that in England the King whether from Light or Interest I do not judge begun a half Reformation And Royal Authority enlightned the Minds of the people I speak not of all but of the Multitude but in Scotland Light from the Word of God did move first the People then the Great Ones and they prevailed with the King at last Zealously to own the Truth of God Yea and to defend it in Print 3. That the Government of the Church of England was suited to the Monarchy that is as I suppose he meaneth framed by a suitableness to the Monarchy as the Standard of it is not its commendation For that is to make it a humane Contrivance or worldly Policy brought into the Church of Christ over which he is the Head and which is to be governed by his Laws Whereas the Government of the Church of Scotland was contrived by the Word of God as the Standard of it yet was it as much suited to the Monarchy as that of England could be That is it gave and giveth to the King all that power in the State that our Laws gave him And all that Authority over the Church that is due to any Man on Earth The Abettors of it preach and practise as much Obedience and Subjection to Kings as others do and can vie in Loyalty with their Accusers as shall after be observed 4. I do not understand how our present Animosities about Church Government should depend on the one way being suited to the Monarchy and the other not seeing this Author as well as his opposites really are doth highly pretend to be not only for the Monarchy but for the present Monarch King William But either he hath a latent Meaning which hath much Truth in it or he hath hit on the Truth by guess as Cajaphas did viz. That our Animosities about Church Government arise mainly from the different Inclinations that are in the two parties toward the Monarchy as now established in the Persons of our Gracious King William and Queen Mary The strain both of their Writings and Actings make it evident that with him the Interest of King James and that of Prelacy are linked together And their Zeal for the one filleth them with Spite and Animosity against what is opposite to the other And whoso considereth the strain of this Pamphlet will find that the Zeal that this Scribler pretendeth to for King William is expressed usually under the general Notion of the Monarchy which may be understood of either of two Monarchies What he saith that Buchannan and others wrote Books that were condemned for Treason is no Argument For that which by one party is condemned for Treason by another party when they have got the Ascendent hath been absolved as not guilty of that Crime That the Puritans vexed King James VI. is no further true than that they could not yield to the endeavours of some evil Counsellers about him for overturning the Setled Government of the Church and encroaching on its Rights It is true He at last got Episcopacy setled by the help of some both in State and Church who were either none of the best Protestants or had their worldly Designs in promoting that way but still our Author owneth on the matter that the Word of God was not consulted in this weighty Concernment of the Church But only his fancied suitableness to the Monarchy and Conformity to England The account he giveth of putting down Episcopacy afterwards and setting up of Presbytery is neither like a Christian nor like a Historian It is perfect railing while he calleth the Nobles that had a hand in it Ambitious and Factious the Gentry Priest-ridden and blind Zealots the Preachers Enthusiasticks The War that he mentioneth is by all Posterity to be lamented but Men as able to discern as he have laid the blame of it on Episcopal Tyranny and Usurpation and their making many steps toward Popish Doctrine as well as Discipline He next giveth account of the Solemn League and Covenant entered into without the Royal Authority calling Parliaments c. These things were done by the Body of the Nation met in the most orderly representative that the time and case could permit And I deny not but that they were extraordinary Actings not to consider now the Morality of them But let this Gentleman freely tell us whether his Episcopal party be capable of Courses parallel to these which he so exposeth The Presbyterians under the conduct of the Primores Regni arose against their King in defence of their Religion and Laws did not the Prelatick party the same and on the same account They were indeed all for Loyalty and Non-resistance while the Royal Authority supported their greatness and power over their Brethren but when seven of their Bishops were touched it proved another case like that in Ployden if we be guilty in this they are not the Men who should cast the first Stone at us For Barbarities committed by the Presbyterians in these times I know of none but what are the necessary consequents of a War But this Man and his Associates have no other Dialect whereby to express their dislike of the Actings of the opposite party He accuseth them with a Bloody Mouth of what hath been a thousand times refuted as a horrid Lie That the Scots Presbyterians did persidiously give up their King to the English who Murdered him He was the King of the English as well as theirs and they could not withhold him from them And gave him into their hands on as good security as could be for his safety and if others dealt perfidiously with him they are not to be blamed for it He hath a hint as if Episcopacy had been setled by King Charles the Second because the Presbyterians refused all conditions of peace and pardon And for the Monarchies sake The former of these is a great untruth they never refused peace nor pardon but would gladly have imbraced both Only they could not buy them at the rate of Perjury Tho' they never refused to disown any Principles that were indeed Rebellious Their preaching up Rebellion in their Conventicles is false They both preached and practised Loyalty Only after many grievous and insupportable hardships suffered for their Conscience some few of them were prevailed upon by that Temptation to vent some Principles that the more Sober and Intelligent were not satisfied with That punishing them who were taken in Rebellion is all the severity complained of is a Notorious Falshood as all the Nation know and I have above disproved it § 3. From these so well laid Foundations he proceedeth p. 5. to give His Highness some Advices if they may not more properly be called Directions The first That the Prince being come to support our Laws is in Honour bound to support Episcopacy which is confirmed by twenty Parliaments This is Saucy enough As if His Majesty had Acted against his Honour now that Episcopacy is not supported That Episcopacy is
it agreed to by the Presbyterians or presented to his Highness We did indeed present an Address if he hath any thing to say against that we shall consider the strength of what he shall say But for this paper it is not only not our Address but hardly can two papers aiming at the same thing and on the same subject have less agreement in matter or words than it hath with our Address What he saith to fix this paper on us p. 23. Is a heap of lies viz. That this Address was agreed to and subscribed in our publick Meeting at Edinburgh That hearing that the Prince had Communicated with the Church of England we demurred sending of it Not one word of all this is true These men have taught their tongues and their pens too to speak and write Lies Whence this Paper came I cannot conjecture unless it was drawn by some member of the Meeting and presented to them but not approved For I know that several Draughts were privately made and out of them was that taken which was sent and which we own Upon this consideration I shall wholly pass over all that he saith on that pretended Address and suffer him to fight with his own shaddow Another most impudent untruth he asserteth also p. 23. that at London our Commissioners desired some Persons of Quality to subscribe our Address and would not allow them to read it till they should Sacredly promise to subscribe and this he saith some of these Persons themselves told him We were so far from that that we never refused a reading of it to any who desired it Yea we gave it to be read by several Persons of quality of whose subscribing it we had no hope § 8. He next giveth the Presbyterians a few good Words He would not be Cruel to them but pitty them as deluded He shall have a meeting from us in both these He would allow them Indulgence but yet he requireth That they should let other Protestants live too That they should yield to such Accommodation as the Learned Protestants abroad are not against That they should not abhor the Communion and practices of the other Reformed Churches That they think themselves not bound to Persecute those of the Church of England We can easily yield to all these postulata sano Sensu For the 1 st We not only let other Protestants live but the People we admit to our Communion in all Ordinances the Ministers we suffer to Preach and enjoy their livings where there are no personal Scandals to hinder it Yea such of the Ministers as will secure the Church Government we admit to manage it with us and to all Ministerial Communion For the second we know there are Learned Protestants abroad who are for toleration to Arminians Socinians and what not We cannot be for such Accommodation but we differ not from the Generality of the Churches and Learned Men abroad in this Matter For the third We do not abhor the Communion of any of the Churches abroad in their Administrating the Ordinances of Christ But we know that some Reformed Churches have practices that we cannot approve and in these practices we can have no Communion with them For the fourth we look on our selves under no tie nor Capacity neither to persecute those of the Church of England Nor do we persecute any of them We leave them to stand or fall to their own Master He now p. 26. cometh very magisterially to require security from us that we will not by our Sentences counter-act the Decrees of the Supreme Civil Judicatories and that we disclaim that absolute Supremacy or Papacy that the Kirk hath always claimed over Kings and Civil Power Ans Tho we owe no such subjection to this Author as to give him Security in this Yet when ever our Rulers shall demand it of us we are willing to give all Security And we disown any power to counteract the Decrees of our Rulers And all Supremacy or Papacy over Kings further than that the Church and every Minister in Her hath a Ministerial power to declare the Laws of Christ not to make new ones of their own and that all men High and Low ought to submit to these Laws and obey them And whoever will not obey them fall under the Displeasure of our great Lord and Master Yet that we do not withdraw Subjection nor due respect nor obedience in all things Lawful from these Rulers who do break the Laws of Christ According to our Confession of Faith Chap. 23. Sect. 4. For the instance he giveth of a sad difference that fell in between the King and the Church It was in a time when the People and their Representatives did also contend with the King And that in a Bloody War And things run to an undue height on all hands The Presbyterians maintain no such Principle as he alledgeth of the Infallibility of the General Assembly as he saith p. 29. Nor of a Supremacy over Kings Charity will Bury what is past but spite and malice endeavoureth to dig it out of its Grave and present it in the most odious dress and every one should for time to come Labour to serve God in the Station that he hath set him in The outrages against his Party that he chargeth us with cannot be made out except what was done by the Rabble in an Interregnum and the Actors were none of our Communion If he had mentioned in particular the Libels against the Government which he blameth in General we could have enquired into them and told our thoughts of them But I may adventure to say that nothing ever came out from among us that contained either so heavy or so unjust complaints against the Government in the late Reigns nor did so tend to raise the very Foundations of that settlement as the multiplied Libels of his Party do by the Government which now is What remains is so pure Railing that it admitteth of no other answer but to brand the whole of it with this motto that it is void of Truth and Honesty And to his hopes that he expresseth of the Worlds judging and the Princes Acting we oppose our confidence of the contrary of both and our Experience of the Latter to the Immortal Praise of the wisdom and goodness of our Gracious Monarch whose heart God hath inclined to favour our righteous Cause An Examination of the Historical Relation of the late General Assembly holden at Edinburgh from October 16th to November 13th 1690. SEveral wise men who have Read this Pamphlet think that the most fit refutation of it were as I said of another such piece to write on the Margin of every page Lies and Calumnies It is mafestly so unanswerable to its Title that no man can have a true Idea of that Venerable Assembly by Reading this Pamphlet The Author confesseth that he was not Eye or Ear Witness to what passed and all that he hath is at second Hand And that as it seemeth from
which the People after took out of the House in presence of his Brother and Man-servant without doing the least hurt to them § 4. Let us now consider the Letter which beginneth pag. 1. excluding what hath gone before He beginneth with taking notice that Episcopacy was abolished by the Parliament on account of its being contrary to the inclinations of the People and so may be restored by another Parliament But he should have considered that whatever motive the Estates went on it is declared against in the Claim of Right as a Grievance and therefore cannot be restored without overturning the Foundation of our present Civil Settlement That Presbytery was never Setled by Law except in times of trouble and danger to the State by the practices of that Party I have sufficiently refuted in my former Vindication on Quest 2. P. 11. He taketh notice of a three fold turning out of Ministers By the Rabble by the Convention of Estates and by the Council For the first he truly saith that it was no wonder being in the Interval of Government if he had added that it was done by a People rendred mad by the Oppressions of these Men who suffered from them he had done well but he thinketh strange that it was not redressed when the Government was Setled This is answered in answer to Account of Persecutions c. Next he giveth us an account of the disaffection of the Western Shires to Episcopacy of their compliance when Persecution grew hot Which we deny to have been so universal as he would have it Tho' I deny not that many put some force on their Light Also their complyances so far as to hear these men when they could hear none else is no Obligation on them to cleave to them as their Ministers Especially when opportunity was put in their Hands to hear others Wherefore it is no Imputation nor blame that when a Liberty was given for Meeting-houses they made use of that opportunity Neither are their Addresses to be blamed wherein they acknowledge the goodness of God and thank men for that Liberty which tho' their due had been detained from them Tho' his Wise men told them that the Liberty was granted to bring in Popery Yet as Wise men as they thought that the best way to keep it out was to make use of the Liberty for setting people in the right way and to beware of countenancing approving of or concurring in any thing that might promote Popery Such as owning the Dispensing Power which he most injuriously imputeth to them and concurring for taking away the Penal Laws against Popery But of these things I have sufficiently discoursed in my former Vindication as also of what followeth that there were few Meeting Houses at first But that this is a kind of Demonstration of the Inclinations of the People toward Episcopacy I see not nor understand what kind of Demonstration it is unlels it be a Paralogysm Next he giveth account of Two sorts of Presbyterians viz. Hill men as he calleth them and others And doth untruly and not without Malice against the Sober Presbyterians assert that the former acted more consequentially to Presbyterian principles The contrary of which is evident in this as in many more things that might be mentioned that two or three Preachers separated from all the rest of the Church and refused subjection to their Meetings § 5. In what followeth this Author dealeth more ingenuously than the former that I dealt with For he imputed the Rabling work to the Presbyterians in General this Man layeth it only on the Cameronians but even them he foully mis-representeth while he speaketh of their Eating and drinking plentifully at the expence of them whom they Rabled All the Reports that we have of them give account of their not Laying their hands on the Prey as it is said of the Jews after Haman's Persecution Esth 9. 15 16. But what is here asserted falsly in general we shall have after more particularly Where it shall be Examined In his Historical account of things that followeth page 6 th I have nothing to observe but that he prevaricateth in alledging the Prince of Orange's Declaration Feb. 6. 1689. Which only saith that every one shall enjoy the Opinion and forms of worship with the same freedom and in the same manner as they enjoyed it in October last But saith nothing of restoring any thing which they lost as he alledgeth but leaveth that to be done by regular and legal Methods That which followeth is an account of the tumult at Glasgow upon the Episcopal Ministers Reassuming the Pulpit after the Princes Declaration that none should disturb one another in matters of Religion This is more fully set down in his 2 d Collection of Papers P. 50. viz. That the Magistrates and Ministers Assembled and resolved that the Ministers should Preach Feb. 17. as was usual In order to this they by the chief Magistrate then in Town required the Captain of the Guard to lay down Arms as the declaration enjoyned He refused After this the People that used to meet in the Hills and they of the Meeting-houses whispered together about their Bloody Designs against the Minister and his People On the Sunday they hindered the ringing of some of the Bells They publickly threatned the People as they went to Church they pursued a Minister who escaped by going into a House The Magistrates going to Church found it Surrounded by a Rabble whom they desired to go home in peace but they Railed at the Magistrates and assaulted them with Staves and Battons gave a blow to John Bell one of the late Baillies the Magistrates ordered the Towns Servants and Officers to beat off the Rabble and so went into the Church in time of Sermon the pretended Captain of the Guard came into the Church crying aloud that the Town was in Arms Toward the end the Rabble conducted by the Laird of Carsland fired into it A Boy was wounded in the Face they brake open the Doors searched for the Parson and found him They refuse to go home when the Magistrates required them They took the People out of Church by fours and fives and exposed them to the fury of the Rabble Many were Wounded and Rudely treated and not a few Persons of some note This Narrative which I have abridged but not altered is signed by James Gibson Baillie John Gilhagie Patrick Bell. For answer to all this it is in the 1 st place to be considered that little Faith is to be given to his Assertions and that on two accounts one is the lying Stories that he had told of the People of Glasgow Page 39. 40. As that on Thursday January 17. 1689. The Minister did not enter into the Church Also what is said about Mr. Alexander George is false They did no more but search for the Keys of the Church Door and tore his Gown Which we do not approve They had been provoked by his Railing in a Sermon against our
He saith also that some of them suffered the loss of Children which is above made appear to be false in the only instance that was brought That they suffered without any Authority is not denied because then there was no Authority in the Nation It was in a state of Anarchy For the right that he saith they have to their by-past Stipends we shall not grudge that they get what was legally due to them But if the Authority of the Nation in the Convention or Parliament have determined otherwise I know not where their Legal right can be founded but this I leave to Lawyers to consider § 7. The fulsome and flattering Expressions in the Presbyterian Address to King James for their Liberty their approving of the Dispensing Power which he taxeth page 9. are his own imaginations other Men can see no such thing in that Address That they never preached against the disorders of the Rabble is false Though we thought not fit to make that our constant Theme And if but few did it it was because they who were Actors in that Scene little regarded the preaching of the sober Presbyterians And they should have lost their sweet Words These practices of the Rabble were publickly spoken against by Ministers both before they were acted for preventing them and after for reproving them and preventing the like That the Presbyterians possessed their places when called to them it was their Right both by their standing Relation to their people from whom they had been thrust away in Anno 1662. And also by the Act of Parliament giving all Ministers then put out regress to their Charges And indeed they who had been by the Bishops put into their places were Intruders and if any entered to other places on the Call of the people to which they had not such former Relation there was no blame because there being no probable regress for the former Incumbents it was not reasonable that the people should continue destitute of the Gospel Beside that there was never a Relation of Pastor and people between them and these Flocks they never having consented to such a Relation For what he saith of the Right of Patrons I think there were but few Ministers Fixed before it was legally made void And if they were we think that Right was only founded on the Law but was contrary to Christs Institution And it was known to be about expiring and therefore it was not contrary to a good Conscience to accept of a Call to a people without the Patron It is true in that Case they could have no Right to the Stipend But the Consent of Minister and people the Authority of a competent Church Judicatory being interposed could well fix a Relation between Minister and People without the Patron He doth next fall heavily on the Convention of Estates for these Men hide not their Treasonable Speeches against the present Government of the State That it is no wonder that many thought that the Design of some who were zealous for the Revolution was more to destroy the Episcopal Clergy than to settle the Nation or preserve our Religion Liberties and Properties This I leave to them to Answer who have power to correct such petulancy He further lasheth the Convention and the Council for their Acts with respect to the Ministers cast out in the Western Shires Neither shall I meddle with him on this Head He hath not yet done with our Rulers But blameth them for the Proclamation for Praying for King William and Queen Mary And punishing Men for not obeying it so suddenly This I have answered on Letter 2. Sect. 17. All that followeth to page 14. is already answered in the forecited place Only he hath a new Argument in Defence of them who did not read or pray viz. That the Proclamation was not sent to them from the Bishops As if the Estates could not imploy what Officers they pleased to Authorize for signifying their Mind to the Ministers page 14. Even the King shall not escape his Censure because while he extended Clemency to Criminals he did not so to the Clergy Who were neither willing to obey his Commands nor pray for him nor so much as own Him for their King And it is indeed an Act of Clemency which few Kings ever shewed to allow such to be in publick Churches and to have the conduct of the Consciences of his Subjects I am sure this is not the way to have the people principled with Loyalty though that was the main Theme that these Men insisted on in the former Reigns What followeth is his observation on a Debate in Parliament about imposing the Oath of Allegiance and why it was not imposed on the Clergy He saith It was out of respect to the Presbyterian Preachers lest they should scruple it They being unwilling to come under Allegiance to King William till first he had setled their Church Government And he thinks some will not take it till the Covenant be renewed Here is bold judging and censuring the secret thoughts and purposes of the Estates As also most calumnious Imputations on the Presbyterians Did ever any of them refuse the Oath of Allegiance Have not many of them even as many as were required on any occasion chearfully taken it And that though the Covenant be not renewed Did ever any of them move such a scruple about it Yea it is manifest that it is not their principle so to bargain with their Kings about Allegiance For they were ready to swear it and did when called to Kings who unsetled their Church Government and who enacted the abjuring of the Covenant What followeth page 15 16. about Ministers being deprived for not reading and praying is answered in Letter 2. Sect. 17. He odiously compareth the States dealing with the Clergy with that of the French with the Protestants there who saved their Life and Fortune if they change their Religion but Compliers here are turned out by the Rabble Ans If he can shew that this is done here by Authority as in France the Persecution is acted or that the Protestants in France suffered in a time of Anarchy by a people that had been so barbarously injured and enraged by them Then should he speak to the purpose otherways his parallel doth no ways hold They had made themselves justly loathsom and a burden to the people who took their opportunity to be rid of them without such Barbarous usage of them as they had suffered from them And the Estates thought it not fit to impose that burden again on a people who had been so crush'd by it what is there here that hath any Affinity with the Case of the Sufferings in France § 8. He pretendeth page 16 and 17. to remove a Mis-information given to them of England That the Clergy were not deprived by the Council for not reading and praying unless they were Immoral in their Conversation And from this he laboureth to vindicate them Much of which is answered above
only the Reader may know that this was never alledged nor given as the reason of their deprivation by any of us Whatever might possibly be talked in England by them who knew little of our Affairs The Council did not consider their Immorality nor freedom from it but only their obedience or disobedience to the Law His story about Bishop Lighton will not Vindicate the Western Clergy from gross and multiplied Immoralities But that is not now the thing under our consideration That Scandals were represented at Court as the ground of their deprivation by the Council is as injurious and false as any thing that can be said The plurality of Episcopal Ministers above the Presbyterians he seemeth to brag of But is it any wonder when twenty eight years ago many had complyed with Episcopacy and all that did not were driven away and in that long time many of them were removed by death Was it not so at the Reformation from Popery How far did the number of Popish Priests exceed that of Protestant Ministers But what he hence inferreth hath no weight viz. That many of the Episcopal Ministers must be removed lest they should over-vote the others For a more rational and sure course was taken to obviate it viz. That the Government should be setled only in the hands of Presbyterians and such as they shall receive which he or his Fellow Censurer of the State had above complained of and we have vindicated He concludeth this Narrative with a warning to the Church of England of the Enmity of Presbyterians against them and their hazard from us And indeed the strain of these Pamphlets is mostly a complaint against the King and Parliament and all the Authority of this Nation and an Appeal to the Church of England for deliverance from this Yoke And I hope our Rulers will consider them accordingly § 9. We now come to consider the Authors several Collections of Papers in which he hath been at a great deal of pains but to little or bad purpose as I hope by Examination of them shall appear His first Collection is of accounts that he hath had from his Complices a Company of Men avowed and malicious Enemies of all Presbyterians concerning their Sufferings from them and all this attested by themselves as I above observed He beginneth with the Story of Mr. Bell of Kilmarnock which I have above answered on Letter second Next he cometh to the Presbytery of Hamiltoun Where it seems he findeth three Mr. John Dalgliesh of Evendal Mr. James Crichtoun of Kilbryd Mr. Angus Mackintosh at Sten-house whose Gowns were torn and they discharged to preach Attested by Dr. Robert Scot Mr. George Leslie and Mr. John Dennistoun To all which I give no other Answer but what hath been said on the like occasion That the Presbyterians are not to answer for such practices which were done by such as Sober Presbyterians do not own nor are owned by them but rather hated and opposed As also that so many lying Stories of this kind have been told by him that it is not worth the while to enquire into the truth of these Men use to slight what is asserted by a common Liar We have next a general account of the Ministers of the Presbytery of Irwin that all their Houses have been assaulted their Gowns torn and they discharged to preach many of their Wives and Children turned out of Doors like to starve by Hunger and Cold in the Winter some forced to fly and lurk that they cannot meet to make known their Grievances Only three or four give these accounts from their own knowledge and certain information Signed Charles Littlejohn Minister of Larg Alexander Laing Minister at Stewartoun One may easily answer all this without particular information Considering the veracity that is to be found in this Pamphlet viz. Here is nothing but Generals and that by report Personal knowledge is pretended but for little of what is Asserted And we have cause to think that these were none of them who are of our Communion who Acted these things Then follows the Sufferings of the Presbytery of Glasgow in the persons of Mr. Russel at Govan Mr. Finny at Carthcart which two Stories are answered and found to be forgeries 〈◊〉 Letter 2. Mr. Blair at Rutherglen Mr. Gilbert Mushet at Cumernâ—… Mr. David Mill at Cumernald which we may rationally judge 〈◊〉 be of the same stamp Neither have we time to search into all the groundless Tales that he thinketh fit either to invent or to take up from them that devise them But that which he laboureth to set off by the Circumstances of it is that January 17. 1689. A Rabble mostly Women came with a design to drag the Minister out of the Pulpit he being warned and forbearing and returning from the Church was assaulted his Gown and other Cloaths torn The same day Mr. Alexander George had his Doors broken and he being upon his Sick-bed they had dragged him out of his Bed if the Provost with ten Men had not come to his Relief Next Sabbath January 20. there was no Sermon in the City on the 22 d they sent a threatning Letter forbidding all Ministers to preach on the highest peril this is attested by Alexander George John Sage the Ministers of Glasgow All this is answered above § 10. Another Paper of History he setteth down page 41. of the Sufferings of the Presbytery of Paislay upon the Bedele of Paislay on the Minister there on the Minister of Kilbarken And how Mr. Houstoun usurped the Pulpit of Eastwood This attested by Robert Fullertoun Moderator and John Taylor Minister at Paislay The answer of all this we take out of the Accusation it self It was done by Mr. Houstoun and his Party A man who not only is disowned by the Soberest sort of Presbyterians but even by the Cameronians as of most unsound Principles and most immoral practices Followeth a Letter Signed by four Ministers George Gregory Francis Fordyce William Irwine Minister at Kirkmichael John Hog Minister at Ochiltry What is not repeated out of the former Stories and answered before is the People of the Meeting-house Battering and Bruising the Minister of Kirkmichaels Man-servant commanding him to remove with what was his Masters from the House Ans It is witnessed under the Hands of David Bell James Cathcart Thomas Craig William Niven all of that Parish That they were present when one Robert Donaldson with some others came to the Minister of Kirkmichlaes House and that they did not beat or use any Violence to the Ministers Man servant But only took the Communion Cups from him and that they two drank together and shook Hands at Parting And that the said Servant lived there peaceably a year after and disposed of the Crop of his Masters Glebe It is also witnessed under the Hand of John Kennedy and George Monaught that the forementioned Robert Donaldson who was said to use Violence in the house of the Minister of Kirkmichael was a common
I am sure his own party have a large share of it among them What he so Tragically Painteth out of Preachers and People going through Parishes where there were no Meeting Houses Amounteth to no more than this that the Ministers were so charitable to People who could not maintain a Minister for themselves as to go to them and help them by appointing their Meetings where such destitute People might attend them § 3. He telleth a long Story pag. 7. Of the Presbyterians Arming themselves and inventing false Reports to give countenance for their so doing and that the design of it was to ruine the Clergy This Allegation is above answered being brought in also in some of the former Letters And himself opposeth it in acknowledging that most of the Clergy were turned out before this Arming of the Countrey Neither are the Papists in that Country so few as he alledgeth Especially considering them as strengthned by all that owned King James's Interest tho nominal Protestants There was both necessity for Protestants providing Arms and it was allowed by Authority after the Prince of Orange Landed That One Troop carried all the Papists to Goal I know not but I am sure before the Prince and his Interest became formidable which was the time when the People provided Arms and while the Episcopalians were not discouraged from appearing for the Papists many Troops would not have done it The Persecution that he speaketh of was by his own Confession mostly if he had said only it had been nothing amiss Acted by the Cameronians Which leaveth it on them not on us to answer for it page 8. That all the Ministers of that Presbytery except one who was absent obeyed the Proclamation for Reading and Praying is a bold Assertion For it is said by guess For first They had few or none to hear them beside their own Families Who then can witness that they obeyed the Proclamation or before whom did they perform this Solemn Action Secondly It was witnessed before the Synod of Wigtoun April 18. 1690. That Mr. Cameron Minister at Inch did the same day pray for King James and the young Prince And that he read not the Proclamation till after the Blessing when the Congregation was a Dissolving The Narrative page 8 9. Of the Two Commissioners treating with Patrick Paterson to make him Provost if he would put out the Minister is most false Mr. Paterson who is now Provost of that Town 1691 denieth that any of the Commissioners did ever insinuate any such terms of his being Provost And these two Commissioners are known to be Persons of that integrity that his Lies will not be able to stain them They did no more than oversee the Election which by the Convention was enjoined What he maliciously saith of William Torbran we have no more but his word for it which of how much value it is may be judged by what already hath been observed § 4. The falshood and malice of what he affirmeth about the Commissioners from Stranrawer to the Convention bringing from Edinburgh with them a part of the Collection for the Irish Protestants is so evident as nothing can be more That Money was according to order delivered to the Provost of the Town Who distributed it Faithfully to the Irish Protestants who were there according to their several Necessities And the names of them who received it with the place of their abode in Ireland and what they received was returned to Sir Patrick Murray And these records can make it appear that it was not bestowed as he alledgeth He cannot forbear to spit his Venome even on the Irish Protestants who had escaped the Bloody rage of the Papists because they were not of his way Which is a Specimen of his Temper and Inclination He telleth a Story of one Ferguson a Souldier who with some others discharged several Ministers to Preach And inlargeth in some Circumstances not worth our Transcribing of the truth or falshood of this I have no Information Nor what sort of man this Ferguson was I easily believe tho not on the Credit of this Author that there might be a man capable to do such things But are the Body of the Presbyterians Countable for every thing that a Person did whom they know not and whose Actions they approve not The same is to be said concerning the Irish Preacher mentioned page 10. Whom we know not nor can we enquire into the truth of the Story nor into the Circumstances of the Person He not being named For what followeth from page 11. to page 18. All the Information that I can find is that the incensed Rabble did indeed turn out these men and discharged them to Preach Which irregular practices we do no ways approve but this is not imputeable to the Persbyterians but to some who had suffered intolerable Injuries from these Men and whom oppression had driven out of the Limits of patience and soberness Neither have we any ground to believe these aggravating Circumstances which he mentioneth to beâ—…ue lying and mis-representation being so Familiar to this Author If the things mentioned be true we disown and abhor them as Barbarous Villanies The Story about Mr. Sommervel at Leswalt being persecuted by the instigation of the Sheriff of the County is disowned by Mr. Sommervel himself and is incredible to every one who knoweth the Gentleman who is thus blamed The account he gives of several in the Presbytery of Stranrawer if all were true is not strange tho yet we are far from approving of what was done for there it was that the most horrid Barbarities were practised on that poor People by means of these Ministers There one might see Bodies hanging on Trees by the way side Heads Arms and Legs of the poor People who had been Murthered without due course of Law set up on Poles in many places And is it strange that people should be enraged to see such sad spectacles of their Relations or that disorderly passions and from them disorderly actions should be the consequent of such moving Objects But whether what is alledged be true or not I cannot tell not having got information from that part of the Country § 5. He concludeth his particular Instances of this Persecution page 18. With the account of Mr. Ramsays sufferings who was Minister at Stranrawer Two things he complaineth of The first is that Mr. Miller the Presbyterian Minister there Hounded out the Rabble to Trouble and expel Mr. Ramsay that himself might get the Tithe Herrings This is denied as an impudent Forgery And Mr. Millar challengeth Mr. Ramsey or any else to adduce one credible Person who will Affirm that he had any hand directly or indirectly in the trouble that Mr. Ramsay met with The second is Mr. Maxwel who had been in Ireland some time when he returned home Mr. Ramsay also and others could not get their Stipend Yea the Sheriff incouraged all those to whom they owed any thing to sue them Where as
confirmed by so many Parliaments I much doubt But am not at leisure to cast up the account But if this Argument be good Presbytery should be supported as being confirmed by many Parliaments and now by this Current Parliament Besides its Authority from Scripture which he doth not pretend to for Prelacy His second Inference from his Historical Narrative or rather Railing Accusation is That Episcopacy is necessary for support of the Government And that they oppose Scots Presbytery only as it hath in it many horrid Principles Both these are denied and cannot be proved unless we take malicious railing for proof His 3 d. That what the late Rulers did was done by Law And that these Laws were made for preserving the Protestant Religion Monarchy Humane Society and Self Defence It is an easie thing to make Sanguinary Laws and then Murder and Destroy Mankind according to these Laws But I have shewed in my former Vindication in answer to Query 5. That they exceeded the bounds even of their own Laws In the Horrid Murthers that were in cold Blood committed by Souldiers with allowance on Persons living in peace But that these Laws were made on such necessary grounds as he affirmeth is an Assertion beyond what Jesuitical impudence it self hath as yet arrived at But I shall not wonder if he should assert that the world could not subsist except Laws be made for extirpating out of it all who own the Christian Religion Cannot the Protestant Religion Monarchy c. be safe unless People be forced to wound their Consciences by hearing men who had invaded the Pulpits of their Faithful Pastors Unless Families be ruined who live in peace and pray for their Rulers who hear a Sermon in a Chamber and not in the Church He affirmeth also under this head that we value our Church Government more than the Protestant Religion A most false Imputation But he proveth it by three notable Lies One is That we complied with the Papists upon getting an Indulgence We neither sought it nor approved the Papists being Indulged nor did we join with them in any thing We indeed had our Meetings at the same time when they had theirs and so had the Episcopal men The other is the Church of England and their Party hazarded all rather than comply I gladly would know wherein did we comply and they did not They had the exercise of their Religion under the same Government with us A third is We magnifie the dispensing power which they opposed All this I have touched before This Assertion is false and injurious We never approved it we made use of the Liberty granted because it was our due But never approved of the power that the Giver of it did acclaim How they opposed it may be judged by considering whether the Contrivers and Promoters of these courses who were about the King were Presbyterians or Prelatists § 4. The fourth thing he is now falling from his Inferences and Counsels to the King to proofs of his Accusations against the Presbyterians that their Principles prove what he would say And their Principles he proveth in that he is informed that many of them own that Subjects may force their King to do justice that they are his Judges and may Dethrone him that they approve of former Rebellions that the Monarch being forfeited Kings have no more Power than the People will give them I observe first That all the Grounds that he hath for these Accusations is He hath heard it but from whom or what cause his Informers had to say so we must not know If this be a sufficient Ground to move a Prince against his People as this man designeth let any Judge 2. That he and they who have whispered this to him do not impute those to the Presbyterians as the Principles of the Party but to many of them And no body knoweth how many It may be there are or have been some who call themselves Presbyterians who hold these or as bad things But the Presbyterians did never approve of all that had gone from among them 3. What he saith about forfeiting of the Monarchy tho I do not meddle with things so far above me hath obtained with the Church of England as well as Scotland And his quarrelling at this hath a further tendency against the present Establishment than may be he is willing that every one should observe His fifth effort against us is He taketh notice of Peoples threatning Ministers he addeth also Magistrates which I never heard of before and thrusting them from their places This was the practice of the Rabble in some places I have in answer to the above mentioned Pamphlets sufficiently vindicated the Presbyterians both from abetting and from approving of these practices And therefore they ought not to be charged with them In the sixth place he would perswade the Prince that our numbers are not so great as theirs this I have also above Discoursed but I shall a little consider his proofs one is 27 Parliaments under four Kings have condemned Presbytery Ans If that prove that they were the greatest number the like Argument will prove that we are more numerous now For the Parliament hath very unanimously condemned their way Next he will prove it because they were always easily overcome in their Rebellions Sure it was not so in King Charles the I. time And in King Charles the II. time it was not the Presbyterians but a few of them that appeared He saith that the reason why they appear more numerous here at London 1689 is they are all here That is manifestly false neither all the Nobility nor the Tenth man of the Gentry beside the Vulgar who are the greatest number were then at London His judging of their designs of being there is his groundless Fancy suggested by his hatred and ill will His party forsooth are so modest that they trusted to the Laws the interest of the Monarchy and his Highnesses just sense of things But others thought that they trusted more to King James's Interest and were more moved by their aversion from his Highness Let the Reader judge whether of the two conjectures hath the more probable Foundation He alledgeth that the Presbyterians have raised tumults to fright Honestmen This is denied his party raised or endeavoured it at least more fearful Tumults And hence he would move the Prince to send down Forces under well Principled Officers That is Jacobites But the Prince was wiser than to Listen to such Counsel § 5. He next would represent us as Persons who would submit to no Laws inconsistent with Presbytery on the account of the Divine right of Presbytery and our obligation to it by Oaths Whereas his Party are readier to comply with any thing that his Highness and a Parliament shall think fit for the good of the Kingdom and so pleadeth for a hearing before his Highness or any to be named by Him This last we shall never decline On the former part of this
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
that they should go and preach and make offer of the Gospel It seemeth this Author hath his Design if for a little time he can perswade some in England of these things Tho' he knoweth his Lies can be discovered by us who are Ear-witnesses and that his Villany would come abroad at last This he not only asserteth but layeth weight on it as sufficient ground for separating from us as persons who teach another Gospel p. 37. He pretendeth to give an account of the Assemblies dealing with them who had appealed to them from Presbyteries as being injured by them And here he cannot find matter of reproach in the Letter sent to the King to satisfie His Majesty in this matter but he mentioneth a draught of that Letter proposed which was appointed to be amended This is to pick Quarrels A draught of a Letter so worded as he saith or of that importance I do not remember of but seeing he confesseth it did not please the Assembly why should it be brought to their Reproach It is a gross Lie That they were referred back to the Presbyteries and Synods from which they had appealed that I confess had been absurd They were all referred to the Commission except such as the Assembly discussed and that of Mr. Heriot which was referred to the Synod In which Synod when his Case was tryed the Presbytery of Dalkeith as a Party was removed although Mr. Heriot in his printed Paper hath the Impudence to deny that they were removed That it was thought grievous to Presbyteries to question the Justice and Legality of their Proceedings is also false for then no Appeal could be received from them nor any Process re-examined by a Superior Judicatory which yet that was done The Affair of Peebles that he next mentioneth is so far from being proof of their unwillingness to canvass the Actings of a Presbytery that it is an evidence to the contrary seeing they did take that business into consideration and not having time to discuss it did refer it to the Commission who did so determine in it as both parties did quietly submit It is true when it was brought into the Assembly some moved that it might be first ripened in the Committee which was readily complied with Neither was there any contest about it between my Lord Commissioner and the Assembly as he falsly insinuateth The printed Information that he mentioneth had a printed Answer by Mr. Vetch They were both considered by the Assembly There were a great many Heretors on both sides it is true none who were of the Duke of Queensbury's Quality but his Grace had not his Residence in the Parish The passage in Mr. Vetch's Answer from which he thinketh he hath so much advantage maketh nothing for his Design For it was not said That a Call from the greatest part of the Parish could not be had to a Presbyterian Minister But that a Call from all could not be had tho' even so it was too general an Assertion for many Parishes there are in Scotland where Presbyterians are called without a dissenting Vote and doth it hence fellow that the people are not generally for Presbytery because in many Parishes yea if it were in all Parishes there are some of another mind or because in some Parishes most are against it I do not intend to dip in that Affair nor to consider the Merits of that Cause but do refer the Reader to the Papers that are printed on both sides only I affirm that the General Assembly nor their Commission cannot be blamed in this matter seeing both parties acquiesced in their Sentence Mr. Meldrum's resolution against Obtruding himself on a people against their will is consonant to the Sentiments of his Brethren and yet the Nation may enjoy Presbyterian Ministers For there are many more places willing to receive them than there are men to occupy such places If there was a Laick as he speaketh who either Lectured to the Neighbourhood or said That the people of God may sin but the wicked must not sin we disown both his Usurpation and his Doctrine But the Truth of the matter of Fact we must take from him on trust tho' it is like he hath either invented it or it hath been told him by no body knoweth who § 16. That the Assembly was so puzled as he saith about the Appeals of tth Episcopal Clergy is false And the Comparison that he useth is Odious and Malicious They were no other way straitened about them but that they wanted time to examine them all And on that Account alone referred them to the Commission Some of them he confesseth they ventured upon And these he quarrelleth with And First he giveth acoount of the Case of Mr. Mitchel and Mr. Lesk But not with that Candor that becometh He mis-representeth the Act of Parliament that gave rise to this debate It was not to repossess such as were put out for not compiying with Episcopacy alone but such as were put out in or since 1661. for Non-conformity or not complying with the courses of the Time All that the Assembly had to judge was whether Mr. Mitchel was legal Minister at Turriff in 1661. And they found that clearly proved whence it followed that Mr. Mitchel by the Act of Parliament had right now to return to his place which had been possessed by Mr. Lesk It was proved that Mr. Mitchel was legally settled in Turriff That he was unjustly Deposed by the Presbytery about 1655. That this Sentence was taken off by the Synod of Aberdeen in which the presbytery of Turriff is and that in July 1661. he was Deposed by the Synod of Aberdeen for Non-compliance with the Courses of that time Whence they concluded that he was Rightful Minister of Turriff and the Act of Parliament allowing such as were put out in 1661. did allow him to return to Turriff It is false that the Reasons of the Sentence were refused to be given him Mr. Lesk for he demanded an extract of the process and Sentence and the Clerk was appointed to give it He complaineth that That the Act of Parliament gave access to the Presbyterians who had been possessed of places tho the Episcopal men had complyed with the Civil Government And was it rational that they should possess the Rights of other Men because they comply with the time was not the same done in England 1660 If Mr. Kirtoun had used his priviledge in emptying his Church for a fitter person than it was possessed by it was not against Law Mertoun was his Charge till he was transported to Edinburgh But the Truth is Mr. Kirtoun went not to Mertoun till the Episcopal Minister had left it as knowing he had no legal Right And when Mr. Kirtoun went thither and got right to the Stipend of a year and half He gave the years Stipend to the Episcopal Minister who had left the place and the half year to the poor Mr. Sleerie's Case cometh next which is not truly