that because the promise belongs only to such as in Prov. 28. 13 He that hideth his sin shall not prosper But whosâ— confesses and forsakes them shall find Mercy Indeed if any Transgressor shall find Mercy of God and be honoured of him in the way of duty Then ought we not to stick precisly on the maner of his confession for assuredly the Lord has blotted out his sin and therefore let not man again set it on the score Furder we charge you with three mistakes which are the Rocks on which our Church hitherto has spliâ—ed The first is That you acknowledge a thing to be duty in it self such as Fidelity in Doctrine and Discipline But the Exercise of it most not come within Doors but must be Shouldered to the Door with carnal prudence and indulged exigences because as in Page 19. You say the Church will have more prejudice by the exercise thereof than benefire Now whether obedience to please God or obedience to please Men bringeth most loss or benefite to the Church let any tender Conscience judge The second is more Tenderness towards Transgressors than towardâ— the Truths of God So that Truth shall be dashed in pieces rather than the Bulk of Professors should be broken Alas this sin has been Epidemick in this Land to the â—uine of the Church The third is confident trusting and Relaying on Mercies and Deliverance without Repentance and confession of sin Forgeâ—ing that threatning Ezek. 17 15. Shall he prosper shall he escape that doth such things or shall he break the Covenant and be delivered Moreover you say you â—ind among our Gâ—ievances yet two more heavy Accusations The first is that there is corruption in the Constitution as it is now established being under the bondage of an Erastian Yoak submited to I Answer For investigating of a more â—nited harmonie and Concatination of the controversie I shall Translate the handling of this Grievance to the posterior place and therefore shall first speak to the Oath of Allegiance Where I shall speak to the Oath of Allegiance in the abstract from the present contraversie I say the Oath of Allegiance when Lawfull is cordially to be taken by the subjects and is a piece of a Religious work and becomes Ministers well to take Qua Subjects and tends nowayes to their Qualifications Qua Ministers but only as Subjects Therefore we do nowayes carp at an Oath of Allegiance when Lawfull Now the Question is Whether the Oath of Allegiance to the present King be lawful yea or no. The Assembly affirmeth but we deny And that 1. Because the Person on the Throne did at his first Entry to Britain Invest and Cloath himself with Prelacy and that contrair to his former practise and Education And this was done by the English Prelats who were the principal moving Instruments in this Revolution in bringing him to the Throne So that as they did countinance him to his upseting so likewise he did countinance them to their defending and maintaining as is to be seen in his present and past practise how he hath owned that Antichristian party by erecting some to Bishopricks which is a thing very clear that his setting up of such and also his hearing and Communicating with them in Worship declares that he hath invested himself with Prelacy and so has devested himself of the Qualifications of a lawful King according to our National Covenant Solemn League and Covenant and Coronation Oath where Kings are engaged to swear to maintain Presbyterian Government and to the utmost of their power to oppose Antichristian Prelacy and all fals Religion Now seing that he hath invested himself with Prelacy then how can any Faithful subject acknowledge him as their King or swear allegiance to him without being guiltie of the sin of Prelacie by their consenting to set it upon the Throne Is not thiâ— Breach of Covenant and perjure in the Subjects to elect a Person to the Throne who has not the elective properties such as the Qualifications contained in our Fundamental Laws For at best his Qualifications are but exercised indifferently either towardâ— Prelacy in England or this supposed Presbytrie in Scotland and therefore doth not leave to the one more than to the other but invests himself with both according to the inclinations of the People Which practise is contradictory for how can one serve two Masters And therefore no Godlie Faithful Subject can in Conscience elect and choise that which is contradictorie seing the Elective properties are wanting and so by consequence no Oath of Allegiance can be given without Sin and Perjurie The second reason is Because he did not take the Covenant at his Entrie to the Throne Now according to the practise of our Ancestors who in the Crowning of their Kâ—ngs did first cause them swear to the National Covenant the Solemn League and Covenant I instance the maner of the Coronation at Seoon in the Year 51. Where Charles the second did take the Covenants And likewise did swear and engage to endeavour the Reformation of Religion â—n the other two Kingdoms that when it should please the Lord to restore him to his Government there that he was bound to endeavour the establishment of the Work of Reformation there as well as to maintain it here But nothing of this hath ever yet been I say the entrie to the Crown hath not come throw the Channal of a Covenant of Reformation And therefore how can any Subject swear to be loyal to him who has not sworn to be loyal and Faithful to the Crown and Interest of Jesus Christ Certainly our obedience and loyalty to Kings must be in the Lord and not in maâ—ters sinful and unlawful either as to the Burieing or yet as to the bearing down the Covenanted work of Reformation which our Ancestors did make a principal mark of a lawful King Anointed and Qualified of God for ruling in righteousness Certainlie where this is either wanting or yet denyed in a King Then the Oath of Allegiance in the Subjects is Sinful and Unlawful according to our Fundamental Laws A third reason is Because the Persons who did elect him did not take the Covenant and therefore were not the lawful Representatives of this Covenanted Land And seing we may refuse a King upon his not taking the Covenant then by consequence we may refuse these Representatives As for example this the present Generation holds good in Thesi as to the maner For they acknowledge that the present Ministers hath no right to their Stipends unless the Persons who elect them be qualified with the Oath of allegiance Now if I may argue from their concession as to the maner then much more may I argue from the matter and ground above mentioned that king and people
and receive that King who complyes with Prelacie and invests himself therewith neither can a King serve two Masters at once For this were to build and destroy simul semel which is a compleat contradiction Therefore none Godly whose Consciences are not byassed and prejudged will ever subject themselves to such a King altho they should suffer the utmost of Cruelty Secondly As to vertue and exercise of Trade how much is this Land opposed hindred and imprisoned by that Nation of England as sad experience has taught us they having the Seat of the Throne and Sitting at the Helm Advising and Counselling their Kings not to Countenance nor assist Scotland in the exercise of Trade But on the otâ—er hand to declare Enmitie againg them of which we have had a late instance But I will not insist upon this head seing both Noblemen â—everal others has spoken Learnedly and reasonably upon this head And I think it is approven by the whole Land except only by these few who are by assed prejudged and bought for Self Interest to the Selling and betraying of their Nation Now from the Consideration of what is abovementioned I think we may be moved to reject that King And if we may refuse and reject him upon the account of Prelacy Then much more may we refuse that Popish Prince who pretends to a Heredetarie Succession contrair to the Lands Engagements and Laws upon the Account of Popery whose intention without doubt is to polluâ—e and dâ—siâ—e the Land with Idolatrie and therefore to be resisted and oppoâ—ed to the outmost of our power by all the Inhabitants of the Land 2. There is a second diâ—siculty that do occur to these who would be for the continuing of Monâ—rchy Government and for choiâ—ing a King from among our selves The difficulty is this the Mould of Kingly Government is lost by that unlawful and intolerable Priviledge and Prerogative that is given to Kings which is a Negative Voice which is not proper to Kings but to the Parliament as Learned Buchannan and Mr. Rutherfoâ—d gives an Account in his Rex Lex concerning the power of Parliaments where he gives instances that under the days of Peagantry the Parliament had the Negative Voice And downward under the Christian Faith yea to the days of our Reformation So that it is out of late crept in buâ— how unlawful this Negative Voice is let Men of understanding Judge for by that they call and raise Parliaments and not any thing can pass in Act but what they please likewise in matters of Life and Death and this is done contrair to the Law and consâ—quently to a Faithful Parliament For the Law and Faithful Parliamenters dâ—th not distinguish That whoso opposes the one opposes the other And this usurped prerogative is so in use in the Land and hâ—s been dispensed with silence and connivance So that now it is difficult to find the Mould of Kingly Government or to perswade Mâ—n to imbrace it And therefore easier to change the Government than to set it up I have spoken this in a Politick way by manner of civil Policie 3. There remains now only this on mean to make use of in order to set up Government in the Land viz. A Common Wealth and this must be done by counsel and direction from Gods word Otherways the Building will be in vain Psal 127. Except the Lord Build the House they labour in vain that Build it Now you must either Build on the Foundation already laid or else you must make it unlawful and disagreeable to Gods word But this will not be as is aboundantly proven from the invincible grounds and Reasons given above For surely what we have done must either be approven or disapproven for as I have already told you that there is no Action situate in individue but must be either good or evil that is It must be either rancked up among the sins of the Fathers or else among the duties of the Fathers And I think when this is Faithfully done it shall appear that the Mercies and Deliverance of the Church shall not run in any other Channel than what we have espoused So that in this I think I have brought this contraversie to a point Now let this Generation play their Game as they will Yet surely this deserted cause will arise coast what it will And hath the Lord been at such pains if so I dare speak to keep his Church in the Fuâ—nace of Affliction near Twenty Years from the Year 61 to the Year 79 inorder to oring forth this duty Then câ—rtainly he will bring them to the same Wilderness and plead with them there as in Hosea 2 14. I will go and return to my place till they acknowledge their offence and seek my Face in their Affliction they will seek me early Hath the Lords Church been under the Feet of cruel Boody Tyrants in Scotland already I fear there is worse dayes coming in which this Land shall be brought under the Feet of cruel Bloody Papifts And then Backsliders shall be Robbed of their Idols of Erastian Indulgence and it may be Burried Convictions will arise though more than Twenty Five Years in the Grave and that with Josephs Brethren some will say as in Gen. 42. 21. We are verily Guilty concerning our Brother c. Now you have thought that such a duty aâ— this would have brought furth much Blood and Confusion in the Land But it will be found that the neglect and omission shall bring furth greater But none believeth nor seeth Judgments but these who sees sins Now having commented at large upon these three heads because in them the most material and substantial part of the Contraversie did lay I shall in the next place proceed to consider the premisses that you lay out against us in your Phamphlet called the Seasonable Admonition taken from the Writings of Mr. Durham concerning Scandalous Divisions which Premisses I shall speak to in order as they lay Ye say we may and ought to endeavour Union though there be many things defective This likewise I acknowledge for no perfection is to be obtained Heir on Earth 1. But first you say Though there be differences of Judgments in many things namely in such things as are consistent with the Foundation and Edification It may be interrogat what Sins can consist with the Foundation I Answer Personal sins sins of ignorance infirmity deadness in wanting Zeal and Courage But no wilful deliberat contented sin that 's obstinatly defended nourished and maintained can be said to consist with the Foundation And that because the Attributâ— and Properties of dutie are given unto it which properly belongs to the Foundation So that here Durham understands sins of ignorance of duty because he saith Mens understandings are not perfect nor of equal reach Now ignorance or simple infirmity can never be cause of Seperation Seing Separation consists either in Defect or else in Excess Now it cannot be said That a Man in
drawn up by Mr. Cargill in the Year 1680 where we do declare that we shall set up over our selves and over what God shall give us power of Government and Governours according to the Word of God and especially to that word Exod. 18 21 viz. That we shall no more commit the Government of our selvs to one single Person or lineal Succession That is Monarchy Government But the Government we incline to is a Common Wealth but whether ARISTOCRATICAL or DEMOCRATICAL or a mixture of both we will not at present determine We seing that Monarchie is very lyable to incoveniences and apt to degenâ—rat into Tyranny as long and sad experience has taught us this flowing from the natures humours and inclinations of the People and especially the Nobility who hitherto has driven Kings to Tyarnnie insinuating themselves in their favours by their makeing a Sacraâ—ice of the Lands rights and Liberties to them that thereby they may partake of the spoill of the Poor subjects of which we can give innumerable and sure inflances But that we may see that if their be any thing that stands in our way of changeing rhis Goverment There are but two things that seemeth to have weight 1 First if the deed and obligation of our Ancestors can bind us to Monarchie Government by lineall or hereditary Succession 2 Secondly if it be in the power of people to choise any form or kind of Government that they please Now as to the first I say the contract and Obligation of the fathers simply considered as an Obligation of the fathers can never bind the posterity and that because a Contract or Covenant is called by POLITITIANS Vinculum peâ—sonarum that 's to say a bond of persons Now the Children not yet existing cannot be said to be Agents in this bond neither can it bind them seeing all men are born free that is to say with the free exercise of reason to choise that which is good and to refuse what is evil I say all our Oâ—ligation flows ex natura rei that 's to say from the nature of the thing in so far as that Obligation tends to the glory of God and saftie of the Kingdom in preserving maintaing and carrying on of Religion and vertue in the Land in this we are bound this being the chief and principle end of all our Actions But on the other hand when this end cannot be obtained Then are we free from the Contract and Obligation of the Fathers this Contract being conditional so that now it is loosed and that ex natura rei Secondly If it be in the power of the People to choise any form or kind of Government that they please That 's most for the good of the Land and safety of the Kingdom It is affirmed First The reason is because we are not bound to Monarchy Government and lineal Succession by a Divine Precept as the Hebrews were for this was Typical of Christ and promised to them from Gen. 49. 10. The Scepter shall not depart from Juda nor a Lawgiver from between his Feet until Shiloh come Now from their Example it cannot be proven that we are tyed to that particular kind of Government Otherwise if by their example this had been then should it have â—yed every individual Kingdom to this kind of Government But the contrair is seen and also taught by all found jurists For People are to choise any kind of Government that they see most convenient for the nature of the People and saftie of the Kingdom in which Religion and vertue may most flourish and grow Secondly All sound Polititians acknowledges that under the Yoak of Tytanny the People may either change the Government or the Family Now the Family is only to be changed where Monarchy suits well with the Kingdom But alas by sad experience the contrair has been seen in Scotland yeâ— unto this day how that Kings has been encouraged and driven on to absolute power and Tyranny by corrupt Noblemen I mean such as Pensioners who partake with them in the spoil of the poor Subjects So that from this experienced Misery it is most convenient to change the Government according to the Judgment of all sound Polititians 2. Moreover in the next place we declare That these Governours that we contend for Shall be able Men such as fear God Men of Truth hating covetousness as in Exod 18 21 Ilay their Qualifications principally are contained in these three things 1 That they be Men of sound principles 2. That they be such as exercise themselves in Gâ—dliness viz. In praying and Meditating on Gods Word seeking counsel and direction from him otherwise they will never be fit for Government 3. That they be free of scandal that 's to say that they be lying under no known sin without Repentance And that these Men whom we shall set over us shall be engaged to govern us principally by that civil and judicial Law we mean not that Law which is Ceremonial and Typical given by God to his People Israel and that we shall be governed by that Law in matters of Life and Death and in all other things alâ—o so far as they reach and are consisting with our Christian liberty established in all Christindom c. Moreover as to the electing of these Governours or Judges that are invested with the Qualifications abovementioned who are to be put in principal places of great and weighty business in the Land such we say are to be chosen by lots And to be gone about by prayer and fasting as our manner was in the year 80 for no other way can better remove envy ambition and contention among a People then this way can do Now I think from the Grounds and Reasons abovementioned it will appear That the Government we have chosen is the only â—itest Government And likewise that the Qualifications of the governours are agreeable to Gods word and consequently to his will and therefore to be embraced by all these who desires the safetie and wellbeing of the Kingdom Therefore I shall lay down three considerations as motives flowing from the miseries of choising any other kind of Government or Governours than what we have espoused First I say to these who contends to have one King with England let such consider the Miseries that will follow upon this choise and let these be grounds and motives to diswade any wellwisher to the Kingdom from embracing of them 1. As to matters of Religion consider the corruptions of that Kingdom by reason of the prevailing power of Prelacie rooted in that Land and the small inclination that the Presbyterian Partie hath to a Lands Reformation by Covenant Vows and Engagments in order to cast out Prelacie So that by this neglect the prelatick Partie are strong in power which makes their Kings Jeroboam like comply with them thinking they cannot possess the Crown and Kingdom if they do not so Now Scotland having cast off Prelacie and sworn against it can never embrace
ought in such a great work to qualifie themselves by entring â—n Covenant with God according to â—he Example of the Lords People in former times as in 2 Kings 11. 17. And Jehojada made a Covenant between the Lord and the King and the People that they should be the Lords People So that from this you see That a Covenanted Land ought to renew their Covenant with God in such a work as this I say both King and People if they expect the Lords presence and blesâ—ing But if otherwayes they do not this then may they expect that chalenge in Hoseâ— 8. 4. They have set up Kings but not by me they have mude Princes and I knew it not That is not by my direction and approbation As if the Lord had said Ye never sought my council in this neither did come before me with confession of sin and Humiliation for your defection In order to leave your sin and cleave to a Covenanted work of Râ—formation And therefore saith the Lord I know it not that 's to say I have no affection to it so as to approve it and when the Lord disproves why should Man approve for certainly where there is no just right or title to a Crown then it may be expected that That Government and these Governours are full of Misery and of short continuance according to that triplicat threatning Ezek 21 27 I will overturn overturn overturn it and it shall be no more until he come whose right it is and I will give it him So I say we cannot acknowledge these Rulers to be lawful or yet lawfully chosen so long as the Covenant is laid aside And therefore from the consideration of this the Oath of Allegiance must be unlawful and that both according to Scripture and our Fundamental Laws The Fourth reason is because he cannot take the Coronation Oath as he is now stated being invested with Prelacy according to our Fundamental Laws Kings are to Swear to maintain the true Religion of Christ Jesus the which Religion is Presbyterian Government in it's power and purity And also shall gainstand and abolish all false Religion contrair to the same under which false Religion Antichristian Prelacy is comprehended which I think the great Assembly will not deny True it is in the Year â—6 the Coronation Oath was proposed to the Person on the Throne being sent by the hand of a privat Person to take but whether or no taken it may be doubted seing he walks contrair thereto by denying all practical obedience But however the sin is greater in breach thereof both by the Taker and Proposers of this Oath than it had never been and that I prove from Scripture Eccles 5. 5. Better is it that thou shouldest not Vow than that thou shouldest Vow and not Pay Now in the breach of this Oath there is a silent contended resting thereon by both Parties without Exhortation or Admonition from the one or endeavour after obedience in the other Is not an lawful Oath seriously to be performed seing that the the taker finds it to be a duty And therefore to be gone about as in Eccles 9. 10. Whatsoever thine hand findeth to do do it with thy might Now if he shall with full power and might maintain Presbyterian Government then Prelacy shall get no aid nor assistance And I hope the Assembly will acknowledge that Prelacie is no where to be Entertained and that the maintainers thereof are Enemies to the Crown and Kingdom of Christ So that it is not enough to countinance Presbytrie now in its shadow or yet I say in its substance in Scotland unless that it be countinanced both in England and Ireland according to the Tenor of the Coronation Oath which is to abolish and gainstand all false Religion and therefore Popery is no where to be Tolerated But in this Revolution there is a Toleration of false Religion and therefore the present Person on the Throne can neither be owned as a lawful King nor yet be looked upon as a faithful Instrument of Reformation Seing he sends out contrair streams from the same Fountain to thir Kingdoms Now according to the Judgment of the Assembly if it shall be yealded that this is a deliverance and libertie yet it is contradictorie to Scripture as in James 3. 11 Doth a Fountain at the same place send forth sweet Water and bitter This the Apostle denys so I say can streams of Liberty and Blessedness proceed from your King to Scotland and bondage and Thraldom to England and Ireland Certainly no our Liberty can never be purchassed with our Brethrens and Neighbours Thraldom And now let this liberty be never so large in this Land yet if it be not universall throughout the whole Kingdoms in its sincere endeavour to the maintaing of Presbytrie to the abolishing of all false Religion contrair to the same then it cannot be said that the Coronation Oath is in the least observed to one more than to another for all comes under his Toleration And so by consequence this Oath is made null and therefore no Subject neither Minister nor People can Swear Allegiance to him without involving themselves in Perjurie and Breach of the Fundamental Laws But some will object and say That the Covenants and Coronation Oath doth not engage us to reform without the Kingdom Answer Yeild it be so yet it binds us to reform our selves and King 1. Our selves in that we are not to suffer any Prelatick Person or favourer thereof oâ— Conniver at any false Religion to be set upon the Throne without being guilty either of direct or indirect complyance therewith I say direct complyance when there is a consenting and an aiding him in his upsetting without evident signs and qualifications for the Authority 2. Indirectly when there is a neglect of a Faithful Testimony against the sin which sin will if not prevented destroy the Soul because it is Rebellion and Enmity against Jesus Christ to entertain Antichristian Prelacy and Popery For what can one be said to be who owns Presbytrie if so it may be said in the one Kingdom and Antichristianism in the other but half Loyal to the Crown and Kingdom of Christ and a Person half Loyal is but at best an Enemy and so consequently becomes lyable to the Wrath and Justice of God And therefore it is the duty of a Faithful Assembly to forwarn the forementioned guilty person of his sin in order to make out of the way of Wrath Otherwise they will be guilty as in Ezek. 33. 9. When I say unto the Wicked Man thou shall surely die if thou doest not speak to warn the Wicked from his way that Wicked Man shall die in his iniquity but his Blood will I require at thine Hand So I say unless that there be Faithful warning given and that in Doctrine both as to Admonition and Exhortation and likewise to the highest degree of censure and Discipline in case of obstinacie Otherwayes we cannot be free of
this guilt nor yet be innocent from Perjurie seing that the King according to the Faith and Practise of the present professing Generation is a lawful King and nourishing Father to the Church and so by consequence is a Member of the Church and therefore Subject to the Laws thereof which I think the Assembly will not deny considering that his Mercies comes under their inspection as is to be seen by their praying for prosperity and a Blessing to his undertakings And why should not his sin and miserie llikewayes be marked and testified against or else we shall never reform our selves But some will object and say that the King has owned and countinanced Presbytrie in Scotland and declared Enmity against Prelacy Answer This he hath done by way of an Erastian Toleration and that from Self Interest as is to be seen Because they Tolerat his sin and becoâ—es obediâ—nt to his corrupt unlawful Commands by keeping of sinful Fast dayes and Thansgiving days and the like And that both contrair to Scripture and the principals of Presbytrie which the Prelatick party out of wilfulness will not do So that from this his Faithfulness doth not appear unless that his Zeal were universal against all the Prelatick party I say in other places as well as here For certainly it is to be followed with Zeal and hatred in the other Kingdoms as well as here it being evil in it self and according to that true Axiom quod Malum est per se non mutatur a Circumstantjis that 's to say That which is evil in it seâ—f cannot be changed from circumstances of place So I say unless that this Zeal be universal it can noways be sound and reall But it may be furder objected that there was good reforming Kings in Judah who did not take away the high places And why may nâ—t our King be owned as a Lawful Reforming King although Prelacy be not altogether abolished Answer The difference is very great As 1 The Reforming Kings of Judah were never Anointted or brought to the Throne by the Priests of the High places But your king was brought to the Throne of Britan principaly by the English Prelats the Lords spritwall as they were called 2 the priests of the high places were never in court or near to the Thâ—one with the Reforming king of Judah But the English Prelats are 3 the kings of Judah never bult the high places in the time of their Reformation but your king hes set up Prelats in England since his coming to the Throne I instance Mr Gilbert Burnet 4 we never read that the kings of Judab Sacrificed in the high places in the time of their Reformation But your king heares and communicats with the prelatick party in worship 5 the Reforming kings of Judah did never swear to defend the high places in the time of their Reformation by opposing and hindering these that would have destroyed them But your King has Defended the high places for the past and present time from these that would have destroyed them So that from this you see that your Kings practise doth nowayes quadrat with the practise of the Reforming Kings of Judah And that because in them it was a sin of deadness and infirmity But in him a willful deliberat contented sin as is to be seen by the laying aside the endeavour of the duty and much more the Perfection thereof in its sincerity Furder you say do we not think him our lawful King and is he not a blessed Instrument in Gods Hand to work so great Deliverance for you and us Answer This we have clearly denyed from the forementioned grounds and objections and we think any single eye that is not by assed and prejudged will assent to what we have said And if any be of that judgment which I am not viz That it might please the Lord for a time to continue Kingly Government in this Land and to raise up a King to rule in Righteousness for the good of his Church and People I say then it might be expected that he should be set upon the Throne with cleaner hands than Blood shedors Test-takers and Erasâ—â—an Indulged Proffessors who hath never yet acknowledged their sin Nor yet prepared themselves for Mercy And whatever you may think of this Revolution in calling it a Deliverance Yet far be it from us to think so as to let such Dreams or Delusions enter into our Heads or Hearts seing there is no promise from the word to believe so Now from what is said above I think it shall appear that the Oath of Allegiance cannot not be given to the present Person on the Throne nor yet to any Successor who shall walk in his steps For what is applicable to the one shall still be applicable to any other of the same practise Now I shall in the next place proceed to the Grievance given against you which is â—hat there is corruption in the Constitution as it is now established being under the bondage of an Erastian Yoak submitted to Which charge you deny as false And then interrogates if we know what Erastianism is It is likely you say few of us do Ans Some of us knows as much of Erastianism as can be said by some of the most famous Learned Divines in Europe And I think our Faithful Ancestors hath not leâ—t this contraversie in the dark as is to be seen by Learned Mr. Gilhespie in his Aarons Rod where he penteth out Erastianism so full as that the capacities of the Vulgar may understand Furder you say do we noâ— consider how sinful and highly uncharitable it is to Accuse Judge and Censure the Godly Ministers of this Church who formerly wrestled against Erastianism as so contradictorie to themselves and Treacherous to their Master as to betray his Interest and the Church Priviledges to an Erastian Yoak Ans This is no argument to prove that they are now Faithful because that they once were so Are not the best of Men subject to sin and fallings And can do nothing of our selves without the Lords Assistance and the help of his holy Spirit And hath not some of the Godlie Kings of Judah Built again that which formerly they Destroyed as Solomon Asa Joash and hath not many Professors in our days walked contrair to their Profession They who once were Remonstrators formerly against Erastianism were seen publiklie to appear in the Street of Edinburgh in the Parliament Closs to the derision oâ— many hundreds puting up an Address and Supplication to a Poâ—ish King for an Erastian Toleration and Lioertie as they called it Now this was the sin of a great many which sin hath been Benjamin like Espoussed by the whole Assembly First in their complying with the Benefite as they called it and then being passed over with silence connivance which should have been confessed Yea and in a well constitute Church should have been Censured and Punished with the Sword of Ecclesiastical Discipline But with you there is