Selected quad for the lemma: kingdom_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A50970
|
The case of the afflicted clergy
|
G. M.
|
1691
(1691)
|
Wing M22; ESTC R217340
|
91,229
|
99
|
Paragraph I make a few Remarks 1. If he mean that we cannot so submit to Laws inconsistent with Presbytery as to give active Obedience to them or that we should do what is inconsistent with it he maketh a right conjecture But it importeth no more than this that we Act by a Principle and are not so Unconscientious as to do what is contrary to our Sentiments if other men glory either in their having no Principle in the matter of Church Government or that they can yield over the Belly of Conscience to promote their Interest or to gain the favour of Men we think such Glorying is not good But if he mean that we cannot so submit to Laws contrary to Presbytery as to live quietly under them To suffer patiently by them when we cannot obey them It is a manifest slander For we gave sufficient proof of that under the late Reigns And if any were unquiet under their sufferings the rest who were the far greatest part are not to be blamed 2. Our Author and his Party have very generous Consciences which it seemeth are influenced by no other Law but the King and Parliaments Opinion that such a thing is for the good of the Monarchy and the Kingdom Men of such Principles can easily save their Interest what ever side be uppermost 3. Seeing they pretend to so supple Consciences I fain would know why they do not comply with Presbytery seeing now the King and Parliament have owned and enacted it as that which is for the good of the Monarchy and the Kingdom Here is a plain declaration that those men can have no plea for a Toleration to be granted them or any Exemption from the Government now by Law established for their Consciences cannot be straitned in this matter And therefore there can be no Imaginable reason for a Toleration But either Humour or a design to carry on an Interest contrary to the present Establishment which I hope our Rulers will consider 4 ly He argueth with his Highness from The aversion that England must have to unite with Scotland if Presbytery be set up there To this I answer two things 1 st If the interest of Religion have more weight with us than that of the State as surely it will when that promise is fulfilled that the Mountain of the Lords house shall be set on the top of the Mountains this reason will be of no force It is better that England and Scotland be two different Nations yet living as Sisters in concord than that the Institutions of Christ should be thwarted that they be made one 2 dly It may be thought strange that England should refuse to unite with Scotland in their Civil concernment because Scotland cannot yield to them in that which concerneth God and their Consciences may not two Nations trade together and be Governed by the same Laws and yet bear with one another as to their Church ways But he enforceth this his Argument by two considerations one is Episcopacy is acknowledged to be the best Bulwark against Popery I know this is the Fancy of some who are Bigotted to that way but on what ground or who acknowledgeth this beside themselves I know not The other is Scotland is Sworn by the Covenant to extirpate Episcopacy in England Answ The Covenant obligeth to no such thing unless England call them to their Assistance The Covenant setteth Limits to mens Actings by their Station If Scotland should meddle with Englands Church Government without their call they should Act beyond their Station § 6. He next p. 8. giveth a Testimony to the Moderation of some Presbyterians which some of his party will not own and the strain in the whole of his discourse seemeth to contradict He is willing that they should have an Indulgence but that they have prepared an address for the extinction of Prelacy This we own But his Inference is strange viz. Therefore they can be subject to no Law and the Covenant tho Illegal and Irreligious must be their Rule This is strange Logick from the Mouth of a Champion of that party which pretendeth to have monopolized learning to it self If Prelacy be extirpated by a Law and Presbytery be by Law established as through the mercy of God now it is cannot Presbyterians be subject to that Law And I have already shewed how we can be subject even to other Laws It is also an unaccountable Inference that the Covenant which he most wickedly reproacheth must be the Rule if Presbytery be settled He may know that Presbyterians have no other Rule in their Church Administrations than the Scripture And if any thing in the Covenant can be made appear contrary to that they are ready to disown it For what he saith of our Address it shall be after considered The last thing that he representeth to the Prince is That the difference betwixt the Episcopal men in Scotland and the Presbyterians is but small They having neither Liturgy nor Ceremonies more than the Presbyterians have We are not for widening the difference but would bring it to as narrow a compass as may be Yet we must not tell untruths as this Author doth to deceive them who know not our affairs by representing Agreement where really it is not For the difference betwixt us and them is irreconcileable without the yielding of one Party while they are for the Jurisdiction of one Minister over the rest and we are for a Parity among them He saith Their Bishops are in the place of our Moderators whom we have sometimes confessed may be constant Ans This we cannot yield Our Moderator hath no Jurisdiction yea no Vote unless where there is an equality The Bishop hath a negative Vote For our Moderator being constant it is contrary to our practice yea our Opinion is that whatever Lawfulness be in it it is so highly inexpedient that we can never yield to it He saith the Presbyters have a free Vote in the Bishops Election Nothing can be more false Is not the Bishop named by the King And was it ever allowed that the Person whom the King had named should be passed by and another chosen where is then the freedom of Vote He saith the Bishops Govern only by Presbyteries and Synods The contrary is known to every one The Bishop taketh their Counsel when he pleaseth not else The grounds for complaint and separation from them such as we made I have above discoursed § 7. He bringeth as a Foundation of most of his discourse against us a Paper that he calleth the Presbyterians Address from Scotland to the Prince of Orange On most passages of it he hath some quibling observes more like a Bouffoon than a Disputant If the paper were ours I should not think his reparties worthy of an answer They are so purely either trifling or railing but the best of it is he hath pickt up a paper to which either he or some Body else hath given that Title But it is none of ours nor was
Reformers Luther Calvin Knox c. Not only so but abundance of Lies are inter-spersed in the narrative of the tumult at the high Church Feb. 17. As that a pernicious Rout surrounded the Church It was only a few Women stood in the Church Door That the Magistrates went to the Church with the Minister is false For only Baily Gibson was there That these Women or any else assaulted the Minister or People is false for his party were the first Aggressors It is also false that 600 of the best quality in Town entered the Church without Arms For there were not in all above 200 and not 40 of such quality and they or many of them were armed with Pistols Swords Clubs with Nails in the ends of them c. It is false that the Ministers party suffered such things as he saith For most and they of the best quality who were there do acknowledge that no such thing was done to them but that the Presbyterians conveyed them home in safety Likewise what is said of their respect to the Prince of Orange's Declaration is a lying pretence for it is well known they have never shewed any respect to him nor to his Government but the contrary is apparent in their whole Conduct It is also to be considered that the Witnesses brought to attest the Story are not competent James Gibson was a party and made a Baily by the Archbishop and all knew the Prelates Inclinations towards the present Civil Government John Gilhagie is lookt on by all as a Foolish and Rash Man who little considereth what he doth Patrick Bell and his Brother were soon after seized for Treasonable practices were long in Prison and are now under Bail The truth in opposition to his lying Story is this The Episcopal Ministers in the Town being thrust from their Churches by the Rabble before the Government was setled the Provost Walter Gibson who had been chosen by the Archbishop made a paction with the Presbyterians for preventing Confusion That the Keys of all the Churches should be deposited in the hands of two Men till the Convention of Estates should determine in the matter instead of this he being absent may be of purpose his Brother Baily Gibson hired a Company of Ruffians armed as is above exprest who with one Minister a simple Man whom they prevailed with went to the Church and found forty Women in the Door fell on them and sadly wounded thirty two of them in a most Barbarous manner The noise of this raised some of the Hill-men who were in Town who beat Drums and got to Arms this occasioned the scattering of the Meeting-houses who were quietly hearing the Word some of the Sober Presbyterians dealt with the Hill-men and endeavoured an Accommodation Only some of the Friends of the Women who had been Wounded could not be restrained from Violence But what they did was nothing like what the Women had suffered The Actors in this Tragedy who beat and wounded the Women were James Gibson Bailey John Bell Commissar Robertson George Robertson and his two Sons John Robertson John Wat 〈◊〉 Inglis Patrick Bell James Marshel John Coats John Filshill John Paterson 〈◊〉 Horn John Aitkin Alexander Aitkin James Lies's two Sons James Robertson The Names of the Women who were Wounded and many of them hardly cured are Mrs. Maxwel Mary Fleckfield Marion Ewin Agnes Rodger Agnes Allan Elizabeth Linning Janet Loudoun Margaret Dalgliesh Bessie Jackson Janet Castellaw Janet Fleeming Janet Robertson Margaret Inglis Marion Finlaw Janet Kid Janet Brand Christian Lang Janet Wood Mrs. Mill Janet Howie Margaret Lin Catherine Lin Isabel Paterson Janet Young Margaret Anderson Margaret Corse Bessie Fleeming Grissel Brown Bessie Marshel Janet Shearer Margaret Steven Some of them are not recovered to this day now after two years They all have suffered patiently and wait for a hearing of their Cause by a competent Judge as was promised them all this was sufficiently attested before John Leckie then Bailie § 6. In p. 7. and 8 Of the Narrative he telleth us that instead of calling these Hill-men to an account for their disorders these very men coming Armed to Edinburgh had the thanks of the House given them for their good service and are still a part of the standing Forces of that Kingdom This he insisteth farther upon in the fourth Collection of passages page 90 91. where he setteth down the Act of the Convention Where he also asserts that they Acted contrary to the Laws of Religion Humanity and of Nations the Laws of this Kingdom and the Princes Declaration in driving out the Clergy being in number about 800 Overawed and Threatned the Electors of Members for the Convention rushed in a tumultuary and hostile manner into Edinburgh c. And this before they were under the Earl of Leven ' s Command hence he is bold to condemn the Acts of the Estates approving of them Here I observe a few things referring the Reader to the Answer to Account of Persecution c. Letter 1. § 8. 1. it cannot be made appear That that Body of Men Acted what he imputeth to the Rabble yea it is evidently false for he saith they were 8000 and in military order The Rabble were scattered Companies sometimes not above ten or twelve or forty or an hundred and that under no fixed command if there were some among them who came to Edinburgh who also were the Rabble 't is not to be wondered at for it is often so in Armies that are in hostile opposition one to another 2. That they were in Arms against Law is false For they were called by the Authority of the States as their Guard when their Enemies had gathered a Formidable party into Edinburgh 3. That they hindered the Election of Members for the Convention is also false Himself and Complices in their accounts of these Elections assign causes of such Members being chosen inconsistent with this Force viz. The negligence of their party But Oportet mendacem esse bene memorem 4. Tho' they were together before the Earl of Leven got the Command yet not before they were called together by the Estates 5. That they affronted either the Bishops or the Nobility is more than can be made out Or that I have heard from any good hand 6. That these Men are part of the standing Forces of the Kingdom tho' there were no absurdity if it were so is false They were totally disbanded a Regiment was indeed raised in that Countrey a long time after And new Officers were set over them And if any of the same Men were listed Souldiers it was accidental But it is well known that that Regiment hath done more Service to the King and Countrey than others have done What followeth page 18. deserveth but a little Animadversion he saith the Clergy suffered patiently without publick complaint This and the other Pamphlets are witnesses to the contrary Could Men complain more publickly more unjustly or more pathetically and maliciously than they do