<!DOCTYPE ETS PUBLIC "-//UMDLPS//DTD EEBOPROOF 2.0//EN">
<ETS>
<TEMPHEAD>
<REVDESCR>
<CHANGE>
<DATE>2012-12-10</DATE>
<RESPSTMT>
<NAME>Olivia Bottum</NAME>
<RESP>MURP</RESP>
</RESPSTMT>
<ITEM>Proofed text and corrected markup.</ITEM>
</CHANGE>
</REVDESCR>
</TEMPHEAD>
<EEBO>
<IDG S="marc" R="UM" ID="A29489">
<STC T="W">B466</STC>
<STC T="C">R10694</STC>
<BIBNO T="oclc">11992462</BIBNO>
<VID>52046</VID>
</IDG>
<TEXT LANG="eng">
<FRONT>
<DIV1 TYPE="title page">
<PB REF="1" MS="y">
<P>A REVIEW OF DOCTOR BRAMBLE, Late Bishop of LONDENDERRY, <HI>HIS</HI> FAIRE WARNING Again&s;t the Scotes Di&s;ciplin.</P>
<P><HI>By R. B. G.</HI></P>
<P>Printed at DELF, By <HI>Michiel Stael,</HI> dwelling at the Turf-Market 1649.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="dedication">
<PB REF="2">
<PB REF="2">
<HEAD>For the right Honourable the Noble and potent Lord <HI>JOHN</HI> Earle of Ca&s;&s;ils, Lord <HI>KENNEDY,</HI> &amp;c. one of his <HI>MAJESTIES</HI> privie coun&s;el, and Lord Iu&s;tice gene|rall of Scotland.</HEAD>
<OPENER><SALUTE>RIGHT HONORABLE.</SALUTE></OPENER>
<P>_MY long experience of your Lordships &s;inceer zeale to the truth of God, and affection to the liberties of the Church and Kingdome of Scotland, again&s;t all ene|mies whom&s;oever; hath imboldened me to offer by your Lordships hand to the view of the publick, my following an&s;wer to a very bitter enemy of that Church and King|dome for their adhaerence to the &s;acred truth of God and their own ju&s;t liberties.</P>
<P>At my fir&s;t &s;ight of his Book and many dayes thereafter I had no purpo&s;e at all to medle with him:
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The Authors rea&s;ons of his wryting.</NOTE> your Lord&s;hip knowes how unprovided men of my pre&s;ent condition mu&s;t be, either with lea&s;ure, or accommodations, or a minde &s;uitable for wryting of books. Al&s;o <HI>Doctor Bramble</HI> was &s;o well knowne on the other &s;ide of the Sea, the ju&s;tice of the Parliament of England and Scotland having unanimou&s;ly condemned him to &s;tand upon the highe&s;t pi|nacle of infamy, among the fir&s;t of the unpardonable incendiaries, and in the head of the mo&s;t pernicious in&s;truments of the late mi&s;eries in Britaine and Ireland: and the evident falshood of his calumnies were &s;o clearly con|futed long ago in printed an&s;wers to the infamous Authors whence he had borrowed them; I &s;aw la&s;tly the mans Spirit &s;o extreame &s;aucy, and his pen &s;o we&s;pi&s;h and full of gall, that I judged him unworthy of any an&s;wer. But under&s;tanding his malions boldnes to put his Book in the hand of his <HI>Maje&s;ty,</HI> of the <HI>Prince of Orange,</HI> and al the eminent per&s;onages of this place who can reed Engli&s;h; yea to &s;end it abroad unto all the Univer&s;ities of the&s;e Provin|ces, with very high and in&s;inuating commendations, from the prime favourers of the Epi&s;copall cau&s;e: hearing al&s;o the threats of that faction to put this their Excellent and unan&s;werable peece, both in Dutch, Fren&s;h, and Latine; that in the whole neighbouring World the reputation of the Scotes might thereby be wounded, killed, and buried, without hope of recovery; I found it nece&s;&s;ary, at the de&s;ire of diver&s;e friends, to &s;end this my review after it, hoping that all who &s;hall be plea&s;ed to be at the paines of comparing the re|ply with the challenge, may be induced to pronounce him not only a ra&s;h, un|timous, malicious, but al&s;o a very fal&s;e accu&s;er. This much ju&s;tice doe I ex|pect from every judicious and aequitable comparer of our wrytes, upon the hazard of their cen&s;ure to fall upon my &s;ide.
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The Praelats are unable by rea&s;on to de|fend Epi&s;co|pacy.</NOTE></P>
<P>His invectives again&s;t us are chiefly for three things; our Di&s;cipline, our Covenant, our alleadged unkindnes to our late Soveraigne. My apology for the fir&s;t is that in di&s;ciplin we maintaine no con&s;iderable conclu&s;ion, but what
<PB REF="3">is avowed by all the Reformed Churches, e&s;pecially our Brethren of <HI>Holland</HI> and <HI>France,</HI> as by the approbatory &s;uffrages of the Univer&s;ities of <HI>Leyden, Vtrecht</HI> and others, to the theorems whereupon our adver&s;arie doth build his chief accu&s;ations, may appeare. If our practi&s;e had aberred from the common rule, the crookednes of the one ought not to praejudge the &s;traightnes of the o|ther: though what our adver&s;ary alleadgeth of the&s;e aberrations is nothing, but his owne calumnious imputations: the chiefe quarrel is our rule it &s;elfe, which all the reformed harmoniou&s;ly defend with us, to bee according to Scripture; and the Epi&s;copall declinations, to bee be&s;ide and again&s;t the line of the word, yea Antichri&s;tian.</P>
<P>If our Praelats had found the humour of di&s;puting this maine cau&s;e to &s;tir in their veines, why did they not vent it in replyes to Didoclavius and Ger&s;ome Bucerus, who for long thirty yeares have &s;tood unan&s;wered? or if fre&s;her meats had more plea&s;ed their ta&s;t, why did not their &s;tomacks venture on <HI>Salma&s;ius</HI> or Hondels books again&s;t Epi&s;copacy? If verbal debates had liked them better then wryting, why had none of them the courage to accept the conference, with that incomparably mo&s;t learned of all knights now living or in any bygone age Sir <HI>Claud Somayis;</HI> who by a per&s;on of honour about the King, did &s;ignify his readines to prove before his <HI>Maje&s;ty,</HI> again&s;t any one or all his praelaticall divines, that their Epi&s;copacy had no warrant at all in the word of God, or any good rea&s;on?</P>
<P>But our friends are much wi&s;er then to be at the trouble and hazard of any &s;uch exerci&s;e;
<NOTE PLACE="marg">Their &s;tron|ged argu|ments are trucks of Court.</NOTE> the artifices of the court are their old trade, they know bet|ter how to watch the &s;ea&s;ons, and to di&s;tribute among&s;t them&s;elves the how|res of the Kings opportunities, when privatly without contradiction they may in&s;till in his tender mind their corrupt principles, and in&s;truct him in his cabine, how &s;afe it is for his con&s;cience, and how much for his honor ra|ther to ruine him&s;elfe, his family and all his Kingdomes with his own hands, then to de&s;ert the holy Church, that is the Bi&s;hops and their followers; then to joine with the rebellious Covenanters, enemies to God, to his Father, to to Monarchy: that the embracing of the Barbarous Iri&s;h the pardoning of all their mon&s;truous murders, the rewarding of their expected merits with a free liberty of Popery, and acce&s;&s;e to all places of the highe&s;t tru&s;t, though contrary to all the Lawes which England and Ireland has knowne this hun|dred yeares; all this without and before any Parliament, mu&s;t be very con|&s;i&s;tent, with con&s;cience, honor and all good rea&s;on. Yea to bind up the &s;oule of the mo&s;t &s;weet and ingenuous of Princes, in their chaines of their &s;lavery for ever, they have fallen upon a mo&s;t rare trick, which hardly the inventions of all their praedece&s;&s;ors can pararel.
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The Brothers unlu<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 letter"> foot is <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 word"> in <GAP DESC="foreign"></NOTE> They re&s;t not &s;atisfied, that for the upholding of their ambition and greed, they did harden our late So|veraigne to his very la&s;t in their Errours, and without compa&s;&s;ion did dryve him on to his fatal praecipice; unles they make him continue after his death to cry loud every day in the cares of his Son in his later will and te&s;tament,
<NOTE PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign"></NOTE> to follow him in that &s;ame way of ruine; rather then to give over to &s;erve the lu&s;ts of the praelaticall clergy. They have gathered together his <HI>Maje&s;ties</HI> la&s;t papers, and cut of them have made a book, whereupon their be&s;t pens
<PB REF="3">have dropped the greate&s;t eloqution, rea&s;on and devotion was among them, by way of e&s;&s;ayes; as it were to frame the heart of the Son by the fingers of the dying Father to piety, wi&s;edome, patience, and every virtue; but ever &amp; znone to let fall &s;o much of their own ungracious dew, as may irrigat the feeds of their praelaticall Errors and Church intere&s;t; &s;o farre as to charge him to per&s;eveer in the maintainance of Epi&s;copall governement upon all ha|zards, without the change of any thing except a little p. 278. and to a&s;&s;ure that all Covenanters are of a faction engaged into a Religious rebellion, who may never be tru&s;ted till they have repented of their Covenant; and that till then never le&s;&s;e loyalty ju&s;tice or humanity may be expected from any, then from them; that if hee &s;tand in need of them hee is undone, for they will devoure him as the Serpent does the dove.</P>
<P>The&s;e and the like pernicious maximes framed by an Epi&s;copall hand, of purpo&s;e to &s;eparat for ever the King from all his covenanted &s;ubjects, how farr they were from the heart, language and wrytings of our late Soveraigne, all who were aquainted with his carriage and mo&s;t intime affections at New-Ca&s;tle, in the I&s;le of Wight and thereafter, can te&s;tify, But it is rea&s;on when the Praelats doe frame an image of a King that they &s;hould have liberty to place their owne image in its forheade, as the &s;tatuary of old did his, in the <HI>Bo&s;s</HI> of <HI>Pallas</HI> targe, with &s;uch artifice that all her wor&s;hipers were nece&s;&s;itat to wor&s;hip him and that no hand was able to de&s;troy the one without the di&s;|folution and breaking in peeces of the other; yet our Praelats would know, that in this age there be many excellent Engyneers, who&s;e witty practicks tran&s;cend the mo&s;t skilfull experiments of our Aunce&s;tors: and what ever may be the ignorance or weaknes of men, wee tru&s;t the breath of our Lords mouth will not faile to blow out the Bishop from the Kings armes, without any detriment at all to royalty, Allwayes the wicked and impious cunning of the&s;e craft&s;emen is much to be blamed who dare be bold to in&s;ert and en|grave them&s;elfes &s;o deeply in the images of the Gods as the one cannot be intended to be picked out of the other more then the Aple from the eye, un|les the &s;ub&s;i&s;tance of both be put in hazard.</P>
<P>The other matter of his rayling again&s;t us is the &s;olemne league and cove|nant;
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The only crime of the Covenant, is that it extir|pate praelacy.</NOTE> when this nimble and quick enough Doctor comes a&s;&s;i&s;ted with all the rea&s;ons the whole Univer&s;ity of <HI>Oxford</HI> can afford him, to demon&s;trat it as he profe&s;&s;es in his la&s;t Chapter, to be wicked, fal&s;e, void, and what not; wee find his mo&s;t demon&s;trative proofes to be &s;o poor and &s;illy that they infere nothing of his conclu&s;ion. To this day no man has &s;hewed any errour in the mater of that covenant; as for our framing and taking of it, our adver&s;a|ries drave us thereunto, with a great deale of nece&s;&s;ity; and now being in it, neither their fraud nor force may bring us from it againe, for we feare the oath of God. After much deliberation we found that covenant the &s;ove|raigne meanes to joyne and keep together the whole orthodox party in the three Kingdomes, for the defence of their Religion and Liberties which a popish, praelaticall and malignant faction with all their might were over|turning who &s;till to this day are going on in the &s;ame de&s;igne, without any vi&s;ible change, in the mo&s;t of their former principles. And why &s;hould any
<PB REF="4">who loves the King hate this covenant, which is the &s;trayte&s;tty the world can devi&s;e, to knit all to him and his po&s;terity, if &s;o be his <HI>Maje&s;tie</HI> might be plea&s;ed to enter therein; but by all meanes &s;uch a mi&s;chiefe mu&s;t be aver|ted, for &s;o the roote of Epi&s;copacy would quickly wither without any hope of repullulation; an evill farr greater in the thoughts of them who now mannage the con&s;cience of the Court the~ the extirpation of Monarchy the ever&s;ion of all the three Kingdomes or any other earthly mi&s;ery.</P>
<P>As for the third &s;ubject of the Warners fury again&s;t us,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The Bi|&s;hops are mo&s;t ju&s;tly ca&s;t out of England.</NOTE> our unkindnes to the late King, if any truth were in this fal&s;e challenge, no other creature on earth could be &s;uppo&s;ed the true cau&s;e thereof, but our unhappy praelats: all our grievances both of Church and State, fir&s;t and la&s;t, came princi|pally from them: had they never been authors of any more mi&s;chiefe, then what they occa&s;ioned to our late Soveraigne, his per&s;on, family and Do|minions this la&s;t dozn of yeares, there is abundant rea&s;on of burying that their praeter and Anti&s;cripturall order in the grave of perpetuall infamy. But the truth is, be&s;ide more auncient quarrels, &s;ince the dayes of our fathers the Albigen&s;es, this limb of Antichri&s;t has ever been witne&s;&s;ed again&s;t; Wickleif, Hu&s;s, and their followers were zealous in this charge, till Luther and his di&s;ciples got it flung out of all the reformed world, except England; where the violence of the ill advi&s;ed princes did keep it up for the perpetuall trouble of that land, till now at la&s;t it hath well neare kicked downe to the ground there,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The Scots were never injurious to their King.</NOTE> both Church and Kingdome. As for the point in hand we deny all unkindnes to our King whereof any rea&s;onable complaint can be framed again&s;t us. Our fir&s;t conte&s;ts &s;tand ju&s;tified this day by King and Parliament in both Kingdomes. When his <HI>Maje&s;tie</HI> was &s;o ill advi&s;ed as to bring downe upon our borders an English army for to punish our refu&s;ing of a world of novations in our Religion contrary to the lawes of God and of our country, what could our land doe le&s;&s;e then lie downe in their armes upon Dunce law for their ju&s;t and nece&s;&s;ary defence? when it was in their power with ea&s;e to haue di&s;&s;ipat the oppo&s;it army, they &s;hew them&s;elves mo&s;t ready upon very ea&s;y conditions to goe home in peace, and gladly would have re&s;ted there, had not the furious Bi&s;hops moved his <HI>Maje&s;tie</HI> without all provocation, to breake that fir&s;t peace and make for a &s;econd inva&s;ion of Scotland, only to &s;econd their unrea&s;onable rage: was it not then nece&s;&s;ary for the Scots to arme againe? when they had de&s;eate the Epi&s;copall Army and taken New|ca&s;tle though they found nothing con&s;iderable to &s;tand in their way to Lon|don, yet they were content to lie &s;till in <HI>Northumberland,</HI> and upon very meane tearnes to returne the &s;econd time in peace. For all this the praelats could not give it over, but rai&s;ed a new Army and filled England with fire and &s;word, yea well neere &s;ubdued the Parliament and their followers and did almo&s;t accompli&s;h their fir&s;t de&s;ignes upon the whole I&s;le. The Scots then with mo&s;t earne&s;t and pitifull entreaties were called upon by their Brethren of England for helpe, where unwilling that their brethren &s;hould peri&s;h in their &s;ight and a bridge &s;hould be made over their carca&s;&s;es for a third warre upon Scotland, when after long tryall they had found all their interce&s;&s;ions with the King for a moderat and rea&s;onable accommodation
<PB REF="4">&s;lighted and rejected they &s;uffered them&s;elves to be per&s;waded to enter in co|venant with their oppre&s;&s;ed and fainting brethren, for the mantainance of the common cau&s;e of Religion and liberty, but with expre&s;&s;e Articles for the pre&s;ervation of royalty in all its ju&s;t rights in his <HI>Maje&s;tie</HI> and his po&s;terity; what unkindnes was heer in the Scots to their King?</P>
<P>When by Gods ble&s;&s;ing on the Scotes helpe the oppo&s;it faction was fully &s;ubdued, his <HI>Maje&s;tie</HI> left <HI>Oxford</HI> with a purpo&s;e for <HI>London,</HI>
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The Scotes &s;elling of the King is a mo&s;t fal&s;e ca|lumnie.</NOTE> but by the &s;eve|rity of the ordinances again&s;t his receivers, he diverted towards <HI>Linn,</HI> to ship for <HI>Holland</HI> or <HI>France;</HI> where by the way fearing a di&s;covery and &s;urpri&s;e, he was nece&s;&s;itate to ca&s;t him&s;elfe upon the Scotes army at <HI>New-wark;</HI> upon his promi&s;e to give &s;atisfaction to the propo&s;itions of both Kingdomes, he was received there and to <HI>New-ca&s;tle:</HI> here his old oathes to adhaere unto Epi&s;|copacy hindred him to give the expected &s;ati&s;faction. AT that time the prime leaders of the Engli&s;h army were &s;eeking with all earne&s;tnes occa&s;ion to fall upon the Scots, much out of heart and reputation by <HI>Iames Grahame</HI> and his <HI>Irishes</HI> incur&s;ions, mo&s;t unhappy for the Kings affaires: Scotland at that time was &s;o full of divi&s;ions that if the King had gone thither they were in an evi|dent hazard of a pre&s;ent war both within among them&s;elfes, and without from England: our friends in the Engli&s;h Parliament whom we did, and had rea&s;on to tru&s;t, a&s;&s;ured us that our taking the King with us to Scotland, was the keeping of the Sectarian Army on foot, for the wracke of the King, of Scorland, of the Presbyterian party in England; as the &s;ending of his <HI>Ma|je&s;tie</HI> to one of his hou&s;es neer London,, upon the faith of the Parliament of England, was the only way to get the Sectaryes di&s;armed, the King and the people &s;ettled in a peace, upon &s;uch tearmes as &s;hould be &s;atisfactory both to the King and the Scots and all the wel-affected in England. This being the true ca&s;e was it any, either unju&s;tice, unkindnes or imprudence in the Scots to leave the King with his Parliament of England? was this a &s;el|ling of him to his enemies? the monyes the Scots received at their departure out of England had no relation at all to the King, they were &s;carce the &s;ixth parte of the arreares due to them for bygon &s;ervice; they were but the one halfe of the &s;ume capitulat for, not only without any reference to the King, but by an act of the Engli&s;h Parliament excluding expre&s;ly from that Treaty of the armies departure all con&s;ideration of the di&s;po&s;all of the Kings per|&s;on. The unexpected evills that followed in the Armies rebellion, in their &s;ea&s;ing on London, de&s;troying the Parliament, murthering the King, no mortall eye could have for&s;een. The Scots were ever ready to the utmo&s;t of their power to have prevented all the&s;e mi&s;chiefes with the hazard of what was deare&s;t to them; notwith&s;tanding of all the hard mea&s;ure they had of|ten received both from the King and the mo&s;t of their friends in England. That they did not in time and unanimou&s;ly &s;tur to purpo&s;e for the&s;e ends they are to an&s;wer it to God, who were the true Authors; the innocency of the Church is cleered in the following treati&s;e. Among the many cau&s;es of the&s;e mi&s;eries the prime fountaine was the venome of Epi&s;copall principles which &s;ome &s;erpents con&s;tantly did infu&s;e by their &s;peaches and letters in the eares and heart of the King to keep him of from giving that &s;atisfaction to
<PB REF="5">his good &s;ubjects which they found mo&s;t nece&s;&s;ary and due; the very &s;ame cau&s;e which ties up this day the hands of covenanters from redre&s;&s;ing all pre|&s;ent mi&s;orders could they have the King to joyne with them in their cove|nant, to quit his unhappy Bi&s;hops, to lay a&s;ide his formall and dead Litur|gie, to ca&s;t him&s;elfe upon the coun&s;els of his Parliaments it were ea&s;y to prophecie what quickly would become of all his enemies: but &s;o long as E|pi&s;copall and malignant agents compa&s;&s;eth him about (though all that comes neer may &s;ee him as lovely hopfull, and promi&s;ing a prince for all naturall endowments as this day breaths in Europe or for a long time has &s;wayed a Scepter in Britaine) yet while &s;uch unlucky birds ne&s;t in his Cabin and men &s;o ungraciou&s;ly principled doe daily be&s;iege him, what can his good people doe but &s;it downe with mournfull eyes and bleeding hearts, till the Lord amend the&s;e otherwi&s;e remediles and in&s;uperable evills? but I hold heer lea&s;t I tran&s;gre&s;&s;e to farr the bounds of an Epi&s;tle?</P>
<P>I account it an advantage to have your Lord&s;hip my judge in what heere and in my following treati&s;e,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The rea&s;on of the dedi|cation.</NOTE> I &s;pake of Religion, the liberties of our country and the Royall Family: I know non fitter then your Lordship, both to di&s;cerne and decerne in all the&s;e matters. Me thinks I may &s;ay it without flattery (which I never much loved either in my &s;elfe or others) that among all our Nobles for con&s;tancy in a zealous profe&s;&s;ion, for exemplary practi&s;e in publick and privat duties; the mercy of God has given to your Lordship a reputation &s;econd to none. And for a rigid adhaerence to the Rights and Pri|viledges of your Country, according to that auncient di&s;po&s;ition of your mo&s;t Noble Family, noted in our Hi&s;torians, e&s;pecially that Prince of them <HI>Georg Buchanan,</HI> the Tutor of your <HI>Grand-Father,</HI> I know none in our Land who wil pretend to goe before you, and for the affairs of the King, your intere&s;t of blood in the Royall Family is &s;o well known, that it would be a &s;trange im|pudency in me, if in your audience I dur&s;t be bold wittingly to give &s;ini&s;trous information. Praying to God that what in the candid ingenuity &amp; true zeale of my &s;pirit, I pre&s;ent under your Lord&s;hips patrociny unto the eye of the World, for the vindication of my mother Church and Country, from the Sicophantick accu&s;ations of a Stigmati&s;ed incendiary may produce the inten|ded effects,</P>
<CLOSER><SIGNED>I re&s;t your <HI>Lordships in all Chri&s;tian duety, R. B. G.</HI></SIGNED> <DATELINE><HI>Hague</HI> <DATE> this 28 <HI>May</HI> / 7 <HI>Iunie.</HI> 1649.</DATE></DATELINE></CLOSER>
</DIV1>
</FRONT>
<BODY>
<DIV1 N="1" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="1" REF="5">
<HEAD>CHAP. I. </HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The praelaticall faction continue re&s;olute, that the King and all his people shall perish, rather then the praelats, be not re&s;tored to their former places of power, for to &s;et up Popery, Profani|ty, and Tirranny, in all the three Kingdomes.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>_WHile the Comi&s;&s;ioners of the Church and Kingdome of Scotland,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The un&s;ea|&s;onablenes of Doctor Brambles warning.</NOTE> were on their way to make their fir&s;t addre&s;&s;es to his Maje|&s;tie, for to condole his mo&s;t lamentable af|flictions, and to make offer of their be&s;t af|fections and &s;ervices for his comfort, in this time of his great di&s;tre&s;&s;e; it was the wi&s;edome and charity of the praelaticall party, to &s;end out <HI>Doctor Bramble,</HI> to meet them with his Faire Warning. For what el&s;e? but to di&s;cou|rage them in the very entry from tendering their propo&s;iti|ons, and before ever they were heard, to &s;top his Maje&s;ties eares with grievous praejudice, again&s;t all that po&s;&s;ibly they could &s;peake; though the world &s;ees that the only apparent fountaine of hope upon earth, for recovery of the wofully confounded affaires of the King, is in the hands of that Anti|praelaticall nation: but it is the hope of the&s;e who love the welfaire of the King and his people, of the Churches and Kingdomes of Britain, that the hand of God, which hath bro|ken all the former devices of the Praelats, shall crush this their engine al&s;o.
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The irra|tional way of the war|ners wri|ting.</NOTE></P>
<P>Our warner undertaketh to oppugne the Scotes di&s;cipline in a way of his owne, none of the mo&s;t rational. He does not
<PB REF="6">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="1" REF="6">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="2" REF="7">&s;o much as pretend to &s;tate a que&s;tion, nor in his whole book to bring again&s;t any maine po&s;ition of his oppo&s;ites, either Scripture, father or rea&s;on, nor &s;o much as a&s;&s;ay to an&s;wer any one of their arguments again&s;t Epi&s;copacy; onely hee culs out &s;ome of their by-tenets, belonging little or nothing to the maine que&s;tions, and from them takes occa&s;ion to gather together in a heape all the calumnies which of old, or of late their knowne enemies out of the forge of their ma|lice and fraud, did obtrude on the credulity of &s;imple peo|ple: al&s;o &s;ome detorted pa&s;&s;ages from the bookes of their friends, to bring the way of that Church in dete&s;tation with|out any ju&s;t rea&s;on.</P>
<P>The&s;e practi&s;es in our warner,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The mo&s;t of his &s;tuffe is borrowed and long agoe con|futed.</NOTE> are the le&s;s pardonable, that though he knowes the chiefe of his allegations, to bee but borrowed from his late much beloved Comerads Ma&s;ter Corbet in his <HI>Ly&s;imachus Nicanor, and Ma&s;ter Maxewell</HI> in his <HI>I&s;&s;achars Burden,</HI> yet he was neither deterred by the &s;trange punishments, which God from heaven inflicted vi|&s;ibly on both the&s;e calumniatores of their mother Church, nor was plea&s;ed in his repeating of their calumnious argu|ments, to releeve any of them from the exceptions under the which they &s;tand publickly confuted, I &s;uppo&s;e to his own di&s;tinct knowledge, I know certainly, to the open view of thou&s;ands in Scotland, England and Ireland; but it makes for the warners de&s;igne to di&s;&s;emble here in Holland, that ever he heard of &s;uch books as <HI>Ly&s;imachus Nicanor, and I&s;|&s;achars Burden,</HI> much le&s;&s;e of <HI>Ma&s;ter Baylies an&s;wer</HI> to both, printed &s;ome yeares agoe at London, Edinburgh and Am&s;terdam, without a rejoinder from any of that faction to this day.
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The con|tumelious bitternes of the warners &s;pirit.</NOTE></P>
<P>How ever let our warner be heard. In the very fir&s;t page of his fir&s;t chapter, wee may ta&s;t the &s;weetnes of his meek Spirit: at the verie entrie, he concludeth but without any
<PB N="3" REF="7">pretence to an argument there or el&s;e where, <HI>the di&s;cipline of the Church of Scotland to be their owne invention, where|on they dote, the Diana, which them&s;elves have canonized, their own dreams, the counterfeyt image which they faine hath fallen down from Iupiter, which they &s;o much adore, the very quinte&s;&s;ence of refined popery, not only mo&s;t injurious to the civill Magi&s;trat, mo&s;t oppre&s;&s;ive to the &s;ubject, mo&s;t perni|cious to both; but al&s;o incon&s;i&s;tent with all formes of civill governement, de&s;tructive to all &s;orts of Policy, a rack to the con&s;cience, the heavie&s;t pre&s;&s;ure that can fall on a people.</HI> So much truth and &s;obernes doth the warner breath out in his very fir&s;t page.</P>
<P>Though he had no regard at all to the cleare pa&s;&s;ages of Holy Scripture, whereupon the Scotes doe build their Anti-Epi&s;copall tenets; nor any reverence to the harmony of the reformed Churches, which unanimou&s;ly joyne with the Scotes in the maine of their di&s;cipline, e&s;pecially in that which the Doctor hates mo&s;t therein, the rejection of Fpi&s;copacy: yet me thinks &s;ome little re&s;pect might have appeared in the man to the authority of the Magi&s;trat, and civil Lawes, which are much more ingeminated by this worthy divine o|ver all his book, then the holy Scriptures.</P>
<P>Can hee &s;o &s;oon forget that the whole di&s;cipline of the Church of Scotland, as it is there taught and practi&s;ed,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The war|ner &s;tricks at the Sco|tes di&s;ci|pline through the Kings &s;ides.</NOTE> is e&s;tablished by acts of Parliament, and hath all the &s;trength which the King and State can give to a civil Law? the war|ner may wel be grieved, but hardly can he be ignorant, that the Kings Maje&s;tie this day does not at all que&s;tion the ju|&s;tice of the&s;e &s;anctions: what ever therefore be the Doctors thoughts, yet &s;o long as hee pretends to keep upon his face the ma&s;ke of loyalty, he mu&s;t be content to eat his former words, yea, to burne his whole book: otherwi&s;e hee layes, again&s;t his own profe&s;&s;ions, a &s;lander upon the King, and
<PB N="4" REF="8">His Royal Father, of great ignorance, or huge unju&s;tice, the one having e&s;tablished, the other offring to e&s;tablish by their civill lawes, a Church di&s;cipline for the whole nation of Scotland, which truly is the quinte&s;&s;ence of Popery, per|nicious and de&s;tructive to all formes of civill governement, and the heavie&s;t pre&s;&s;ure that can fall on a people.</P>
<P>All the cau&s;e of this choler which the warner is plea&s;ed to &s;peake out;
<NOTE PLACE="marg">In the threshold hee &s;tum|bles on the Kings con|&s;cience.</NOTE> is the attempt of the Scotes, to obtrude their di&s;cipline upon the King, contrary to the dictars of his own con&s;cience, and to compell forraigne Churches to embrace the &s;ame. An&s;. Is it not pre&s;umption in our warner, &s;o &s;oone to tell the world in print what are the dictats of the Kings con&s;cience, as yet he is not his Maje&s;ties confe&s;&s;or, and if the Clerk of the Clo&s;et had whi&s;pered &s;ome what in his eare, what he heard in &s;ecret, hee ought not to have proclaimed it without a warrant; but we doe altogether mi&s;tru&s;t his re|ports of the Kings con&s;cience: for who will beleeve him, that a knowing and a ju&s;t King will ever be content, to command and impo&s;e on a whole Nation by his Lawes, a di&s;cipline contrary to the dictats of his owne con&s;cience. This great &s;tumble upon the Kings con&s;cience in the fir&s;t page, mu&s;t be an ominous ce&s;pitation on the threshold.</P>
<P>The other imputation had no ju&s;t ground:
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The Scots never of|fered to impo&s;e any thing upon En|gland.</NOTE> the Scotes did never medle, to impo&s;e any thing upon forraigne Churches, there is que&s;tion of none, but the English; and the Scotes were never &s;o pre&s;umptuous, as to impo&s;e any thing of theirs upon that Church. It was the a&s;&s;embly of divines at We&s;t|min&s;ter, convocat by the King and Parliament of England, which after long deliberation, and much debate, unani|mou&s;ly concluded the Pre&s;biterian di&s;cipline in all the parts thereof, to be agreable to the word of God: it was the two Hou&s;es of the Parliament of England without a contrary voice, who did ordaine the abolition of Epi&s;copacy, and
<PB N="5" REF="8">the &s;etting up of Presbyteryes and Synods in England and Ireland. Can heere the Scotes be &s;aid to compell the English to dance after their pype, when their own a&s;&s;embly of di|vines begins the &s;ong, when the Lords and Commons a&s;|&s;embled in the Parliament of England concurre without a di&s;cording opinion, when the King him&s;elfe for perfecting the harmony offers, to adde his voice for three whole yeares together?</P>
<P>In the remainder of the chapter the warner layes upon the Scotes three other crimes: fir&s;t,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The elder praelats of England were E|ra&s;tians, and more, but the younger are as much anti-Era&s;tian as the mo&s;t riged of the Pre&s;|bytery.</NOTE> That they count it Era&s;tia|ni&s;me to put the governement of the Church in the hand of the Magi&s;trat. An&s;w. The Doctors knowledge is greater then to bee ignorant, that all the&s;e goe under the name of Era&s;tians, who walking in Era&s;tus ways of flattering the Magi&s;trat, to the prejudice of the ju&s;t rights of the Church, run yet out much beyond Era&s;tus per&s;onall tenets; I doubt if that man went &s;o far as the Doctor heere and el&s;e where, to make all Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall juri&s;diction, but a part of the Magi&s;trats civill power, which for its execution, the &s;u|preame Governours of any &s;tate may derive out of the foun|taine of their &s;upremacy to what ever hands civill or Ec|cle&s;ia&s;tick them&s;elfes think fit to commit it. Let the Doc|tor adde to this much knowledge, but a little ingenuity, and he shall confes that his Brethren the Later Bishops, who claime Epi&s;copacy by divine right, are all as much again&s;t this E|ra&s;tian Cae&s;aro-papi&s;me, as any Pre&s;biterian in Scotland. The elder Bishops indeed of England and all the Lawes there for Epi&s;copacy &s;eeme to be point blank according to the Era&s;tian errours: for they make the crowne and royall &s;upremacy the originall, root and fountaine whence all the di&s;cipline of the Church doth flow: as before the days of Henry the eight it did out of the Popes head-ship of the Church under Chri&s;t. How ever let the Doctor ingenuou&s;ly
<PB N="6" REF="9">&s;peake out his &s;ence, and I am deceived, if he shall not ac|knowledge, that how gro&s;&s;e an Era&s;tian &s;o ever him&s;elfe and the elder Bishops of England might have been, yet that long agoe, the mo&s;t of his praelatical friends have become as much oppo&s;it to Era&s;tiani&s;me, as the mo&s;t rigid of the Presbiterians.</P>
<P>The other crime he layes to the charge of the Scotes is,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The Sco|tes fir&s;t and grea|te&s;t crime is irrecon|ciliablenes with Rome.</NOTE> that they admit no latitude in Religion, but will have every opinion afundamentall article of faith, and are aver&s;e from the reconciliation of the Prote&s;tant Churches: An&s;. If the warner had found it &s;ea&s;onable to vent a little more of his true &s;ence in this point, he had charged this great crime far more home upon the heade of the Scotes: for indeed though they were ever far from denying the true degrees of impor|tance which doe cleerly appeare among the multitude of Chri&s;tian truthes, yet the great quarrell heer of the warner and his freinds again&s;t them, is that they &s;poiled the Canter|burian de&s;igne of reconcealing the Prote&s;tant Churches not among them&s;elfes, but with the Church of Rome. When the&s;e good men were with all earne&s;tnes proclaming the greate&s;t controver&s;ies of Papi&s;ts and Prote&s;tants, to be up|on no fundamentalls but only di&s;putable opinions, wherein beleefe on either &s;ide was &s;afe enough, and when they found that the Papi&s;ts did &s;tand punctually to the Tenets of the Church of Rome, and were ob&s;tinately unwilling to come over to England, their great labour was that the English and the re&s;t of the Prote&s;tants, ca&s;ting a&s;ide their needle&s;&s;e be|leefe of problematick truths, in piety, charity and zeale, to make up the breach and take away the shi&s;me, should be at all the paines to make the journey to Rome. While this de|&s;igne is far advanced and furiou&s;ly driven on in all the three Kingdomes, and by none more in Yreland then the Bishop of Derry, behold the rude and plaine blewcapes &s;tep in to
<PB N="7" REF="9">the play and marre all the game: by no arte, by no terrour can the&s;e be gotten alongs to &s;uch a reconciliation. This was the fir&s;t and greate&s;t crime of the Scotes, which the Doctor here glances at, but is &s;o wy&s;e and mode&s;t a man as not to bring it above board.</P>
<P>The la&s;t charge of the chapter is,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The Scotes were ever anti epis|copall.</NOTE> that the Scotes keep not &s;till that re&s;pect to the Bishops of England, which they were wont of old in the beginning of Queen Elizabeths reigne. An&s;. In that letter cited by the warner from the generall a&s;&s;embly of Scotland. 1566. Se&s;&s;. 3. there is no word of ap|probation to the office of Epi&s;copacy: they &s;peake to the Bi|shops of England in no other quality or relation, but as Mi|ni&s;ters of the word, the highe&s;t &s;tile they give them is, re|verend Pa&s;tors and Brethren; the tenour of the whole Epi&s;tle is a grave and brotherly admonition to beware of that fatall concomitant of the mo&s;t moderat Epi&s;copacy, the trou|bling of the be&s;t and mo&s;t zealous &s;ervants of Chri&s;t for idle &amp; fruitles Ceremonies. How great a reverence the Church of Scotland at that time carried to praelacy, may be &s;een in their &s;upplication to the &s;ecret coun&s;ell of Scotland, in that &s;ame a&s;&s;embly the very day and Se&s;&s;ion wherein they write the letter in hand to the Bishops of England. The Arch-Bishop of S. Andrews being then u&s;urping juri&s;diction over the mini&s;try by &s;ome warrant from the &s;tate, the A&s;&s;embly was grieved, not only with the popery of that Bishop, but with his <HI>auncient juri&s;diction,</HI> which in all Bishops, Popish and prote&s;tant, is one and the &s;ame: That juri&s;diction was the only matter of their pre&s;ent complaint; and in relation there|to they a&s;&s;ure the coun&s;el in di&s;tinct tearmes, that <HI>they would never be more &s;ubject unto that u&s;urped tiranny the~ they would be to the devill him&s;elfe:</HI> So reverend an opinion had the Church of Scotland at that time of Epi&s;copall juri&s;diction.</P>
<P>But &s;uppone that &s;ome four&s;core yeares agoe, the Scotes
<PB N="8" REF="10">before they had ta&s;ted the fruits of Prote&s;tant Bishops,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The Prae|lates lately were found in the act of intro|ducing Po|pery, in|to the Church, and Tiran|ny into the Kingdom.</NOTE> had judged them tolerable in England, yet &s;ince that time by the long tract of mi&s;chiefes, which con&s;tantly has accompanied the order of praelacy, they have been put upon a more ac|curat in&s;pection of its nature, and have found it not only a needles, but a noxious and poy&s;onous weed, nece&s;&s;are to be plucked up by the root, and ca&s;t over the hedge. Be&s;ide al its former malefices, it hath been deprehe~ded of late in the very act of everting the foundations, both of Religion and governement, of bringing in Popery and Tiranny, in the Churches and States of all the three Kingdomes, (<HI>Canter|burian &s;elf conviction cap.</HI> 1.)</P>
<P>And for the&s;e crimes, it was condemned, killed, and buried in Scotland, by the unanimous con&s;ent of King, Church and Kingdom: when England thereafter both in their A&s;&s;embly and Parliament, without a di&s;cording voice had found it nece&s;&s;ary, to root out that unhappy plant, as long agoe with great wi&s;edome, it had been ca&s;t out of all the re&s;t of the reformed Churches, had not the Scotes all the rea&s;on in the World, to applaud &s;uch pious ju&s;t and ne|ce&s;&s;ary re&s;olutions of their English Brethren, though the warner should call it the greate&s;t crime?</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 N="2" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD>CHAP. II.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><NOTE PLACE="marg">No con|trover &s;ie in Scotland betwixt the King and the Church, a|bout the convoca|ting of Sy|nods.</NOTE> <HI>The Pre&s;biterians a&s;&s;ert po&s;itively, the Magi&s;trats right to con|vocat Synods, to confirme their acts, to reforme the Chur|ches within their dominions.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>IN the &s;econd Chapter the warner charges the Scotes pre&s;|bytery, with the overthrowing the Magi&s;trats right in
<PB N="9" REF="10">convocating of Synods. When he comes to prove this, he for|gets his challenge: and digre&s;&s;es from it to the Magi&s;trates power of choy&s;ing elders and making Eccle&s;ia&s;tick lawes, avowing that the&s;e things are done in Scotland by Eccle&s;i|a&s;tick per&s;ons alone, without con&s;ent of the king or his coun&s;el. An&s;. It &s;eemes our Warner is very ignorant of the way of the Scotes di&s;cipline, the ordinary and &s;et meetings of all a&s;&s;emblies both nationall and provincionall &s;ince the fir&s;t reformation are determined by acts of Parliament, with the Kings con&s;ent, &s;o betwixt the King and the Church of Scotland, there is no que&s;tion for the convocating of ordi|nary a&s;&s;emblies, for extraordinary, no man in Scotland did ever controvert the Kings power to call them when and where he plea&s;ed: as for the inhaerent power of the Church to meet for di&s;cipline, al&s;well as for worship, the Warner fals on it heereafter, we mu&s;t therefore pa&s;&s;e it in this place.</P>
<P>What hee meanes to &s;peake of the Kings power in choy|&s;ing elders or making Eccle&s;ia&s;tick Lawes, him&s;elfe knowes:
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The war|ners Era&s;|tian and Tirannick principles, hated by the King.</NOTE> his Maje&s;tie in Scotland did never require any &s;uch privi|ledge, as the election of elders, or Commi&s;&s;ioners to Par|liament, or members of any incorporation, civill or Eccle|&s;ia&s;tick, where the Lawes did not expre&s;ly provide the no|mination to be in the crowne. The making of Eccle&s;ia&s;tick Lawes in England, al&s;well as in Scotland, was ever with the Kings good contentment, referred to Eccle&s;ia&s;tick a&s;|&s;emblies: but the Warner &s;eemes to be in the mind of the&s;e his companions, who put the power of preaching, of admi|ni&s;tring the Sacraments and di&s;cipline in the &s;upreame Ma|gi&s;trat alone, and derives it out of him as the head of the Church to what members he thinks expedient to commu|nicat it: al&s;o that the legi&s;lative power al&s;well in Eccle&s;ia|&s;tick as civill affairs, is the property of the King alone. That the Parliaments and generall a&s;&s;emblies are but his arbitrary
<PB N="8" REF="11">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="9" REF="11">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="10" REF="12">coun&s;els, the one for matters of the &s;tate, the other for matters of the Church, with whom or without whom hee makes acts of Parliament and Church cannons, according to his good plea&s;ure, that all the offices of the Kingdome, both of Church and State are from him, as he gives a Com|mi&s;&s;ion to whom he will to be a sheriffe or ju&s;tice of peace, &s;o he &s;ends out whom he plea&s;eth to preach &amp; celebrate Sa|craments by virtue of his regal mi&s;&s;ion. The Warner and his Era&s;tian friends may well extend the royall &s;upremacy to this largenes, but no King of Scotland was ever willing to accept of &s;uch a power though by erroneous flaterers, &s;ometimes obtruded upon him, <HI>(&s;ee Canterburian &s;elf con|viction. cap. ult.)</HI></P>
<P>The Warner will not leave this matter in generall,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The War|ners igno|rant and fal&s;e re|port of the Scotes procee|dings.</NOTE> he di&s;|cends to in&s;tance a number of particular incroatchments of the Scots Presbiters upon the royall authority: wee mu&s;t di&s;pence in all his di&s;cour&s;e with a &s;mall peckadillo in rea&s;o|ning, hee mu&s;t bee permitted to lay all the faults of the Presbiterians in Scotland upon the back of the Pre&s;bitery it &s;elfe, as if the faylings of officers were naturall to, and in&s;e|parable from their office: mis-kenning this little mote of un|con&s;equentiall argumenting, we will goe through his parti|cular charges, the fir&s;t is, that King James anno 1579, re|quired the generall a&s;&s;embly, to make no alteration in the Church-Policy, till the next Parliament, but they contem|ning their Kings command, determined po&s;itively all their di&s;cipline without delay, and que&s;tioned the Arch-Bi&s;chop of Sainct Andrews for voting in Parliament according to the undoubted Lawes of the Land, yea twenty Pres|biters did hold the generall a&s;&s;embly at Aberdeen after it was di&s;charged by the King. An&s;. The Warner po&s;|&s;ibly may know, yet certainly he doth not care what he writes in the&s;e things to which hee is a meere &s;tran|ger:
<PB N="11" REF="12">the authentick regi&s;ters of the Church of Scotland convinces him heire of falshood.
<NOTE PLACE="marg">Bishops were abo|li&s;hed and Presby te|ries &s;et up in Scot|land with King Iames con&s;ent.</NOTE> His Maje&s;tie did write from Stirling to the generall a&s;&s;embly at Edinburgh 1579, that they should cea&s;&s;e from concluding any thing in the di&s;cipline of the Church, during the time of his minority; upon this de&s;ire the a&s;&s;embly did ab&s;taine from all conclu&s;i|ons, only they named a committee to goe to Striveling for conference which his Maje&s;tie upon that &s;ubject. What followeth thereupon? I. Immediatly a Parliament is called in October 1579, and in the fir&s;t act declares and grantes juri&s;diction unto the Kirk, whilk con&s;i&s;tes in the true preach|ing of the word of Je&s;us Chri&s;t, correction of manners, and admini&s;tration of the true Sacraments, and declares that there is no other face of Kirk, nor other face of Religion then is pre&s;ently by the favour of God e&s;tablished within this realme, and that there be no other juri&s;diction Eccle&s;ia&s;ti|cal acknowledged within this realme then that whilk is, and shalbe within the &s;amen Kirk, or that which flowes therfra, concerning the premi&s;&s;es. II. In Aprile 1580. Proclama|tion was made <HI>ex deliberatione Dominorum Con&s;ilii</HI> in name of the King, charging all Superintendentes and Commi&s;&s;io|ners and Mini&s;ters &s;erving at Kirkes. To note the names of all the &s;ubjectes al&s;weel men as women &s;u&s;pected to be Papi&s;tes or &mdash; and to admonish them &mdash; to give Confe&s;&s;ion of their faith according to the Forme approved by the Par|liament, and to &s;ubmitte unto the di&s;cipline of the true Kirk within a rea&s;onable &s;pace &mdash;: and if they faile &mdash; that the Superintendents or Commi&s;&s;ioners pre&s;ente a role or catalogue of their names unto the King and Lords of Secret Coun&s;ell whereby they shalbe for the time, between and the 15 day of Iulie nixt to come, to the end that the actes of Parliament made again&s;t &s;uch per&s;ones may be execute. III. The shorte Confe&s;&s;ion wes drawen up at the Kings
<PB N="12" REF="13">command, which was fir&s;t &s;ub&s;crived by his royall hand, and an act of Secret Coun&s;ell commanding all &s;ubjectes to &s;ub|&s;crive the &s;ame; as is to be &s;een by the Act printed with the Confe&s;&s;ion, wherein Hierarchie is abjured, that is (as hath been &s;ince declared by Nationall a&s;&s;emblies and Parliamen|tes both called and held by the King) epi&s;copacie is abjured. IV. In the a&s;&s;emblies 1580 and 1581 that Confe&s;&s;ion of faith and the &s;econd book of di&s;cipline (after debating many praeceding years) were approved (except one chapter <HI>de dia|conatu</HI>) by the A&s;&s;emblie, the Kings Commi&s;&s;ioner being al|wayes pre&s;ente, not finde we any thing oppo&s;ed then by him: yea then at his Maje&s;ties &s;peciall direction about fifty cla&s;&s;ical Presbyteries were &s;et up over all Scotland which remaine un|to this day, Was there heer any contempt of the roy all authority?</P>
<P>About that time &s;ome noble men had gote the revenues of the Bi&s;&s;hop-rickes for their private u&s;e; and becau&s;e they could not enjoy them by any legal right, therefore for elu|ding the Law, they did effectuate that &s;ome Mini&s;ters should have the title of this or that Bishopricke; and the revenues were gathered in the name of this titulare or tulchan Bishop, albeit hee had but little part: e. g. Robert Montgomerie Mini&s;ter at Sterline was called Arch-Bishop of Gla&s;gow: and &s;o it can bee in&s;tanced in other Bishop-rickes and abba|cies. Now this kind of praelats pretended no right to any part of the Epi&s;copall office, either in ordination or juri&s;dic|tion: when &s;ome of the&s;e men began to creep in to vote for the Church in Parliament, without any Law of the State, without any commi&s;&s;ion from the Church, the generall a&s;&s;embly di&s;charged them, being Mini&s;ters, to practi&s;e any more &s;uch illegall in&s;olencies, with this ordinance of the Church, after a little debate, King James at that time did shew his good &s;atisfaction.</P>
<PB N="13" REF="13">
<P> But the Warner heere jumps over nole&s;&s;e then twenty &s;e|ven years time from the a&s;&s;embly at Edinburgh 1579,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The inno|cency of the much maligned a&s;&s;embly of Aber|deen.</NOTE> to that at Aberdeen 1605, then was King James by the English Bi|shops per&s;wa&s;ion re&s;olved to put down the generall a&s;&s;em|blies of Scotland, contrary to the Lawes and con&s;tant prac|ti&s;e of that Church, from the fir&s;t reformation to that day. The act of Parliament did bear that once at lea&s;t a yeare the a&s;&s;embly should meet, and after their bu&s;ines was ended they should name time &amp; place for the next a&s;&s;embly. When they had met in the yeare 1602, they were moved to ad|journe without doing any thing for two whole yeares to 1604, when then they were conveened at the time and place agreed to by his Maje&s;tie, they were content upon his Ma|je&s;ties de&s;ire without doing any thing againe to adjourne to the nixt yeare 1605, at Aberdeen, when that dyet came his Maje&s;ties Commi&s;&s;ioner offered them a Letter: To the end they might be an A&s;&s;embly and &s;o in a Capacity to receave his Maje&s;ties Letter, with the Commi&s;&s;ioners good plea&s;ure they &s;ate downe, they named their Moderator and Clark they received and read the Kings letter commanding them to ri&s;e, which they obeyed without any farther action at all but naming a dyet for the nixt meeting according to the Lawes and con&s;tant practi&s;e of Scotland, hereupon by the pernicious coun&s;el of Arch-Bishop Banckroft at London, the King was &s;tirred up to bring &s;ore trouble upon a number of gracious Mini&s;ters.
<NOTE PLACE="marg">Chri&s;tmas and other &s;uper&s;titi|ous fe&s;ti|vals aboli|shed in Scotland, both by Church and State.</NOTE> This is the whole matter which to the Warner heir is &s;o tragick an in&s;olence, that never any Par|liament dur&s;t attempt the like. See more of this in the Hi|&s;toricall vindication.</P>
<P>The nixt in&s;tance of our Presbiteryes u&s;urpation upon the Magi&s;trat is their abolition, (before any &s;tatute of Parliament thereupon) of the Church fe&s;tivals in their fir&s;t book of di&s;ci|pline. An&s;. Con&s;ider the grievou&s;ne&s;&s;e of this crime, in
<PB N="14" REF="14">the intervall of Parliaments, the great coun&s;el of Scotland in the minority of the Prince entru&s;ted by Parliament to rule the Kingdome, did charge the Church to give them in wryte their judgement about matters Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall: in obedience to this charge the Church did pre&s;ent the coun&s;el with a wryte named &s;ince the fir&s;t book of di&s;ciplin: which the Lords of coun&s;el did approve, &s;ub&s;cribe and ratify by an Act of State: a part of the fir&s;t head in that wryte was that Chri&s;tmas, E|piphany, purification, and other fond fea&s;ts of the virgin Mary, as not warranted by the holy Scriptures, should bee laid a&s;ide. Was it any encroachment upon the Magi&s;trate for the Church to give this advice to the privy coun&s;ell when earne&s;tly they did crave it? the people of Scotland ever &s;ince have shewed their ready obedience to that direc|tion of the Church founded upon Scripture, and backed from the beginning with an injunction of the &s;tate.</P>
<P>His third in&s;tance of the Church of Scotlands u&s;urpation upon the Magi&s;trat is,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The friends of Epi&s;copa|cy thryves not in Scotland.</NOTE> their abolition of Epi&s;copacy in the a&s;&s;embly 1580, when the Law made it trea&s;on to impugne the authority of Bishops, being the third e&s;tate of the King|dome. An&s;. The Warner &s;eemes to have no more know|ledge of the affairs of Scotland, then of Japan or Utopia, the Law hee &s;peakes of was not in being &s;ome yeares after 1580, how ever all the generall a&s;&s;emblyes of Scotland are authori&s;ed by act of Parliament, to determine finally with|out an appeale in all Eccle&s;ia&s;tick affaires: in the named a&s;|&s;embly Lundie the Kings Commi&s;&s;ioner did &s;it and con&s;ent in his Maje&s;ties name to that act of abolition, as in the nixt a&s;&s;embly 1581, the Kings Commi&s;&s;ioner Caprinton did erect in his Maje&s;ties name the Presbiteryes in all the Land; it is true, three yeares thereafter a wicked Courtier Captaine James Stuart, in a shadow of a clo&s;&s;e and not &s;ummoned Parliament, did procure an act to abolish Presbiteries and
<PB N="15" REF="14">erect Bishops, but for this and all the re&s;t of his crimes that evill man was quickly rewarded by God before the world, in a terrible de&s;truction: the&s;e acts of his Parliament the very nixt yeare were di&s;claimed by the King, the Bishops were put downe, and the Presbitry was &s;et up again, and ne|ver more removed to this day.</P>
<P>The Warners digre&s;&s;ion to the perpetuity of Bishops in Scotland, to the acts of the Church and State for their re|&s;titution, is but to shew his ignorance in the Scotes &s;tory: what ever be the Epi&s;copall boa&s;tings of other Nations, yet it is evident that from the fir&s;t entrance of Chri&s;tian Religion into Scotland, Pre&s;biters alone without Bishops for &s;ome hundred yeares did governe that Church: and after the re|formation their was no Bishop in that Land, but in tittle and benefice till the yeare 1610; when Bancroft did con&s;ecrat three Scotes Mini&s;ters, all of them men of evill report, whom that violent Commi&s;&s;ioner the Earle of Dunbar in the cor|rupt and null a&s;&s;embly of Gla&s;gow, got authori&s;ed in &s;ome pairt of a Bishops office; which part only and no more was ratified in a po&s;terior Parliament. Superintendents are no where the &s;ame with Bishops much le&s;&s;e in Scotland where for a time only till the Churches were planted, they were u&s;ed as ambulatory Commi&s;&s;ioners, and vi&s;itors to preach the word, and admini&s;ter the Sacraments for the &s;upply of vacant and un&s;etled congregations.</P>
<P>The fourth in&s;tance is the Churches obtruding the &s;econd book of di&s;cipline, without the ratification of the State. An&s;.
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The &s;e|cond book of di&s;ciplin why not al ratified in Parlia|ment.</NOTE> For the Eccle&s;ia&s;tick enjoining of a generall a&s;&s;emblyes de|crees a particular ratification of Parliament is unnece&s;&s;ary; generall acts of Parliament commanding obedience to the acts of the Church, are a &s;ufficient warrant from the State, be|&s;ide, that &s;econd book of di&s;ciplin was much debated with the King, and at la&s;t in the generall a&s;&s;embly 1590, his con|&s;ent
<PB N="16" REF="15">was obtained unto it: for in that a&s;&s;embly where unani|mou&s;ly the &s;ub&s;cription of the &s;econd book of di&s;ciplin by all the mini&s;ters of the Kingdome was decried, his Maje&s;tie &s;ome time in per&s;on and alwayes by the chancelor his Com|mi&s;&s;ioner was pre&s;ent, and in the act for &s;ub&s;cription Se&s;&s;. 10. Augu&s;ti 8. it is expre&s;ly &s;aid that not only all the Mini&s;ters but al&s;o all the Commi&s;&s;ioners prae&s;ent did con&s;ent, among which Commis&s;ioners the chancelor, his Maje&s;ties Commi&s;|&s;ioner was chief. But neither the King nor the Church could get it to pa&s;&s;e the Parliament in regaird of the oppo&s;ition, which &s;ome States-men did make unto the&s;e parts thereof, which touched on their owne intere&s;t of unju&s;t advantage, this was the only &s;tick.</P>
<P>The next in&s;tance of the Churches encroachement is their u&s;urpation of all the old rents of the clergy,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The War|ners hipo|cri&s;y, cal|ling that a crime, which him&s;elfe counts a virtue.</NOTE> as the Churches patrimony, and their decerning in ana&s;&s;embly that nothing in the nixt Parliament should pa&s;&s;e before the Church were fully re&s;tored to her rents. An&s;. Con&s;ider heere the Warners hypocri&s;ie and unju&s;tice, he challenges the Pre&s;bi|terians for that which no praelate in the world did ever e&s;teem a fault, a meer declaration of their judgement that the Church had a ju&s;t right to &s;uch rents, as by law and long po&s;&s;es&s;ion were theirs, and not taken away from them by any lawfull meanes. What if heere they had gone on with the mo&s;t of the praelaticall party to advance that right to a <HI>jus divinum?</HI> what if they had put them&s;elves by a com|mand from Court, into the po&s;&s;es&s;ion of that right, with|out a proce&s;&s;e, as diver&s;e of the Warners friends were begun lately to doe in all the three Kingdomes? but all that he can here challenge the Scotes for, is a meere declaration of their &s;imple right, with a &s;upplication to the Regent his grace, that hee would indeavour in the nixt Parliament, to procure a ninth part of the Churches patrimony, for the mantainance
<PB N="17" REF="15">of the mini&s;try, and the poore of the country: for all the rent that the Churches then could obtaine or did petition, was but a third of the thirds of the benefices or tithes. That ever any a&s;&s;embly in Scotland did make any other addre&s;&s;e to the Parliament for &s;tipends then by way of humble &s;uppli|cation, it is a great untruth.</P>
<P>The la&s;t in&s;tance is, the erecting of Presbyteries through al the Kingdome, by an act of the Church alone. An&s;. I have showne already the untruth of this alleadgeance; the proofe heere brought for it, is grounded only upon an ambiguous word which the Warners ignorance in the Scotish di&s;ciplin and Presbitery (though the maine &s;ubject of his booke) permits him not to under&s;tand. The Presbyteries were &s;et up by the King after the a&s;&s;embly 1580, but the &s;econd booke of di&s;cipline of which alone the citation &s;peaks, how ever enjoind by many a&s;&s;emblies, yet it could never be got|ten ratified in any Parliament, only becau&s;e of the&s;e parts of it which did &s;peake for the patrimony of the Church, and oppugne the right of patronages.</P>
<P>How well the Warner hath proven the Presbiterian prac|ti&s;es to be injurious to the Magi&s;trate we have con&s;idered,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The War|ner a gro&s;&s;e E|ra&s;tian.</NOTE> po&s;&s;ibly he will bee more happy in his nixt undertaking, in his demon&s;trations that their doctrinall principles doe tram|ple on the Magi&s;trats &s;upremacy and Lawes; their fir&s;t prin|ciple hee takes out of the &s;econd book of di&s;ciplin. Cap. 7. That no Magi&s;trat nor any but Eccle&s;ia&s;tick per&s;ons may vote in Synods. An&s;. Though I find nothing of this in the place cited, yet there is nothing in it that cro&s;&s;eth either the Laws or the Kings &s;upremacy: for according to the acts of Parliament of Scotland both old and late and the con&s;tant practi&s;e of that Church, the only members of Pre&s;|byteries are Mini&s;ters and ruling elders. Is it the Warners minde to vent here his &s;uper-Era&s;tiani&s;me, that all Eccle&s;ia|&s;tick
<PB N="18" REF="16">a&s;&s;emblies Cla&s;&s;icall, Provinciall, nationall are but the arbitrary Courts of the Magi&s;trat for to advi&s;e him in the execution of his inhaerent power about matters Eccle&s;ia|&s;ticall; and for this cau&s;e, that it is in his arbitrement to give a deci&s;ive voyce in all Church a&s;&s;emblies, to whom and how many &s;o ever hee will? Though this may bee the Warners minde, as it hath been &s;ome of his friends, yet the mo&s;t of the praelaticall party will not man taine him heerein. How ever, &s;uch principles are contrary to the Lawes of Scotland, to the profe&s;&s;ions al&s;o and practi&s;es of all the Princes and Magi&s;trats that ever have lived there.</P>
<P>But the Warner heere may po&s;&s;ibly glaunce at another principle of his good friends,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">Praelatical principles impo&s;&s;ibi|litate al&s;o|lid peace, betwixt the King and his Kingdoms</NOTE> who have been willing lately to vent before al Britaine in print their Elevating the &s;upre|macy of Soveraignes &s;o far above Lawes, that what ever peo|ple have obtained to bee e&s;tabli&s;hed by never &s;o many a&s;&s;em|blies and Parliaments and confirmed with never &s;o many great &s;eales of ratification, and peaceably injoyed by never &s;o long a po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion, yet it is nothing but commendable wi&s;edome and ju&s;tice for the &s;ame Prince who made the fir&s;t conce&s;&s;ions or any of his &s;ucce&s;&s;ors when ever they find them&s;elfes &s;trong enough, to cancell all and make void what ever Parliaments, A&s;&s;emblies, royall ratifications, and the longe&s;t po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion made foolish people beleeve to be mo&s;t firme and unque&s;tionable. To this purpo&s;e Bishop Max|wel (from whom much of this warning is borrowed) doth &s;peak in his <HI>Sacro-Sancta regum Maje&s;tas.</HI> Though this had been the Cabine divinity of our praelats, yet what can be their intentions in &s;peaking of it out in the&s;e times of confu|&s;ion, them&s;elves mu&s;t declare: for the cleare con&s;equente of &s;uch doctrine &s;eemes to be a nece&s;&s;ity either of &s;uch Warners perpetuall banishment from the Courts and eares of Sove|raignes, or el&s;e that &s;ubjects be kept up for ever in a &s;trong
<PB N="19" REF="16">jealou&s;y, and feare that they can never be &s;ecure of their liberties, though never &s;o well ratified by Lawes and pro|mi&s;es of Princes any longer then the &s;word and power re|maines in their owne hand to pre&s;erve what they have ob|tained. Such Warners &s;o long as they are po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ed with &s;uch maximes of &s;tate, are cleare everters of the fir&s;t funda|tions of tru&s;t betwixt Soveraignes and &s;ubjects, they take away all po&s;&s;ibility of any &s;olid peace of any confident &s;etle|ment in any troubled &s;tate, before both parties be totally ruined or one become &s;o &s;trong that they need no more to feare the others malcontentment in any time to come.</P>
<P>Our &s;econd challenged principle is that wee teach the whole power of convocating a&s;&s;emblies to be in the Church.
<NOTE PLACE="marg">Era&s;tian praelats evert the legall foundati|ons of all govern|ment.</NOTE> An&s;. The Warners citations prove not that we maintaine any &s;uch a&s;&s;ertion, our doctrin and con&s;tant practi&s;e hath been to a&s;cribe to the King a power of calling Synods, when and where&s;oever he thought fit, but that which the Warner &s;eemes to point at is, our tenet of an intrin&s;icall power in the Church to meet, as for the word and Sacraments &s;o for di&s;|ciplin; in this all who are Chri&s;tians, old and late, the prae|laticall and Popi&s;h party as well as others, goe along with us to mantaine in doctrine and practi&s;e, a nece&s;&s;ity even in times of per&s;ecution, that the Church mu&s;t meet for the worship of God and execution of Eccle&s;ia&s;tick di&s;ciplin among their owne members. In this the doctrine and practi&s;e of the Scots is according to their &s;etled lawes, uncontroverted by his Ma|je&s;tie. If the Warner will mantaine, that in rea&s;on and con|&s;cience al the Churches of the world are oblidged to di&s;&s;olve and never more to meet when an erroneous Magi&s;trat by his Tyrannous edict commands them to doe &s;o, let him call up Era&s;tus from the dead to be di&s;ciplined in this new doc|trine of the praelats impious loyalty.</P>
<P>The third principle is that the judgment of true and fal&s;e
<PB N="20" REF="17">doctrine of &s;u&s;pen&s;ion and deprivation of Mini&s;ters belong|eth to the Church.
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The finall determi|nation of all Eccle|&s;ia&s;tick cau&s;es by the Lawes of Scot|land, is in the gene|rall a&s;&s;em|bly.</NOTE> An&s;. If this be a great here&s;ie it is to be charged as much upon the &s;tate as upon the Church, for the acts of Parliament give all this power to the Church, neith|er did the lawes of England or of any Chri&s;tian &s;tate, popish or prote&s;tant, refu&s;e to the Church the determination of &s;uch Eccle&s;ia&s;tick cau&s;es; &s;ome indeed doe debate upon the power of appeales from the Church, but in Scotland by the law, as no appeale in things civill goes higher then the Parliament &s;o in matters Eccle&s;ia&s;tick none goes above the generall a&s;|&s;embly. Complaints indeed may goe to the King and Parlia|ment for redre&s;&s;e of any wrong has been done in Eccle&s;ia&s;tick Courts, who being <HI>cu&s;todes religionis</HI> may by their coercive power command Eccle&s;ia&s;tick Courts to rectifie any wrong done by them contraire to Scripture, or if they per&s;i&s;t take order with them. But that two or three praelats should be|come a Court of delegats, to receave appeales from a gene|rall a&s;&s;embly, neither Law nor practi&s;e in Scotland did ever admit, nor can the word of God or any Equity require it. In the Scotes a&s;&s;emblies no cau&s;es are agitat but &s;uch as the Parliament hath agreed to bee Eccle&s;ia&s;tick and of the Churches cogni&s;ance: no Proce&s;&s;e about any Church rent was ever cogno&s;ced upon in Scotland but in a civill Court: its very fal&s;e that ever any Church cen&s;ure, much le&s;&s;e the highe&s;t of excommunication did fall upon any for robbing the Church of its patrimony.
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The divine right of di&s;cipline, is the tenet of the mo&s;t of praelats.</NOTE></P>
<P>Our fourth challenged principle is that wee maintain Ec|cle&s;ia&s;tick juri&s;diction by a divine right. An&s;. Is this a huge crime? is there divine in the world, either Papi&s;t or Pote&s;tant, except a few praelaticall Era&s;tians, but they doe &s;o? If the Warner will profe&s;se (as it &s;eemes hee mu&s;t) the contradiction of that which he a&s;cribes to us, his avowed te|net mu&s;t bee that all Eccle&s;ia&s;tick power flowes from the
<PB N="21" REF="17">Magi&s;trat, that the Magi&s;trat him&s;elf may execute all Church cen&s;ures, that all the Officers appointed by Chri&s;t for the governement of his Church, may bee laid a&s;ide, and &s;uch a kind of governors bee put in their place, as the Magi&s;trate shalbe plea&s;ed to appoint: that the &s;pirituall &s;word and Kei|es of heaven belong to the Magi&s;trate by vertue of his &s;u|premacy, als wel as the temporall &s;word and the Keies of his earthly Kingdome: our difference heere from the War|ner will not (I hope) be found the greate&s;t here&s;ie.</P>
<P>Our la&s;t challenged principle is,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">All the power of the Church in Scot|land is le|gall, and with the Magi&s;trats con&s;ente.</NOTE> that wee will have all our power again&s;t the Magi&s;trat, that is, although hee di&s;&s;ent. An&s;. It is an evill comentare that al mu&s;t be again&s;t the Ma|gi&s;trate, which is done again&s;t his con&s;ent: but in Scotland their is no &s;uch ca&s;e: for all the juri&s;diction which the church there does enjoy, they have it with the con&s;ent of the Magi|&s;trat: all is ratified to them by &s;uch acts of Parliament as his Maje&s;tie doth not at all controvert. Concerning that odious ca&s;e the Warner intimats, whither in time of per&s;ecutio~, when the Magi&s;trat cla&s;sheth with the Church, any Eccle&s;ia&s;tick di&s;ciplin be then to be exerci&s;ed; him&s;elfe can better an&s;wer it then we, who with the auncient Chri&s;tians doe think, that on all hazards (even of life) the church may not be di&s;&s;olved, but mu&s;t meet in dens and caves and in the wildernes for the word and Sacraments and keeping it &s;elfe pure by the divine ordinance of di&s;cipline.
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The pre|lats rather then to lay a&s;ide their owne inte|re&s;t, will keepe the King and his people in mi&s;ery for ever.</NOTE></P>
<P>Having cleered all the pernicious practi&s;es and all the wicked Doctrines, which the Warner layes upon us, I think it needles to in&s;i&s;t upon the&s;e defen&s;es which he in his aboun|dant charity brings for us, but in his owne way, that he may with the greater advantage impugne them: only I touch one pa&s;&s;age whereupon he make injurious exclamations: that which Mr. Gile&s;pie in his theoremes wryts; when the Ma|gi&s;trate abu&s;es his power unto Tyranny and makes havock
<PB N="22" REF="18">of all, it is lawfull to re&s;i&s;t him by &s;ome extraordinary wayes and meanes, which are not ordinarily to bee allowed: &s;ee the principles from which all our mi&s;eryes and the lo&s;&s;e of our gracious Ma&s;ter have flowed. An&s;. Wee mu&s;t heere yeeld to the Warner the great equity and nece&s;&s;ity that every doctrine of a Presbyter, should be charged on the Presbytery it &s;elfe, and that any Presbyter teaching the lawfulne&s;&s;e of a Parliaments defen&s;ive armes is tantamont to the Churches taking of armes again&s;t the king. The&s;e &s;mall uncon&s;equen|ces wee mu&s;t permit the Warner to &s;wallow downe without any &s;tick, however wee doe deny that the maxime in hand was the fountaine of any our mi&s;eryes, or the cau&s;e at all of the lo&s;&s;e of our late Soveraigne. Did ever his Maje&s;tie or any of his advi&s;ed coun&s;ellers declare it &s;imply unlawfull for a Parliament, to take armes for defence in &s;ome extraordinary ca&s;es, however the unhappines of the Canterburian Prelats did put his Maje&s;tie on the&s;e cour&s;es, which did begin and promote all our mi&s;ery, and to the very la&s;t the&s;e men were &s;o wicked as to refu&s;e the lou&s;ing of the&s;e bands which their hands had tyed about his mi&s;informed con&s;cience, yea to this day they will not give their con&s;ent, that his Maje&s;tie, who now is, should lay a&s;ide Epi&s;copacy, were it for the gay|ning the peaceable po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion of all his three Kingdomes, but are urgers of him night and day to adhaere to their errours, up|on the hazard of all the mi&s;eries that may come on his per&s;on, on his family and all his people: yet few of them to this day dur&s;t be &s;o bold as to print with this Warner, the unlawful|nes of a Parliaments armes again&s;t the Tyranny of a Prince in any imaginable ca&s;e, how extraordinary &s;oe|ver.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 N="3" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="23" REF="18">
<HEAD>CHAP. III. </HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The Lawes and cu&s;tomes of Scotland admitte of no appeal from the generall a&s;&s;embly.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>IN this chapter the challenge is,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">Appeals in Scot|land from a generall a&s;&s;embly were no le&s;&s;e irra|tionall then illegall.</NOTE> that there are no appeales from the generall A&s;&s;embly to the King, as in England from the Bishops Courts to the King in Chauncery, where a Commi&s;&s;ion u&s;es to be given to delegats, who di&s;cu&s;&s;e the appeales. An&s;. The warner con&s;iders not the difference of the Government of the Church of Scotland from that which was in England. what the Parliament is in the State, that the generall a&s;&s;embly is in the Church of Scotland: both are the highe&s;t courts in their owne kind. There is no appeale any where in moderat Monarchies to the Kings per&s;on, but to the King in certaine legall courts; as the Warner here con|fe&s;&s;eth the appeale from Bishops lyes not, to the King in his per&s;on, but to the King in his court of Chauncery. As no man in Scotland is permitted to appeale in a civil cau&s;e from the Lords of Se&s;&s;ion; much le&s;&s;e from the Parliament; &s;o no man in an Eccle&s;ia&s;tick cau&s;e is permitted by the verie civil Law of Scotland to appeale from the general a&s;&s;embly. According to the Scots order &amp; practi&s;e, the King in per&s;on or el&s;e by his high Commi&s;&s;ioner &s;its als u&s;ually in the generall a&s;&s;embly, as in Parliament. But though it were not &s;o, yet an appeale from a generall a&s;&s;embly to be di&s;cu&s;&s;ed in a Court of delegats, were unbe&s;eeming and unrea&s;onable, the one Court con&s;i&s;ting of above two hundred, all cho&s;en men the be&s;t and mo&s;t able of the Kingdome; the other but of two or three, often of very &s;mall either abilities or integrity, who yet may be more fitt to decerne in an Eccle&s;ia&s;tick cau&s;e then a &s;ingle Bishop over his officiall, the ordinary tru&s;ted in
<PB N="24" REF="19">all acts of juri&s;diction for the whole dioces. But the Scots way of managing Eccle&s;ia&s;tick cau&s;es is a great deale more ju&s;t, &s;afe and Satisfactory to any rationall man then that old popish order of the English, where all the &s;pirituall juri&s;|diction of the whole dioces was in the hand of one merce|nary officiall without all reliefe from his &s;entence, except by an appeale, as of old to the pope and his delegats, &s;o therafter to the King, though never to be cogno&s;ced-upon by him&s;elfe, but as it was of old by two or three delegats,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The Churches ju&s;t &s;everi|ty again&s;t Montgo|mery and Adam&s;on was ap|proven by the King and the parties them&s;elfe.</NOTE> the weake&s;t of all courts, often for the quality and ever for the number of the judges.</P>
<P>Two in&s;tances are brought by the Warner to prove the Church of Scotlands &s;topping of appeals from the generall A&s;&s;embly to the King, the ca&s;es of <HI>Montgomery</HI> and <HI>A|dam&s;on:</HI> if the cau&s;es and events of the named ca&s;es had been wel knowne to the Warner, as he made this chapter di&s;proportionally short, &s;o readily he might have deleted it al together. Both the&s;e men were infamous not only in their Mini&s;teriall charges but in their life &amp; conver&s;ation; both became &s;o in&s;olent that contrary to the e&s;tablished order of the Church &amp; Kingdome, being &s;uborned by wicked &s;tate&s;|men, who in that day of darknes had wel neer brought ruine both to King and country, would needs take upon them the office of Arch-Bishops. While the a&s;&s;embly was in proces with them for their manifold and high mi&s;deameanors, the King was moved by them and their evill patrons, to shew his high di&s;plea&s;ure again&s;t the a&s;&s;emblyes of the Church. they for his Maje&s;ties &s;ati&s;faction &s;ent their Commi&s;&s;ioners and had many conferences; whereby the pride and contempt of the&s;e prelats did &s;o encrea&s;e, that at la&s;t they drew the &s;en|tence of excommunication upon their own heads: the King after &s;ome time did acknowledge the equity of the Church proceedings, and profe&s;&s;ed his contentment their with:
<PB N="25" REF="19">both the&s;e unhappy men were brought to a humble confe&s;&s;i|on of their crimes, and &s;uch &s;ignes of repentance, that both after a renunciation of their titulare Bishopriks were read|mitted to the function of the mini&s;try, which they had de&s;er|ted. Never any other before or after in Scotland did appeale from the generall a&s;&s;embly to the King: the late excommu|nicat praelats in their declinatour again&s;t the a&s;&s;embly of Gla&s;gow, did not appeale as (I remember) to the King, but to another generall a&s;&s;embly to bee con&s;titute, according to their own Popish and Tyrannical principles.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 N="4" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD>CHAP. IV. </HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>Faulty Mini&s;ters in Scotland are le&s;&s;e exempted from pu|nishment, then any other men.</HI>
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The pride of prelats lately, but never the Presbitery did ex|empt their fel|lows from punish|ment for their civil faults.</NOTE></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE Warner in his fourth Chapter offers to prove, that the Scottish di&s;cipline doth exempt Mini&s;ters from pu|nishment for any trea&s;on or &s;edition they can act in their pulpits. An&s;. This challenge is like the re&s;t, very fal&s;e. The rules of the Church di&s;cipline in Scotland obliges Churchmen to bee &s;ubject to punishment, not only for every fault for which any other man is lyable to cen&s;ure, but ordaines them to bee punished for &s;undrie things, which in other men are not at all que&s;tionable: and what ever is cen&s;urable in any, they appoint it to be much more &s;o in a Mini&s;ter. It is very untrue, that the pulpits in Scotland are Sanctuaries for any crime, much le&s;&s;e for the grievous crimes of &s;edition and trea&s;on. Let the Warner remember, how short a time it is, &s;ince an Epi&s;copall chayre or a canonicall coate did priviledge in England and Ireland from all cen|&s;ure
<PB N="26" REF="20">either of Church or State, great numbers, who were no|toriou&s;ly knowne to be guilty of the foule&s;t crimes. Was e|ver the Warners companion Bishop Aderton challenged for his Sodomy, &s;o long as their commune patrone of Canterbury did rule the court? did the warner never heare of a prelate very &s;ibb to Doctour Bramble, who to this day was never cal|led to any account for flagrant &s;candals of &s;uch crimes as in Scotland are punishable by the gallows? the Warner doth not well to in&s;i&s;t upon the Scots Clergie exempting them|&s;elfe from civill punishments: no where in the world are Churchmen more free of crimes de&s;erving civil cogni&s;ance then in Scotland: and if the ears and eyes of the world may be tru&s;ted, the popish clergy this day in Italy and Spaine are not &s;o challengeable, as the praelaticall divines in England and Ireland lately were for many gro&s;&s;e misdemeanors.</P>
<P>But why does the Warners anger run out &s;o farre as to the preachers in Holland?
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The War|ner is inju|rious to the Mini|&s;ters of Holland.</NOTE> is it becau&s;e he knoweth the Church di&s;ciplin in Holland to be really the &s;ame with that he op|pugnes in the Scots, and that all the reformed Churches doe joyne cordially with Scotland in their rejection of E|pi&s;copacy? is this a ground for him to &s;lander our Brethren of Holland? Is it charity for him a &s;tranger to publish to the world in print that the mini&s;ters in Holland are &s;editious oratours, and that they &s;aucily controll the Magi&s;trats in their pulpits? Their crime &s;eemes to be, that for the love of Chri&s;t their ma&s;ter, they are zealous in their doctrin, to pre&s;&s;e upon the Magi&s;trat as well as upon the people the true prac|ti&s;e of piety, the &s;anctification of the &s;abbath day, the &s;up|pre&s;&s;ion of here&s;y and shi&s;me, and repentance for the &s;ins of the time &amp; place wherein they live. This is a crime whereof few of the Warners friends were wont to be guilty of: their shamefull &s;ilence and flattery was one of the great cau&s;es of all the &s;ins and calamities that have wracked the three King|domes:
<PB N="27" REF="20">the &s;treame of their &s;ermons while the enjoyed the pulpit, was to encourage to &s;uper&s;tition and contempt of piety, to &s;ing a&s;leepe by their ungracious way all, that gave eare unto them. The man is impatien, t to &s;ee the Pa&s;tors of Holland or any where, to walk in another path then his own, and for this cau&s;e would &s;tirre up their Magi&s;trats again&s;t them: as it was his and his Brethrens cu&s;tome to &s;tirre up the Magi&s;trats of Britan and Ireland to impri&s;on, banish, and heavily vex the mo&s;t zealous &s;ervants of God, only for their oppo&s;ition to the praelats profanity and errours. The War|ner (I hope) has not yet forgotten, how Doctor <HI>Bramble</HI> and his neighbour <HI>Lefly</HI> of Down did ca&s;t out of the Mini&s;try, and made flee out of the Kingdome, men mo&s;t eminent for zeale, piety and learning, who in a short time had done more good in the hou&s;e of God, then all the Bishops that ever were in Ireland, I meane Ma&s;ter <HI>Blaire,</HI> Ma&s;ter <HI>Leving&s;ton,</HI> Ma|&s;ter <HI>Hamilton,</HI> and Ma&s;ter <HI>Cuningham,</HI> and others.</P>
<P>The Warner needed not to have marked as a &s;ingularity of Geneva, that there all the Eccle&s;ia&s;ticks, <HI>qu&acirc; tales,</HI> are punishable by the Magi&s;trats for civil crimes; for wee know none of the reformed Churches, who were ever following Rome in exeeming the Clergy from &s;aecular juri&s;diction, ex|cept it were the Canterburian Praelats: who indeed did skarre the mo&s;t of Magi&s;trats from medeling with a canonical coat though defiled with drunckene&s;&s;e, adultery, &s;colding, fighting, and other evils, which were too common of late to that order.</P>
<P>But how does hee prove,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The pre|tended de|claration of King Iames, was Bi&s;hop A|dam&s;ons lying libel.</NOTE> that the Scots Mini&s;ters exempt them&s;elves from civill juri&s;diction? fir&s;t (&s;aith he) by the de|claration of King James 1584. An&s;. That declaration was not from King James, as him&s;elfe did te&s;tify the yeare thereafter under his hand, but from Ma&s;ter <HI>Patrike Adam|&s;on,</HI> who did acknowledge it to bee his owne upon his death
<PB N="28" REF="21">bed, and profe&s;&s;ed his repentance for the lyes and &s;launders, wherewith again&s;t his con&s;cience hee had fraughted that in|famous libell.</P>
<P>His &s;econd proofe is from the &s;econd booke of di&s;cipline Chapter II,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">Though alwayes in England yet never in Scot|land had Commi&s;|&s;arie any juri&s;dicti|on over Mini&s;ters.</NOTE> It is ab&s;urd that Commi&s;&s;aries haveing no func|tion in the Church, should be judges to Mini&s;ters to depo&s;e them from their charges. An&s;. Though in England the Commi&s;&s;ary and officiall was the ordinary judge to depo&s;e and excommunicat all the Mini&s;ters of the dioce&s;e, yet by the Lawes of Scotland no Commi&s;&s;aries had ever any juri&s;|diction over Mini&s;ters. But though the officialls juri&s;diction together with their Lords the Bishops were abolished, yet doth it follow from this, that no other juri&s;diction remaineth whereby Mini&s;ters might be punished either by Church and State, according to their demerits? is not this &s;trongly rea&s;oned by the Warner?</P>
<P>His third proofe is the ca&s;e of James Gib&s;on,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">Iames Gib&s;on was never ab&s;olved by the Church from his Proces.</NOTE> who had rai|led in pulpit again&s;t the King, and was only &s;u&s;pended, yea thereafter was ab&s;olved from that fault. An&s;. Upon the complaint of the Chancelor the alleadged words were con|demned by the generall a&s;&s;embly: but before the mans guil|tines of the&s;e words could bee tryed, hee did ab&s;ent him&s;elfe: for which ab&s;ence he was pre&s;ently &s;u&s;pended from his Mini&s;try: in the nixt a&s;&s;embly he did appeare and clear|ed the rea&s;on of his ab&s;ence to have been ju&s;t feare and no contumacy, this hee made appeare to the a&s;&s;emblyes &s;atis|faction, but before his proce&s;&s;e could be brought to any i&s;&s;ue, he fled away to England, where he died a fugitive never re|&s;tored to his chardge, though no tryell of his fault was per|fected.
<NOTE PLACE="marg">Ma&s;ter Blacks ap|peale from the coun|&s;el cleered.</NOTE></P>
<P>The fourth proofe is Mr. Blacke his ca&s;e: heereupon the Warner makes a long and odious narration. If wee interro|gat him about his ground of all the&s;e Stories, he can produce
<PB N="29" REF="21">no warrant but Spots-woods unprinted book: this is no au|thentick regi&s;ter whereupon any under&s;tanding man can re|ly, the writer was a profe&s;t enemy, to his death, of the Scot|tish di&s;ciplin, he &s;pent his life upon a Story for the di&s;grace of the Presbytery and the honour of Bishops: no man who is acquainted with the life or death of that Author will build his beleefe upon his words. This whole narration is abun|dantly confuted in the hi&s;toricall vindication, when the Warner is plea&s;ed to repeat the challenge from I&s;&s;achars burden hee ought to have replyed &s;omething after three yeares advi&s;ement to the printed an&s;wer.</P>
<P>The matter (as our regi&s;ters beare) was shortly thus, in the yeare 1596 the Popish and malignant faction in King James his court grew &s;o &s;trong that the countenance of the King towards the Church was much changed, and over all the Land great feares did daily increa&s;e of the overthrow of the Church di&s;cipline e&s;tablished by Law. The Mini&s;ters in their pulpits gave free warning thereof, among others Mr. Black of Saint Andrews, a mo&s;t gracious and faithful Pa&s;tor, did apply his doctrine to the &s;ins of the time; &s;ome of his E|nemies delated him at Court for words injurious to the King and Queen: the words hee did deny and all his hone&s;t hea|rers did ab&s;olve him by their te&s;timony from the&s;e calum|nies: of him&s;elfe hee was mo&s;t willing to be tryed to the ut|termo&s;t before all the world, but his Brethren finding the libelled calumnies to bee only a pretence and the true inten|tion of the Courtiers therein was, to &s;top the mouthes of Mi|ni&s;ters, that the crying &s;ins of the time should no more bee reproved in pulpits, they advi&s;ed him to decline the judge|ment of the coun&s;el, and appeale to the generall a&s;&s;embly, as the competent judge according to the word of God and the Lawes of Scotland, in the cau&s;e of doctrin; for the fir&s;t in&s;tance they did never que&s;tion, but if any thing truely
<PB N="30" REF="22">&s;editious had been preached by a Mini&s;ter that he for this might be called before the civill Magi&s;trat and accordingly punished but that every Mini&s;ter for the application of his doctrine according to the rules of &s;cripture to the &s;ins of his hearers for their reclaming, should be brought before a ci|vill court at the fir&s;t in&s;tance, they thought it unrea&s;onable and defired the King in the nixt a&s;&s;embly might cogno&s;ce upon the equity of &s;uch a proceding. The Mini&s;ters had many a conference with his Maje&s;tie upon that &s;ubject, often the matter was brought very neare to an amicable conclu&s;i|on, but becau&s;e the Mini&s;ters refu&s;ed to &s;ub&s;cribe a band for &s;o great a &s;ilence as the Court required again&s;t his Maje|&s;ties countenancing of treacherous Papi&s;ts, and favouring the enemies of religion, a &s;eveer Sentence was pronounced not only again&s;t Ma&s;ter <HI>Black,</HI> but al&s;o all the Mini&s;ters of Edinburgh.</P>
<P>In the meane time malcontented States-men did adde oyle to the flame,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The tu|mult of the &s;even|teenth day of Decem|ber was harmele&s;&s;e and no Mi|ni&s;ter guil|ty of it.</NOTE> and at the very in&s;tant while the Mini&s;ters and their friends are offering a petition to his Maje&s;tie, they &s;ubborne a villane to cry in one part of the &s;treets the Mini|&s;ters are &s;lain, and in another part of the &s;treets that the King was killed: whereupon the People rush all out to the &s;treets in their armes, and for halfe an howr at mo&s;t were in a tu|mult, upon meere ignorance what the fray might be, but without the hurt of any one man: &s;o &s;oone as it was found that both the King and Mini&s;ters were &s;afe, the people went all peaceably to their hou&s;es. This is the very truth of that innocent commotion, whereupon the Warner heere and his fellowes el&s;ewhere make all their tragedies. None of the Mini&s;try were either the authors or approvers thereof, though diver&s;e of them &s;uffered &s;ore troubles for it.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 N="5" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="31" REF="22">
<HEAD>CHAP. V. </HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>No Presbyterian ever intended to excommunicat any &s;u|preame Magi&s;trat.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE Warner in his fifth chapter chardges the Scotes for &s;ubjecting the King to the cen&s;ure of excommunication and bringing upon princes all the mi&s;eries which the popes excommunications of old wont to bring upon Anathema|ti&s;ed Emperours. An&s;.
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The prae|lats ordi|narly, but the Pres|bytery never were for ra&s;h ex|communi|cations.</NOTE> It does not become the Warner and his fellowes to object to any the abu&s;e of the dreadfull &s;entence of excommunication, no Church in the world was ever more guilty of that fault then the praelats of England and Ireland, did they ever cen&s;ure their own officialls for the pronouncing of that terrible &s;entence mo&s;t profanly again&s;t any they would, had it been for the non-payment of the &s;malle&s;t &s;ummes of mony. As for the Scotes, their doctrine and practi&s;e in the point of excommunication is as con&s;ide|rat as any other church in the world, that cen&s;ure in Scot|land is mo&s;t rare and only in the ca&s;e of ob&s;tinacy in a great &s;in: what ever be their doctrine in generall with all other Chri&s;tians and as I think with the praelaticall party them|&s;elves, that the object of Chri&s;tian doctrine Sacraments and di&s;ciplin is one and the &s;ame, and that no member of Chri&s;t, no &s;one of the Church, may plead a highnes above admo|nitions and Church cen&s;ures, yet I know they never thought it expedient &s;o much as to intend any proce&s;&s;e of Church a|nimadver&s;ion again&s;t their Soveraigne. To the worlds end I hope they shal not have againe greater grievances and tru|er cau&s;es of citation from their Princes then they have had already. It may be confidently beleeved that they who upon &s;o pregnant occa&s;ions did never &s;o much as intend the
<PB N="32" REF="23">beginning of a proce&s;&s;e again&s;t their King, can never be &s;uppo&s;ed in danger of any &s;uch proceeding for time to come. How ever,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The Prae|lats flatter Princes to their ruine.</NOTE> we love not the abu&s;ed ground of the Warners flattering of Princes to their owne great hurt: is it &s;o indeed that all the &s;ins of princes are only again&s;t God, that all Kings are not only above all lawes of Church and State but when they fall into the greate&s;t crimes that the wor&s;t of men have ever committed, that even then their &s;ins mu&s;t not be again&s;t any man or again&s;t any law? &s;uch Epi&s;copall doctrin &s;purrs on princes to the&s;e unhappy praecipies, and oppre&s;&s;ed people unto the&s;e outrages that both fall into inextricable calamities.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 N="6" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD>CHAP. VI.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>It grieves the Praelats that Presbyterians are faithfull Watch|men, to admonish Princes of their duty.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE &s;ixth Chapter is &s;pent on an other crime of the Pres|bytery;
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The Scots Mini&s;ters preaching for ju&s;tice, was ju&s;t and nece&s;|&s;ary.</NOTE> it makes the Presbiters cry to the Magi&s;trat for ju|&s;tice upon capitall offenders. An&s;. What hes Presbytery to doe with this matter were it never &s;o great an offence: will the Warner have all the faults of the praelaticall faction, flow from the fountaine of Epi&s;copacy? this uncon&s;equentiall rea&s;oning will not be permitted to men below the degrees of Doctors. But was it a very great crime indeed for Mini&s;ters to plead the cau&s;e of the fatherle&s;&s;e and widowes, yea the cau&s;e of God their Ma&s;ter and to preach unto Magi&s;trats, that according to Scriptures murtherers ought to die, and the Land bee purged from the &s;taine of innocent blood? when the shamefull impunity of murther made Scotland by
<PB N="33" REF="23">deadly fends, in time of peace a feild of warre and blood, was it not time for the faithfull &s;ervants of God to exhort the King toexecute ju&s;tice, and to declare the danger of mo&s;t frequent pardons drawne from his hand often again&s;t his heart by the importunity and deceitfull information of powerfull &s;olicitors, to the great offence of God again&s;t the whole land, to the unexpre&s;&s;ible griefe and wrong of the &s;uffering party, to the opening al&s;o of a new floodgate of more blood which by a legall revenge in time ea&s;ily might have been &s;topped? Too much pitty in &s;paring the wilfull shedders of innocent blood ordinarlie proves a great cruel|ty, not only to wards the di&s;con&s;olat oppre&s;&s;ed who cry to the vicegerents of God the avenger, for ju&s;tice in vaine, but al&s;o towards the &s;oule of him who is &s;pared and the life of many more who are friends either to the oppre&s;&s;or or op|pre&s;&s;ed.</P>
<P>As for the named ca&s;e of Huntly let the world judge,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">Huntlyes notorious crymes.</NOTE> whether the Mini&s;ters had rea&s;on often to give Warning a|gain&s;t that wicked man and his complices. Be&s;ide his apo&s;|tacy and after-&s;eeming-repentance his frequent relap&s;es into avowed popery, in the eighty eight he banded with the King of Spaine to overthrow the religion and government of the whole Iland and after pardon, from time to time did renew his trea&s;onable plots for the ruine of Britain: hee did commit many murders, he did invade under the no&s;e of the King, the hou&s;e of his Cou&s;in the Earle of Murray, and mo&s;t cruelly murdered that gallant Nobleman, hee appea|red with di&s;played Banner again&s;t the King in per&s;on, he killed thereafter many hundreds of the Kings good people, when the&s;e multiplyed outrages did cry up to the God of heaven, was is not time for the men of God to cry to the jud|ges of the earth to doe their duty, according to the war|rant of many Scriptures? what a dangerous humour of flat|tery
<PB N="34" REF="24">is this in our Praelats, not only to lull a&s;leep a Prince in a mo&s;t &s;infull neglect of his charge, but al&s;o to cry out upon others more faithfull then them&s;elves for a&s;&s;aying to breake of their &s;lumber by their whole&s;ome and &s;ea&s;onable admo|nitions from the word of God?</P>
<P>The nixt challenge of the Scotes Presbyters is that they &s;poile the King of his Tythes,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">Never any que&s;tion in Scotland betwixt the King and the Church, for Tythes and patro|nages.</NOTE> fir&s;t fruits, patronage and dependence of his &s;ubjects. An&s;. The Warner under&s;tands not what he writes, the Kings Maje&s;tie in Scotland never had, never craved any fir&s;t fruits: the Church never &s;poi|led the King of any Tythes, &s;ome other men indeed, by the wickedne&s;&s;e mo&s;t of Praelats and their followers, did cou|&s;in both the King and the Church of many Tythes: but his Maje&s;tie and the Church had never any controver&s;ie in Scot|land about the Tythes: for the King, &s;o far as concerned him&s;elfe, was ever willing that the Church should enjoy that which the very act of Parliament acknowledgeth to bee her patrimony. Nor for the patronages had the Church any plea with the King: the Church declared often their minde of the iniquity of patronages, wherein they never had from the King any con&s;iderable oppo&s;ition, but from the Nobi|lity and gentry the oppo&s;ition was &s;o great, that for peace|&s;ake the Church was content to let patronages alone, till God should make a Parliament lay to heart what was incum|bent for gracious men to doe, for liberating congregations from their &s;lavery of having Mini&s;ters intruded upon them by the violence of Patrones. Which now at la&s;t (ble&s;&s;ed be God) according to our mind is performed. As for the de|pendence of any va&s;&s;als upon the King,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">King Iames a|vowes him&s;elfe a hater of Era&s;tiani&s;|me.</NOTE> it was never que|&s;tioned by any Presbyterian in Scotland.</P>
<P>What is added in the re&s;t of the Chapter, is but a repeti|tion of that which went before, to wit, the Presbyters deny|ing to the King the &s;pirituall government of the Church,
<PB N="35" REF="24">and the power of the keyes of the Kingdome of heaven: &s;uch an u&s;urpation upon the Church, King James declared un|der his hand (as at length may be &s;een in the Hi&s;toricall vin|dication) to be a &s;inne again&s;t the Father, Son, and Holy Gho&s;t, which puts in the hand of the Magi&s;trat the power of preaching and celebrating the Sacraments: a power which &s;ince that time no Magi&s;trat in Britaine did a&s;&s;ume, and if any would have claimed it, none would have more oppo&s;ed, then the mo&s;t zealous patrones of Epi&s;copacy. The injurious invectives, which the Warner builds upon this his Era&s;tian a&s;&s;ertion, wee pa&s;&s;e them as Ca&s;tles in their aire, which mu&s;t fall and evanish for want of a foundation. Only before I leave this Chapter, let the Warner take a good Sentence out of the mouth of that wy&s;e Prince King James, to te&s;tifie yet farther his minde again&s;t Era&s;tiani&s;me. His Maje&s;tie in the yeare 1617 having come in progre&s;&s;e to vi&s;it his auncient Kingdome of Scotland, and being pre&s;ent in per&s;one at a publick di&s;putation in Theologie in the Univer&s;itie of St. Andrews, whereof al&s;o many both Nobles and Church-men of both Kingdomes were auditors; when one of tho&s;e that acted a part in the di&s;putation, had affirmed and went about to maintaine this a&s;&s;ertion that the King had power to depo&s;e Mini&s;ters from their Mini&s;teriall function. The King him|&s;elf as abhorring &s;uch flatterie, cried out with a loud voice, <HI>Ego po&s;&s;um deponere Mini&s;tri caput, &s;ed non po&s;&s;um deponere ejus officium.</HI></P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 N="7" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD>CHAP. VII.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The Presbyterie does not draw from the Magi&s;trat any paritie of his power by the cheate of any relation.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>IN the &s;eventh chapter the Warner would cau&s;e men be|lieve many more of the Presbyteries u&s;urpations upon the
<PB N="36" REF="25">civill Magi&s;trate.
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The Pres|bytery co|gno&s;ceth only upon &s;candals, and that in &s;ewer civil things then the Bi&s;hops|courts were wont to meddle with.</NOTE> The fir&s;t is that all offences what&s;oever are cogno&s;cible in the con&s;i&s;tory upon the ca&s;e of &s;candals. An&s;. Fir&s;t the Presbyterie makes no offence at all to come before the con&s;i&s;tory, but &s;candall alone. Secondly the&s;e civill offences (the &s;candall whereof comes before the Pres|bytery) are but very few, and a great deale fewer than the Bishops officiall takes notice of in his con&s;i&s;toriall court. That capitall crimes pa&s;t over by the Magi&s;trate should bee cen&s;ured by the Church, no &s;ociety of Chri&s;tians who have any di&s;cipline, did ever call in que&s;tion. When the &s;word of the Magi&s;trat hes &s;pared a murderer, an adulterer, a Bla&s;phemer; will any ingenuous, either praelaticall or popish divine, admitte of &s;uch to the holy table without &s;ignes of repentance?</P>
<P>The Warners &s;econd u&s;urpation is but a branch of the fir&s;t, that the Presbyterie drawes directly before it &s;elfe the cogni|&s;ance of fraud in barganing, fal&s;e mea&s;ures, oppre&s;&s;ion and in the ca&s;e of Mini&s;ters, brybing, u&s;ury, fighting, per|jury, &amp;c. An&s;. Is it then the Warners minde, that the notorious &s;lander of &s;uch gro&s;&s;e &s;ins does not de&s;erve &s;o much, as an Eccle&s;ia&s;tick rebooke? Shall &s;uch per&s;ons with|out admonition be admitted to the holy communion? Se|condly the named ca&s;es of fraud in barganing, fal&s;e mea&s;u|res, oppre&s;&s;ion, come &s;o rarely before our Church-judica|tories that though the&s;e thirty yeares I have been much con|ver&s;ant in Presbyteries, yet did I never &s;ee, nor doe I re|member that ever I heard any of the&s;e three ca&s;es brought before any church a&s;&s;embly. In the per&s;one of Mini&s;ters, I grant, the&s;e faults which the canons of the Church in all times and places make the cau&s;es of deprivation are cog|no&s;ced upon in Presbyteries, but with the good liking (I am &s;ure) of all both papi&s;ts and praelats, who them&s;elves are free of &s;uch vices. And why did not the Warner put in a|mong
<PB N="37" REF="25">the cau&s;es of church mens deprivation from office and benefite, adultery, gluttonny and drunkennes? are the&s;e in his, &amp;c. which he will not have cogno&s;cible by the Church in the per&s;ons of Bishops and Doctors?</P>
<P>The Warners third challenge amounts to an high crime, that Presbyterian Mini&s;ters are bold to preach upon the&s;e &s;criptures which &s;peake of the Magi&s;trats duty in his office, or dare offer to re&s;olve from &s;cripture any doubt, which per|plexeth the con&s;cience of Magi&s;trats or people, of Husband or Wife, of Ma&s;ter or Servant, in the di&s;charge of their Chri&s;tian duty one to another. What ever hath been the negligence of the Bishop of Derry, yet I am &s;ure, all the preaching Praelats and Doctors of England pretended a great care to goe about the&s;e uncontroverted parts of their mini&s;terial function, and yet without medling with the My|&s;teries of State, or the depths of any mans particulare vocati|on; much le&s;&s;e with thejudgement of juri&s;diction in politi|call or aeconomicall cau&s;es.</P>
<P>As for the Churches declaration again&s;t the Late engage|ment;
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The Churches proceed|ings in the late enga|gement cleered from mi&s;takes.</NOTE> did it not well become them to &s;ignify their judge|ment in &s;o great a ca&s;e of con&s;cience, e&s;pecially when the Parliament did propone it to them for re&s;olution, and when they found a conjunction driven on with a cleerly malig|nant partie, contrary to &s;olemne oathes and covenants, unto the evident hazard of Religione and them who had been mo&s;t eminent in&s;truments of its pre&s;ervation; was it not the churches duty to give warning again&s;t that &s;inne, and to exhort the ring leaders therein to repentance?</P>
<P>But our Warner mu&s;t needs in&s;i&s;t upon that unhappy en|gagement, and fa&s;ten great blame upon the Church for gi|ving any advice about it. An&s;. Mu&s;t it be Je&s;ui&s;iti&s;me, and a drawing of all the civill affaires to the Churches barre <HI>in ordine ad Spiritualia,</HI> for an a&s;&s;embly to give their advice
<PB N="38" REF="26">in a mo&s;t eminent and important ca&s;e of con&s;cence, when earne&s;tly called upon in a multitude of &s;upplications from the mo&s;t of the Congregations under their charge; yea when required by the States of the Kingdome in &s;everall expre&s;&s;e me&s;&s;ages for that end? It &s;eemes, its our Warners conclu&s;i|on, if the Magi&s;trat would draw all the Churches in his ju|ri&s;diction to a mo&s;t unlawfull warre, for the advancement of the greate&s;t impiety and unju&s;tice po&s;&s;ible, wherein nothing could be expected by all who were engaged there|in but the cur&s;e of God; if in this ca&s;e a doubting Natione should de&s;ire the a&s;&s;emblies coun&s;el for the &s;tate of their &s;ou|les, or if the Magi&s;trate would put the Church to declare what were lawfull or unlawfull according to the word of God, that it were nece&s;&s;ary heer for the &s;ervants of God to be altogether &s;ilent, becau&s;e indeed warre is &s;o civill a bu&s;i|nes, that nothing in it concernes the &s;oule, and nothing a|bout it may be cleered by any light from the word of God.</P>
<P>The truth is, the Church in their publick papers to the Par|liament, declared oftner then once, that they were not a|gain&s;t, but for an engagement, if &s;o that Chri&s;tian and friend|ly treaties could not have obtained rea&s;on, and all the good people in Scotland were willing enough to have hazarded their lives and e&s;tates, for vindicating the wrongs done, not by the Kingdome of England, but by the &s;ectarian party there, again&s;t God the King, covenant and both Kingdo|mes: but to the great griefe of their hearts, their hands were bound and they forced to &s;it &s;till, and by the over great cunning of &s;ome, the erroneous mis-per&s;wa&s;ions of others and the rash praecipitancy of it, that engagement was &s;o &s;poiled in the &s;tating and mannaging, that the mo&s;t religi|ous with peace of con&s;cience could not goe along nor en|courage any other to take part therein. The Warner touches on three of their rea&s;ons: but who will looke upon their pu|blick
<PB N="39" REF="26">declarations, shall find many more, which with all faithfullne&s;&s;e were then propounded by the Church, for the rectifying of that action, which, as it &s;tood in the &s;tate and managment, was cleerly foretold to be exceeding like to de&s;troy the King and his friends of all &s;orts in all the three Kingdomes. The irreparable lo&s;&s;es and unutterable cala|mities which quickly did follow at the heeles, the misbe|leefe and contempt of the Lords &s;ervants and the great dan|ger religion is now brought unto in al the&s;e Kingdomes, hes, I &s;uppo&s;e, long agoe brought griefe enough to the heart of them who&s;e unadvi&s;ed rashnes and intemperate fervour did contribute mo&s;t for the &s;poiling of that de&s;igne.</P>
<P>The fir&s;t de&s;ire about that engagement which the Warner gives to us, concernes the &s;ecurity of religion. In all the de|bate of that matter, it was aggreed (without que&s;tion upon all hands, that the Sectarian party de&s;erved punishment for their wicked attemptes upon the Kings per&s;one, contrary to the directions of the Parliamentes of both Kingdomes, and that the King ought to be re&s;cued out of their hands, and brought to one of his hou&s;es for perfecting the treaty of peace which often had been begunne: but here was the que&s;tion; Whither the Parliament and Army of Scotland ought to de|clare their re&s;olutiones to bring his Maje&s;tie to London with honour, freedome and &s;afty, before he did promi&s;e any &s;e|curity for e&s;tablishing Religion; The Parliaments of both Kingdomes in all their former treaties had ever pre&s;&s;ed upon the King a number of propo&s;itions to be &s;igned by his Maje|&s;tie before at all he came to London: was it then any fault in the Church of Scotland to de&s;ire the granting but of one of the&s;e propo&s;itions concerning Religion and the covenant, before the King were brought (by the new hazard of the lives and e&s;tats of all the Scottish nation) to &s;it in his Parliament in that honnor and freedome which him&s;elfe did de&s;ire? There
<PB N="40" REF="27">was no complaint, when many of thirty propo&s;itions were pre&s;&s;ed to be &s;igned by his Maje&s;tie for &s;atisfaction and &s;ecu|rity to his people, after &s;o great and long de&s;olations: how then is an out-cry made, when all other propo&s;itions are po&s;tponed, and only one for Religion is &s;tuck upon, and that not before his Maje&s;ties re&s;cue and deliverance from the hands of the &s;ectaries, but only before his bringing to Lon|don in honor freedom and &s;afety? This demande, to the Warner, is a crime, and may be &s;o to all of his beleefe, who takes it for a high unju&s;tice, to re&s;traine in any King the ab&s;o|lute power by any condition: for they doe mantaine that the admini&s;tration of all things both of Church and &s;tate does re&s;ide &s;o freely and ab&s;olutly in the meere will of a Sove|raigne, that no ca&s;e at any time can fall out, which ought to bound that ab&s;olutne&s;&s;e with any limitation.</P>
<P>The &s;econd particular the Warner pitches upon, is the Kings negative voyce; behold how criminous we were in the point; When &s;ome (mo&s;t needle&s;ly) would needs bring into debate the Kings negative voyce in the Parliament of England, as one of the royall praerogatives to bee maintai|ned by our engagement: it was &s;aid, that all di&s;cour&s;e of that kynde might bee laid a&s;ide as impertinent for us: if any debate should chance to fall upon it, the proper place of it was, in a free Parliament of England; that our Lawes did not admit of a negative voyce to the King in a Parliament of Scot|land; and to pre&s;&s;e it now as a prerogative of all Kings, (be|&s;ides the reflection it might have upon the rights of our Kingdome,) it might put in the hand of the King a power to deny all and every one of the&s;e things, which the Parlia|ments of both Kingdomes had found nece&s;&s;ary for the &s;etling the peace in all the three dominions. Wee marvail not, that the Warner heere should taxe us of a great errour, &s;eeing it is the beleefe of his faction, that every King hath not onely
<PB N="41" REF="27">a negative but an ab&s;olute affirmative voyce in all their Par|liaments, as if they were nothing but their arbitrary coun|&s;els for to per&s;wade by their rea&s;ons but not to conclude nor impede any thing by their votes; the whole and intire power of making or refu&s;ing Lawes being in the Prince alone, and no part of it in the Parliament.</P>
<P>The Warners third challenge again&s;t us about the ingage|ment is, as if the Church had taken upon it to nominate the officers of the army; and upon this he makes his invectives. An&s;. The Church was farre from &s;eeking power to nomi|nate any one officer: but the matter was thus; when the State did require of them, what in their judgement would give &s;atisfaction to the people, and what would encourage them to goe along in the ingagement? one and the la&s;t parte of their an&s;wer was, that they conceived if a Warre shalbe found nece&s;&s;arie, much of the peoples encouragement would depend upon the qualification of the commanders, to whom the mannaging of that great tru&s;t should be commit|ted: for after the right &s;tating of the Warre, the nixt would be the carying on of it by &s;uch men who had given con&s;tante proofe of their integrity. To put all the power of the King|dome in their hande, who&s;e by pa&s;t mi&s;cariadges had given ju&s;t occa&s;ion to &s;u&s;pect their de&s;ignes and firmene&s;&s;e to the intere&s;t of God before their owne or any other mans, would fill the hearts of the people with jealou&s;ies and feares, and how whol&s;ome an advice this was, experience hath now too cleerly demon&s;trate.</P>
<P>To make the world know our further re&s;olutiones to medle with civile affaires, the Warner is plea&s;ed to bring out a|gain&s;t us above 80 yeares old &s;tories, and all the &s;tuffe which our malicious enemy Spot&s;ewood can furnish to him: from this good author he alledges that our Church di&s;charged merchants to traffique with <HI>Spaine,</HI> and commanded the
<PB N="42" REF="28">change of the mercat dayes in <HI>Edenburgh.</HI> An&s;. Both the&s;e calumnies are taken of at length in the Hi&s;toricall Vin|dication. After the <HI>Spanish</HI> inva&s;ion of the yeare eighty eight, many in Scotland kept corre&s;pondence with <HI>Spaine</HI> for treacherous de&s;ignes: the Inqui&s;itors did &s;educe &s;ome, and per&s;ecute others of our merchants in their traffique, the Church did deale with his Maje&s;tie to interceed with the <HI>Spa|nish</HI> King for more liberty to our country men in their tra|ding: and in the meane time while an an&s;wer was returned from <HI>Madrile,</HI> they adverti&s;ed the people to be warry, how they hazarded their &s;oules for any worldly gaine which they could find about the inqui&s;itors feet.</P>
<P>As for the mercat dayes,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The Church medled not with the mun|day mer|cat but by way of &s;upplica|tion to Parlia|ment.</NOTE> I grante, it was a great griefe to the Church, to &s;ee the fabbath day profaned by handy la|bour and journeying, by occa&s;ion of the munday-mercats in the mo&s;t of the great tounes: for remedie heerof, many &s;upplications have been made by the A&s;&s;embly to the Par|liament: but &s;o long as our Bishops &s;atte there, the&s;e peti|tiones of the Church were alwayes eluded: for the praelats labour in the whole Iland was to have the &s;unday no Sab|bath, and to procure by their Doctrine and example the profanation of that day by all &s;orts of playes, to the end people might be brought back to their old licentiou&s;nes and ignorance, by which the Epi&s;copall Kingdome was advan|ced. It was vi&s;ible in <HI>Scotland,</HI> that the mo&s;t eminent Bi|shops were u&s;ual players on the Sabbath, even in time of divine &s;ervice. And &s;o &s;oone as they were ca&s;t out of the Par|liament, the Churches &s;upplications were granted, and acts obtained for the carefull &s;anctification of the Lords day, and removing of the mercats in all the land from the Mun|day to other dayes of the week.</P>
<P>The Warners nixt challenge of our u&s;urpation is, the a&s;|&s;embly at Edinburgh 1567 their ratifying of acts of Parlia|ment,
<PB N="43" REF="28">and &s;ummoning of all the country to appeare at the nixt a&s;&s;embly.
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The Church once for &s;afty of the infant Kings life, with the concur|rence of the &s;ecrete coun&s;el did cal an extraordi|nary meet|ing.</NOTE> An&s;. If the Warner had knowne the hi&s;to|ry of that time, he would have choy&s;ed rather to have omit|ted this challenge, then to have proclaimed to the world the great rottenne&s;&s;e of his own heart; at that time the condition of the Church and Kingdome of Scotland was lamentable, the Queen was declared for popery, King James's Father was cruelly without any cau&s;e murthered by the Earle of Bothwell; King James him&s;elfe in his infancy was very neare to have been de&s;troyed by the murtherer of his Father, there was no other way conceivable of &s;aftie for Religion for the infant King, for the Kingdome, but that the Prote&s;tantes should joine together for the defence of King James again&s;t the&s;e popish murtherers. For this end the generall a&s;&s;embly did crave conference of the &s;ecrete coun&s;el: and they with mutual advi&s;e did call for a meeting of the whole Prote&s;tant party: which did conveen at the time appointed mo&s;t fre|quently in an extraordinary and mixed a&s;&s;embly of all the con&s;iderable per&s;ons of the Religion, Earles, Lords, Bar|rons, Gentlemen, Burge&s;&s;es and Mini&s;ters, and &s;ub&s;cribed a bond for the revenge of King <HI>Henryes</HI> death, and the de|fence of King <HI>Iames</HI> his life: This mixed and extraordinary a&s;&s;embly made it one of the chiefe articles in their bond to de|fend the&s;e Actes of the Parliament 1560 concerning religi|on, and to endeavour the ratification of them in the nixt en|&s;uing Parliament. As for the a&s;&s;emblies letter to their Brethren for &s;o frequent a meeting at the nixt extraordinary a&s;&s;embly, it had the authority of the &s;ecret coun&s;el; it was in a time of the greate&s;t nece&s;&s;ity, when the Religion and liberties of the land were in evident hazard from the po|tent and wicked coun&s;els of the popish party, both at home and abroad; when the life of the young King was daily in vi|&s;ible danger from the hands of them who had murthered his
<PB N="44" REF="29">Father, and ravished his Mother. Le&s;&s;e could not have been done in &s;uch a juncture of time by men of wi&s;edom and courage, who had any love to their Religion, King and country: but the re&s;olution of our praelats is to the contrary, when a mo&s;t wicked villaine had obtained the connivance of a Queen to kill her husband, and to make way for the killing of her Son in his Cradle, and after the&s;e murders to draw a nation &amp; Church from the true Religion, e&s;tablished by Law, into popery; and a free Kingdome to an illegall Tyranny; in this ca&s;e there may be no meeting, either of Church or State, to provide remedies again&s;t &s;uch extraor|dinary mi&s;chiefes. Beleeve it, the <HI>Scotes</HI> were never of this opinion.</P>
<P>What is &s;ubjoined in the nixt paragraph of our Churches prae&s;umption to abolish acts of Parliament;
<NOTE PLACE="marg">By the lawes and cu&s;tomes of Scot|land the A&s;&s;embly praecieds the Par|liament in the refor|mation of Eccle&s;ias|tical abu|&s;es.</NOTE> is but a repeti|tion of what is &s;poken before. Not only the lawes of <HI>Scotland</HI> but equity and nece&s;&s;ity referres the ordinary reformation of errours and abu&s;es in Religion to the Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall a&s;&s;em|blies: what they find wrong in the Church, though ratified by acts of Parliament, they rectify it from the word of God, and thereafter by petition obtaines their rectification to be ratifyed in a following Parliament, and all former acts to the contrary to be annulled. This is the ordinary Methode of proceeding in <HI>Scotland</HI> and (as I take it) in all other States and Kingdomes. Were Chri&s;tians of old hindred to leave paganisme and embrace the Go&s;pell, till the emperiall la|wes for paganisme and again&s;t Chri&s;tianity were revoked? did the oecumenicall and National Synods of the auncients &s;tay their reformation of here&s;ies and corruptions in reli|gion, till the lawes of State (which did countenance the&s;e errors) were cancelled? Was not popery in <HI>Germany France</HI> and <HI>Britaine</HI> &s;o firmely e&s;tablished, as civil lawes could doe it? It &s;eems, the Warner heer does joyne with his Brother
<PB N="45" REF="29"><HI>I&s;&s;achar,</HI> to proclaime all our Reformers in <HI>Britaine France</HI> and <HI>Germany,</HI> to be Rebells for daring by their preachings and A&s;&s;emblies to change the&s;e things, which by acts of Parliaments had been approven, before new Parliaments had allowed of their reformation. Neverthele&s;&s;e this plea is foolishly intended again&s;t us, for the Mini&s;ters prote&s;tation again&s;t the acts of Parliament 1584, e&s;tablishing (in that houre of darknes) iniquity by a law, and again&s;t the acts of the A&s;&s;embly of Glasgow declaring the unlawfulne&s;&s;e of Bi|shops and ceremonies; which &s;ome Parliaments upon Epi&s;|copall mis-information had approven: both the&s;e actions of the Church were according to former Lawes and were rati|fied afterward by acts of Parliament yet &s;tanding in force which for the Warner (a privatman, and a &s;tranger) to challenge, is to contemne much more gros&s;ly the law, then they doe, whom here he is accu&s;ing of that crime.</P>
<P>By the nixt Story the Warner will gaine nothing,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The Church parte in the road of Ruth|ven clee|red.</NOTE> when the true ca&s;e of it is knowne. In King <HI>Iames</HI> minority, one Captaine <HI>Iames Stuart</HI> did &s;o farre prevail upon the tender and unexperienced yeares of the Prince, as to &s;teale his countenance unto acts of the greate&s;t oppre&s;&s;ion; &s;o farre that <HI>Iames Hamelton</HI> Earle of Arran (the nixt to the King in blood, in his health a mo&s;t gallant Prince, and a mo&s;t zealous profe&s;&s;or of the true Religion) in time of his &s;ick|nes, when he was not capable to commit any crime again&s;t the State, was notwith&s;tanding &s;poiled of all his livelyhood and liberty: his Lands and honour with the dignity of high Chancelor of <HI>Scotland</HI> were conferred on that very wicked Tyrant Captain <HI>Iames,</HI> a number of the be&s;t affected and prime nobility impatient of &s;uch unheard-of oppre&s;&s;iones, with meere boa&s;ts and no violence at the road of Ruthven cha&s;ed away that unhappy chancelor from the Kings per&s;o|ne, this his Maje&s;tie for the time profe&s;&s;ed to take in &s;o good
<PB N="46" REF="30">part that under his hand he did allow it for good &s;ervice, in his letters to the mo&s;t of the Neighbour princes: he dealt al&s;o with the &s;ecrete coun&s;el and the chiefe judicatories of the land, and obtained from them the approbation of that act of the Lords as convenient and laudable, promi&s;ing likewi&s;e to ratify it in the nixt en&s;uing Parliament. When the Lords for their more abundante cleering required the A&s;&s;emblies declaration there upon, the Mini&s;ters declined to medle at all with the ca&s;e; but the Kings Maje&s;tie &s;ent his Commi&s;&s;ioners to the A&s;&s;embly, entreating them withall earne&s;tne&s;&s;e to declare their good liking of that action, which he a&s;&s;ured them was for his good, and the good both of the Church and Kingdome: for their obedience to the Kings importunity they are heer railed upon by the wi&s;e Warner. It is true, Captaine <HI>Iames</HI> shortly after creept in againe into Court, and obtained a &s;ever revenge again&s;t the authors of that action, before a Parliament could &s;it to approve it, but within a few monthes the &s;ame Lords with &s;ome more did at <HI>Striveling</HI> cha&s;e againe that evill man from the Court: whither he never more returned, and this their action was ratified in the nixt Parliament, and &s;o &s;tands to this day unque&s;tioned by any but &s;uch as the Warner, either out of ignorance or malice.</P>
<P>I am weary to follow the Warner in all his wandrings;
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The inte|re&s;t of the generall a&s;&s;embly of Scot|land, in the reforma|tion of England.</NOTE> at the nixt loupe he jumps from the 1584 to the 1648, skip|ping over in a moment 64 yeares. The articles of <HI>Strive|ling</HI> mentions that the promoving of the worke of Refor|mation in England and Ireland, bee referred to the generall a&s;&s;embly, upon this our friend does di&s;charge a flood of his choler: all the matter of his impatience heere is, that Scot|land when by fraud they had been long allured, and at la&s;t by open violence invaded by the English Praelats, that they might take on the yock of all their corruptions, they were
<PB N="47" REF="30">contented at the earne&s;t de&s;ire of both the hou&s;es of Parlia|ment, and all the wel-affected in England, to a&s;&s;i&s;t their Brethren, to purge out the leaven of Epi&s;copacy, and the Service book with all the re&s;t of the old corruptions of the English and Irish Churches; with the mannaging of this &s;o great and good an Eccle&s;ia&s;tick worke, the Parliament of Scotland did intru&s;t the generall a&s;&s;embly. No mervaile that <HI>Doctor Bramble</HI> a zealous lover of all the Arminiani&s;me, Popery and Tyranny, of which his great patron <HI>Doctor Lade</HI> &s;tands convicted yet without an an&s;wer to have been brin|ging in upon the three nations, should bee angry at the di&s;|coverers and di&s;-appointers of that mo&s;t pious work as they wont to &s;tyle it?</P>
<P>What heere the Warner repeats, it is an&s;wered before,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The vio|lent ap|prehen&s;ion of Ma&s;&s;e-Prie&s;ts Prie&s;ts in their act of idola|try repro|ved by the Warner.</NOTE> as for the two Storyes in his conclu&s;ion, which he takes out of his fal&s;e Author Spots-wood, adding his owne large am|plifications; I conceive, there needs no more to be &s;aid to the fir&s;t, but that &s;ome of <HI>Iohn Knocks</HI> zealous hearers un|der&s;tanding of a Ma&s;&s;e-Prie&s;t at their very &s;ide committing idolatry contrary to the Lawes, did with violence break in upon him and &s;ea&s;e upon his per&s;on and Ma&s;&s;e-cloathes, that they might pre&s;ent him to the ordinary Magi&s;trat to receave ju&s;tice according to the Law; This act the Warner wil have to be a huge rebellion, not only in the actors, but al&s;o in <HI>Iohn Knocks,</HI> who was not &s;o much as pre&s;ent thereat.</P>
<P>What fir&s;t he &s;peaks of the A&s;&s;emblies convocating the people in armes to be pre&s;ent at the tryall of the popish Lords and their avowing of that their deed to the King in his face we mu&s;t be pardoned to mi&s;tru&s;t the Warner heerin upon his bare word without the releefe of &s;ome witnes, and that a more faithfull one then his Brother in evill, Mr. Spotswood, whom yet heere he does not profe&s;&s;e to cite. Again&s;t the&s;e popish Lords after their many trea&s;ons and bloody murders
<PB N="48" REF="31">of the lieges, the King him&s;elfe at la&s;t was forced to arme the people; but that the generall a&s;&s;embly did call any unto armes we require the Warners proofe that we may give it an an&s;wer.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 N="8" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD>CHAP. VIII.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The chiefe of the Praelats agree with the Presbyterians about the divine right of Church di&s;cipline.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE Warners challenge in this chapter is that we man|taine our di&s;cipline by a <HI>Iure divino,</HI> and for this he &s;pe|wes out upon us a &s;ea of &s;uch rhetorick, as much better be|&s;eemed. An&s;. <HI>Mercurius Aulicus</HI> then either a Warner or a praelate. In this challenge he is as unhappy as in the re&s;t, it is for a matter wherein the mo&s;t of his owne Brethren (though our Adver&s;aries) yet fully agree with us that the di&s;cipline of the Church is truely by divine right,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The War|ner and his Praelatical Era&s;tian brethren are obli|ged by their owne principles to advi&s;e the King to lay a&s;i|de Epi&s;co|pacy and &s;et up the Praesbyte|ry in all his domini|ons.</NOTE> and that Je&s;us Chri&s;t holds out in &s;cripture the &s;ub&s;tantials of that Governement whereby he will have his hou&s;e to be ruled to the worlds end; leaving the circum&s;tantials to be determi|ned by the judicatories of the Church according to the ge|nerall rules, which are clear al&s;o in the word for matters of that nature. In this neither Papi&s;ts nor the learnde&s;t of the Praelats find any fault with us; yet our Warner mu&s;t &s;pend a whole Chapter upon it.</P>
<P>It is true as we ob&s;erved before the elder Praelats of Eng|land in <HI>Edwards</HI> &amp; <HI>Elizabeths</HI> dayes, as the Era&s;tians now, did mantaine that no particular Governement of the Church was <HI>jure divino,</HI> and if this be the Warners mind, it were ingenuity in him to &s;peake it out loud, and to endeavour
<PB N="49" REF="31">to per&s;wade his friends about the King of the truth of this te|net, he was never imployed about a better and more &s;ea&s;o|nable &s;ervice: for if the di&s;cipline of the Church be but <HI>hu|mano jure</HI> then Epi&s;copacy is keeped up upon no con&s;cience, con&s;cience being bottomed only upon a divine right, &s;o Epi&s;|copacy wanting that bottom may well be laid a&s;ide at this time by the King for any thing that concernes con&s;cience &s;ince no command of God nor warrant from &s;cripture tyes him to keep it up. This truely &s;eemes to be the maine ground whereupon the whole di&s;cour&s;e of this Chapter is builded. Is it tolerable that &s;uch truthes should be concealed by our Warners again&s;t their con&s;cience, when the &s;peaking of them out might be &s;o advantagious to the King and all his Kingdomes, how ever wee with all the reformed Churches doe beleeve in our heart the divine right of Synods and Pre&s;|byteries, and for no po&s;&s;ible inconvenient can be forced to deny or pa&s;&s;e from this part of truth, yet the Warner heere joynes with the elder Praelats who till Warner <HI>Banckrofts</HI> ad|vancement to the &s;ea of Canterburry did unanimou&s;ly deny Epi&s;copacy to be of divine right, and by con&s;equent affir|med it to be moveable, and &s;o lawfull to be laid a&s;ide by princes, when &s;o ever they found it expedient for their af|faires to be quyte of it, why does not the warner and his Brethren &s;peake plainly their thoughts in his Maje&s;ties eares? why do they longer di&s;&s;emble their con&s;cience, only for the &s;atisfaction of their ambition, greed, and revenge? &s;undry of the Praelaticall divines come yet further to joyne fully with Era&s;tus in denying not only Epi&s;copacy and all other particular formes of Church government to be of di|vine in&s;titution, but in avowing that no governement in the Church at all is to be imagined, but &s;uch as is a part of the civill power of the Magi&s;trat. The Warner in the Chapter and in diver&s;e other parts of his booke &s;eemes to agree with
<PB N="50" REF="32">this judgment: and upon this ground if he had ingenuity he would offer his helping hand to untie the bonds of the Kings con&s;cience, if heere it were &s;traytened, by demon&s;trating from this his principle, that very &s;afely without any offence to God and nothing doubting for con&s;cience &s;ake, his Maje&s;tie might lay a&s;ide Epi&s;copacy and &s;et up the Presby|tery &s;o fully as is required in all his dominions though not upon a divine right which the Presbyterians beleeve, yet upon Era&s;tus royall right which the Warner here and el&s;e|where avouches.</P>
<P>What the Warner puts heere again upon the Presbyterie,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The prae|laticall party were late|ly bent for Popery.</NOTE> the u&s;urpation of the temporall &s;word in what indirect rela|tion &s;o ever, its probation in the former chapter was found &s;o weake and naughty, that the repetition of it is for no u&s;e: only wee marke that the Warner will have the Presbitery to be an ab&s;olute papacy, for no other purpo&s;e but to vent his de&s;ire of revenge again&s;t the Presbyterians, who gave in a challenge again&s;t the Praelats, e&s;pecially the late Canterbu|rians, among whom <HI>Doctor Bramble</HI> was one of &s;ome note, to which none of them have returned to this howre an an|&s;wer; that their principles unavoidably did bring backe the pope. For a Patriarch over all the we&s;terne Churches, and among all the Patriarches of the whole Catholick Church a primacy in the <HI>Roman,</HI> flowes cleerly out of the fountaine of Epi&s;copacy, according to the avowed doctrine of the En|glish praelats: who yet are more liberall to the pope in gran|ting him be&s;ide his &s;pirituall &s;uper-in&s;pection of the whole Catholick Church, all his temporall juri&s;dictions al&s;o in the patrimony of S^t. Peter, and all his other faire principalities within and without Italy. There is no ceremony in <HI>Rome</HI> that the&s;e men &s;tick upon: for of all the &s;uper&s;titious and idolatrous ceremonies of <HI>Rome,</HI> their images and altars and adorations before them are incomparably the wor&s;t; yet
<PB N="51" REF="32">the Warners friends without any recantation we have heard of, avow them all; even an adoration of and to the altar it &s;elfe. As for the doctrines of <HI>Rome</HI> what points are wor&s;e then the&s;e which that party have avowed in expre&s;&s;e tear|mes, a corporall pre&s;ence of Chri&s;ts body upon the Altar the Tridentine ju&s;tification, free-will, finall apo&s;tacy of the Saints: when no other thing can be an&s;wered to this our &s;ore challenge, it is good to put us off with a Squib that the Presbyterie is as ab&s;olute papacy as ever was in <HI>Rome.</HI></P>
<P>The Presbyterian po&s;ition which the Warner heere offers not to di&s;pute but to laugh at, that Chri&s;t as King of his Church according to his royall office and Scepter hes ap|pointed the office bearers and lawes of the hou&s;e, is accorded to by the mo&s;t and sharpe&s;t of our adver&s;aries, whether En|glish or Romish, as their owne tenet: howbeit &s;uch foolish con&s;equences, that all acts of Synods mu&s;t be Chri&s;ts Lawes, &amp;c. neither they nor wee doe acknowledge.</P>
<P>His declamations again&s;t the novelty of the Presbyterie in the ordinary &s;tile of the Je&s;uites again&s;t Prote&s;tants,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The Prae|lats pro|fe&s;&s;e now a willing|nes to a|bolish at lea&s;t three parts of the former Epi&s;copa|cy.</NOTE> and of the pagan Philo&s;ophers again&s;t the Chri&s;tians of old, who will regarde: our plea for the Praesbyterie is, that it is &s;criptu|rall; if &s;o; it is auncient enough: if not; let it be abolished. But it were good, that heer al&s;o the Warner and his friends would be ingenuous, to &s;peake out their minds of Epi&s;copa|cy. Why have they all &s;o long deceived the King, in a&s;&s;u|ring him that English Episcopacy was wel warranted both by Scripture and antiquity. Be it &s;o (which yet is very fal&s;e) that &s;omething of a Bishop di&s;tinct from a Presbyter had any footing in Scripture, yet can they be &s;o impudent, as to af|firme, that an English Bishop in his very flesh and blood, in his &s;ub&s;tantiall limbs was ever knowne in the World till the pope was become Antichri&s;t? A Bishop by virtue of his of|fice a Lord in Parliament, voycing in all acts of State, and
<PB N="52" REF="33">exerci&s;ing the place of a high The&s;aurer, of a Chancelor, or what ever civill charge the favour of a Prince did put upon him; a Bishop with &s;ole power of ordination and juri&s;dicti|on, with out any Presbytery; a Bishop exerci&s;ing no ju|ri&s;diction him&s;elfe in any part of his dioces, but devolving the exerci&s;e of that power wholly upon his officials &amp; Com|mi&s;&s;aries; a Bishop ordaining Presbyters him&s;elfe alone, or with the fashionall a&s;&s;i&s;tance of any two Presbyters, who chaunce to be neare; a Bishop the only Pa&s;tor of the whole dioces, and yet not bound to feed any flock, either by word or Sacrament, or governement, but having a free liberty to devolve all that &s;ervice upon others, and him&s;elf to wayte at court &s;o many yeares as he shall think fit. This is our En|glish Bishop not only in practi&s;e but in law, and &s;o was hee defended by the great di&s;putants for praelacy in England.</P>
<P>But now let the Warner &s;peake out,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The porti|on of Epi&s;|copacy, which yet is &s;tuck to, cannot be kept up upon any principle either of honour or con|&s;cience.</NOTE> if any &s;uch trea&s;ure can more be defended or was ever knowne in &s;cripture, or &s;een in any Chri&s;tian Church for 800. yeares and above, af|ter the death of Chri&s;t. I take it indeed, to be con&s;cience, that forces now at la&s;t the be&s;t of our Court-divines to deve&s;t their Bishop of all civill imployment in Parliament court or Kingdome, in denying his &s;olitarines in ordination, in re|moving his officiall and Commi&s;&s;ary courts, in taking away all his arches, Arch-Bishops, Arch-Deacons, deane and Chapter and all the, &amp;c. in erecting Presbyteries for all ordinations and &s;pirituall jurisdiction. It is good that con&s;cience moves our adver&s;aries at la&s;t to come this farre towards us: butwhy will they not yet come nearer, to acknow|ledge that by the&s;e their to lately recanted errours they did to long trouble the world; and that the little which yet they de&s;ire to keepe of a Bishop is nothing le&s;&s;e then that English Bishop but a new creature of their own devi&s;ing ne|ver known in England which his Maje&s;tie in no honnour is
<PB N="53" REF="33" MS="y">obliged to mantaine for any re&s;pect either to the lawes or cu&s;tomes of England, and lea&s;t of all, for con&s;cience?</P>
<P>While the Warner with &s;uch confidence avowes,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The &s;mal|le&s;t porti|on of the mo&s;t mo|derat E|pi&s;copacy is contrary to &s;crip|ture.</NOTE> that no text of Scripture can be alleadged again&s;t Epi&s;copacy, which may not with more rea&s;on be applyed again&s;t the Presbytery; behold I offer him here &s;ome few, ca&s;ting them in a couple of arguments, which according to his great pro|mi&s;es, I wish, he would an&s;wer at his lea&s;ure.</P>
<P>Fir&s;t I doe rea&s;on from Ephe&s;ians 4.11: all the officers that Chri&s;t has appointed in his Church for the Mini&s;try of the word, are either Apo&s;tles, Evangeli&s;ts, Prophets, Pa&s;tors or Doctors: but Bishops are none of the&s;e fyve: Ergo they are none of the officers appointed by Chri&s;t for the Mi|ni&s;try of the word. The Major is not wonte to be que&s;tio|ned: the minor thus I prove; Bishops are not Apo&s;tles, E|vangeli&s;ts, nor prophets: for its confe&s;&s;ed, all the&s;e were extraordinary and temporary officers: but Bishops (&s;ay yow) are ordinary and perpetuall: our adver&s;aries pitch upon the fourth, alleadging the Epi&s;copall office to be pa&s;torall; but I prove the Bishop no Pa&s;tor thus; no Pa&s;tor is &s;uperior to o|ther Pa&s;tors in any &s;pirituall power: but according to our ad|ver&s;ary, a Bishop is &s;uperior to all the Pa&s;tors of his dioces in the power of ordination and juri&s;diction. Ergo. The doubt heer is only of the Major, which I prove <HI>Argumento &agrave; pari|bus:</HI> no Apo&s;tle is &s;uperior to an Apo&s;tle, nor an Evange|li&s;ts to an Evangeli&s;t, nor prophet to a prophet nor a Doc|tour to a Doctour in any &s;pirituall power according to &s;crip|ture. Ergo no Pa&s;tor to a Pa&s;tor. Againe I rea&s;on from 1. <HI>Tim.</HI> 4.14. <HI>Math:</HI> 18.15. 1. <HI>Cor.</HI> 5.4.12.13, What taks the power of ordination and jurisdiction from Bishops, de&s;troyes Bishops: as the removall of the &s;oule kills the man, and the denyall of the forme takes away the &s;ubject; &s;o the power of ordination and juri&s;diction the e&s;&s;entiall forme, whereby the
<PB N="54" REF="34" MS="y">Bishop is con&s;titute and di&s;tinguished from the Presbyter and every other Church officer, being removed from him, he mu&s;t perish: but the quoted places take away cleerly the&s;e powers from the Bishop: for the fir&s;t puts the power of or|dination in the Presbytery, and a Bishop is not a Presbytery; the &s;econd puts the power of juri&s;diction in the Church; and the third in a company of men which meet together: but the Bishop is not the Church nor a company of men met toge|ther: for the&s;e be many, and he is but one per&s;one.</P>
<P>When the Doctors learning he; &s;atisfied us in the&s;e two, he shall receave more &s;cripturall arguments again&s;t Epi&s;co|pacy.
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The Prae|lats una|ble to an|&s;wer their oppo&s;its.</NOTE> But why doe wee expect an&s;wers from the&s;e men, when after &s;o long time (for all their boa&s;ts of learning and their vi&s;ible lea&s;ure) none of their party hes hade the cou|rage, to offer one word of an&s;wer to the Scriptures and Fa|thers, which in great plenty Mr. <HI>Parker</HI> and Mr. <HI>Didoclave</HI> of old, and of late that mitacle of learning mo&s;t noble <HI>So|mais,</HI> and that Magazin of antiquity Mr. <HI>Blondel</HI> have prin|ted again&s;t them?</P>
<P>What in the end of the Chapter the Warner addes of our trouble at King James his fiftie and five que&s;tions 1596, and of our yeelding the bucklers without any oppo&s;ition till the late unhappy troubles; we an&s;wer that in this as every where el&s;e the Warner proclaines his great and certaine knowledge of our Eccle&s;ia&s;tick &s;tory: the troubles of the Scots divines at that time were very &s;mall, for the matter of the&s;e que&s;ti|ons, all which they did an&s;wer &s;o roundly, that ther was no more &s;peach of them therafter by the propounders: but the manner and time of the&s;e que&s;tions did indeed perplex good men, to &s;ee Era&s;tian and Prelaticall coun&s;ellors &s;o farr to prevaile with our King, as to make him by captious que&s;ti|ons carpe at the&s;e parts of Church-di&s;cipline, which by &s;ta|tuts of Parliament and acts of A&s;&s;emblyes were fully e&s;tabli|shed.</P>
<PB N="55" REF="34">
<P> Our Church at that time was far from yeelding to Epi&s;co|pacy:
<NOTE PLACE="marg">Prelacy was ever grievous to Scot|land.</NOTE> great trouble indeed by &s;ome wicked States-men was then brought upon the per&s;ones of the mo&s;t able and faithfull Mini&s;ters, but our land was &s;o far from receiving of Bishops at that time, that the que&s;tion was not &s;o much as propo&s;ed to them for many yeares thereafter, it was in <HI>Ann.</HI> 1606 that the English Praelats did move the King by great violence to ca&s;t many of the be&s;t and mo&s;t learned Preachers of Scotland out of their charges, and in <HI>Ann.</HI> 1610, that a kind of Epi&s;|copacy was &s;et up in the corrupt a&s;&s;embly of <HI>Gla&s;gow;</HI> under which the Church of Scotland did heavily groane till the yeare 1637, when their burdens was &s;o much increa&s;ed by the English praelaticall Tax-ma&s;ters, that all was shaken of together, and divine ju&s;tice did &s;o clo&s;ly follow at the heeles, that oppre&s;&s;ing praelacy of England as to the great joy of the long oppre&s;&s;ed Scotes, that evill root and all its branches was ca&s;t out of <HI>Britaine,</HI> where wee tru&s;t, no shadow of it shall ever againe be &s;een.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 N="9" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD>CHAP. IX.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The Common-wealth is no mon&s;ter, when God is made So|veraigne, and their commands of men are &s;ubordina|ted to the clear will of God.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>HAving cleered the vanity of the&s;e calumnious challenges, where with the Warner did animate the King and all Magi&s;trates again&s;t the Presbyterians, let us try if his skill be any greater, to inflame the people again&s;t it. Hee would make the World beleeve that the Presbyterians are great tran&s;&s;ub&s;tantiators of whole Common-wealths into bea&s;ts,
<PB N="56" REF="35">and Metamorpho&s;ers of whole Kingdomes of men, into Ser|pents with two heads; how great and mon&s;trous a Serpent mu&s;t the Presbytery be, when shee is the Mother of a Dragon with two heads. But it is good, that she has nothing to doe with the procreation of the Dragon with &s;even heads, the great Antichri&s;t, the Pope of <HI>Rome:</HI> this honour mu&s;t bee left to Epi&s;copacy: the Presbytery mu&s;t not pretend to any share in it.</P>
<P>The Warners ground for his pretty &s;imilitude is,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">There is no Lord|ship but a meer &s;er|vice and mini&s;try in the Pa&s;tors of the Church</NOTE> that the Presbyterians make two Soveraignities in every Chri&s;tian State, who&s;e commands are contrary. An&s;. All the evill lyeth in the contrariety of the commands: as for the double Soveraignity, ther is no shew of truth in it: for the Pres|byterians cannot bee guilty of coordinating two Soveraigni|ties in one State, though the Praelats may wel be guilty of that fault; &s;ince they with there Ma&s;ters of <HI>Rome</HI> mantaine a true hierarchie, a Spirituall Lord-ship, a domination and principality in their Bishops above all the members of the Church, but the Presbyterians know no <GAP DESC="foreign">, no dominion, no Soveranity in Church officers, but a meer mini&s;try un|der Chri&s;t. As for the contrariety of commands, its true: Chri&s;ts Mini&s;ters mu&s;t publish all the commands of their So|veraigne Lord, whereunto no command of any temporall Prince needs or ought to be contrary; but if it fall out to bee &s;o, it is not the Presbytery; but the holy Scriptures, which command rather to obey God then man. Dare the Warner heere oppo&s;e the Presbyterians? dare he mantaine a &s;ubordi|nation of the Church to the State in &s;uch a fashion, that the cleer commands of God published by the Church ought to give place to the contrary commands of the State? if the Warner mu&s;t needs invert and contradict Chri&s;t ruling of this ca&s;e, let him goe on to preach doctrine point blank to the Apo&s;tles, that it is better to obey men then God. It falls
<PB N="57" REF="35">out as rarely in Scotland as any where in the world, that the Church and State run contrary wayes; but if &s;o it happen, the commune rules of humane direction towards right and wrong judgement mu&s;t be followed: if a man find either the Church or the State or both command what he knowes to be wrong (for neither the one nor the other hath any infallibi|lity) their is no doubt but either or both may be di&s;obeyed, yet with this difference, that for di&s;obedience to the Churches mo&s;t ju&s;t commands, a man can not fall under the &s;malle&s;t temporall inconvenient without the States good plea&s;ure, but for his di&s;obedience to the mo&s;t unju&s;t commands of the State he mu&s;t &s;uffer what ever punishment the law does in|flict without any releefe from the Church.</P>
<P>Two in&s;tances are brought by the Warner, of the Church and States contrary commands: the fir&s;t the King comman|ded Edenburgh to fea&s;t the frensh Amba&s;&s;adours, but the Church commanded Edenburgh to fa&s;t that day when the King de&s;ired them to fea&s;t. An&s;. Heer were no &s;o contra|ry commands, but both were obeyed, the people did kepe the humiliation, and &s;ome of the Magi&s;trats that &s;ame day did give the banquet to the frensh Amba&s;&s;adours as the King commanded; that for this any Church cen&s;ure was inten|ded again&s;t them it is a malitious calumny, according to the author of this fable his owne confe&s;&s;ion, as at length may be &s;een in the unloading of I&s;&s;achars burden.</P>
<P>As for his &s;econd in&s;tance,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The War|ner is ful of calum|nious un|truths.</NOTE> the difference of the Church and State about the late ingagement we have &s;poken to it in the former chapter at length: the furthe&s;t the Church went was by humble petitions and remon&s;trances to &s;et before the Parliament the great danger, which that ingagement (as it was &s;tated and mannaged) did portent to religion, the Kings Per&s;on &amp; whole Kingdom, when contrary to their whole &s;ome advices the ingagement went on, they medled not to oppo&s;e
<PB N="58" REF="36">the act of State further then to declare their judgement of its unlawfulne&s;&s;e, according to the duty of faithfull watch|men <HI>Ezek.</HI> 33. It is very fal&s;e that the Church has cha&s;ed any man out of the country, or excommunicated any for fol|lowing that engagement, or have put any man to &s;ack|cloath for it, unto his day. Neither did ever any man call the freedome of the late Parliament in que&s;tion, how un&s;a|tisfied &s;oever many were with its proceedings.</P>
<P>When the Warner heapes up &s;o many untruths in a few lines, in things done but ye&s;terday before the eyes of thou|&s;ands, we shall not wonder of his venturing to lye con&s;ident|ly in things pa&s;t long before any now living were borne: but there are a generation of men who are bold to &s;peake what makes for their end upon the hope that few wil be at the pains, to bring back what hes flowne from their teeth to the touch|&s;tone of any &s;olide tryall.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 N="10" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD>CHAP. X. </HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The Nature of the Pre&s;bytrie is very concordant with Par|liaments.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>IN the tenth chapter the Warner undertakes to shew the antipathy of Presbyteries to Parliaments; albeit there bee no greater harmony po&s;&s;ible betwixt any two bodies, then betwixt a generall a&s;&s;embly and Parliament, a Presbyterie and an inferior civill court, if either the con&s;titution or end or dayly practi&s;e of the&s;e judicatories be looked upon: but the praelaticall learning is of &s;o high a flight, that it dare un|dertake to prove any conclu&s;ion: yet the&s;e men are not the fir&s;t, that have offered to force men to beleeve upon unan|&s;werable
<PB N="59" REF="36">arguments though contrary to common &s;ence and and rea&s;on that &s;now is black and the fire cold and the light dark.
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The eight de&s;ires of the Church about the ingage|ment were ju&s;t and nece&s;&s;ary.</NOTE></P>
<P>For the proofe of his conclu&s;ion he brings backe yet a|gaine the late engagement: how often shall this in&s;ipide col|wort be &s;et upon our table? Will the Warner never be filled with this un&s;avory dish? The fir&s;t crime that here the War|ner marks in our Church again&s;t the late Parliament in the matter of the ingagement is, their paper of the eight de&s;ires: upon this he unpoureth out all his good plea&s;ure, not willing to know that all the&s;e de&s;ires were drawne from the Church by the Parliaments owne me&s;&s;ages, and that well neare all the&s;e de&s;ires were counted by the Parliament it &s;elf to be very ju&s;t and nece&s;&s;ary: E&s;pecially the&s;e two which the wi&s;e Warner pitches upon as mo&s;t ab&s;urd for the fir&s;t a &s;ecurity to religion from the King upon oath under his hand and &s;eale: where the que&s;tion among us was not for the thing it &s;elf, but only about the time, the order and &s;ome part of the matter of that &s;ecurity. And for the &s;econd, the quali|fication of the per&s;ons to be imployed, that all should be &s;uch who had given no ju&s;t cau&s;e of Jealou&s;y; no man did que&s;tion, but all who were to have the managing of that warre should be free of all ju&s;t cau&s;es of Jealou&s;y, which could be made appeare not to halfe a do&s;&s;en of Mini&s;ters, but to any competent judicatory according to the lawes of the Kingdome. The Warner has not been carefull to informe him&s;elfe, where the knot of the difference lay, and &s;o gives out his owne groundle&s;&s;e conjectures for true Hi&s;toricall narrations, which he might ea&s;ily have helped by a more attentive reading of our publick declarations.</P>
<P>The &s;econd fault he finds with our Church is, that they proclaime in print their di&s;&s;atisfaction with that ingagement as favourable to the malignant party, &amp;c. An&s;. The
<PB N="60" REF="37">Warner knows not that it is one of the liberties of the Church of Scotland e&s;tablished by law and long cu&s;tome to keep the people by publick declarations in their duty to God,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">It is one of the li|berties of the Church of Scot|land to publish declarati|ons.</NOTE> when men are like to draw them away to &s;in according to that of <HI>E&s;ay.</HI> 8. <HI>v.</HI> 12.13. What in great humility piety and wi&s;e|dome was &s;poken to the world in the declaration of the Church concerning that undertaking, was vi&s;ible enough for the time to any who were not peremptor to follow their owne wayes: and the lamentable event &s;ince has opened the eyes of many, who before would not &s;ee, to acknow|ledge their former errours: but if God should &s;peake never &s;o loud from Heaven, the Warner and his party will &s;toppe their eares: for they are men of &s;uch gallant Spirits, as &s;corne to &s;ubmit either to God or men, but in a Romane con&s;tan|cy they will be ever the &s;ame though their coun&s;els &amp; wayes be found never &s;o palpably pernicious.</P>
<P>The third thing the Warner layes to the charge of our Church is,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The leavy was never offered to be &s;topped by the Church.</NOTE> that they retarded the leavies. An&s;. In this al&s;o the Warner shewes his ignorance or malice: for how &s;ore &s;oever the Levy (as then &s;tated &amp; mannaged) was again&s;t the hearts of the Church, yet their oppo&s;ition to it, was &s;o cold-rife and &s;mall, that no complaint needs bee made of any retardment from them. So &s;oone as the commanders thought it expedient, there was an Army gotten up &s;o nu|merous and &s;trong, that with the ordinary ble&s;&s;ing of God was aboundantly able to have done all the profe&s;&s;ed &s;er|vice: but where the aver&s;ion of the hearts of the Church and the want of their prayers is &s;uperciliou&s;ly contemned,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The Church was not the cau&s;e of the ga|thering at Mauchlin Moore.</NOTE> what mervaile, that the &s;tronge&s;t arme of flesh bee quickly bro|ken in peeces?</P>
<P>The fourth charge is mo&s;t calumnious, that the Church gathered the country together in armes at Mauchline moor to oppo&s;e the expedition. An&s;. No Church man was the
<PB N="61" REF="37">cau&s;e of that meeting a number of yeomen being frighted from their hou&s;es, did flee away to that corner of the Land, that they might not be forced again&s;t their con&s;cience to goe as &s;ouldiers to England: while their number did grow, and they did abide in a body for the &s;ecurity of their per&s;ons, up|on a &s;udden a part of the Army came upon them: &s;ome Mi|ni&s;ters being neare (by occa&s;ion of the communion at Mau|chlin the day before) were good in&s;truments with the peo|ple to goe away in peace. And when the matter was tryed to the bottom by the mo&s;t Eagle-eyed of the Parliament, no|thing could be found contrary to the Mini&s;ters prote&s;tation, that they were no wayes the cau&s;e of the peoples convening or fighting at Mauchlin.</P>
<P>The paralell that the Warner makes betwixt the generall a&s;&s;embly and Parliament is malicious in all its parts.
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The a&s;&s;em|bly is help|full and not hurt|full to the Parlia|ment.</NOTE> For the fir&s;t, though the one Court be civill, and the other Spiritu|all, yet the Presbyterians lay the authority of both upon a divine fundation, that for con&s;cience &s;ake the Courts civil mu&s;t be obeyed in all their Lawfull commands, al&s;ewell as the a&s;&s;emblyes of the Church; God being the author of the politick order as well as the Eccle&s;ia&s;tick, and the revenger of the contempt of the one alswell as of the other. But what doth the Warner meane, to mock at Mini&s;ters for carrying them&s;elves as the Amba&s;&s;adors of Chri&s;t, for judging accor|ding to the rule of Scripture, for caring for life eternall? is he become &s;o shamefullie impious, as to per&s;wade Mini&s;ters to give over the care of life eternall, to lay a&s;ide the holy Scrip|ture, and deny their amba&s;&s;age from Je&s;us Chri&s;t? behold what Spirit leads our praelats, while they jeere the World out of all Religion, and cha&s;e away Mini&s;ters from Chri&s;t, from Scripture, from eternall life.</P>
<P>Of the &s;econd part of the parallell, that people are more ready to obey their Mini&s;ters then their Magi&s;trats what shall
<PB N="62" REF="38">be made? all the power which Mini&s;ters have with the people is builded on their love to God and religion: how much &s;o ever it is, a good Statseman will not envy it: for he knowes that God and con&s;cience con&s;traine Mini&s;ters to imploy all the power they have with the people to the good of the Ma|gi&s;trat, as the deputy and &s;ervant of God for the peoples true good. The Warner heer under&s;tands be&s;t his owne meaning, while he &s;coffes at Mini&s;ters for their threatning of men with hells fire. Are our Praelats come to &s;uch open proclamations of their Athei&s;me, as to printe their de&s;ires to banish out of the hearts of people all feare not only of Church-cen&s;ures, but even of hell it &s;elfe? whither may not Satan drive at la&s;t the in&s;truments of his Kingdome?</P>
<P>The third parte of the paralell con&s;i&s;ts of a number of unju&s;t and fal&s;e imputations before particularly refuted.</P>
<P>What he &s;ubjoines of the power of the generall A&s;&s;embly to name Comittees to &s;it in the intervalls of A&s;&s;emblies,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The ap|pointment of comit|tees is a right of every court as well Ec|cle&s;ia&s;tick as civil.</NOTE> it is but a poore charge: is it not the dayly practi&s;e of the Parliaments of Scotland to nominat their Comittees of State for the intervalls of Parliament? Is it not ane inhaerent right to every Court to name &s;ome of their number to cogno&s;ce upon things within their owne &s;pheare at what ever times the court it &s;elfe finds expedient; how ever the judicatories of the Church by the lawes of the Kingdome being authorized to meet when them&s;elves think fit both ordinarly and <HI>pro re nata,</HI> their power of appointing Comittees for their owne affaires was never que&s;tioned: and truely the&s;e Comittees in the times of our late troubles when many were lying in waite to di&s;turbe both Church and State, have been for|ced to meet oftner then otherwi&s;e any of their members did de&s;ire: who&s;e diver&s;ion from their particular charges (though for attendance on the publick) is joyned with &s;o great fashery and expence, that with all their heart they could
<PB N="63" REF="38">be glade to decline it, if feare of detriment to the Church made not the&s;e meetings very nece&s;&s;ary.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 N="11" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD>CHAP. XI.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The Presbytery is no burden to any hone&s;t man.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE bounds and compa&s;&s;e of the Warners rage again&s;t the Presbytery is very large;
<NOTE PLACE="marg">There is no rigour at all in the Pre&s;|bytery.</NOTE> not being content to have incen&s;ed the King and Parliament again&s;t it, he comes downe to the body of the people, and will have them beleeve the &s;peciall enimity of the Scots di&s;cipline again&s;t them, fir&s;t becau&s;e it inflicts Church cen&s;ures upon every one for the &s;malle&s;t faults. An&s;. The faults which the Warner men|tions may well be ane occa&s;ion of a private advice in the eare, but that any of them did ever procure the &s;malle&s;t cen&s;ure of the Church, it is a great untruth: no man who knowes us will complaine of our rigour, heerwe wish we were able to refute upon as good rea&s;on the charge of our &s;laknes in the mouth of &s;ectaries as we are that of our &s;trictnes in the mouth of Era&s;tianes. Wee would know of the Warner, what are the&s;e Sabbath recreations, which he &s;aith are void of &s;candal, and con&s;i&s;tent with the dutyes of the day; are they not the &s;tage playes and the other hone&s;t pa&s;times, wherewith his friends were wonte to &s;anctify the Lords day, as no more a Sabbath then any other day in the yeare, and much le&s;&s;e then diver&s;e popish fe&s;tivalls? An Apo&s;teme in the lowe&s;t gutt will shew it &s;elfe by the un&s;avory vapours, which now and then are eructat from it. That ever in Scotland there was one word of debate about &s;tarch and cuffs, is more then the Warner can prove.</P>
<PB N="64" REF="39">
<P> The &s;econd oppre&s;&s;ion,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">Crimes till repen|ted of ought to keep from the holy table.</NOTE> whereby the Presbytery trods the people under foot is a rare cruelty; that per&s;ons, for grievous crimes whereof the Magi&s;trate takes notice, are called to Eccle&s;ia&s;tick repentance. Will the Doctor in his fury a|gain&s;t us, run out upon all his owne friends for no appea|rance of a fault? Will either the English or popish praelats admit murtherers, whoores or theeves to the holy table without any &s;ignes of repentance? Is not the greate&s;t crime the ground of the greate&s;t &s;candal? Shall &s;mall &s;candals be purged away by repentance, and the greate&s;t be totally pa&s;t by? The Doctor heer may know his owne meaning but others will confe&s;&s;e their ignorance of his minde.</P>
<P>The third grievance he would have the people conceive again&s;t the Presbytery is,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">Excom|munica|tion in Scotland is not in|jurious to any.</NOTE> the rigour of their excommunica|tion; in this al&s;o the Warner &s;eemes to know little of the Scots way, let excommunication be &s;o &s;eveer in Scotland as is po&s;&s;ible, yet the hurt of it is but &s;mall: it is &s;o rare an acci|dent, men may live long in Scotland, and al their life never &s;ee that cen&s;ure execute; I have lived in one of the greate&s;t Ci|ties of that land and for fourty &s;even yeares even from my birth to this day, that cen&s;ure to my knowledge or hearing was never execute there in my dayes but twice; fir&s;t upon ane ob&s;tinat and very profaine Papi&s;t; and nixt on &s;ome hor|rible &s;candalous praelats. Againe when any is excommuni|cated by the Church, we goe no further with them then Pauls commande: 2. <HI>Thes.</HI> 3.14. only they who are not tyed to them by naturall bonds, ab&s;taine from familiar and unne|ce&s;&s;ary conver&s;ation, to bring them by the &s;ence of this shame to repentance for their fins.</P>
<P>Thirdly the civil inconvenientes which followe that cen|&s;ure come along from the State and the acts of Parliament, for which the Church ought not to be challenged; e&s;pecially by praelats who wont to allow their officials to excommuni|cat
<PB N="65" REF="39">whole incorporations of people for a &s;mall debt of mony, and to pre&s;&s;e the contemners of that frivolous and profane &s;entence, with all the civil inconvenientes they could. Fourth|ly what ever be the laws in Scotland again&s;t them who con|tinues long in the contempt of Excommunication, (which are not inflicted but for great &s;ins and after a long proce&s;&s;e) yet certainly their execution is very farre from all cruelty, as they who know the proceedings of that land, will beare witnes.</P>
<P>What he objects about fugitives; it is true, when a pro|ces is begunne, a fugitive may have it concluded, and &s;ent after him; but we count not that man a fugitive from di&s;ci|pline or contumacious as the Warner quarrels us, who upon ju&s;t feare to hazard his life does not compear.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 N="12" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD>CHAP. XII.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The Pre&s;bytery is hurtfull to no order of men.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>PRaelaticall malice is exorbitant beyond the bounds of all shew of moderation:
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The War|ners out|rage a|gain&s;t the Presbytery</NOTE> was it not enough to have calum|niat the Presbytery to Kings, Princes and Soveraignes, to Parliaments and all Courts of Ju&s;tice, to people and all particular per&s;ons, but yet a new chapter mu&s;t be made to shew in it the hurtfullnes of Presbytery to all orders of men: wee mu&s;t have patience to &s;tand a little in the un&s;avoury aire of this vomite al&s;o.
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The Prae|lats were con&s;tant oppre&s;&s;ors: of the No|bility and gentry.</NOTE></P>
<P>Unto the nobility and gentry the Presbitery mu&s;t be hurt|full, becau&s;e it &s;ubjecteth them to the cen&s;ures of a raw hea|dy novice and a few ignorant artificers. An&s;. Its good that our praelats are now turned pleaders again&s;t the oppre&s;&s;ion
<PB N="66" REF="40">of the Nobility and gentry: its not long &s;ince the praelatical clergy were accu&s;tomed to &s;et their &s;oule feet on the necks of the greate&s;t peeres of the three Kingdomes with to high a pride and pre&s;&s;ure; that to shake of their yock, no &s;uffering, no hazard has been refu&s;ed by the be&s;t of the Nobility and gentry of <HI>Britaine:</HI> but natures and principles are &s;o ea&s;y to be changed, that no man now needs feare any more oppre&s;|&s;ion from the praelats, though they were &s;et downe again and wel warned in their repaired throns.</P>
<P>But to the challenge we an&s;wer,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The way of the Sco|tes Pres|bytery is incompa|rably bet|ter then that of the Engli&s;h E|pi&s;copacy.</NOTE> that the meane&s;t Elder|ship of a &s;mall Congregation in Scotland con&s;i&s;ts of the Pa|&s;tor, and a dozen (at lea&s;t) of the mo&s;t wi&s;e pious and lear|ned that are to be found in the whole flock; which yet the Warner heer makes to be judges but of the common people in matters of &s;malle&s;t moment. But for the cla&s;&s;icall Pres|bytery, to which he referres the Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall cau&s;es of the Nobility and gentry, and before whom indeed every Church proce&s;&s;e of any con&s;iderable weight or difficulty does come, though it concerne the per&s;ons of the meane&s;t of the people, this Presbytery does con&s;i&s;t ordinarly of fifeteen Mini&s;ters (at lea&s;t) and fifeteen of the mo&s;t qualified noblemen, gent|lemen and Burge&s;&s;es, which the circuit of fifteen parishes can affoord, the&s;e (I hope) may make up a judicatory of a great deale more worth then any officiall court, which con|&s;i&s;ts but of one judge, a petty mercenary lawyer, to who&s;e care alone the whole Eccle&s;ia&s;tick juri&s;diction over all the Nobility and gentry of diver&s;e shyres is committed, and that without appeale as the Warner has told us, except it be to a Court of delegats; a mi&s;erable releefe that all the Nobili|ty, gentry and Commons of a Kingdome, who are op|pre&s;&s;ed by Epi&s;copall officials, have no other remedie but to goe attende a Committee of two or three civilians at London deputed for the di&s;cu&s;&s;ing of &s;uch appeales.</P>
<PB N="67" REF="40">
<P> The Presbyterian cour&s;e is much more ready, &s;olide and equitable: if any grievance ari&s;e from the &s;entence of a Pre&s;|bytery, a Synode twice a yeare doth &s;it in the bounds, and attends for a week, or if need be, longer, to determine all appeales, and redre&s;&s;e all grievances: now the Synode does con&s;i&s;t of all the Mini&s;ters within the bounds, which ordi|narly are of diver&s;e whole shyres as that of <HI>Gla&s;gow,</HI> of the upper and neather ward of <HI>Clid&s;edaile, Baerranfrow, Lennox, Kile, Carrick</HI> and <HI>Cunninghame;</HI> al&s;o be&s;ide Mini&s;ters, the con&s;tant members who have deci&s;ive voice in Synodes, are the chiefe Noblemen, Gentlemen and Burge&s;&s;es of all the&s;e shyres, among whom their be &s;uch parts for judgment as are not to be found nor expected in any inferiour civil Court of the Kingdom, yet if it fall out &s;o, that any party be grieved with the &s;entence of a Synode, there is then a farther and fi|nall appeale in a Generall a&s;&s;embly, which con&s;i&s;ts of as many Burge&s;&s;es and more Gentlemen from every shire of the Kingdome then come to any Parliament: be&s;ide the prime Nobility and choi&s;e&s;t Mini&s;try of the land; having the Kings Maje&s;tie in per&s;one, or in his ab&s;ence, his high Commi&s;&s;ioner to be their prae&s;ident. This meeting yeerly (or oftner, if need be) &s;its ordinarly a month; and if they think fit, longer: the number, the wi&s;edome, the eminency of the members of this Court is &s;o great, that be&s;ide the unju&s;tice, it were a very needle&s;&s;e labour to appeal from it to the Parlia|ment, for (as we have &s;aid) the King or his high Commi&s;&s;io|ner, &s;its in both meetings albeit in a differe~t capacity: the num|ber and qualification of knights and Burge&s;&s;es is ever large as great in the a&s;&s;embly as in the Parliament: only the difference is, that in the Parliament all the Nobility in the Kingdom &s;it without any election and by virtue of their birth, but in the A&s;&s;embly only who for age, wi&s;edome and piety are cho|&s;en by the Presbyteries as fitte&s;t to judge in Eccle&s;ia&s;tick af|fairs:
<PB N="68" REF="41">but to make up this oddes of the ab&s;ence of &s;ome Noble|men, the A&s;&s;embly is alwayes adorned with above ane hun|dred of the choife&s;t Pa&s;tors of the whole land, none whereof may &s;it in Parliament: nothing that can conciliate authority to a Court, or can be found in the Nation, is wanting to the generall a&s;&s;embly; how ba&s;ely &s;o ever our praelats are plea&s;ed to trample upon it.</P>
<P>The &s;econd alledged hurt which the Nobility have from the Presbytery,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">All que&s;ti|ons about patrona|ges in Scotland are now ended.</NOTE> is the lo&s;&s;e of their patronages by congre|gations electing their Pa&s;tors. An&s;. How&s;oever the judg|ment of our Church about patronages is no other then that of the Reformed divines abroad, yet have our Presbyteries alwayes with patience endured patrons to pre&s;ent unto va|cant Churches, till the Parliament now at la&s;t hath taken away that grievance.</P>
<P>The Nobilities la&s;t hurt by the Presbytry is their lo&s;&s;e of all their impropriations and Abey-lands.
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The po&s;|&s;e&s;&s;ors of Church lands were ever feared for Bishops, but never for the Presby|tery.</NOTE> An&s;. How Sy|cophantick an accu&s;ation is this? for who knowes not, how farre the whole generation of the praelaticke faction doe ex|ceed the highe&s;t of the Presbyterians in zeale again&s;t that which they call Sacriledge? never any of the Presbyterians did attempt either by violence, or a cour&s;e of Law, to put out any of the Nobility or gentry from their po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ions of the Church-lands, but very lately the threats and vigorous activity of the praelats, and their followers were &s;o vehement in this kinde, that all the Nobility and gentry who had any intere&s;t, were wackned (to purpo&s;e) to take heed of their rights. In the la&s;t Parliament of Scotland when the power of the Church was as great as they expect to &s;ee it againe, though they obtained the abolition of patronages, yet were the po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ors of the Church-lands and tythes &s;o little har|med that their rights therto were more cleerly and &s;trongly confirmed, then by any praeceding Parliament.</P>
<PB N="69" REF="41">
<P> The fourth hurt is that every ordinary Presbyter wil make him&s;elfe a Noblemans fellow. An&s;. No where in the World does gracious Mini&s;ters (though meane borne men) receive more re&s;pect from the Nobility then in Scotland: neither any where does the Nobility and gentry receive more duely their honour then from the Mini&s;ters there. That in&s;olent &s;peach fathered on Mr. <HI>Robert Bruce</HI> is demon&s;trat to be a fabulous calumny in the hi&s;toricall vindication.</P>
<P>However the Warner may know that in all Europe where Bishops have place, it hes ever, (at lea&s;t the&s;e 800 yeares) been their nature to trample under foot the highe&s;t of the Nobility. As the Pope mu&s;t be above the Emperour, &s;o a little Cardinal <HI>Bellarmin</HI> can tell to King <HI>Iames,</HI> that hee may well be counted a companion of any Ilander King: were the Bishops in Scotland ever content, till they got in Parlia|ment the right hand and the neare&s;t &s;eates to the throne, and the doore of the greate&s;t Earles, Marque&s;&s;es and duks? was it not Epi&s;copacy, that did advance poore and capricious pedants to &s;trive for the whyte &s;taves &amp; great Seales of both Kingdomes, with the prime Nobility; and often overcome them in that &s;trife? In Scotland I know, and the Warner will a&s;&s;ure for England and Ireland, that the ba&s;e&s;t borne of his brethren hes ruff led it in the &s;ecreet coun&s;el, in the roy|all Exchequer, in the highe&s;t courts of ju&s;tice, with the greate&s;t Lords of the Land: its not &s;o long, that yet it can be forgotten,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The prae|lats conti|nue to an|null the being of al the refor|med Chur|ches for their want of Epi&s;co|pacy.</NOTE> &s;ince a Bishop of <HI>Galloway</HI> had the mode&s;ty to give unto a Marqui&s;e of <HI>Argile,</HI> tanta mont to a broadly in his face at the coun&s;el table. The Warner shall doe well to reckon no more with Presbyters for braving of Noble|men.</P>
<P>The nixt hee will have to bee wronged by the Presbytery are the orthodoxe clergy. An&s;. All the Presbyterians to him (it &s;eemes) are heterodoxe; Epi&s;copacy is &s;o nece&s;&s;ary
<PB N="70" REF="42">a truth that who denies it, mu&s;t be &s;tamped as for a grievous errour with the character of heterodox. The following words cleere this to be his mind, <HI>they lo&s;&s;e</HI> (&s;aith hee) <HI>the confortable a&s;&s;urance of undoubted &s;ucce&s;&s;ion by Epi&s;copall or|dination:</HI> what &s;ence can be made of the&s;e words, but that all Mini&s;ters who are not ordained by Bishops, mu&s;t lie un|der the confortle&s;&s;e uncertainty of any lawfull &s;ucce&s;&s;ion in their mini&s;teriall charge, for want of this &s;ucce&s;&s;ion through the lineall de&s;cent of Bishops from the Apo&s;tles; at lea&s;t for want of ordination by the hands of Bishops, as if unto them only the power of mi&s;&s;ion and ordination to the Mini&s;try were committed by Chri&s;t: becau&s;e of this defect the Presbyterian Mini&s;ters mu&s;t not only want the confort of an a&s;&s;ured and undoubted calling to the Mini&s;try, but may very well know and be a&s;&s;ured that their calling and Mini&s;try is null. The words immediatly following are &s;craped out after their printing: for what cau&s;e the author le&s;t knoweth: but the purpo&s;e in hand makes it proba|ble, that the deletted words did expre&s;&s;e more of his mind, then it was &s;afe in this time and place to &s;peake out: it was the late doctrine of <HI>Doctor Brambles</HI> prime friends, that the want of Epi&s;copall ordination did not only annull the calling of all the Mini&s;ters of <HI>France, Holland, Zwit-zerland,</HI> and <HI>Germany,</HI> but al&s;o did hinder all the&s;e &s;ocieties to be true Churches: for that popular Sophi&s;me of the Je&s;uits our prae|lats did greedily &s;wallow; where are no true Sacraments, there is no true Church; and where is no true Mini&s;try, there are no true Sacraments; and where no true ordination, there is no true mini&s;try; and where no Bishops, there is no true ordination: and &s;o in no reformed country but in England and Ireland where were true Bishops, is any true Church. When Epi&s;copacy comes to this height of elevation, that the want of it mu&s;t annuall the Mini&s;try, yea null the Church and
<PB N="71" REF="42">all the Reformed at one &s;trock, is it any mervaill, that all of them doe concurre together for their own pre&s;ervation, to abolish this in&s;olent abaddon and de&s;troyer? and notwith|&s;tanding all its ruine have yet no di&s;confort at all, nor any the lea&s;t doubt of their mo&s;t lawfull ordination by the hands of the Presbytry.</P>
<P>After all this was writen, is heer it &s;tands,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The Prae|lats are &s;o ba&s;elie injurious to all the reformed Churches that their &s;elfes are a&s;hamed of it.</NOTE> another copie of the Warners book was brought to my hand wherin <HI>I found the deleted line &s;tand printed in the&s;e di&s;tinct tearmes, and put it to a dangerous que&s;tion whither it be within the payle of the Church,</HI> the deciphering of the&s;e words puts it beyond all peradventure that what I did conjecture of the Warner and his Brethrens minde, of the &s;tate of all the reformed Church|es, was no mis-take, but that they doe truely judge the want of Epi&s;copall ordination to exclude all the Mini&s;ters of other Reformed Churches, and their flocks al&s;o from the lines of the true Church. This indeed is a mo&s;t dangerous que&s;tion: for it &s;tricks at the root of all. If the Warner out of remor&s;e of con&s;cience had blotted out of his book that er|rour, the repentance had been commendable: But he hes left &s;o much yet behind un&s;craped out, as does shew his minde to continue what it was, &s;o that feare alone to pro|voke the reformed heere at this un&s;ea&s;onable time, &s;eemes to have been the cau&s;e of deleting the&s;e too cleare expre&s;&s;i|ons of the praelaticall tenet again&s;t the very being and &s;ub&s;i&s;|tence of all the Prote&s;tant Churches, which want Epi&s;copa|cy, when the&s;e me~ doe &s;till &s;tand upon the extreame pinacle of impudency and arrogance, denying the Reformed to be true Churches, and without &s;cuple averring Rome as shee &s;tands this day, under the coun&s;el of Trent, to be a Church mo&s;t true, wherin there is an ea&s;y way of &s;alvation, from which all &s;eparation is needle&s;&s;e, and with which a re-uni|on were much to be de&s;ired? That gracious faction this day
<PB N="72" REF="43">is willing enough to per&s;wade, or at lea&s;t to re&s;t content without any oppo&s;ition that the King should of him&s;elfe without and before a Parliament, (though contrary to ma|ny &s;tanding Lawes) grant under his hand and &s;eale a full li|berty of Religion to the bloody Irish, and to put in their hands, both armes, Ca&s;tles and prime Places of tru&s;t in the State; that the King should give a&s;&s;urance of his endeavour, to get all the&s;e ratified in the nixt Parliament of England, the&s;e men can heare with all moderation and patience: but behold their furious impatience, their whole art and indu|&s;try is wakned, when they heare of any appearance of the Kings inclination towards covenanting Prote&s;tants: night and day they beate in his Maje&s;ties head, that all the mi&s;|chieves of the world does lurke in that mi&s;erable covenant, that death and any misfortune, that the ruine of all the King|domes ought much rather to bee imbraced by his Maje&s;tie, then that prodigious Mon&s;ter, that very hell of the Cove|nant, becau&s;e for&s;ooth it doth oblige in plane tearmes the taker to endeavour (in his &s;tation) the abolition of their great Godde&s;&s;e, praelacy.</P>
<P>The nixt hurt of Mini&s;ters from the Presbytry,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The gene|rality of the Epi&s;|copal cler|gy have ever been covered with igno|rance, beg|gery, and contempt.</NOTE> is, that by it they are brought to ignorance, contempt and beggery. An&s;. Whither Epi&s;copacy or Presbytry is the fitte&s;t in&s;tru|ment to avert the&s;e evills, let rea&s;on or experience teach men to judge. The Presbyteriall di&s;cipline doth oblige to a great deale of &s;everer tryalls in all &s;ort of learning requi&s;ite in a divine before ordination then doth the Epi&s;copall: let either the rule or practi&s;e of Presbyterian and Epi&s;copall or|dination be compared or the weekly Exerci&s;es and monthly di&s;putations in Latine upon the controverted heads be look|ed upon which the Presbytry exacts of every Mini&s;ter after his ordination all the dayes of his life: for experience let the <HI>French, Dutch</HI> and <HI>Scots</HI> divines who have been or yet are,
<PB N="73" REF="43">be compared with the ordinary generation of the English Clergie, and it will be found, that the praelats have not great rea&s;on &s;o &s;uperciliou&s;ly to look downe with contempt upon their Brethrens learning. I hope, <HI>Cartwright, Whi|taker, Perkins, Reynolds, Parker, Ames,</HI> and other Pres|byterian English were inferior in learning to none of their oppo&s;its: &s;ome of the English Bishops has not wanted good &s;tore of learning, but the mo&s;t of them (I beleeve) wilbe con|tent to leave of boa&s;ting in this &s;ubject, what does the Warner &s;peake to us of ignorance, contempt and Beggery? does not all the world know, that albeit &s;ome few, &s;carce one of twenty, did brook good benefices, yea plurality of them whereby to live in &s;plendor at Court, or where they li&s;ted in their non-re&s;idency, neverthele&s;&s;e it hath been much com|plained, that the greate&s;t parte of the prie&s;ts, who had the cure of &s;oules thorow all the Kingdome of England, were incomparably the mo&s;t ignorant, beggerly and contemp|tible clergy, that ever have been &s;een in any of the reformed Churches? neither did we ever heare of any great &s;tudy in the Praelats to remeed the&s;e evils, albeit &s;ome of them be pro|vident enough for their owne families. <HI>Doctor Bramble</HI> knowes who had the skill before they had &s;itten &s;even yeare in their charge to purcha&s;e above fifeteen hundred pounds a yeare for them&s;elves and their heirs what &s;omever.</P>
<P>The third evil which the Ptesbytery brings upon Mini&s;|ters is that it makes them prat and pray non&s;ence everla&s;t|ingly. An&s;.
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The Prae|lats conti|nue to hate preaching and prayer but to ido|lize a po|pish &s;er|vice.</NOTE> It is indeed a great heartbrake unto igno|rant, lazy and uncon&s;ciencious Mini&s;ters to be put to the paines of preaching and prayer, when a read &s;ervice was wont to be all their exerci&s;e: but we thought that all indiffe|rently ingenuous men had long agoe been put from &s;uch impudence. It was the late labour of the praelats by all their skill to di&s;grace preaching and praying without booke, to
<PB N="72" REF="44">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="73" REF="44">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="74" REF="45">cry up the Liturgy as the only &s;ervice of God, and to idolize it as a mo&s;t heavenly and divine peece of write, which yet is nought but a tran&s;cript of the &s;uper&s;titious breviary and idolatrous mi&s;&s;all of Rome. The Warner would doe well to con&s;ider and an&s;wer after &s;even yeares advi&s;ement Mr. <HI>Bailie</HI> his pararell of the &s;ervice with the mi&s;&s;all and Breviarie, be|fore hee pre&s;ente the world with new paralels of the English liturgy, with the directories of the Reformed Churches. Is it &s;o indeed, that all preaching and praying without book is but a pratting of non-&s;ence everla&s;tingly, why then con|tinues the King and many well minded men to be deceived by our Doctors, while they affirme that they are as much for preaching in their practi&s;e and opinion as the Presbyterians, and for prayer without book al&s;o, before and after &s;ermon, and in many other occa&s;ions? it &s;eemes the&s;e affirmations are nothing but gro&s;&s;e di&s;&s;imulation in this time of their low|ne&s;&s;e and affliction, to decline the envy of people again&s;t them for their profane contempt of divine ordinances; for wee may &s;ee heere their tenet to remaine what it was, and them&s;elves ready enough, when their &s;ea&s;on shall be fitter, to ring it out loud in the eares of the World, that for divine &s;ervice people needs no more but the reading of the liturgy,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">Vide la|<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="3 letters">ium. cap. 7.</NOTE> that &s;ermons on week dayes and Sundayes afternoon mu&s;t all be laid a&s;ide, that on the Sabbath before noone Sermon is needle&s;&s;e, and from the mouths of the mo&s;t Preachers very noxious; that when &s;ome learned Schollars are plea&s;ed on &s;ome fe&s;tivall dayes to have an oration, it would be short and and according to the Court paterne, without all Spirit and life for edification; but by all meanes it mu&s;t bee provided, that no word of prayer either before or after be &s;poken, ex|cept only a bidding to pray, for many things even for the welfare of the &s;oules departed; and all this alone in the words of the Lords prayer. If any shall dare to expre&s;&s;e the
<PB N="75" REF="45">de&s;ires of his heart to God in privat or publick in any words of his own framing hee is a gro&s;&s;e Puritan, who is bold to offer to God his own non&s;ence rather then the auncient; and well advi&s;ed prayers of the holy Church.</P>
<P>The Warner is heer al&s;o mi&s;taken in his beleefe, that ever the Church of Scotland had any Liturgy, they had and have &s;till &s;ome formes for helpe and direction, but no ty ever in any of them by law or practi&s;e: they doe not condemne the u&s;e of &s;et formes for rules, yea nor for u&s;e in beginners, who are thereby endeavouring to attaine a readine&s;&s;e to pray in their family out of their owne heart in the words which Gods &s;pirit dytes to them; but for Mini&s;ters to &s;uppre&s;&s;e their mo&s;t confortable and u&s;efull gift of prayer by tying their mouth unto &s;uch formes which them&s;elves or others have compo&s;ed wee count it a wrong to the giver, and to him who has re|ceived the gift, and to the gift, and to the Church for who&s;e u&s;e that was be&s;towed.</P>
<P>In the nixt place the Warner makes the Presbytry injuri|ous to parents,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">Epi&s;copall warrants for clan|de&s;tin mar|riages, rob Parents of their chil|dren.</NOTE> by marying their children contrary to their con&s;ent, and forcing them to give to the disobedient as large a portion as to any other of their obedient children, and that it is no mervail the Scots should doe the&s;e things who have &s;tripped the King the father of their country of his ju&s;t rights. An&s;. By the Warners rule all the actions of a nation where a Presbytry lodges mu&s;t be charged on the back of the Pres|bytry. II. The Parliament of Scotland denyes, that they have &s;tripped the King of his ju&s;t rights; while he was &s;tirred up and keeped on by the praelaticall faction to cour&s;es de|&s;tructive to him&s;elfe and all his people; after the shedding of much blood, before the exerci&s;e of all parts of his royall go|vernment, they only required for all &s;atisfaction and &s;ecu|rity to religion and liberties, the grant of &s;ome few mo&s;t e|quitable demands. The unhappy Praelats from the begin|ning
<PB N="76" REF="46" MS="y">of our troubles to this day finding our great demande to runne upon the abolition of their office, did ever pre&s;&s;e his Maje&s;tie to deny us that &s;atisfaction, and rather then Bishops should be laid a&s;ide they have concluded that the King him&s;elfe, and all his family and all his three King|domes shall perish: yet with all patience the Scotes con|tinue to &s;upplicat and to offer not only their Kingdome, but their lives and e&s;tats and all they have for his Maje&s;ties &s;er|vice upon the grant of their few and ea&s;y demands; but no mi&s;ery either of King or people can overcome the de&s;perat ob&s;tinacy of Praelaticall hearts.</P>
<P>As for parents con&s;ent to the mariage of their children, how tenderly it is provided for in Scotland it may be &s;een at length in the very place cited. It was the Bishops, who by their warrants for clande&s;tine mariages, and di&s;pen&s;ations with mariages without warrant have &s;poiled many parents of their deare children: with &s;uch abhominations the Pres|bytery was never acquainted; all that is alleadged out of that place of our di&s;cipline is, when a cruel parent or tutor abu&s;es their authority over their children, and again&s;t all rea&s;on for their owne evill ends perver&s;ely will cro&s;&s;e their children in their lawfull and every way hone&s;t de&s;ires of mariage; that in that ca&s;e the Magi&s;trats and Mini&s;ters may be intreated by the grieved childe to deale with the unju&s;t parent or tutor, that by their mediation rea&s;on may be done. I beleeve this advice is &s;o full of equity, that no Church nor State in the world will complaine of it: but how ever it be, this ca&s;e is &s;o rare in Scotland that I profe&s;&s;e, I never in my life did know, nor did heare of any child before my dayes, who did a&s;&s;ay by the authoritative &s;entence of a Magi&s;trate or Mini&s;ter to force their parents con&s;ent to their marriage. As for the War|ners addition of the Mini&s;ters compelling parents to give portions to their children, that the Church of Scotland haths
<PB N="77" REF="46">any &s;uch canon or practi&s;e its an impudent lie, but in the place alledged is a pa&s;&s;age again&s;t the &s;paring of the life of adul|terers, contrary to the Law of God: and for the excom|munication of Adulterers, when by the negligence of the Magi&s;trat their life is &s;pared, this po&s;&s;ibly may be the thorne in the &s;ide of &s;ome which makes them bite and &s;purne with the heele &s;o furiou&s;ly again&s;t the Authors and lovers of &s;o &s;evere a di&s;cipline.</P>
<P>The Presbyteries nixt injury is done to the Lawyers, Sy|nodes &amp; other Eccle&s;ia&s;tick Courts revoke their Sentences. An&s;. No &s;uch matter ever was attempted in Scotland; fre|quent prohibitions have been obtained by curti&s;an Bishops, again&s;t the highe&s;t civil judicatories in England, but that e|ver a Presbitry or Synode in Scotland did &s;o much as a&s;&s;ay to impede or repeale the proceedings of any the meane&s;t ci|vil court, I did never heare it &s;o much as alleaged by our ad|ver&s;aries.</P>
<P>The nixt injury is again&s;t all Ma&s;ters,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">Serious ca|techi&s;ing is no Epi&s;co|pal crime.</NOTE> and Mi&s;tre&s;&s;es of fa|milies, whom the Presbytery will have to be per&s;onally exa|mined in their knowledge once a yeare, and to be excom|municat, if gro&s;ly and wilfully ignorant. An&s;. If it bee a crime for a Mini&s;ter to call together parcels of his congre ga|tion to be in&s;tructed in the grounds of Religion, that &s;er|vants and children and (where ignorance is &s;u&s;pected,) others al&s;o may be tryed in their knowledge of the Catechi&s;me; or if it bee a crime that in family-vi&s;itations oftener then once a yeare the conver&s;ation of every member of the Church may be looked upon; we confe&s;&s;e the Mini&s;ters of Scotland were guilty thereof, and &s;o farre as we know the generality of the Epi&s;copall faction may purge them&s;elves by oath of any &s;uch imputation: for they had &s;omewhat el&s;e to doe, then to be at the pains of in&s;tructing or trying the Spirituall State of every sheep in their flocks: we confe&s;&s;e likewi&s;e, that it is
<PB N="78" REF="47">both our order and practi&s;e to keep off from the holy table, whom wee find gro&s;lly and wilfully ignorant: but that ever any for &s;imple ignorance was excommunicat in Scotland, none who knowes us will affirme it.</P>
<P>The la&s;t whom he will have to be wronged by the Presby|tery are the common people,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">Church fe&s;&s;ions are not high com|mi&s;&s;iones.</NOTE> who mu&s;t groane under a high commi&s;&s;ion in every parish, where ignorant governors rule all without Law, medling even in dome&s;ticall jarres be twixt man and wife, Ma&s;ter and Servant. An&s;. This is but a gybe of revenge for the overthrow of their Tyrannous high Commi&s;&s;ion-Court, where they were wont to play the Rex at their plea&s;ure above the highe&s;t &s;ubjects of the three King|doms, and would never give over that their in&s;olent dome|neering court, till the King and Parliaments of both King|domes did agree to throw it down about their eares. The thing he jeares at, is the congregation all Eldership, a judi|catory which all the Reformed doe enjoy to their great con|fort as much as Scotland. They are farre from all arbitrary judications; their Lawes are the holy Scripture and acts of &s;uperior Church-judicatories, which rule &s;o clearly the ca|&s;es of their cogni&s;ance, that rarely any difficulty remaines therein: or if it doe, immediatly by reference or appeal it is tran&s;mitted to the Cla&s;&s;es or Synode. The judges in the lowe&s;t Eldership (as wee have &s;aid before) are a do&s;zen at lea&s;t, of the mo&s;t able and pious who can bee hade in a whole congregation to joine with the Pa&s;tors one or more as they fall to be: but the Epi&s;copall way is to have no di&s;ci|pline at all in any congregation: only where there is hope of a fyne, the Bishops officiall will &s;ummon before his owne learned and con&s;cientious wi&s;edome, who ever within the whole dioces have fallen into &s;uch a fault as hee plea&s;eth to take notice of: as for dome&s;tick infirmities, Presbyterians are mo&s;t tender to medle therein; they come never before
<PB N="79" REF="47">any judicatory, but both where the fault is great, and the &s;candal thereof flagrant, and broken out beyond the wals of the family.</P>
<P>The&s;e are the great injuries and hurts which the Church di&s;cipline has procured to all orders of men in the whole re|formed world, when Epi&s;copacy has been &s;uch an innocent lambe, or rather &s;o holy an angel upon earth, that no harme at all has ever come by it to any mortall creature: a misbe|leeving Jew will nothing misdoubt this &s;o evident a truth.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD>CHAP. ULT.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The Warners exceptions again&s;t the covenant are full of con|&s;idence but exceeding frivolous.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THough in the former Chapters the Warner has shewed out more venome and gall then the bagge of any one mans &s;tomack could have been &s;uppo&s;ed capable of, yet as if he were but beginning to vomite, in this la&s;t Chapter of the covenant a new flood of blacker poy&s;on rusheth out of his pen. His undertaking is great, to demon&s;trat cleerly that the covenant is meerly void wicked and impious. His fir&s;t clear demon&s;tration is, that it was devi&s;ed by &s;trangers, im|po&s;ed by &s;ubjects, who wanted requi&s;ite power, and was extorted by ju&s;t feare of unju&s;t &s;uffering, &s;o that many that took it with their lips, never con&s;ented with their hearts. An&s;. This cleer demon&s;tration is but a poor and evill argu|ment: the Major, if it were put in forme, would hardly be granted,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The Cove|nant was not di&s;ho|nourable to union.</NOTE> but I &s;tand on the minor as weake and fal&s;e for the covenant was not devi&s;ed by &s;trangers, the Commi&s;&s;ioners of the Parliament of England together with the Commi&s;&s;io|ners of the Parliament and generall a&s;&s;embly of Scotland
<PB N="80" REF="48">were the fir&s;t and only framers thereof, but they who gave the life and being to it in England were the Lords and Com|mons a&s;&s;embled in Parliament at We&s;t-Mini&s;ter by the Kings call, and at that time acknowledged by his Maje&s;tie without any que&s;tion about the lawfullnes of their con&s;titution and authority: the&s;e men and that Court were not I hope great &s;trangers in England. The covenant was not impo&s;ed upon the King: but the Parliaments of both Kingdomes made it their earne&s;t de&s;ire unto his Maje&s;tie, that he would be plea|&s;ed to joyne with them in that Covenant, which they did judge to be a maine peece of their &s;ecurity for their Religion and liberties in all the three Kingdomes. As for their impo|&s;ing of it upon the &s;ubjects of England, an ordinance of Par|liament (though the King con&s;ent not) by the uncontrover|ted lawes of England, is a &s;ufficient authority to crave obe|dience of all the &s;ubjects of England, during the continuan|ce of that Parliament.</P>
<P>The la&s;t part of the demon&s;tration is dishonorable indeed to the English Nation if it were true, it was no dishonour to England to joyne with their brethren of Scotland in a Cove|nant for mantainance of their Religion and Liberties: but for many of the English to &s;weare a covenant with their lippes, from which their heart did di&s;&s;ent and upon this diffe|rence of heart and mouth to plead the nullity of the oath, and to advance this plea &s;o high as to a cleer demon&s;tration, this is &s;uch a dishonour and dishone&s;ty, that a greater can|not fall upon a man of reputed integrity, E&s;pecially when the ground of the lie and perjury is an evident falshood: for the covenant was not extorted from any flesh in England by feare of any unju&s;t &s;uffering; &s;o far was it from this, that to this day it could never be obtained from the Parliament of England, to enjoyne that covenant upon any by the penul|ty of a two pence.</P>
<PB N="81" REF="48">
<P> The Warners &s;econd demon&s;tration is no better then the fir&s;t, the ground of it is,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">Covenan|ters were not de|ceived, but under|&s;tood what they &s;weare.</NOTE> that all oathes are void which have deceipt and errour of the &s;ub&s;tantiall conditions incident to them. This ground had need to be much better cautioned, then heere it is, before it can &s;tand for a major of a clear de|mon&s;tration: but how is the minor proved? behold how much short the Warners proofes are of his great boa&s;tings. His fir&s;t argument is grounded upon an evident falshood, that in the Covenant we &s;weare the lately devi&s;ed di&s;cipline to be Chri&s;ts in&s;titution. An&s;. There is no &s;uch word nor any &s;uch matter in all the Covenant: was the Warners ha|tred &s;o great again&s;t that peece of write, that being to make cleare demon&s;trations again&s;t it, hee would not &s;o much as ca&s;t his eye upon that which he was to oppugne, Covenan|ters &s;weare to endeavour the reformation of England, ac|cording to the word of God and the be&s;t reformed Churches, but not a word of the Scotes Presbytery, nor of any thing in any Church even the be&s;t reformed, unle&s;&s;e it be found ac|cording to the paterne of Gods holy word.</P>
<P>The &s;econd ground of his demon&s;trantion is al&s;o an evi|dent errour,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The War|ner unwit|tingly comends the Cove|nant.</NOTE> that the covenant in hand is one and the &s;ame with that of King <HI>Iames.</HI> An&s;. Such a fancy came never in the head of any man, I know; much le&s;&s;e was it ever wri|ten or &s;poken by any: that the Covenant of King <HI>Iames</HI> in Scotland 1580, should bee one and the &s;ame with the Cove|nant of all the three Kingdomes 1643, what&s;oever iden|tities may appeare in the matter and &s;imilitude, in the ends of both; but the gro&s;&s;e&s;t errors are &s;olide enough grounds for praelaticall clear demon&s;trations. Yet heere the War|ner under&s;tands not how hee is cutting his own vines; his friends in Scotland will give him &s;mall thanks for at|tributing unto the nationall Covenant of Scotland, (that Covenant of King <HI>Iames</HI>) the&s;e three properties, that it
<PB N="80" REF="49">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="81" REF="49">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="82" REF="50" MS="y">was i&s;&s;ued out by the Kings authority, that it was for the maintenance of the Lawes of the realme, and for the main|tenance of the e&s;tablished Religion: tyme brings adver&s;a|ries to confe&s;&s;e of their own accord long denyed truthes. But the Characters, which the Warner inprints upon the &s;olemne league and Covenant of the three Kingdomes, wee mu&s;t bee pardoned to controvert, till he have taken &s;ome lea&s;ure to trie his wilde a&s;&s;ertions. Fir&s;t that the league is again&s;t the authority of the King, &s;econdly that it is again&s;t the Law; and thirdly that it is for the overthrow of Religion. The man cannot think, that any should beleeve his dictats of this kind without proofe, &s;ince the expre&s;&s;e words of that league do flatly contradict him in all the&s;e three po&s;itions.</P>
<P>His gentle memento, that Scotland, when they &s;ued for aid from the crowne of England, had not the English di&s;|cipline obtruded upon their Church, might heer have been &s;paired: was not the English di&s;cipline and liturgy obtruded upon us by the praelats of England with all craft and force? did we ever obtrude our di&s;ciplin upon the English? but when they of their owne free and long deliberate choice had abolished Bishops and promi&s;ed to &s;et up Presbytery, &s;o far as they had found it agreable to the word of God, were wee not in all rea&s;on obliged to encourage and a&s;&s;i&s;t them in &s;o pious a work?</P>
<P>In the nixt words the Warner for all his great boa&s;ts fin|ding the weaknes of all the former grounds of his &s;econde demon&s;tration,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The King did not clame the &s;ole and ab&s;olute po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion of the mi|litia.</NOTE> he offers three new ones: which doubtles will doe the deid: for he avowes po&s;itively that his follo|wing grounds are demon&s;trative, yet who&s;oever shalbe plea&s;ed to grip them with never &s;o &s;oft an hand shall find them all to be but vanity and wind. The fir&s;t, after a num|ber of pro&s;yllogi&s;mes re&s;ts upon the&s;e two foundations, fir&s;t that the right of the <HI>militia</HI> re&s;ides in the King alone: &s;econd|ly
<PB N="83" REF="50">that by the covenant the <HI>militia</HI> is taken out of the Kings hands; and that every covenanter by his covenant di&s;po&s;es of him&s;elfe and of his armes, again&s;t the right which the King hath into him. An&s;. The Warner will have much adoe to prove this &s;econd &s;o, that it may be a ground of a clear demon&s;tration: but for the fir&s;t that the power of the <HI>militia</HI> of England doth re&s;ide in the King alone, that the two hou&s;es of Parliament have nothing at all to doe with it, and that their taking of armes for the defence of the liberties of England or any other imaginable cau&s;e again&s;t any party countenanced by the Kings pre&s;ence again&s;t his lawes mu&s;t be altogether unlawfull; if his demon&s;tration be no clearer, then the ground where upon he builds it, I am &s;ure, it will not be vi&s;ible to any of his oppofits: who are not like to be convinced of open rebellion by his naked a&s;&s;ertion, upon which alone he layes this his mighty ground. Beleeve it, he had need to a&s;&s;ay its releefe with &s;ome colour of ane argu|ment; for none of his owne friends will now take it of his hand for ane indemon&s;trable principle, &s;ince the King for a long time was willing to acknowledge the Parliaments jointe intere&s;t in the <HI>militia,</HI> yea to put the whole <HI>militia</HI> in their hands alone for a good number of yeares to come: &s;o farre was his Maje&s;tie from the thoughts, that the Parlia|ments medling with a parte of the militia, in the time of e|vident dangers, should be &s;o certainly and clearly the crime of rebellion.</P>
<P>The Warners &s;econd demon&s;trative ground wee admit without que&s;tion in the major, that where the matter is evi|dently unlawfull, the oath is not binding; but the applica|tion of this in the minor is very fal&s;e. All that hee brings to make it appeare to be true, is that the King is the &s;upreame Legi&s;lator, that it is unlawfull for the &s;ubjects of England to change any thing e&s;tablished by Law, e&s;pecially to the
<PB N="84" REF="51">prejudice of the Praelats without their own con&s;ent, they being a third order of the Kingdom; otherwi&s;e it would be a harder mea&s;ure then the Friers and Abbots received from <HI>Henry</HI> the eight.
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The change of lawes in England ordinarly beginne by the two hou&s;es without the King.</NOTE> An&s;. May the Warner be plea&s;ed to con|&s;ider how farre his dictats heere are from all rea&s;on, much more from evident demon&s;trations. That the burden of Bi|shops and ceremonies was become &s;o heavy to all the three Kingdomes, that there was rea&s;on to endeavour their lay|ing a&s;ide, he does not offer to di&s;pute; but all his complanit runnes again&s;t the manner of their removall: this (&s;ay I) was done in no other then the ordinary and high path-way, whereby all burden&s;ome Lawes and cu&s;tomes u&s;e to be re|moved. Doth not the Hou&s;es of Parliament fir&s;t begin with their ordinance before the Kings con&s;ent be &s;ought to a Law? is not an ordinance of the Lords and Commons a good war|rant to change a former Law during the &s;itting of the Parlia|ment? The Lawes and cu&s;tomes of England permit not the King by his di&s;&s;ent to &s;toppe that change.
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The King did really con&s;ent to the aboli|tion of Bishops.</NOTE> I grant for the tur|ning an ordinance to a &s;tanding Law, the Kings con&s;ent is required, but with what qualifications and exceptions wee need not heere to debate, &s;ince his Maje&s;ties con&s;ent to the pre&s;ent ca&s;e of abolishing Bishops was obtained well neere as farre as was de&s;ired; and what is yet lacking, wee are in a faire way to obtaine it: for the Kings Maje&s;tie long agoe did agree to the rooting out of Epi&s;copacy in Scotland, he was willing al&s;o in England and Ireland to put them out of the Parliament, and all civil courts, and to dive&s;t them of all civil power, and to joyne with them Presbyteries for or|dination and &s;pirituall juri&s;diction; yea to abolish them to|tally name and thing, not only for three yeares but ever till he and his Parliament should agree upon &s;ome &s;etled order for the Church, was not this <HI>Tantamont</HI> to a perpetuall abo|lition for all and every one in both hou&s;es having abjured E|pi&s;copacy
<PB N="85" REF="51">by &s;olemne oath and Covenant, the Parliament was in no hazard of agreing with the King to re-erect the fallen chaires of the Bishops: &s;o there remained no other, but that either his Maje&s;tie should come over to their judge|ment, or by his not agreing with them, yet really to agree with them in the perpetuall abolition of Epi&s;copacy, &s;ince the conce&s;&s;ion was for the laying Bishops a&s;ide ever, till hee and his hou&s;es had agreed upon a &s;ettled order for the Church. If this be not a full and formall enough con&s;ent to the ordinance of changing the former Lawes anent praelat<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 letter">, his Maje&s;tie, who now is, ea&s;ily may and readily would &s;upply all &s;uch defects: if &s;ome of the faction did not con|tinually, for their own evill intere&s;ts, whi&s;per in his eares pernicious coun&s;el, as our Warner in this place al&s;o doeth by frighting the King in con&s;cience from any &s;uch con&s;ent, for this end he ca&s;ts out a di&s;cour&s;e, the &s;inshews whereof are in the&s;e three Epi&s;copall maximes.
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The Prae|lats would flatter the King into a Tyran|ny.</NOTE> Fir&s;t that the legi&s;lative power is &s;ollie in the King, that is according to his Brethrens Co~mentary, that the Parliament is but the Kings great coun|&s;el of free choyce, without or again&s;t who&s;e votes hee may make or unmake what Lawes he thinks expedient; but for them to make any ordinance for changing without his con|&s;ent of any thing that has been, or in&s;tituting any new thing, or for them to defend this their legall right and cu&s;tome (time out of mind) again&s;t the armes of the Malignant party, no <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 word"> may deny it to be plaine rebellion.</P>
<P N="2">II. <NOTE PLACE="marg">The prae|lats takes to them|&s;elves a negative voice in Parlia|ment.</NOTE> That the King and Parliament both together cannot make a Law, to the praejudice of Bishops without their own con&s;ent, they being the third order of the Kingdome: for albeit it be &s;acriledge in the Lords and Commons, to clame any the &s;malle&s;t share of the legi&s;lative power, (this in them were to pyck the chiefe&s;t jewel out of the Kings Crowne) yet this mu&s;t be the due priviledge of the Bishops, they mu&s;t
<PB N="84" REF="52">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="85" REF="52">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="86" REF="53" MS="y">be the third order of the Kingdome, yea the fir&s;t and mo&s;t high of the three, far above the other two temporall States of Lords and Commons; their share in the Legi&s;lative pow|er mu&s;t be &s;o great, that neither King nor Parliament can pa&s;&s;e any Law without their con&s;ent, &s;o that according to their humble prote&s;tation, all the Lawes and acts, which have been made by King and Parliament, &s;ince they were expelled the hou&s;e of Lords, are cleerly voide and null.</P>
<P>That the King and Parliament in dive&s;ting Bishops of their temporall honour and e&s;tats,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The Prae|lats grieve that Monks and Friers, the Pope and Car|dinals were ea&s;ten out of England by Henry the eight.</NOTE> in abolishing their places in the Church, doe &s;in more again&s;t con&s;cience then did <HI>Henry</HI> the eight and his Parliament, when they put down the Abbots and the Fryers. Wee mu&s;t beleeve that <HI>Henry</HI> the eight his abolishing the order of Monks was one of the acts of his greate&s;t Tyranny and greed: wee mu&s;t not doubt, but according to Law and rea&s;on, Abbots and priours ought to have kept &s;till their vote in Parliament, that the Mona|&s;teryes and Nunryes should have &s;tood in their integrity, that the King and Parliament did wrong in ca&s;ting them down, and that now they ought in con&s;cience to be &s;et up againe, yea that <HI>Henry</HI> the eight again&s;t all rea&s;on and con&s;cience did renounce his due obedience to the Pope, the Patriarch of the We&s;t; the fir&s;t Bishop of the univer&s;e, to whom the &s;uperin&s;pection and government of the whole Catholick Church in all rea&s;on doth belong. Though all this be heere glaunced at by the Warner, and el&s;ewhere <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 word"> prove it to be the declared mind of his Brethren, yet we mu&s;t be pardoned not to accept them as undenyable principles of cleare demon&s;trations.
<NOTE PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 span"> &s;upremacy of Kings is not pre|judged by the Cove|nant.</NOTE></P>
<P>The la&s;t ground of the Doctors demon&s;tration is, that the covenant is ane oath to &s;et up the Presbyterian govern|ment in England at it is in Scotland and that this is contrary to the oath of Supremacy; for the oath of Supremacy makes
<PB N="87" REF="53">the King the only &s;upreame head and governour of the Church of England, that is, the civil head to &s;ee that every man doe his duty in his calling; al&s;o it gives the King a &s;u|preame power over all per&s;ons in all cau&s;es: but the Presby|tery is a politicall papacie, acknowledging no governours but only the Presbyters: it gives the King power over all per|&s;ons as &s;ubjects, but none at all in Eccle&s;ia&s;tick cau&s;es. An&s;. Is there in all this rea&s;oning any thing &s;ound? Fir&s;t what article of the covenant beares the &s;etting up of the Presbyterian government in England as it is in Scotland? II. If the oath of &s;upremacy import no more then what the Warners expre&s;&s;e words are here, that the King is a civil head, to &s;ee every man doe his duty in his calling, let him be a&s;&s;ured that no Presbyterian in Scotland was ever con|trary to that &s;upremacy. III. That the Presbytery is a pa|pacy, and that a politicall one, the Warner knowes it ought not to be graunted upon his bare word. IV. That in Scot|land no other governors are acknowledged then Presbyters, him&s;elfe contradicts in the very nixt words, where he tells that the Scots Presbytery a&s;cribes to the King a power over all per&s;ons as &s;ubjects. V. That any Presbyterian in Scotland makes it &s;acriledge to give the King any power at all in any Eccle&s;ia&s;tick cau&s;e; it is a &s;en&s;ele&s;&s;e untruth.</P>
<P>The Warners arguments are not more idle and weake,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The War|ners in&s;o|lent vanity.</NOTE> then his triumphing upon them is in&s;olent: for he concludes from the&s;e wi&s;e and &s;trong demon&s;trations, that the poor covenant is apparently deceitfull, unvalide, impious, re|bellious, and what not? yea that all the learned divines in Europe wil conclude it &s;o, &amp; that all the covenanters them|&s;elfes who have any ingenuity, mu&s;t grant this much; and that no knowing English man can deny it, but his owne con&s;cience will give him thely. An&s;. If the Warner with any &s;eriou&s;ne&s;&s;e hath weighed this part of his owne write, and
<PB N="88" REF="54">if his mind goe along with his pen, I may without great pre&s;umption pronounce his judgment to be none of the mo&s;t &s;olide.</P>
<P>His following vapours being full of aire we let them eva|nish, only while he mentioneth our charging the King with intentions of changing the Religion and government, we an&s;wer, that we have been mo&s;t willing alwayes to a&s;cribe to the King good intentions but withall we have long avo|wed that the praelaticall party have gone beyond intentions to manife&s;t by printed declarations and publick actions their former de&s;igne to bring Tiranny upon the States, and po|pery upon the Churches of all the three Kingdomes: and that this very write of the Warners makes it evident, that this &s;ame minde yet remaines within them without the lea&s;t shew of repentance. So long as the con&s;cience of the court is mannaged by men of &s;uch principles, it is not po&s;&s;ible to free the hearts of the mo&s;t under&s;tanding, from a great deale of Jealou&s;y and feare to have Religion and lawes &s;till over|turned by that factione.</P>
<P>But the Warner commands us,
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The cove|nant is not for propa|gating of Religion by armes.</NOTE> to &s;peake to his <HI>Dilemma,</HI> whither we think it lawfull or unlawfull for &s;ubjects to take armes again&s;t their prince meerly for Religion. We an&s;wer, that the rea&s;ons whereby he thinks to conclude again&s;t us, on both &s;ides are very poor, if we shall &s;ay, it is unlawfull; then he makes us to condemne our &s;elfes, becau&s;e our co|venant te&s;tifies to the world, that we have taken up armes meerly to alter Religion, and that we beare no alleadgance to our King but in order to Religion, which in plaine tear|mes is to our owne humours and conceits. An&s;. There be many untruthes here in few words, fir&s;t how much reality and truth the Warner and &s;ome of his fellowes beleeves to be in that thing which they call Religion, their owne heart knowes; but it can be no great charity in him to make the
<PB N="89" REF="54">Religion of all covenanters to be nothing but their owne humours and conceits. Secondly it is not true that Covenan|ters beare no alleadgance to the King but only in order to religion. III. The Parliament of England denied that they took up armes again&s;t their King, though to defend them|&s;elves again&s;t the popish praelaticall and malignant faction, who were about to de&s;troy them with armes. IV. They have declared, that their purpo&s;e was not at all, to alter Religion but to purge it from the corruptions of Bishops and ceremonies that to long had been noxious unto them. V. They have oft profe&s;&s;ed that their armes were taken for the defence of their ju&s;t liberties, whereof the pre&s;ervation and reformation of Religion was but one.</P>
<P>The other horne of his <HI>Dilemma</HI> is as blunt in pushing as the former. If we make it lawfull (&s;aith he) to take up armes for Religion, we then ju&s;tify the independents and Ana|bapti&s;ts; wee make way for any that will plant what ever they apprehend to be true Religion by force, and to cut the throat of all Magi&s;trats, who are in a contrary opinion to them; that it is a ridiculous partiality for any to priviledge their own Religion as truth and Go&s;pell. An&s;.
<NOTE PLACE="marg">The War|ners black Athei&s;me.</NOTE> Whether will the&s;e men goe at la&s;t, the &s;trength of this rea&s;on is blak athei&s;me, that their is no realty of truth in any Religion, that no man may be permitted to take his Religion for any thing more but his owne apprehen&s;ion, which without ridi|culous folly he mu&s;t not praeferre to any other mans appre|hen&s;ion of a contrary Religion: this is much wor&s;e then the pagane Sceptici&s;me, which turned all reality of truth into a meer apprehen&s;ion of truth, wherein their was no certainty at all: this not only turnes the mo&s;t certaine truths, even the&s;e divine ones of Religion, into meer uncertaine concep|tions; but which is wor&s;e, it wil have the mo&s;t orthodoxe beleever &s;o to think, &s;peake and act, as if the opinions of
<PB N="88" REF="55">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="89" REF="55">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="90" REF="56">Independents, Anabapti&s;ts, Turks, Jews, Pagans or gro&s;&s;e Athei&s;ts were as good, true and &s;olide as the beleefe of <HI>Moy&s;es</HI> or <HI>Paul,</HI> were of the truths revealed to them from heaven. Secondly we &s;ay that &s;ubjects defence of their Religion and liberties e&s;tablished by Law, again&s;t the violent u&s;urpation of Papi&s;ts, Praelats or Malignants, is not the planting of Religi|on by arms; much le&s;&s;e is it the cutting of the throats of al Ma|gi&s;trats who differ in any point of Religion.
<NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">The Prae|lats con|demne the defen&s;ive armes of the Dutch &amp; Frensh Prote|&s;tants.</NOTE> III. In the judgement of the praelaticall party, the defen&s;ive armes of the Prote&s;tants in <HI>France, Holland,</HI> and <HI>Germany,</HI> mu&s;t be als much condemned as the offen&s;ive armes of the Anabap|ti&s;ts in <HI>Mun&s;ter,</HI> or of the &s;ectaries this day in <HI>England.</HI> Can the&s;e men dreame that the World for their plea&s;ure will &s;o farre dive&s;t them&s;elves of all Religion and rea&s;on, as to take from their hands &s;o brutish and Athei&s;ticall maximes.</P>
<P><NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">The Prae|lats decline the judge|ment of coun&s;els.</NOTE> He concluds with a wish of a generall coun&s;el, at lea&s;t of all prote&s;tant Churches for to condemne all broatchers of &s;editious principles. An&s;. All true covenanters goe before him in that de&s;ire, being confident that he and his fellowes as they have declined al ready the mo&s;t &s;olemne a&s;&s;emblies of their owne countries, upon a&s;&s;urance of their condemna|tion; &s;o their tergiver&s;ation would be als great, if they were to an&s;wer to an oecumenick Synod.
<NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg">The Prae|lats over|throw the foundatio~s of Prote|&s;tant Re|ligion.</NOTE> What (I pray) would the Warner &s;ay in a coun&s;el of prote&s;tants for the practi&s;e of his party pointed at in his la&s;t words? I meane their purging the Pope of <HI>Antichri&s;tiani&s;me,</HI> of purpo&s;e to make way for a recon|ciliation, yea for a returne to <HI>Rome,</HI> as this day it lyes under the wings of the Pope and Cardinals.
<NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg">The Prae|lats are &s;til perempto|rie to de|&s;troy the King and all his Kingdoms if they may not be re&s;to|red.</NOTE> Al&s;o what could they an&s;wer in a Chri&s;tian coun&s;el unto this charge, which is the drift of this whole Book, that they are &s;o farre from any re|mor&s;e for all the blood and mi&s;ery, which their wickednes (mo&s;t) has brought on the former King and all his King|domes the&s;e eleven yeares, that rather then they had not
<PB N="91" REF="56">the Covenant and generall a&s;&s;embly in Scotland de&s;troyed as an Idoll and Antichri&s;t, they wil chu&s;e yet &s;till to im|broyle all in new calamities? This King al&s;o and his whole Family, the remainder of the blood and E&s;tats in all the three Kingdomes, mu&s;t be hazarded for the &s;owing together of the torne mytres, and the reerecting of the fallen chayres of Praelats. If Bishops mu&s;t lie &s;till in their de&s;erved ruines, they per&s;eveer in their peremptory re&s;olution, to have their burials &s;princkled with the ashes of the royall Family and all the three Kingdomes.</P>
<TRAILER>FINIS.</TRAILER>
</DIV1>
</BODY>
<BACK>
<DIV1 TYPE="errata">
<PB REF="57">
<HEAD>ERRATA.</HEAD>
<P><HI>GOod Reader, the Authors ab&s;ence from the Pre&s;&s;e the whole time of the impre&s;&s;ion, and the Printers unacquain|tance with the English language, has occa&s;ioned not onely many mi&s;punctations and literall faults, but al&s;o diver&s;e gro&s;|&s;er Errata &s;uch as the following which thou art intreated to mend with thy Pen:</HI></P>
<P><HI>PAg.</HI> 4. <HI>lin.</HI> 23. <HI>for had read hath. pag.</HI> 9. <HI>lin.</HI> 8. <HI>for Provincio|nall read Provinciall. p.</HI> 11. <HI>l.</HI> 30 <HI>for whereby r. where. p.</HI> 15. <HI>l.</HI> 19. <HI>for pairt r. part. p.</HI> 20. <HI>l.</HI> 19, <HI>for can r. doth. l.</HI> 30. <HI>for pote|&s;tant r. Prote&s;tant. pag.</HI> 22. <HI>l.</HI> 19. <HI>for the&s;e r. the. p.</HI> 23. <HI>l. ult. for over r. or. for tru&s;ted r. tru&s;tee. p.</HI> 27. <HI>l.</HI> 4. <HI>for impatien, t r. impa|tient. l.</HI> 18. <HI>dele, and. p.</HI> 28. <HI>in marg. for commi&s;&s;arie r. commi&s;|&s;aries. l.</HI> 14. <HI>for and r. or. l.</HI> 29. <HI>for chardge r. charge. p.</HI> 31. <HI>l.</HI> 1. <HI>for chardges r. charges. l.</HI> 25. <HI>for citation r. irritation. p.</HI> 32. <HI>l.</HI> 10. <HI>for praecipies r. praecipices. p.</HI> 35. <HI>in tit. of chap.</HI> 7. <HI>for paritie r. part. p.</HI> 36. <HI>l.</HI> 2. <HI>for &s;candals r. &s;candal. p.</HI> 37. <HI>l.</HI> 2. <HI>for benefite r. benefice. p.</HI> 38. <HI>l.</HI> 10. <HI>for nation r. &s;ouldier. l.</HI> 11. <HI>for their &s;ouls r. his &s;oule. p.</HI> 48. <HI>c.</HI> 8. <HI>l.</HI> 4. <HI>dele An&s;. p.</HI> 49. <HI>l.</HI> 18. <HI>for Warner r. Doctor. p.</HI> 51. <HI>l.</HI> 13. <HI>for the r. his. p.</HI> 52. <HI>l.</HI> 16. <HI>for trea&s;ure r. Bishop. p.</HI> 55. <HI>in tit. of chap.</HI> 9. <HI>for their r. the. p.</HI> 56. <HI>l.</HI> 31. <HI>for Chri&s;t r. Chri&s;t his. l.</HI> 32. <HI>for point blank to r. point blanck. contrare to. p.</HI> 59. <HI>l.</HI> 1. <HI>dele and. l.</HI> 1. <HI>for unpoureth r. vapoureth l.</HI> 17. <HI>for where r. heere. p.</HI> 65. <HI>l.</HI> 5. <HI>for continues r. continue. l.</HI> 6. <HI>for are r. is. p.</HI> 66. <HI>l.</HI> 3. <HI>for to r. &s;o. l.</HI> 9. <HI>for warned. r. warmed. p.</HI> 67. <HI>l.</HI> 16. <HI>for in. r. to. p.</HI> 68. <HI>l.</HI> 5. <HI>for or. r. which. l.</HI> 16. <HI>for la&s;t. r. nixt. p.</HI> 70. <HI>l.</HI> 18. <HI>for le&s;t. r. be&s;t. l. ult. for null the Church and r. the verie being of. p.</HI> 71. <HI>l.</HI> 1. <HI>for Reformed r. Reformed Churches. p.</HI> 73. <HI>l.</HI> 23. <HI>for charge r. chaire. p.</HI> 74. <HI>l.</HI> 6. <HI>for &s;ervice r. &s;ervice book. l.</HI> 28. <HI>dele, and. p.</HI> 75. <HI>l.</HI> 16. <HI>dele, and to the gift. p.</HI> 76. <HI>l. ult. for haths. r. hath. p.</HI> 78. <HI>l.</HI> 24. <HI>for do&s;zen r. dozen. p.</HI> 82. <HI>l.</HI> 5. <HI>for inprints. r. imprints. p.</HI> 84. <HI>l.</HI> 9. <HI>for complanit r. complaint. p.</HI> 85. <HI>l.</HI> 7. <HI>for a&s;ide ever r. a&s;ide for ever. l.</HI> 16. <HI>for &s;inshews r. &s;inews.</HI></P>
</DIV1>
</BACK>
</TEXT>
</EEBO>
</ETS>
