<!DOCTYPE ETS PUBLIC "-//UMDLPS//DTD EEBOPROOF 2.0//EN">
<ETS>
<TEMPHEAD>
<REVDESCR>
<CHANGE>
<DATE>2014-10-30</DATE>
<RESPSTMT>
<NAME>Olivia Bottum</NAME>
<RESP>MURP</RESP>
</RESPSTMT>
<ITEM>Corrected markup.</ITEM>
</CHANGE>
</REVDESCR>
</TEMPHEAD>
<EEBO>
<IDG S="marc" R="UM" ID="B28926">
<STC T="W">R1103</STC>
<STC T="C">R10127</STC>
<BIBNO T="umi">99834805</BIBNO>
<VID>199607</VID>
</IDG>
<TEXT LANG="eng">
<FRONT>
<DIV1 TYPE="title page">
<PB REF="1">
<PB REF="1" MS="y">
<P>THE Queries and Prote&s;tation OF THE <HI>Scots Epi&s;copal Clergy</HI> AGAINST THE AUTHORITY OF THE Presbyterian General A&s;&s;emblies and Committees, given in to the Committee of the General A&s;&s;em|bly at <HI>Aberdeen,</HI> June 29th, 1694.</P>
<P>Together with the Committee's An&s;wer and Proceed|ings; with REFLECTIONS upon the QUERIES, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P><HI>By a Layman of the Church of</HI> Scotland.</P>
<Q><BIBL><HI>1 Cor. 11.16.</HI></BIBL> <GAP DESC="foreign">.</Q>
<P><HI>London,</HI> Printed in the Year 1694.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="preface">
<PB REF="2">
<PB REF="2">
<HEAD>The PREFACE.</HEAD>
<P>THE Cau&s;e of publi&s;hing the following Queries and Reflections upon them, is to obviate Mi&s;repre|&s;entations, and &s;et things in their true Light, it having been the con&s;tant Practice of the Scots Prelati&s;ts and their Friends here, not only to put fal&s;e Glo&s;&s;es upon things, but really to publi&s;h &V;ntruths, as Matter of Fact, ever &s;ince the Revolution, by which they impo&s;e upon tho&s;e who are Stran|gers to Scots Affairs. The Truth of this cannot be denied by any who con&s;ider the Pamphlets which they have publi&s;hed from time to time again&s;t the Church of <HI>Scotland,</HI> as by Law e&s;tabli&s;h'd, both in relation to particular Mini&s;ters and Members, and the Acts and Proceedings of her General A&s;&s;emblies and Commit|tees: Nor is it unknown how &s;ome Per&s;ons of no mean Character did indu&s;triou&s;ly mi&s;repre&s;ent the Act for &s;ettling the Quiet and Peace of the Church, which was enacted in the la&s;t Se&s;&s;ion of Parliament at <HI>Edin|burgh, June 12, 1693.</HI> before it appear'd in print, on purpo&s;e to render their Proceedings odious to the Church of <HI>England;</HI> and the Oppo&s;ition made to the &s;itting of the la&s;t General A&s;&s;embly, who authorized the Committee here treated of, as al&s;o the Tricks which were endeavoured to be put upon them when they were call'd, are &s;till fre&s;h in the Memory of every one concern'd: So that the&s;e things, together with the Weight of the following Queries, not in them&s;elves, but as being concerted by a General Meeting of the Epi&s;copal Clergy in the North of <HI>Scotland,</HI> for them&s;elves and their Adherents, will ju&s;tify the publi&s;hing of them to the World; and that there may be a true Relation of the Matter of Fact on both &s;ides, here is al&s;o an Account of the Committee's An&s;wer and Proceedings.</P>
<P>As to what concerns the <HI>Reflections,</HI> though the judicious and prudent An&s;wer of the Committee, and the pertinent Prote&s;tation of Mr. <HI>Dunlop,</HI> are &s;ufficient to &s;atisfy tho&s;e who are acquainted with our Af|fairs, and the legal and orderly Procedure of the Judicatories of our Church, yet &s;omething further was thought nece&s;&s;ary to inform People here, amongst whom the Queries and Prote&s;tation of the Epi&s;copal Party have made a Noi&s;e, whereas there was no notice taken of the Committee's An&s;wer, nor the other Prote&s;ta|tion; tho&s;e who tran&s;mitted the Account of the one from <HI>Edinburgh,</HI> to tho&s;e who did &s;end it in the Pub|lick News and otherwi&s;e, through this Kingdom, having either &s;uppre&s;s'd it out of Ignorance or De&s;ign. The Nece&s;&s;ity of the&s;e Reflections, &s;uch as they are, will further appear to tho&s;e who con&s;ider the Humour and Carriage of the Faction's Adherents in this place, being &s;uch as lay hold of every Opportunity to calum|niate the Church of <HI>Scotland,</HI> and by Con&s;equence improve tho&s;e Queries, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> as a &s;pecial Occa&s;ion of begging and running about with their malicious Tattle amongst the Church-of-<HI>England</HI>-Clergy, and others to whom they know &s;uch things to be acceptable: and therefore the Author of the following Reflections, out of pure Zeal for the Government of his Country, as at pre&s;ent e&s;tabli&s;h'd both in Church and State, thought it incumbent on him to throw in his Mite; but does &s;olemnly prote&s;t that he has neither Commi&s;&s;ion, Concurrence, nor Connivance from the Committee, nor any of their Number, nor indeed from any Mini&s;ter or Mini&s;ters in <HI>Scotland,</HI> for what he has done herein, which he thinks fit to declare, to obviate the Mi&s;repre&s;entations of the oppo&s;ite Party; and that no Mi&s;management of his, though he be con&s;cious of no other but Weakne&s;s, may be imputed to his own Party, who&s;e Pardon he hopes that he may al&s;o obtain, though his meddling in their Affairs may &s;eem officious, &s;eeing he hath &s;o ingenuou&s;ly declared his Motive, and that he &s;uppor&s;es his Reflections may keep the Adver&s;aries in play for a while, till the Committee, or &s;ome deputed by them, &s;hall be at lei&s;ure to take their Queries into Con&s;ideration, if they think that they de&s;erve &s;o much of their time.</P>
<P>What's to be &s;aid further at pre&s;ent is, that all moderate Church-of <HI>England</HI>-men, into who&s;e Hands this may fall, would do well to take notice, that tho&s;e who pretend to be of their Party in <HI>Scotland, don't contend now for the Order of Bi&s;hops,</HI> it being apparent that they do, neither in the <HI>Formula</HI> which they offered to &s;ign in <HI>1690,</HI> nor in the pre&s;ent Queries, make any mention of the Abolition of that Order, as a Cau&s;e of their declining Conformity to the Church of <HI>Scotland:</HI> Nor is their Renunciation of Epi&s;copacy or Pa&s;&s;ive Obedience required, though we were obliged to renounce Presbytery, and the Law|fulne&s;s of defen&s;ive Arms, or el&s;e we could not conform to their Church-E&s;tabli&s;hment; for not only the Ab|juration
<PB REF="3">of the &s;olemn League and Covenant, but a Conformity to the Church, as owning the King's Su|premacy, and the Government of the Church by Bi&s;hops, were expre&s;ly requir'd by Acts of Parliament, <HI>Se&s;&s;. 2. Act 3,</HI> and <HI>5. Parl. 1. Car. 2. Se&s;&s;. 3. Act 2.</HI> whereas in effect there's nothing required of them by the Act for Settling the Peace of the Church, <HI>June, 1693.</HI> but what they did &s;eemingly concede by the <HI>Formula</HI> above-mentioned: And though they pretend to rai&s;e new Scruples now, as in their Que|ries, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> it will appear by the following Reflections, that they them&s;elves did practi&s;e tho&s;e things which they condemn in others. And whereas it may po&s;&s;ibly be alledged, that they forbear making mention of the Abolition of Epi&s;copacy, or requiring its Re&s;titution as a Term of their Conformity, out of Deference to the Government, that cannot be the Rea&s;on; for tho&s;e things which they impugn have al&s;o the Sanction of the Civil Government.</P>
<P>But to conclude, tho&s;e of the Church of <HI>England</HI> are likewi&s;e de&s;ired to con&s;ider, whether they them|&s;elves would not be &s;hy of admitting &s;uch as refu&s;e either to own the Government or Doctrine of their Church; and therefore whether it be not very rea&s;onable in the Church of <HI>Scotland,</HI> to be wary how they admit tho&s;e Men into her Judicatories, who not only refu&s;e Submi&s;&s;ion to her Government and Doctrine, but by their Influence, tho&s;e who adher'd to her were in the late Reigns expo&s;ed to <HI>Impoveri&s;hment, Bani&s;hment, Fining, Confining, Impri&s;onment, Torture,</HI> and <HI>Death</HI> it &s;elf; it being no le&s;s than <HI>a Capital Crime, by their Laws, for any Presbyterian Mini&s;ter to preach,</HI> Act <HI>8.</HI> Parl. <HI>1.</HI> Jac. <HI>7.</HI> and no Man <HI>could farm either Hou&s;e or Land without agreeing to a Clau&s;e in his Lea&s;e, obliging him and his Family to Conformity under exorbitant Penalties: And Landlords and Ma&s;ters were to put away their Tenants and Servants without warning, if they went to Meet|ings,</HI> Act. <HI>24.</HI> Parl. <HI>1.</HI> Jac. <HI>7.</HI> and the Act in <HI>1681,</HI> when the D. of <HI>York</HI> was Commi&s;&s;ioner. Now if the&s;e Laws and others which the pre&s;ent Parliament have declared to be <HI>impious,</HI> together with the <HI>Acts of Council</HI> which were yet more bloody and barbarous, <HI>as impowering the Souldiers to exa|mine and kill any Man they met, if they did not give &s;atisfying An&s;wers to their Que&s;tions,</HI> be duly con&s;idered, it's referred to the Judgment of any di&s;creet Man, whether it would be prudent for the Presbyterian Mini&s;ters to take the Party who &s;olicited tho&s;e Laws into the A&s;&s;emblies of their Church, without conforming to the Terms required by the Act of Parliament, <HI>June 12, 1693.</HI> viz. <HI>that they &s;hould take the Oath of Allegiance and A&s;&s;urance, &s;ign the Confe&s;&s;ion of Faith as their own, and promi&s;e to &s;ubmit to, concur with, and never to endeavour the Subver&s;ion of the pre&s;ent Church-Government;</HI> which cannot appear to be har&s;h Terms to any Man who will &s;eriou&s;ly con&s;ider the <HI>Formula</HI> that the Party did offer to &s;ign in <HI>1690.</HI> which, becau&s;e it is often referred unto in the fol|lowing <HI>Reflections,</HI> and that it plainly demon&s;trates the &V;n&s;tedfa&s;tne&s;s and Shuffling of the Party, if compared with their pre&s;ent Queries, it's thought &s;it here to exhibit.</P>
<P><Q>I <HI>A. B.</HI> do &s;incerely declare and promi&s;e, that I will &s;ubmit to the Presbyterian Government of the Church, as it is now e&s;tabli&s;h'd in this Kingdom by their Maje&s;ties K. <HI>William</HI> and Q. <HI>Mary,</HI> by Presbyteries, Provincial Synods, and General A&s;&s;emblies; and that I will, as becomes a Mini&s;ter of the Go&s;pel, heartily concur with the &s;aid Government for &s;uppre&s;&s;ing of Sin and Wickedne&s;s, promoting Piety, and purging of the Church of all erroneous and &s;candalous Men. And I do further promi&s;e, that I will &s;ub&s;cribe the Confe&s;&s;ion of Faith, and larger and &s;horter Catechi&s;m, now confirm'd by Act of Parliament, as containing the Doctrine of the Prote&s;tant Religion profe&s;s'd in this Kingdom.</Q></P>
<P>Now let the Queri&s;ts an&s;wer, whether here be not a plain Offer to &s;ubmit to the Presbyterian Govern|ment, without any mention of the Objections in&s;i&s;ted upon in their pre&s;ent Queries? whether they do not own here that there were &s;candalous and erroneous Mini&s;ters amongst them, which now they are &s;o loth to con|fe&s;s? whether they did not here acknowledg the Authority of the Presbyterians to purge out tho&s;e Mini&s;ters, whereas now they prote&s;t against their having any &s;uch Power? whether they did not prevaricate with the Civil Government in offering tho&s;e Terms, and yet refu&s;e to conform according to the Act of <HI>June 12, 1693?</HI> and whether their offering to &s;ign the Confe&s;&s;ion of Faith as the Doctrine of the Prote&s;tant Religion pro|fe&s;&s;ed in the Kingdom, while they refu&s;ed to &s;ign the &s;ame as the Confe&s;&s;ion of their own Faith, was not a &s;illy and gro&s;s piece of Di&s;&s;imulation?</P>
</DIV1>
</FRONT>
<BODY>
<DIV1 TYPE="part">
<PB N="1" REF="3">
<HEAD>Names of the DELEGATS commi&s;&s;ionat by the Gene|ral Meeting at <HI>Aberdeen</HI> upon the 5th Day of <HI>June</HI> 1694. for pre&s;enting the <HI>Queries, &amp;c.</HI> to the Committee at <HI>Aberdeen,</HI> are as follows:</HEAD>
<LIST>
<ITEM>MR. <HI>John Forbes</HI> Par&s;on of <HI>Kincairden.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>Mr. <HI>Thomas Robert&s;on</HI> Par&s;on of <HI>Clatt.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>Mr. <HI>Alexander Lunan</HI> Par&s;on of <HI>Davi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">t.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>Mr. <HI>Patrick Harvy</HI> Par&s;on of <HI>Forgon.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>Mr. <HI>Alexander Gellie</HI> Par&s;on of <HI>Fordyce.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>Mr. <HI>Alexander Barclay</HI> Mini&s;ter at <HI>Peterhead.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>Mr. <HI>Alexander Clark</HI> Mini&s;ter at <HI>Methlick.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>Mr. <HI>Alexander Mill</HI> Mini&s;ter at <HI>&V;dnie.</HI></ITEM>
</LIST>
<P>Together with all the Mini&s;ters of the Presbytery of <HI>Aberdeen,</HI> &amp;c. Of which Number of Delegats, the&s;e were pre&s;ent; and did give in the &s;aid Queries to the Committee fore&s;aid, upon the 29th Day of <HI>June</HI> in the Year fore&s;aid, <HI>viz.</HI></P>
<LIST>
<ITEM>Mr. <HI>Thomas Robert&s;on</HI> Par&s;on of <HI>Clatt.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>Mr. <HI>Alexander Lunan</HI> Par&s;on of <HI>Daviot.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>Mr. <HI>Alexander Clark</HI> Mini&s;ter at <HI>Methlick.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>Mr. <HI>Alexander Mill</HI> Mini&s;ter at <HI>&V;dnie.</HI></ITEM>
</LIST>
<LIST>
<HEAD>And the&s;e of the Presbytery of <HI>Aberdeen,</HI> viz.</HEAD>
<ITEM>Mr. <HI>James Gordon</HI> Par&s;on of <HI>Banchory-davinick.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>Mr. <HI>George White</HI> Mini&s;ter at <HI>Maryculter.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>Mr. <HI>John Duntop</HI> Mini&s;ter at <HI>Skeen.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>Mr. <HI>George Smith</HI> Mini&s;ter at <HI>Kinellar.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>Mr. <HI>Gilbert Ram&s;ey</HI> Mini&s;ter at <HI>Dyee.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>Mr. <HI>George Seton</HI> Mini&s;ter at <HI>&V;ppermachan.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>Mr. <HI>Richard Metland</HI> Mini&s;ter at <HI>Nigg.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>Mr. <HI>Thomas Crevey</HI> Mini&s;ter at <HI>Newhills.</HI></ITEM>
</LIST>
<CLOSER><SIGNED>Sic Sub&s;cribitur, <HI>M. Chrevey</HI> Clericus.</SIGNED></CLOSER>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="part">
<HEAD>At the King's College-Kirk of <HI>Aberdeen,</HI> the <HI>5th</HI> of June <HI>1694.</HI></HEAD>
<P>THe which Day <HI>being met the Mini&s;ters of the Dioce&s;s of</HI> Aber|deen, <HI>together with Delegats from the Dioce&s;&s;es of</HI> Murray, Ro&s;s, Caithnes <HI>and</HI> Orknay, <HI>and from the Shyres of</HI> Mairns <HI>and</HI> Angus; <HI>for con&s;ulting anent the nece&s;&s;arie Affairs of the Church in this Juncture: And under&s;tanding that the Committee of the late Pre&s;|biterian A&s;&s;emblie for the North, is to &s;it at</HI> Aberdeen <HI>once in this Month; Did therfore nominate and chu&s;e the Brethren after-mentioned,</HI> viz. <HI>Mr.</HI> John Forbes <HI>Par&s;on of</HI> Kincairden, <HI>Mr.</HI> Thomas Robert&s;on <HI>Par&s;on of</HI> Clatt, <HI>Mr.</HI> Alexander Lunan <HI>Par&s;on of</HI> Daviot, <HI>Mr.</HI> Alexander Gellie
<PB N="2" REF="4"><HI>Par&s;on of</HI> Fordyce, <HI>Mr.</HI> Patrick Harvie <HI>Mini&s;ter of</HI> Forgon, <HI>Mr.</HI> Alexan|der Barclay <HI>Mini&s;ter at</HI> Peterhead, <HI>Mr.</HI> Alexander Clark <HI>Mini&s;ter at</HI> Methlick, <HI>Mr.</HI> Alexander Mill <HI>Mini&s;ter at</HI> Udnie: <HI>Together with all the Brethren of the Presbitrie of</HI> Aberdeen; <HI>together al&s;o with any others of other Presbitries or Dioce&s;&s;es who may be upon the Place for the time, or any three or one of them as their Commi&s;&s;ioners and Repre&s;entatives, With full Power, Warrand, and Commi&s;&s;ion to them to compear before the &s;aid Committee when ever it &s;hall happen any of their Number to be cited be|fore them: And in their Name to pre&s;ent to them &s;ome Queries or Pro|po&s;als concerted by them at their &s;aid Meeting, relating to the Eccle&s;ia&s;tick Authority and Juri&s;diction of the &s;aid Committee, and to demand An&s;wers and Re&s;olutions thereunto, and all other things to act and do relative to the Churches intre&s;t,</HI> pro re nata. <HI>And to e&s;tabli&s;h and con&s;titut Procu|rators one or more in their Name, To compear in their Ab&s;ence, and to act before the &s;aid Committee as fullie and freelie as if all and every one of them were per&s;onallie pre&s;ent them&s;elves. And appoynted one Extract of this Act to be given to the for&s;aids Commi&s;&s;ioners, under the Clerk of the Meetings Hand, for their Warrand and Commi&s;&s;ion.</HI> Extracted furth of the Records of the Meeting above &s;pecifyed.</P>
<CLOSER><SIGNED><HI>Sic Sub&s;cribitur,</HI> M. Chrevey <HI>Clericus.</HI></SIGNED></CLOSER>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="part">
<HEAD>Reflections <HI>on the Meeting of the Epi&s;copal Clergy at</HI> Aberdeen.</HEAD>
<P>THE Gentlemen who compo&s;ed this Meet|ing, having entertained the Committee of the General A&s;&s;embly with Queries, will not I hope take it ami&s;s to have a little of the &s;ame Entertainment them&s;elves, and may certainly give a very agreeable Diver&s;ion to the Publick, if they will be plea&s;ed to an|&s;wer the following Queries, <HI>viz.</HI></P>
<P>By what Authority they met? for by the Authority of their pre&s;ent Maje&s;ties they could not meet; and if by the Authority of the late King, whether or not their Meet|ing was not Rebellion? If neither by the Authority of the late King, nor their pre|&s;ent Maje&s;ties, how they came to act con|trary to their former Principles, <HI>viz.</HI> that all Convocations of the Lieges, without the King's Authority, is Rebellion? If they be Fra&s;tians in their Principle, according as their Party did &s;wear, and profe&s;s them|&s;elves to be by the late Oath of Supremacy, and the 14 <HI>Act</HI> of <HI>Parl.</HI> 2. <HI>Car.</HI> 2. how came they to contradict this Principle by calling an A&s;&s;embly of the Church without the Ma|gi&s;trates Concurrence? If K. <HI>William</HI> and Q. <HI>Mary</HI> be <HI>Ch.</HI> 2d<HI>'s</HI> lawful Succe&s;&s;ors, to whom by virtue of the Supremacy and the Inherent Right of the Crown, the Ordering of the Government of the Church, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> doth properly belong, how comes it to pa&s;s that they meet in Oppo&s;ition to the Committee of the A&s;&s;embly which has their Maje&s;ties Authority to vi&s;it and purge the Church, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> and not only meet in Oppo&s;ition to them, but decline the Authority of them and their Con&s;tituents? If K. <HI>William</HI> and Q. <HI>Mary</HI> be not K. <HI>Ch.</HI> 2d<HI>'s</HI> lawful Succe&s;&s;ors, how can the Queri&s;ts appeal to them as the only Su|preme
<PB N="3" REF="4">Judges in the&s;e Dominions? And &s;ee|ing they appeal to them as the only &s;upreme Judges, why they don't acquie&s;ce in their Judgment, which they have &s;olemnly given by Act of Parliament, <HI>viz.</HI> in lodging the Ec|cle&s;ia&s;tical Juri&s;diction of the National Church, by <HI>Act.</HI> 5. <HI>Se&s;&s;.</HI> 2. of this pre&s;ent Par|liament, on the Presbyterian Mini&s;ters, outed &s;ince 1661, and &s;uch as they have received or &s;hall receive; and impowering them to ap|point Vi&s;itors to purge the Church, &s;u&s;pend and deprive? <HI>&amp;c.</HI> And &s;eeing the Committee which the Queri&s;ts oppo&s;e have &s;uch a Pow|er, whether they might not in Law deprive the &s;aid Queri&s;ts for their Contumacy? And &s;eeing they have not depriv'd them, whether they have not behav'd them&s;elves with more Moderation towards the Queri&s;ts, than their Party did toward the Presbyterians? And whether the Presbyterian Mini&s;ters were not beheaded, hang'd, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> in the late Reigns, for le&s;s Oppo&s;ition to the Government? The Queri&s;ts would oblige the Publick further to an&s;wer, whether or not their Meeting in this Manner, without the late King <HI>James</HI>'s Authority, if they &s;till own his Title, be not a direct Breach of their Oath of Allegiance, wherein they were &s;worn to maintain his Ju|ri&s;diction over all Per&s;ons, and in all Cau&s;es, again&s;t all Per&s;ons what&s;oever? And if they own their pre&s;ent Maje&s;ties Authority, how they can acquit them&s;elves of that Oath to King <HI>James,</HI> &s;eeing they did al&s;o take the De|claration, that it was not lawful to re&s;i&s;t his Maje&s;ty, or any commi&s;&s;ionated by him, on any Pretence what&s;oever? And if they own that to have been a fal&s;e Principle, why they did not declare &s;o to the World, exhibit their Rea&s;ons, and avow their Repentance for &s;wearing &s;uch a ra&s;h Oath? And further their An&s;wer is de&s;ired, whether their a&s;&s;em|bling about Church-matters, in this manner, without the Con&s;ent of the Civil Magi&s;trate, be not an expre&s;s owning of the inherent and intrin&s;ick Right of the Church; for maintain|ing of which their Party did per&s;ecute the Presbyterians to Death in the late Reigns? whether &s;uch a Meeting of &s;uch Per&s;ons who have not given tho&s;e Proofs of their Loyalty to their Maje&s;ties that the Law requires, e&s;|pecially when call'd on purpo&s;e to oppo&s;e a Committee cloth'd with their Maje&s;ty's Au|thority, be agreeable to the Principles of Pa&s;&s;ive Obedience, and not actual Re&s;i&s;tance? and how that can be called the A&s;&s;embly of a Church, which con&s;i&s;ts only of pretended Pa&s;tors, without Delegats from the People?</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="part">
<HEAD>Some Propo&s;als from the Mini&s;ters of the Dioce&s;s of <HI>Aberdeen,</HI> for them&s;elves, and in Name of the whole Epi&s;copal Clergy within this Kingdom, who concur with them to the Commit|tee of the late Presbyterian A&s;&s;embly, now &s;itting at <HI>Aberdeen,</HI> upon the 29th of <HI>June,</HI> 1694.</HEAD>
<DIV2 N="1" TYPE="proposal">
<HEAD>Query I. <HI>WHereas, according to the Principles of Presbyterian Govern|ment, there ought be no higher Degree of Pa&s;tors in the Church than Presbyters, and all Presbyters are equal in Power and Authority, we de&s;ire to know by what Divine and Eccle&s;ia&s;tick Right the&s;e fifty or &s;ixty &s;ur|viving Presbyterian Mini&s;ters, not being in actual Charge within this King|dom, did take upon them the Exerci&s;e of the whole Eccle&s;ia&s;tick Power of this
<PB N="4" REF="5">National Church, and have exerced a more full and ab&s;olute Authority and Ju|ri&s;diction over their Brethren, nine hundred or a thou&s;and Mini&s;ters, who were in Office when Epi&s;copacy was aboli&s;hed, than ever the Bi&s;hops pretended to, who never claimed a Power to make Acts concerning the Church, without Con&s;ent of its Mini&s;ters.</HI></HEAD>
<HEAD TYPE="sub">Reflections <HI>upon the Fir&s;t Query.</HI></HEAD>
<P>THE De&s;ign of this Query is, to charge the Committee of the A&s;&s;embly with acting contrary to Presbyterian Principles, and ex|erci&s;ing a more ab&s;olute Authority over their Brethren, the Epi&s;copal Mini&s;ters, than ever the Bi&s;hops pretended to.</P>
<P>The Arguments on which they would found the fir&s;t Part of the Charge are, becau&s;e the Commi&s;&s;ion owns no higher Pa&s;tors in the Church than Presbyters, and that all tho&s;e are equal in Power; and yet fifty or &s;ixty &s;urviving Presbyterian Mini&s;ters, not being in actual Charge within this Kingdom, did take upon them the Exerci&s;e of the whole Eccle|&s;ia&s;tick Power.</P>
<P>As to the fir&s;t Part of the Argument, it &s;eems altogether frivolous, and cannot infer the lea&s;t Contrariety to Presbyterian Princi|ples, that becau&s;e they own no higher Pa&s;tors in the Church than Presbyters, therefore Pre&s;|byters &s;hould take upon them the Exerci&s;e of the whole Eccle&s;ia&s;tick Power: for it's natu|ral to conclude, that &s;eeing they own none higher, therefore they mu&s;t needs think that the Eccle&s;ia&s;tick Power devolves on them.</P>
<P>Nor is the &s;econd Argument any thing more concludent to prove the Committee's contradicting their own Principles, than as if one &s;hould argue thus, becau&s;e all the Members of the Hou&s;e of Commons are of equal Power, therefore the Commons, or a Committee of their own Number, have no Power over a faulty Member or Members: or becau&s;e the Members of the A&s;&s;embly which met at <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> had not in their &s;ingle Capacities any Power over one another, as Apo&s;tle over Apo&s;tle, or Elder over Elder, therefore when gathered together as an A&s;|&s;embly, they had no Power, neither of them|&s;elves, nor by a Committee, to cen&s;ure a faulty Member or Members.</P>
<P>Then as to the third and &s;tronge&s;t Part of the Argument, that fifty or &s;ixty of the &s;ur|viving Presbyterian Mini&s;ters, not being in actual Charge within this Kingdom, did take upon them the Charge of the whole Eccle&s;i|a&s;tick Power:</P>
<P>It may be an&s;wered, 1&s;t. That the Ca&s;e is fal&s;ly and maliciou&s;ly &s;tated; for tho&s;e fifty or &s;ixty &s;urviving Mini&s;ters did not take upon them&s;elves that Charge <HI>de novo,</HI> at the Abo|lition of Prelacy, but were only re&s;tored to the free Exerci&s;e of that Charge, which by the Iniquity of the late Times, and the Pre|latical Per&s;ecution, they were unju&s;tly de|prived of, but had continued in the Po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion and Practice of it, as Providence afforded them Opportunity, in private.</P>
<P N="2">2dly. That they did not take the Charge afore&s;aid upon them&s;elves, but the free Ex|erci&s;e of the &s;ame was re&s;tored to them by the Parliament, in conjunction with &s;uch others as they &s;hould think fit to take in.</P>
<P N="3">3dly. That the Epi&s;copalians, by denying them to have been in actual Charge at the Revolution, would have done well to have explain'd their Meaning: If by not being in actual Charge they intend their not being &s;et|led in Pari&s;h-Churches, it may be granted without any Damage to their Cau&s;e: For by the Practice of the Prelati&s;ts them&s;elves, a Man may be <HI>in officio,</HI> though not <HI>in beneficio;</HI> and if he be <HI>in officio,</HI> he may certainly per|form what belongs to his Office. And by their own Conce&s;&s;ion (<HI>Q.</HI> 2.) the Power of Di&s;cipline and Government is in&s;eparable
<PB N="5" REF="5">from the Power of Preaching; &s;o that until it be proved that they were ju&s;tly deprived of the Power of Preaching, they mu&s;t &s;till allow them to have been in actual Charge. And by Con&s;equence this Part of their Argument falls to the Ground.</P>
<P>Then as to that Part of it, that fifty or &s;ix|ty Presbyterian Mini&s;ters &s;hould exerci&s;e the whole Eccle&s;ia&s;tick Power of the National Church; be&s;ides what may be &s;aid to ju&s;tify them from Theological Topicks, they have a very &s;trong Argument from Politicks, by which the Prelati&s;ts ought to be &s;atisfied, ac|cording to their own Conce&s;&s;ion in their Pro|te&s;tation, as &s;hall be evinc'd anon.</P>
<P>For fifty or &s;ixty Presbyterian Mini&s;ters may very well take upon them the Exerci&s;e of the whole Eccle&s;ia&s;tick Power of a Nation, when the Repre&s;entatives of that Nation, in Parliament a&s;&s;embled, will own no other to have any Right thereunto: and for <HI>this Rea|&s;on,</HI> as appears &s;till by the Vote of the Con|vention, <HI>that the Bi&s;hops and their Clergy were the great and in&s;upportable Grievance of the Nation.</HI> And for this Cau&s;e, together with the Con&s;i|deration of the illegal Method us'd in turning out the Presbyterian Mini&s;ters in 1660, and 1661. of which there were only tho&s;e fifty or &s;ixty alive at the Revolution, their Maje|&s;ties, by Advice of their Parliament, after the &s;ettling of the Church-Government had hung above a Year in Su&s;pence, did &s;ettle the &s;ame upon tho&s;e fifty or &s;ixty Presbyterian Mini&s;ters, and &s;uch as they &s;hould admit; &s;o that according to the Appeal which the Pre|lati&s;ts have made in their Prote&s;tation to King <HI>William</HI> and Queen <HI>Mary,</HI> as Supreme Judges under God in the&s;e Dominions, they ought to re&s;t &s;atisfied in their Determination by the Touch of the Scepter in Parliament, which is the only authoritative way by which they can determine Ca&s;es of that Con&s;equence; though by this Appeal it would &s;eem that our Prelati&s;ts are of another Mind. It's in vain for them to think of evading, by &s;up|po&s;ing that their Maje&s;ties were &s;urpriz'd into that A&s;&s;ent, for they were &s;ufficiently &s;a|tisfied how Matters &s;tood; and all the Argu|ments that could be urg'd for the Epi&s;copal Party, were repre&s;ented and &s;et off to the be&s;t Advantage, by the Vi&s;count of <HI>T</HI>&mdash;, and others of their Champions, and back'd by the Intere&s;t of the high-flown Church-men here; &s;o that if their Maje&s;ties had not been fully convinc'd of the Truth of what was repre|&s;ented to them by their Grand Council, the Parliament, as to what Form of Church-Go|vernment was be&s;t for <HI>Scotland,</HI> it's not rea|&s;onable to think that ever they would have given their Royal A&s;&s;ent to that Act. So that if the&s;e Gentlemen had either any due Re|gard to the Dignity of Scots Parliaments, the impugning of who&s;e Acts is no le&s;s than Trea&s;on; or if they had any real Deference to the Judgment of their Maje&s;ties, to whom they appeal, they would never be &s;o bold, to &s;ay no wor&s;e, to appeal to them in a Matter which they have already determined in the mo&s;t &s;olemn and legal manner that can be, and much le&s;s to prote&s;t again&s;t the General A&s;&s;embly of the Church or their Committee, as exerci&s;ing Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Juri&s;diction, tho not altogether by, yet with their Maje&s;ties Authority. And if the Party had but the lea&s;t Remnant of Mode&s;ty, they would be a&s;ham'd to aver that the Presbyterians exer|ci&s;e a more full and ab&s;olute Authority and Juri&s;diction over their Brethren, nine hundred or a thou&s;and Mini&s;ters, who were in Office when Epi&s;copacy was aboli&s;h'd, than ever the Bi&s;hops pretended to, who never claim'd a Power to make Acts concerning the Church, without Con&s;ent of its Mini&s;ters.</P>
<P>It being very well known, that though the Bi&s;hops, to plea&s;e the People, kept up a Form of Presbyteries and Synods, by who&s;e Advice they pretended to make Acts; yet tho&s;e Presbyteries and Synods were never al|lowed that Freedom and Liberty which they them&s;elves de&s;ired, but were directly lorded over by the Bi&s;hops; of which the Scuffle which happened betwixt them and their Ciergy, about a Convocation in 1674. or thereabouts, as I take it, was a convincing In&s;tance, for the poor Curates were forc'd at la&s;t to &s;ubmit. Whereas it is evident that
<PB N="6" REF="6">the Presbyterians do neither claim nor exer|ci&s;e any &s;uch ab&s;olute Juri&s;diction over their Epi&s;copal Brethren, the A&s;&s;embly in 1690 having expre&s;ly declared <HI>that they would de|po&s;e no Incumbents &s;imply for their Judgment con|cerning Church-Government, nor yet urge Recordi|nation upon them.</HI> Nor can they give any In|&s;tances that they have acted contrary to this Declaration, all of tho&s;e that have hitherto been turn'd out being found really &s;candalous, or refu&s;ing to own their pre&s;ent Maje&s;ties; whereas the Presbyterians turn'd out in 1660, and 1661, could neither be accus'd as &s;can|dalous in their Conver&s;ation, Heterodox in their Doctrine, or of refu&s;ing to own King <HI>Charles</HI> II. and yet the Prelatical Council turn'd them out meerly becau&s;e they would not &s;ubmit to the Bi&s;hops, by who&s;e Influence afterwards it was enacted, <HI>Parl.</HI> 1. <HI>Se&s;&s;.</HI> 2. <HI>Act.</HI> 2. <HI>Car.</HI> 2. that all Petitions, Writing, Printing, Praying, Remon&s;trating or Preach|ing, &s;hewing any Di&s;like of the Government of the Church by Bi&s;hops, was &s;editious. So that the World may judg of the Truth of tho&s;e Mens A&s;&s;ertion, who &s;ay, that the Presbyte|rians do exerci&s;e a more full and ab&s;olute Au|thority and Juri&s;diction over them, than ever the Bi&s;hops pretended to, who not only &s;o|licited the above-mentioned Act, but con|curred with their Authority to e&s;tabli&s;h it in|to a Law. And &s;eeing our Adver&s;aries do own that the Bi&s;hops never made any Acts without the Con&s;ent of their Clergy, we would pray them to an&s;wer then, whether this does not plainly give the Lie to all their Preten&s;ions of Moderation towards the Pre&s;|byterians in the late Reigns, which they mag|nified &s;o much in &s;ome of their Pamphlets &s;ince the Revolution.</P>
<P>They may, perhaps, object, that the Bi|&s;hops did not do this in their Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Capacity, but as Members of Parliament. To which it may ea&s;ily be replied, that they &s;it in Parliament as Bi&s;hops, which is their Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Capacity; but whether they did it in that Capacity or not, it's all one upon the matter; for, according to the&s;e Gentle|mens Allegation, they did not concur to make &s;uch Acts relating to the Church, without Con|&s;ent of their Clergy: and if they did it with|out their Concurrence, then they lorded it over them and the Presbyterians both: &s;o that they have brought them&s;elves into a Di|lemma, let them get out of it which way they can.</P>
<P>It may be further an&s;wered, as to their charging the Presbyterians with exerci&s;ing a more ab&s;olute Juri&s;diction over the Epi&s;copal Mini&s;ters than the Bi&s;hops did, that without any Breach of Charity, if we con&s;ider the Practice and De&s;igns of the Scots Bi&s;hops, it was neither their Intere&s;t nor Inclination to enquire into the Doctrine and Conver&s;ation of their Clergy; for Loo&s;ene&s;s of Practice and Errors in Doctrine, &s;uch as Arminiani&s;m, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> were the Path-road to Popery and Slavery: for the advancing of which the Generality of our Scots Bi&s;hops did concur with the Court, as mo&s;t, if not all of them who were in Office at the Revolution, do adhere to the late King &s;till, and the Northern Parts of the Kingdom, where the&s;e refractory Clergy-men do now re&s;ide: as they are mo&s;t oppo&s;ite to this Go|vernment both in Church and State, &s;o they did comply with the Cour&s;es of the late Reigns mo&s;t of any. And whereas they pre|tend that the Bi&s;hops did not make any Acts concerning the Church, without the Con&s;ent of its Mini&s;ters; we an&s;wer, that if they de|manded any Con&s;ent, it was only from tho&s;e who own'd their Juri&s;diction, and not from the Presbyterian Mini&s;ters: and they cannot deny but the Presbyterian A&s;&s;emblies act with the Advice and Con&s;ent of all that own <HI>their</HI> Juri&s;diction. So that the Epi&s;copal Party condemn their own Practice by condemning us. All the Difference that can be alledged is, that tho&s;e Epi&s;copal Mini&s;ters who com|plain thus, are &s;till in their Churches, where|as the Presbyterians were thrown out; which is meerly the Fruits of the Government's Mildne&s;s, and does not one whit alter the Ca&s;e, except they will alledg, which they never did hitherto, that none can be Mini&s;ters but &s;uch as are fix'd in particular Congregati|ons: And in truth this is but a very &s;orry Re|quital
<PB N="7" REF="6">to the Presbyterians for their Mode|ration in &s;uffering them to continue in the Churches, whence they could have as ea&s;ily ejected them as they did vote them the great and in&s;upportable Grievance of the Nation; that nothing will &s;atisfy them, except they be admitted into the Judicatories of the Church, to embroil Affairs and overtun it afre&s;h: And becau&s;e they &s;eem to lay &s;uch mighty Weight upon their being in Office when Epi&s;copacy was aboli&s;h'd; they may remember that the Presbyterians were al&s;o in Office, in their &s;en&s;e, when Epi&s;copacy was &s;et up, without the Con&s;ent of the Mini&s;ters then in Office.</P>
<P>Then as to that part of the Query, by what Divine or Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Right tho&s;e fifty or &s;ixty Mini&s;ters took upon them the Charge above-mentioned:</P>
<P>It hath been an&s;wered already, that they never lo&s;t that Right, tho they were ob&s;truct|ed in the Exerci&s;e of it by Force; and as in general Defections, when the number of the Faithful is always the lea&s;t, yet the Right is pre&s;erved in tho&s;e few that continue faithful; &s;o the ca&s;e was here, the &s;mallne&s;s of their Number is no Argument again&s;t the Ju&s;tice of their Cau&s;e: For the Scriptures acquaint us, that the Witne&s;&s;es for the Truth were reduced to two, (that is, a &s;mall, tho &s;ufficient Number in Law to confirm the Truth) while the whole World wondered after the Bea&s;t; and we have often heard of <HI>unus Athana&s;ius contra totum Orbem.</HI> The Walden&s;es were but few in Number compared with the Mul|titude of Idolaters, and yet the Succe&s;&s;ion of Church was pre&s;erved in them. The Arians of old, and the Papi&s;ts of late did brag of their Multitude, but that was never allowed by the Orthodox as a concluding Argument. <HI>Chry&s;o&s;tom ad Pop. Antioch.</HI> hom. 26. &s;ays, <HI>Quid mihi cum multitudine malo unum pretio&s;um Lapi|dem quam obolos multos. Et</HI> hom. 40. <HI>Elias unus erat, &s;ed totus Mundus non dignus erat qui repen|deretur ei.</HI> Greg. Nazian. Orat. 25. contra Ari|anos. <HI>&V;bi &s;unt, inquit, qui Eccle&s;iam multitudine definiunt, &amp; parvum Gregem de&s;picantur?</HI> This Compari&s;on it's probable will be rejected as odious, and &s;avouring too much of a cen|&s;orious Spirit: but whoever will be at the Pains to con&s;ider, that the Divine In&s;tituti|on of the Order of Presbyters is agreed on among all Chri&s;tians in general, while that of any Superiour Order is granted by the mo&s;t Learned of the Epi&s;copal Party them|&s;elves to be meerly of Human Right; and then if we take a view of the &s;olemn Obli|gations which the Kingdom of <HI>Scotland</HI> lay under to have pre&s;erved the Prote&s;tant Do|ctrine, and Presbyterian Government in that Church, the undue Methods taken to rein|troduce Prelacy there, by the mo&s;t notorious Perjury that ever was heard of under Hea|ven; the Deluge of Profanity which accom|panied that Change; the Laws for e&s;tabli&s;h|ing it, which this pre&s;ent Parliament have voted to be impious, and the unhallowed Means and In&s;truments made u&s;e of to &s;up|port and maintain the Scots Epi&s;copacy: then if we con&s;ider the &s;lackning of the Reins of all publick Di&s;cipline, together with the manife&s;t decay of the Power of Godline&s;s, and the Hatred which was evidenced again&s;t it by mo&s;t of the Scots Bi&s;hops and their Clergy; when at the &s;ame time they con|curred with their utmo&s;t Power to bring the Nations under a Popi&s;h Government, to the manife&s;t hazard of our Civil and Reli|gious Liberties: and if to this we add the vi&s;ible Inclination which that Party have &s;till to the late King <HI>James,</HI> tho in League with the French King, and never to be re&s;tored but by the &s;worn Enemy of our Religion; the Doctrine of which they do apparently di&s;own by refu&s;ing to &s;ign the Confe&s;&s;ion of Faith: I &s;ay, that if all tho&s;e things be con|&s;idered, it will appear with undeniable Evi|dence, that our Scots Prelati&s;ts were and are engaged in a dreadful Defection, and join'd in I&s;&s;ue and Intere&s;t with <HI>Babylon,</HI> tho God by his Word and Providence did call aloud for his People to come out of her. Which Reflection being founded upon undeniable Matter of Fact, can offend no unprejudic'd Per&s;on, who will allow them&s;elves time to con&s;ider of it; and therefore the Ca&s;e being
<PB N="8" REF="7">thus, and the Parliament of <HI>Scotland</HI> which was called by his pre&s;ent Maje&s;ty King <HI>William,</HI> whom God hath in a wonderful manner rais'd up to &s;upport and maintain the Pro|te&s;tant Intere&s;t, which was ready to &s;ink, having, as already hinted, voted the Scots Bi|&s;hops and their Clergy, to be the great and in&s;upportable Grievance of the Nation, let no Man tax me with being uncharitable, if I &s;ay that the Prelatical Party, having dive&s;ted them&s;elves of all pretences to Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Juri&s;diction by their Defection, it mu&s;t ne|ce&s;&s;arily remain in tho&s;e Presbyterian Mini|&s;ters who continued faithful: and that this was the &s;en&s;e of the Body of Prote&s;tants in the Nation, appear'd by the unanimous Vote of their Repre&s;entatives, who rejected the Bi&s;hops and their Clergy as an un&s;upportable Grievance; and by Law did e&s;tabli&s;h the Ex|erci&s;e of Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Juri&s;diction in tho&s;e few Presbyterian Mini&s;ters, and &s;uch as they &s;hould admit: &s;o that here's all that can be requi&s;ite to prove their Divine and Eccle&s;i|a&s;tick Right to the Juri&s;diction of the Na|tional Church. They had their Mi&s;&s;ion and Ordination as Mini&s;ters by the Hands of the Presbytery, which, <HI>in foro Eccle&s;iae,</HI> does re|gularly con&s;titute them Amba&s;&s;adors of Je&s;us Chri&s;t, and the Nation by their Repre&s;enta|tives have &s;ubmitted them&s;elves to their Ju|ri&s;didiction, as &s;uch: So that there is nothing wanting to clear their Right, either by Laws Divine or Human.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="2" TYPE="proposal">
<HEAD>Query II. <HI>Since according to their own Principles, the Power of preaching the Go&s;pel, and admini&s;tring the Sacraments, and the Power of Di&s;cipline and Government are in&s;eparable in the Office of a Pa&s;tor;</HI> Quaeritur, <HI>If that Con&s;titution of Church-Government be lawful, which excludes the greate&s;t part of the Pa&s;tors of the Church from having any &s;hare in the Go|vernment thereof?</HI></HEAD>
<HEAD TYPE="sub">Reflections <HI>on the Second Query.</HI></HEAD>
<P>THE De&s;ign of this Query is, fir&s;t, to fix upon the Presbyterians an Incon&s;i&s;tency with their own Principles, in excluding the greate&s;t part of the Mini&s;ters of that Church from any &s;hare in the Government, tho they own that the Power of Preaching, and the Power of Di&s;cipline are in&s;eparable. And in the next place, to prove that the pre&s;ent Con&s;titution of the Church-Government is unlawful upon that Account.</P>
<P>As to the fir&s;t: They may remember that it was the Practice of their own Church as well as of ours, to admit Probationers to preach without allowing them the Power of Di&s;cipline; whence it appears that this Re|flection upon us is not duly cautioned, nor can it infer any Incon&s;i&s;tency with our Prin|ciples. But what if we &s;hould an&s;wer their Que&s;tion with another; Whether do they think that the Apo&s;tle, tho he was glad that Chri&s;t was preached out of Envy, would have admitted tho&s;e envious Preachers into the Judicatories of the Church, to debate upon tho&s;e Matters whereof they them&s;elves were accu&s;ed?</P>
<P>But this Reflection of theirs will appear &s;till more unrea&s;onable, if we con&s;ider;</P>
<P N="1">1. That tho the Presbyterians thought it fit to connive at their preaching, yet they never gave them any formal Allowance to preach; &s;o that their denying them any &s;hare in the Di&s;cipline, &s;eeing they never
<PB N="9" REF="7">had their Allowance to preach, cannot in|fer any Contradiction in the Presbyterians to the Principle above-mentioned.</P>
<P N="3">3. That it were highly imprudent, to &s;ay no wor&s;e, for the A&s;&s;embly to admit tho&s;e Men into a &s;hare of the Government of the Church, whom the Repre&s;entatives of the Nation, who are the Body of that Church, did vote to be the in&s;upportable Grievance of the Nation, which is a flagrant Scandal, whence the Party have never purged them|&s;elves; and it will be allowed by the Pre|lati&s;ts that Mini&s;ters under a Scandal, may be &s;u&s;pended <HI>ab Officio:</HI> &s;o that they have no rea&s;on to complain when they are only de|bar'd from part of that which they pretend to be their Office, whereas they might have ju&s;tly been excluded from the whole.</P>
<P N="4">4. That for the Presbyterian Mini&s;ters to admit tho&s;e Men into a &s;hare of the Church-Government, who during this time that they have been allowed to preach &s;ince the Revo|lution, which is more than enough for Pro|bation, have given no Evidences of their Amendment, nor Inclination to comply with the Terms of Conformity enjoin'd by the Act of Parliament: I &s;ay, for the Presbyte|rian Mini&s;ters to admit tho&s;e Men, were to betray the Tru&s;t which God and the Govern|ment have repo&s;ed in them, and to break down the Hedges and let in the Foxes to &s;poil the Vines: And if they &s;hould do &s;o, how could they ju&s;tify them&s;elves, or an&s;wer the Reproaches which the Civil Govern|ment might upbraid them with; that when they had lodged the Government of the Church upon them&s;elves, they let in their own Enemies and tho&s;e of the State, to over|turn it?</P>
<P>From all which it will appear, that it can reflect nothing of Unlawfulne&s;s upon the Con&s;titution of the Church-Government, that the Presbyterians exclude tho&s;e from any &s;hare in it, who, tho they look upon them&s;elves as the Major Part of the Pa&s;tors, are accu&s;ed by the People in Parliament as the in&s;upportable Grievance of the Nation, who therefore deprived them of any &s;hare of the Church-Government, and left it to the Presbyterian Mini&s;ters, to take &s;uch of them in as they &s;hould think fit upon Probation, which gave the &s;aid Presbyterian Mini&s;ters a Civil Right: and as to the Divine Eccle|&s;ia&s;tic<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> Right, it was touched before.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="3" TYPE="proposal">
<HEAD>Query III. <HI>SEeing no A&s;&s;embly of Church-Officers can ju&s;tly claim any Au|thority or Juri&s;diction over a Church, wherein that Church is not duly repre&s;ented; and a Church cannot be repre&s;ented in an A&s;&s;embly in which their Delegats are not allowed to &s;it: And that by the Con&s;titution of this Church, a General A&s;&s;embly doth con&s;i&s;t of Commi&s;&s;ioners from all the Presbytries within the Kingdom.</HI> Quaeritur, <HI>How the late Presbyterian A&s;&s;emblies can be owned for lawful General A&s;&s;emblies of this Church, &s;ince they con&s;i&s;ted intirely of the Presbyterian Party; and the Presbytries of this Dioce&s;s, and &s;everal others within this Kingdom had no Commi&s;&s;ioners pre&s;ent at the&s;e A&s;&s;emblies, nor had they a Call to &s;end any?</HI></HEAD>
<PB N="10" REF="8">
<HEAD TYPE="sub">Reflections <HI>on the Third Query.</HI></HEAD>
<P>THE De&s;ign of this Query is, to impugn the Authority of the General A&s;&s;em|blies, becau&s;e they alledg that the Church was not duly repre&s;ented in them, as con|&s;i&s;ting wholly of the Presbyterian Party, and wanting Delegates from the Dioce&s;s of <HI>Aber|deen,</HI> and &s;everal others.</P>
<P>The&s;e Gentlemen are not aware that the Objection may be retorted upon them&s;elves with more advantage, and therefore they would do well to con&s;ider how they can ju&s;tify the Authority of any of their Synods under the Bi&s;hops, to which none were admitted but tho&s;e of their own Party; and in which the Body of the Church was never repre&s;ented, there being no Elders to repre|&s;ent the People: &s;o that they had not the Concurrence of the Nation as we have in our A&s;&s;emblies, where the People are not tyranniz'd over, but chearfully concur with what is done, according to that Pattern in the 15th of the <HI>Acts.</HI> And as to the wanting of Delegates from &s;ome Dioce&s;&s;es which are either refractory, or uncapable of &s;ending, upon the account above-mentioned, it will no more prejudg the Right of the re&s;t, than the Ob&s;tinacy of &s;ome Rebellious Counties can invalidate the Acts of Parliament of a whole Kingdom, to which they &s;end no Mem|bers; for in all &s;uch ca&s;es the Right remains in the Majority of the &s;ound Part: So that this Objection, however weighty it may have been e&s;teem'd by our Adver&s;aries, has no|thing of Solidity in it. And whereas they might in&s;i&s;t upon their not having a Call to &s;end any Delegates to the A&s;&s;embly; it hath been an&s;wered already, that they were ren|dred uncapable of it by the general Accu&s;a|tion of the Kingdom by their Repre&s;enta|tives; and it was never known in the World, that the Accu&s;ed Party &s;hould be &s;uffered to be Judges in their own Cau&s;e. But &s;uppo&s;ing that the A&s;&s;embly &s;hould have called upon them to &s;end in their Delegates, their Practice makes it plain that they would have de|clin'd, their Authority, and embroil'd the poor Remainders of the Church which had e&s;caped the Tyranny of the la&s;t Reigns, into vain and endle&s;s Janglings and Debates. Nor was it rea&s;onable to think, that a Party who had &s;olicited and promoted the Exe|cution of tho&s;e impious Laws again&s;t the Presbyterians, would ever concur to the E&s;tabli&s;hment of their Di&s;cipline, which they had laboured to de&s;troy with &s;o much Vio|lence: &s;o that either for the Parliament, or the General A&s;&s;embly to have called on the Epi&s;copal Party to &s;end Delegates to &s;it in their Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Judicatories for e&s;ta|bli&s;hing the Government of the Church, had been ju&s;t the &s;ame, as if they &s;hould have &s;ent for all the known Jacobites in the Nation to have &s;at in Parliament for &s;etling the Crown on King <HI>William</HI> and Queen <HI>Mary.</HI> But our Queri&s;ts may plea&s;e to take notice further, That tho they a&s;&s;ume to them&s;elves and their Party, the &s;pecious Name of Pa|&s;tors of the Church, the People to whom they pretended that Relation, did by their Repre&s;entatives di&s;own it, and accu&s;ed them as an in&s;upportable Grievance, and re&s;tored tho&s;e to the Po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion of the Juri&s;diction who had the be&s;t Right, and upon who&s;e Charges the Queri&s;ts Party were Intruders, having neither &s;ought nor obtain'd the Con|&s;ent of the People, or any Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Ju|dicatory; but entred upon the Churches of the Presbyterian Mini&s;ters, who were turn'd out without either Accu&s;ation, Citation, Conviction, Sentence, or a Hearing allowed them.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="4" TYPE="proposal">
<PB N="11" REF="8">
<HEAD>Query IV. <HI>SInce by the Principles already mentioned, all Pa&s;tors have an equal Right to &s;hare in the Government of that Church where|of they are Members and Office-bearers: And &s;ince the whole Body of the Pa&s;tors of this Church, who were in Office at the time of the Aboli&s;hment of Epi&s;copacy, cannot be charged with Ignorance, gro&s;s Error, Immorality of Life, or &s;upine Negligence in their Office; We cannot under&s;tand how the Con&s;titution of the pre&s;ent Church-Government, and late A&s;&s;emblies, can be ju&s;tified by the Presbyterian Mini&s;ters but upon this Suppo&s;ition, that the whole Body of Pa&s;tors fore&s;aid, are either no Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel, or &s;uch corrupt ones upon the account of their Principles and Practice, in rela|tion to Church-Government, as that they are not worthy to be tru&s;ted with the Exerci&s;e of that Power which belongs to the Pa&s;toral Office: which we cannot own without either renouncing our Mini&s;trie, and declaring all the Acts of our Mini&s;terial Function null and void.</HI></HEAD>
<HEAD TYPE="sub">Reflections <HI>on the Fourth Query.</HI></HEAD>
<P>THE De&s;ign of this Query, is to vindicate the Body of the Epi&s;copal Clergy from Ignorance, Gro&s;s Error, Immorality or Neg|ligence in their Office; and to fix upon the Presbyterians that they cannot deny them a Share in the Church-Government, ex|cept they either look upon them as no Mi|ni&s;ters, or &s;uch corrupt ones upon the ac|count of their Principles and Practices, in Relation to the Government of the Church, as that they are not worthy to be tru&s;ted with the Exerci&s;e of it: Which (&s;ay they) they cannot own without renouncing their Mini&s;try, and declaring all their Mini&s;terial Acts void and null.</P>
<P>As to their Vindication, it comes un&s;ea|&s;onably; for they ought to have put it into the Convention of States and Parliament when they voted the Bi&s;hops and their Cler|gy the great and in&s;upportable Grievance of the Nation: which &s;eeing they did not do then, there was all the rea&s;on of the World to take it <HI>pro confe&s;&s;o;</HI> and &s;eeing they are charged &s;o heavily by the Repre&s;entatives of the Nation, it were a piece of very great Inju&s;tice to &s;uppo&s;e that Augu&s;t A&s;&s;embly to be Liars or Calumniators, and not able to make good their Charge: and therefore until &s;uch time as they be purg'd by as good Authority as they are accus'd, they cannot charge the Presbyterian Mini&s;ters as being uncharitable for thinking them un|worthy of any Share in the Church-Go|vernment; e&s;pecially &s;eeing they were &s;o far from di&s;proving the Charge, that they made it good to the View of the World: all their Bi&s;hops adhering to the late King, &s;everal of the Clergy joining in Arms again&s;t their pre&s;ent Maje&s;ties, above Two hundred of them being actually depriv'd by the Civil Government for refu&s;ing to own their Ma|je&s;ties. And the pre&s;ent Queri&s;ts, by their Queries and Prote&s;tation, do manife&s;tly &s;trike at the Root of the Government both in Church and State; as &s;hall be made to ap|pear more fully afterwards.</P>
<PB N="12" REF="9">
<P>And whereas they alledg, that they can|not be charged with gro&s;s Error: It &s;eems they have forgot that &s;uch of them as made Application to the A&s;&s;embly, refu&s;ed to &s;ign the Confe&s;&s;ion of Faith, as containing &s;ound Doctrine again&s;t Arminiani&s;m, Sociniani&s;m and Popery; by which they did virtually charge them&s;elves with gro&s;s Errors; and their &s;illy Propo&s;al of offering to &s;ign that Confe&s;&s;ion, as <HI>containing the Doctrine of the Pro|te&s;tant Religion profe&s;&s;ed in the Kingdom of</HI> Scot|land, <HI>but not as their own Doctrine,</HI> fixes the Su&s;picion of Error upon them with more force &s;till: upon which account, their Ma|je&s;ties did with Advice and Con&s;ent of the E&s;tates of Parliament, <HI>June</HI> 12th 1693, enact, <Q>That no Mini&s;ter or Preacher be admitted or continued unle&s;s he &s;ign the &s;aid Confe&s;&s;ion as that of his own Faith, and the Doctrine that he will con&s;tantly adhere to.</Q> So that it can &s;carcely be de|termin'd whether it be more impudent or ridiculous in tho&s;e Queri&s;ts, to blame the Presbyterian Mini&s;ters for not admitting them to the Exerci&s;e of the Church-Go|vernment contrary to the Laws, when it is not in their Power to do it: and it may ju&s;tly be admir'd, with what Confidence tho&s;e Men can de&s;ire to be admitted to the Exer|ci&s;e of the Government of the Church of <HI>Scotland,</HI> when they refu&s;ed to &s;ign the Con|fe&s;&s;ion of Faith which they own to contain the Doctrine of the Prote&s;tant Religion pro|fe&s;&s;ed in <HI>Scotland,</HI> as the Confe&s;&s;ion of their own Faith; e&s;pecially when it's known that their Brethren of the Church of <HI>England</HI> ad|mit no Mini&s;ters into their Church without te&s;tifying their A&s;&s;ent and Con&s;ent to the 39 Articles, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>Then as to Immoralities which they pre|tend they cannot be charg'd with: They would do well to remember, that not only many of their Number were guilty, and ac|cordingly accus'd of gro&s;s Immoralities, &s;uch as are hateful to be named, but their Bi&s;hops, who according to them, were the mo&s;t e&s;|&s;ential Part of their Church, were generally Men of ill Morals, and Arch-bi&s;hop <HI>Pater|&s;on</HI> in particular is accus'd as &s;uch by Mr. <HI>Gordon</HI> one of the Queri&s;ts, in his Book cal|led <HI>the Reformed Bi&s;hop:</HI> And is it not very well known, that the two late Heads of their Church, from whence they deriv'd all their Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Juri&s;diction, were gro&s;ly immoral, and their Church never &s;o hone&s;t as to reprove them for it, in order to re|form them, or prevent the Corruption of Manners among&s;t the People who were de|prav'd by their bad Example, which makes their whole Body chargeable with the ge|neral Prophanity that abounds to this very day in the Nation? And they may be pleas'd to remember further, that be&s;ides tho&s;e Sorts of Immoralities which are generally own'd to be &s;uch, they are chargeable with tho&s;e of another nature; as the Breach of that Solemn League and Covenant which ma|ny of them did per&s;onally &s;ign, and were thereby obliged to re&s;i&s;t Popery and Pre|lacy, and maintain the Privileges of Parlia|ment; and yet they avowedly broke through all tho&s;e Ties by &s;ubmitting to, and pleading for Prelacy, and preaching up the King's Prero|gative over the Parliament and all Laws: &s;o that by their Concurrence, the late King, when D. of <HI>York,</HI> though a Papi&s;t, &s;at in their Par|liaments as Commi&s;&s;ioner, without qualify|ing him&s;elf according to Law; and being by their Intere&s;t advanc'd to the Throne, took upon him, by his Proclamations, to ca&s;s and annul what Laws he pleas'd. Then, I &s;uppo&s;e, they may al&s;o remember their taking of the &s;elf-contradictory Oath, cal|led <HI>the Te&s;t,</HI> in K. <HI>Charles</HI> the Second's time, which the hone&s;te&s;t of their Party refu&s;ed: And all of them took the Declaration, that it was unlawful to re&s;i&s;t the King, or any having his Commi&s;&s;ion. Notwith&s;tanding of which, they offer to join with this Go|vernment, without giving the World any ac|count of their Rea&s;ons why, or acknowledg|ing their former Error. Their &s;huffling with the Church of <HI>England,</HI> by pretending to be mighty Zealots for her Di&s;cipline and Cere|monies, and yet offering in their Te&s;t or Declaration to &s;ubmit to, and concur with
<PB N="13" REF="9">the Presbyterian Government as at pre&s;ent e&s;tabli&s;h'd in the Kingdom of <HI>Scotland,</HI> is al|&s;o known. And now they &s;huffle with the Presbyterians again, and pretend they are not &s;atisfied in their Con&s;ciences with their Government, though about two Years ago they declared by their <HI>Formula,</HI> that they could &s;ubmit to it, and concur with it. Nor can they deny their Prevarication with their pre&s;ent Maje&s;ties, pretending that they would take the Oaths to be faithful to them, if the &s;ame were al&s;o impos'd upon the Presbyte|rians; and they refus'd them notwith&s;tand|ing of the Presbyterians being injoin'd by Law to take them. So that if the Queri&s;ts had given them&s;elves leave to remember tho&s;e things, they might quickly have been &s;atisfy'd, that the Presbyterians had ground enough to charge them with Immoralities; and becau&s;e of their pa&s;t and pre&s;ent Levity, to &s;u&s;pect their future Fidelity. For who can put any Confidence in a Party of Men, that have hitherto prov'd &s;o un&s;tedfa&s;t and fal&s;e to all Intere&s;ts that ever they engaged with?</P>
<P>As for <HI>the Presbyterian Mini&s;ters looking upon the Epi&s;copal Clergy to be either no Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel, or &s;uch corrupt ones upon the account of their Principles and Practice in relation to Church-Government, as they are not worthy to be tru&s;ted with the Exerci&s;e of that Power which belongs to the Pa&s;toral Office:</HI></P>
<P>The&s;e Gentlemen may remember that they were not entru&s;ted with the full Exerci&s;e of Di&s;cipline by their own Bi&s;hops; and Mr. <HI>Hickeringill,</HI> in his <HI>Ceremony-Monger,</HI> p. 124. &s;ays that he and his Brethren of the Church of <HI>England are &s;uffered indeed to preach or to feed; but as to Church-Di&s;cipline, they are &s;o many Ciphers; and the Bi&s;hops take from their Brethren the Presbyters, half the Work of a Pre&s;|byter.</HI> So that the Queri&s;ts reflect upon their own Bi&s;hops, and their Brethren of the Church of <HI>England,</HI> as much, if not more, than upon us: for they withhold the Exer|ci&s;e of Di&s;cipline from them, as thinking it no Part of their Office, though the Scots Bi&s;hops to plea&s;e the People did allow their Clergy &s;ome more &s;hare; but the Presby|terians only withhold it as from Per&s;ons un|der a temporary Incapacity, till &s;uch time as they give Proof of their being worthy of it: and this is a farther Proof of what was for|merly a&s;&s;erted, that even the Epi&s;copal Par|ty them&s;elves don't think the Power of Preaching and Di&s;cipline at all times un&s;e|parable; and yet we &s;uppo&s;e, that both the Engli&s;h and Scots Bi&s;hops look'd upon their inferiour Clergy as Mini&s;ters, notwith&s;tanding of their detaining the Power of Di&s;cipline from them.</P>
<P>The Queri&s;ts do al&s;o know very well, that the Presbyterians don't look upon a Prelate to be an Officer of Divine In&s;titution; nor having the Power of Ordination either &s;ing|ly in his own Per&s;on, or &s;o as that Presby|ters cannot do it without him. And Mr. <HI>Hickeringill, Cerem. Monger,</HI> p. 108. though him&s;elf an actual Mini&s;ter of the Church of <HI>England,</HI> calls the Prelatical Ordination a Schi&s;matizing from Scripture, and all the Prote&s;tants of the World. And yet though the Presbyterians don't think this Manner of Ordination Scriptural; our Queri&s;ts may &s;ee that they don't impo&s;e a Re-ordination upon them, nor declare their Mini&s;terial Acts void and null: for the A&s;&s;embly held in 1690, declared, as I &s;aid before, that they would <HI>not depo&s;e any Man for his Opinion in Church-Government, nor urge Re-ordination upon them.</HI> And though the Presbyterians are al&s;o of Opi|nion that Epi&s;copal Collation, and a Patron's Pre&s;entation, are not &s;ufficient to entitle any Man to be Pa&s;tor of a particular Pari&s;h; yet they are far from treating the Epi&s;copal Clergy as no Mini&s;ters: and yet the Queri&s;ts would enviou&s;ly in&s;inuate &s;o much, that they may render them odious to the Church of <HI>England;</HI> though if they &s;hould have treated them as no Mini&s;ters, it had been but <HI>quid pro quo,</HI> and upon much better Grounds than the Prelatical Party of <HI>England</HI> and <HI>Scotland</HI> both do treat them as &s;uch, by enjoining Re-ordination upon all Pre&s;|byters that have not been Epi&s;copally or|dain'd, though at the &s;ame time they ac|cept
<PB N="14" REF="10">of Romi&s;h Prie&s;ts without it; by which we have as much Rea&s;on as Mr. <HI>Hickeringhill,</HI> to &s;ay, that they &s;chi&s;matize from the Scrip|tures and all Prote&s;tants of the World. And this does al&s;o make it evident, that the Pre&s;|byterians have good Ground to charge the Queri&s;ts with corrupt Principles as to the Go|vernment of the Church, &s;eeing their Bi&s;hops did all &s;olicite and concur with the Act of Parliament in 1670. <Q>Declaring all Ordina|tion of Mini&s;ters &s;ince 1661, which hath not been by Bi&s;hops, null and invalid, and that they are no Mini&s;ters that are other|wi&s;e ordained.</Q> And the whole Epi&s;copal Clergy mu&s;t, according to the Queri&s;ts for|mer Po&s;ition that their Bi&s;hops made no Acts relating to the Church without the Con&s;ent of their Presbyters, have given their Con|currence with the Bi&s;hops to procure this Act: Therefore &s;eeing the Presbyterian Mi|ni&s;ters have but too good Ground to think that the Prelati&s;ts look upon them as no Mi|ni&s;ters, they had no rea&s;on to be &s;udden in admitting any of that Party into a &s;hare of the Church-Government.</P>
<P>But as a farther Ground to &s;u&s;pect their corrupt Principles on that Head, they may remember, that when their Party was trium|phant, they procured it to be enacted, <HI>Parl.</HI> 2. <HI>Act.</HI> 1. <HI>Car.</HI> 2. <Q>That by Virtue of the Supre|macy the ordering of the Government of the Church doth properly belong to his Ma|je&s;ty and Succe&s;&s;ors, as an inherent Right of the Crown; and that he may enact and emit &s;uch Con&s;titutions, Acts and Orders concerning Church-Admini&s;trations, Per|&s;ons, Meetings and Matters, as he in his Royal Wi&s;dom &s;hall think fit.</Q> Now they know very well, that the Presbyterians look upon this as a very corrupt Principle; and accordingly this was annull'd by the Aboliti|on of the Supremacy in this Reign: and this Act being procured and &s;ubmitted unto by all the Prelati&s;ts, they are ju&s;tly chargeable with it as their Principle, though their pre&s;ent Practice is diametrically oppo&s;ite; for ac|cording to this Principle they ought to &s;ub|mit to the pre&s;ent Con&s;titution of the Church-Government, if they believed &s;uch a Power to be inherent in the Crown, and due to all King <HI>Charles</HI> the Second's Succe&s;&s;ors: For that the pre&s;ent Con&s;titution is &s;ettled by their Maje&s;ties and the Parliament, cannot be denied; &s;o that they have no way to avoid this Contradiction betwixt that Principle and their pre&s;ent Practice, but either to &s;ay, that they have chang'd their Principle on that Head, which apparently they have not; for in their Prote&s;tation they <HI>appeal to the King and Queen as Supreme Judg under God in the&s;e Domi|nions;</HI> which being the Words of the abo|li&s;h'd Act of Supremacy, gives us rea&s;on to think that they believe that Right to be in their Maje&s;ties &s;till: or el&s;e, notwith&s;tanding of all their Pretences, they mu&s;t think that their Maje&s;ties are not <HI>Charles</HI> the Second's lawful Succe&s;&s;ors, and con&s;equently to have no Right to that Power, which it's more than probable is the real, though not the pretend|ed Cau&s;e. And if they do &s;till hold this Prin|ciple, it will be worth their while to con&s;ider how they could ju&s;tify that trifling Oppo&s;ition to King <HI>James</HI>'s Liberty of Con&s;cience, which they valued them&s;elves upon in &s;ome of their Pamphlets here &s;ince the Revolution: or, if they own their general and &s;tupid Submi&s;&s;ion at that time, how came they to behave them|&s;elves &s;o mildly and quietly under the Regu|lations made then in Church-Affairs by a Po|pi&s;h Prince, when they are &s;o very nice and &s;crupulous now to &s;ubmit to Con&s;titutions en|acted by a Prote&s;tant Soveraign, for the Se|curity of the Prote&s;tant Religion? whereas that Declaration of King <HI>James</HI> gave a very ample Liberty to the Papi&s;ts, and yet they made no Prote&s;tation again&s;t it, as now again&s;t the Committee of the A&s;&s;embly, and the A&s;|&s;embly it &s;elf, which act with their pre&s;ent Maje&s;ties Authority.</P>
<P>Then having made it appear that the Pre&s;|byterians don't look upon them as no Mini|&s;ters, ina&s;much as they don't urge Re-ordina|tion upon them, the Queri&s;ts have no Rea&s;on to think that their &s;ubmitting to &s;uch Terms as the Law requires, though it may infer that they can comply with another Form of
<PB N="15" REF="10">Government and Di&s;cipline than what they formerly own'd, that therefore it declares the Acts of their Mini&s;terial Function null and void: Or &s;uppo&s;ing that they &s;hould hereby own that they were formerly corrupt in Prin|ciple and Practice as to Church-Government, it does not therefore follow that their Mini|&s;terial Acts are null and void; for they know that when tho&s;e who have taken Orders in the Church of <HI>Rome</HI> are admitted by them, yet they don't declare all their former Mini|&s;terial Acts null and void, though they ac|knowledg their former corrupt Principles and Practices as to Church-Government, el&s;e they &s;hould rebaptize all &s;uch as are convert|ed from Popery, which they do not.</P>
<P>Then as to their corrupt Practices in the Di&s;cipline of the Church, the Queri&s;ts mu&s;t needs be &s;en&s;ible of the Remi&s;ne&s;s of their whole Party, as to the putting of that in Ex|erci&s;e; whence it came to pa&s;s that Profanity is now arrived to &s;uch height, that it &s;eems not remediable by any thing le&s;s than Omni|potence. And though the Queri&s;ts will not own it, yet we dare appeal to their own Con|&s;ciences, whether they do not know it to be true, that the Generality of all tho&s;e of their Party, who per&s;ecuted us with &s;o much Fury, were openly wicked, and yet care&s;&s;ed by the governing Part of their Church, and look'd upon as its be&s;t Friends.</P>
<P>And now that there has been occa&s;ion to touch their Per&s;ecution, the Queri&s;ts may plea&s;e to con&s;ider further, whether the Pre&s;|byterians have not rea&s;on to be &s;hy of ad|mitting tho&s;e Men into the Government of the Church, who by their Numbers may out-vote them, or their Un&s;tedfa&s;tne&s;s betray them; and if the Throne &s;hould happen to be fill'd with &s;uch a Prince as &s;ome of tho&s;e who were lately upon it, would join with them to overturn the pre&s;ent Government of the Church, under pretence that the Majori|ty of the Pa&s;tors and People were for Epi&s;co|pacy: which, con&s;idering the Rea&s;on of State, given by the late Convention for abo|li&s;hing Prelacy, becau&s;e contrary to the In|clinations of the Generality of the People, would carry the &s;ame Appearance of Rea&s;on on the other &s;ide, to re-e&s;tabli&s;h it; and in that ca&s;e the Presbyterians would be under a Nece&s;&s;ity either of defending their Con&s;titu|tion by the Sword, or &s;ubmitting to &s;uch a horrid and inhumane Per&s;ecution as were tho&s;e in the late Reigns.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="5" TYPE="proposal">
<HEAD>Query V. Quaeritur, <HI>Whether the annual Office of Ruling (not Preaching) Elders, cho&s;en out among the People, and joined with Mini|&s;ters in Kirk-Se&s;&s;ions, Presbyteries, Provincial and General A&s;&s;emblies, and their Committees, to a&s;&s;i&s;t and concur with them in the Exerci&s;e of Di&s;cipline and Government, can be warrantably affirmed to be of Divine In&s;titution? And if any Foot&s;tep of &s;uch an Office doth appear in the Practice of the antient Church; or any plain convincing Proof of its In&s;titution can be produced out of the Scriptures: And if this Office be not of Divine In&s;titution, whether a Judi|catory con&s;i&s;ting in part of &s;uch Officers pretending to Divine In&s;titution, and to act by Warrant and Commi&s;&s;ion from Je&s;us Christ, be a lawful Judicatory?</HI></HEAD>
<PB N="16" REF="11">
<HEAD TYPE="sub">Reflections <HI>on the Fifth Query.</HI></HEAD>
<P>THE De&s;ign of this Query is to prove Presbyterian Government unlawful, <HI>be|cau&s;e they admit of Ruling Elders in all the Judi|catories of the Church,</HI> there being no Foot&s;tep of any &s;uch Officer to be found either in the Scripture or Antiquity, as they would in&s;i|nuate.</P>
<P>We are glad to find this Principle granted by the Queri&s;ts, that Judicatories, con&s;i&s;ting in part of &s;uch Officers as do but pretend to Divine In&s;titution, are therefore unlawful Ju|dicatories. Their Brethren the Bi&s;hops of <HI>England,</HI> and the Courts kept under them, will &s;carcely perhaps give them Thanks for this Hypothe&s;is, becau&s;e Mr. <HI>Hickeringhill, Ce|rem. Mong.</HI> p. 108. calls the <HI>Apparitors, Sam|ners, Regi&s;ters, Proctors, Canoni&s;ts, Lay-Vicars, Vicar Generals, Commi&s;&s;aries, Officials, Surro|gates,</HI> &amp;c. which are Officers in the Engli&s;h Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Judicatories, by &s;ome other Name than Officers of Divine In&s;titution: And at the &s;ame time it ju&s;tifies the Noncon|formity of the Scots Presbyterians in the late Reigns, who could never &s;ee it proved, that the Scots Prelats were Officers of Divine In|&s;titution, though their Brains were almo&s;t beat out, becau&s;e their Eye-&s;ight was no bet|ter; in&s;omuch that a &s;mall matter would have per&s;waded them that there was &s;omething more than a Poetical Fancy in the following Di&s;tich, compo&s;ed by the learned and inge|nious <HI>Andrew Marvel</HI> E&s;q; in his Loyal Scot,
<Q><L>In&s;tead of all the Plagues had Bi&s;hops come,</L>
<L>Without doubt <HI>Pharaoh</HI> bad &s;ent <HI>I&s;rael</HI> home.</L></Q> which it's &s;uppos'd the Author meant of Scots Bi&s;hops.</P>
<P>But as to the Ruling Elders, if the Queri&s;ts had given them&s;elves the Trouble of reading Mr. <HI>Guthry</HI>'s little Tractate, what the <HI>London</HI> Mini&s;ters have writ concerning them in the <HI>Jus Divinum Regiminis Eccle&s;ia&s;tici,</HI> or what Dr. <HI>Owen</HI> writ lately on that Head, they would have found &s;uch Arguments for the Divine In&s;titution of Ruling Elders, as were never yet an&s;wered: and &s;eeing they have been in print, &s;ome of them for many Years, it had been worth our Queri&s;ts while to have confuted them before they came to put this Query to the Committee, who they knew had neither Time nor Authority to enter into &s;uch Di&s;putes.</P>
<P>In the next place, the Queri&s;ts would do well to an&s;wer the&s;e following Queries, <HI>viz.</HI> Where was this Objection, and all the other four, again&s;t the Lawfulne&s;s of the pre&s;ent Con&s;titution of the Church of <HI>Scotland,</HI> when their Party did offer, by their <HI>Formula</HI> in 1690, to &s;ubmit to and concur with the Presbyterian Government as it is at pre&s;ent e&s;tabli&s;h'd in the Church of <HI>Scotland?</HI> How it came to be lawful for them to comply then and not now? and whether they did not know all tho&s;e things as to the Govern|ment of the Church of <HI>Scotland</HI> then, that they object again&s;t it now? and if they did, as no doubt they mu&s;t, why did they not put in &s;uch a Di&s;tinction in their <HI>Formula,</HI> as to the Government of the Church, as they did then concerning the Doctrine? and whether or not they have not &s;ome more hidden Scruples which they can bring out by Piece-meal, and dally with the Church and State till &s;uch time as they &s;ee whether the late King, with the A&s;&s;i&s;tance of <HI>Lewis</HI> XIV. can re-e&s;tabli&s;h the Scots Prelacy?</P>
<P>But the Divine In&s;titution of Ruling Elders being confidently impugn'd by the Queri&s;ts, it's thought fit, le&s;t they or their Party &s;hould triumph too much, to hint at a few Arguments to prove it, referring tho&s;e who have a mind to be fully &s;atisfied concerning it, to the three Books before-mentioned.</P>
<P>But before we come to the Arguments, it may be nece&s;&s;ary to de&s;cribe what this Ruling Elder is, becau&s;e that Officer is not &s;o well known in this Kingdom as in <HI>Scotland.</HI></P>
<PB N="17" REF="11">
<P>The Ruling Elder then is one cho&s;en from among&s;t the People of more than ordinary Gifts and Piety, to a&s;&s;i&s;t the Pa&s;tor in exa|mining tho&s;e that come to the Lord's Table, in vi&s;iting the Sick, cau&s;ing the Acts of Church-Judicatories to be put in execution, admoni&s;hing People privately of their Duty; and if they prove refractory, to bring the Matter before the Mini&s;ter and the re&s;t of the Elders: They are frequently to vi&s;it Fa|milies, in&s;truct the Ignorant, exhort the Negligent, admoni&s;h the Slothful, rebuke tho&s;e who walk di&s;orderly, comfort the Afflicted, e&s;tabli&s;h the Wavering, incourage tho&s;e that do well; and, in &s;hort, to &s;ee Pie|ty and Godline&s;s promoted in Families: And for the more convenient Di&s;charge of tho&s;e Duties, every Elder has his particular quar|ter of the Pari&s;h a&s;&s;ign'd him; and they and the Mini&s;ter meet once a Week, or oftner, <HI>pro re nata,</HI> to give an Account of their Charge. Then as to their Office in higher Judicatories, one of the mo&s;t eminent in a Pari&s;h a&s;&s;i&s;ts in the Presbytery and Provincial Synod; and a few from every Presbytery a&s;|&s;i&s;t in the General A&s;&s;embly. The&s;e are the Officers, and this their Office, which our E|pi&s;copal Queri&s;ts think &s;ufficient to render the Presbyterian Con&s;titution unlawful, which is no very promi&s;ing Evidence of their Friend|&s;hip to the promoting of an Univer&s;al Piety and Reformation.</P>
<P>But to come to the Divine In&s;titution of the&s;e Officers:</P>
<P>The fir&s;t Argument is from <HI>Rom.</HI> 12.6, 7, 8. <HI>Having then Gifts&mdash;Let us wait on our mini&s;tring, be that teacheth on teaching, he that exhorteth on Exhortation, he that giveth let him do it with Simplicity, he that R&V;LETH with Di|ligence, he that &s;heweth Mercy with Chearfulne&s;s.</HI> Where he that ruleth is di&s;tingui&s;h'd from Doctor, Pa&s;tor and Deacon, and all of them are called the <HI>Gifts of God;</HI> which does ne|ce&s;&s;arily infer a Divine In&s;titution of him that <HI>ruleth,</HI> as well as of him that <HI>teacheth</HI> and <HI>giveth.</HI> Nor is this the Sen&s;e of the Scots Presbyterians alone, but of <HI>Pareus, Pi&s;cator, Calvin</HI> and <HI>Beza,</HI> upon the place.</P>
<P>The &s;econd is from 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12.8. &mdash; <HI>God hath &s;et &s;ome in the Church, fir&s;t Apo&s;tles, &s;econdly Prophets, thirdly Teachers, afterwards Powers, then Gifts of Healing, Helps, GOVERNMENTS, kinds of Tongues.</HI> Here Governments are clearly &s;aid to be of Divine In&s;titution, as a thing peculiar and di&s;tinct from other Church-Officers, who had al&s;o a Power of Govern|ment, as Apo&s;tles, Prophets, Teachers; b<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">t Government was not all that belonged to their Office, as it was the whole of the Ruling Elders. And from the Nature and Nece&s;&s;ity of Government it will appear that the <HI>Govern|ments here mentioned</HI> were not Temporary and Extraordinary, as that of <HI>Apo&s;tles, Tongues, Gifts of Healing,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
<P>The third Argument is from 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 5.17. <HI>Let the Elders that rule well, be counted worthy of double Honour, e&s;pecially they that labour in the Word and Doctrine:</HI> Where a <HI>ruling Elder</HI> di&s;tinct from him that labours in the Word and Doctrine, is plainly held forth.</P>
<P>It's true that there are Exceptions again&s;t the Arguments from the&s;e Texts, both by Epi&s;copalians and Era&s;tians; but they are &s;ufficiently an&s;wered by the <HI>London</HI> Mini&s;ters in the <HI>Jus Divinum Regiminis,</HI> and Mr. <HI>Gil|le&s;pie</HI> in his <HI>Aaron</HI>'s <HI>Rod,</HI> whither tho&s;e that de&s;ire farther Satisfaction are referred; it being incon&s;i&s;tent with the de&s;igned Brevity to in&s;ert them here.</P>
<P>Then as to that part of the Query, Whe|ther there be any Foot&s;tep of the&s;e Officers in Antiquity? If the Queri&s;ts plea&s;e to read <HI>Ambro&s;e</HI>'s Comment on 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 5.1. <HI>Tertullian</HI> in the 34th Chaper of his <HI>Apology. Ba&s;iliu<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> Magnus</HI> on <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 3.2. <HI>Jerome</HI> on that &s;ame place, <HI>Augu&s;tin</HI>'s <HI>Epi&s;tle</HI> 137. <HI>Gregory contrae Cel&s;um, lib.</HI> 3. <HI>Aug. L.</HI> 3. <HI>contra Cre&s;cent. cap.</HI> 56. they will find that the Chri&s;tian Church had them in the Primitive Times. And <HI>Ambro&s;e,</HI> as cited by <HI>Calvin,</HI> on 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 5.17. complains, <HI>that that Cu&s;tom grew ob&s;olete by the Sloth, or ra|ther Pride of the Teachers or Doctors, while they alone would &s;eem to be eminent; than which a bet|ter Rea&s;on cannot be a&s;&s;igned, why the&s;e Officers were laid a&s;ide by our Scots Prelates,</HI> tho a &s;hadow of them were &s;till kept up in parti|cular
<PB N="18" REF="12">Pari&s;hes to plea&s;e the People: which &s;hows that the Queri&s;ts do act <HI>mala fide</HI> when they reckon our Government unlaw|ful for that which was practi&s;ed in their own.</P>
<P>Another of their Cavils again&s;t the&s;e Offi|cers is, that they are Annual. But the Que|ri&s;ts would have found no room for this Objection, if they had con&s;idered what Mr. <HI>Guthry</HI> &s;ays, <HI>pag.</HI> 33. of his Treati&s;e of Ruling Elders and Deacons, <HI>viz.</HI> <Q>That Elders once lawfully called to the Office, and having Gifts from God meet to ex|erci&s;e the &s;ame, unle&s;s they be removed therefrom becau&s;e of Mi&s;carriage, are &s;till Elders: Tho haply in Congregations, where many qualified Men may be found, &s;ome may be permitted for a time to &s;ur|cea&s;e from the Exerci&s;e of the Charge, and others be put in their room, as was among the Levites under the Law in &s;er|ving the Temple by Cour&s;es.</Q> And to this we may add, that the Condition of mo&s;t Congregations or Pari&s;hes being &s;uch, that they cannot allow a Maintenance for tho&s;e Elders; and that many times Providence calls upon them to remove from one Pari&s;h to another, it's but highly rea&s;onable that all tho&s;e who are qualified in a Pari&s;h &s;hould bear this Office by turns, according as they are regularly called.</P>
</DIV2>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="epilogue">
<HEAD>The Epilogue to the Queries.</HEAD>
<P><HI>THe&s;e are &s;ome of the most weighty Scruples which we have in our Con&s;ci|ences anent the Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Authority of the Committee deputed from the late Presbyterian A&s;&s;embly, and the&s;e we propo&s;e not out of any fear of being tried in relation to our Life and Doctrine; in which we are willing to &s;ub|mit our &s;elves to an impartial Trial by any competent Judicatory Civil or Ec|cle&s;ia&s;tick within this Kingdom: Nor, as if we would not have a due Regard to this Committee, if they clothed them&s;elves with a Delegation from the Civil Power: But that we cannot (until we be re&s;olved in the&s;e Scruples) without betraying the Liberties of this National Church, acknowledg any Eccle&s;ia&s;tick Power or Juri&s;diction in this Committee, or their Con&s;tituents, to be Judges of any of our Number.</HI> And therefore, <HI>We hope the Members of this Com|mittee will either de&s;i&s;t from any farther Procedor again&s;t us, or el&s;e give us a &s;atisfactory An&s;wer to the&s;e Propo&s;als, which we have good ground to expect from them; &s;ince it is both ju&s;t and rea&s;onable in it &s;elf, and well-becoming the Character they own of Go&s;pel-Mini&s;ters, that they &s;hould &s;atisfy the Con&s;ciences of the &s;crupulous concerning their Authority and Juri&s;diction before they urge them to &s;ubmit thereunto: And that in regard the A&s;&s;embly in their In|&s;tructions to the Commi&s;&s;ion, have required the &s;ame to take all due Pains to
<PB N="19" REF="12">inform, convince and &s;atisfy &s;uch as think that they have receded from their known Principles.</HI></P>
<P>The&s;e Queries were concerted by the General Meeting at Old <HI>Aber|deen.</HI></P>
<CLOSER><SIGNED><HI>Sic &s;ub&s;cribitur,</HI> M. Chrevey, <HI>Clericus.</HI></SIGNED></CLOSER>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="part">
<HEAD>Reflections <HI>on the Epilogue to the Queries.</HI></HEAD>
<P>WHether the&s;e Scruples be weighty or not, and whether mo&s;t of them do not as much condemn the Practices of their own Church as that of the Presbyterians, let tho&s;e who impartially peru&s;e the foregoing Reflections be Judges. And whether the Presbyterians have not rea&s;on to think that Error in Doctrine, and Scandal in Practice have not a con&s;iderable Influence in their de|clining a Trial, let what hath been charged on the whole Party from undeniable Matter of Fact determine: Or, whether the Committee was not a competent Judicatory, both as to Ci|vil and Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Right, when the General A&s;&s;embly of the Church, from whom they had their Authority, are own'd by the Re|pre&s;entatives of all the Prote&s;tants in the Na|tion, a&s;&s;embled in a Parliamentary way, to have the only Right of Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Juri&s;|diction, let law and Divinity decide. And con&s;equently whether it be ju&s;t and rea&s;ona|ble to think that their &s;ubmitting to the Committee, or their Con&s;tituents, would have been a betraying of the Liberties of the Na|tional Church, when the General A&s;&s;embly are in full Parliament nationally clothed with a National Right; and the far greate&s;t part of the Nation do calmly acquie&s;ce and te&s;tify their Concurrence, by &s;ending their Delegates, the ruling Elders, from the &s;eve|ral Quarters of the Nation to &s;it in the A&s;&s;embly.</P>
<P>The Queri&s;ts would al&s;o do well to con&s;ider with what Confidence they and their Con&s;ti|tuents can take upon them the Name of the National Church, when the Bi&s;hops from whom they had their Pa&s;toral Authority are vomited out by the Convention, as the great and in&s;upportable Grievance of the Nation: When in their General Meeting, as they call it, at old <HI>Aberdeen,</HI> they had no Delegates to repre&s;ent the People, or te&s;tify their Con|&s;ent; and when the greate&s;t part of the People, in mo&s;t parts of the Nation, at lea&s;t of tho&s;e who by Go&s;pel-Rules are capable of being admitted to enjoy all Ordi|nances in the Church, have both by their Repre&s;entatives in Parliament, and their own Practice throughout the Kingdom, te&s;tified their general di&s;like of the Bi&s;hops and their Clergy. And let them an&s;wer whether this ar|rogating to them&s;elves the Government of the Church without the Churches Con&s;ent, be not a lording it over God's Heritage; of which Name they have injuriou&s;ly bereft the Peo|ple, and appropriated the &s;ame to them&s;elves under the Greek Title of Clergy, but per|haps not without a &s;pecial Providence, that their Prelacy might be clearly evinc'd to be that prohibited Lording it over God's Heri|tage, &s;eeing they alone, <HI>&s;i Diis placet,</HI> will needs be call'd &s;o; and that their Prelates lorded it over them, is beyond Contra|diction.</P>
<P>Their pretended Deference to the Civil Power will fall properly under the Reflecti|ons upon their Prote&s;tation. But here it's fit to take notice of the Weakne&s;s of the Rea|&s;ons from which they pretended to hope that the Committee &s;hould either give a &s;atisfactory An&s;wer to their Queries, or de|&s;i&s;t from proceeding again&s;t them.</P>
<P N="1"><PB N="20" REF="13"> 1. Becau&s;e according to them they had no Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Authority, tho all their Ob|jections again&s;t it were either mi&s;taken Mat|ters of Fact, or &s;uch as did more &s;trongly militate again&s;t that Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Authority which they them&s;elves did practi&s;e and own; and if there be any of their Objections which don't fall under tho&s;e two Heads, they were an&s;wered in Print many Years ago. So that the Committee, tho they had both had Time and Commi&s;&s;ion to di&s;pute with them, might very well have refer|red them thither, or demanded Replies to tho&s;e An&s;wers before they had given them|&s;elves any farther Trouble. Whence it ap|pears, that the Queri&s;ts had rather a de&s;ign to cavil and gain time, than any de&s;ire to be &s;atisfied in their Con&s;ciences. But fur|ther, if Cavils and Exceptions to Eccle&s;ia&s;ti|cal Judicatories ought to &s;u&s;pend their Pro|cedure, then Hereticks and Schi&s;maticks &s;hould never want an invincible Argument.</P>
<P N="2">2. Becau&s;e they own the Character of Go&s;pel-Mini&s;ters, which would &s;eem to im|ply that tho they own it, yet they don't de&s;erve it; and this cannot be under&s;tood as a wre&s;ting of their Sen&s;e, if we con&s;ider their former Act of Parliament, declaring all tho&s;e who were not Epi&s;copally ordained, to be no Mini&s;ters. And in this Ca&s;e let any Man judg whether the Committee had any rea&s;on to &s;top their Procedure again&s;t them. But further, the Queri&s;ts would do well to con&s;ider, whether it be any way contrary to the Character of Go&s;pel-Mini|&s;ters to proceed to Cen&s;ure again&s;t Delin|quents, becau&s;e they are contentious, and will in&s;i&s;t either upon Fal&s;ities, or Objections an&s;wered over and over. And I am per|&s;waded that to any unbia&s;&s;ed Man the&s;e Que|ries will appear to proceed more from Con|tention than Scruple, if they con&s;ider that the weightie&s;t of them were an&s;wered long ago, that others of them did directly con|demn their own Practice, and that the Party have &s;everal times &s;ince the Revolution, offered Submi&s;&s;ion to the Government of the Church without mentioning any of them: and therefore, &s;eeing there is very great Ground to think that the&s;e Queries had their Ri&s;e from Contention, the Apo&s;tle's An|&s;wer is plain, <HI>But if any Man be contentions, we have no &s;uch Cu&s;tom, neither the Churches of God.</HI></P>
<P N="3">3. Becau&s;e of the A&s;&s;embly's In&s;tructions, for which peru&s;e the Committee's An&s;wer in the Negative.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="part">
<HEAD>The Committee's An&s;wer to the Queries.</HEAD>
<P><Q>THE Committee finding that the Que|&s;tions propo&s;ed do &s;trike at the Root of Presbyterian Government, and the pre|&s;ent E&s;tabli&s;hment thereof according to the Laws of this Kingdom, and do overturn the Authority of this Committee, with which they are entru&s;ted by the A&s;&s;embly, Do judg it not becoming and &s;utable to the Tru&s;t repo&s;ed in this Judicatory, to enter in Debate with any particular Per&s;ons few or moe about the Con&s;titution and Power of the pre&s;ent e&s;tabli&s;hed Government of this Church. <HI>And,</HI> Do think that if it had indeed been Satisfaction to their own Con|&s;ciences which they de&s;ired, they both might have long before this time, and yet may take more proper and obvious Mea|&s;ures for that end. Be&s;ides that, the Com|mittee have other urging and important Work committed by the General A&s;&s;embly to them, which cannot allow them &s;o much Time for Debates and Di&s;putes, as the Matter propo&s;ed would require, nor have they any Commi&s;&s;ion for that Effect.</Q></P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="part">
<PB N="21" REF="13">
<HEAD>Prote&s;tation and Appeal given in at <HI>Aberdeen</HI> upon the 29th Day of <HI>June</HI> 1694, under form of In&s;trument, to the Committee of the late Presbyterian A&s;&s;embly, by the Mini&s;ters Delegat for that end from the Dioce&s;s of <HI>Aberdeen,</HI> for them&s;elves, and in the Name of all their Adherents.</HEAD>
<P><HI>WE the Mini&s;ters of the Dioce&s;&s;es of</HI> Aberdeen, Murray, Ro&s;&s;e, Caithne&s;s, Orkney, <HI>and of the Shyres of</HI> Angus <HI>and</HI> Mairns, <HI>Do hereby declare that we cannot own the A&s;&s;emblies of our Presbyterian Brethren &s;ince the la&s;t E&s;tabli&s;hment of their Government, to have been the full and lawful Repre&s;entatives of this National Church; and con&s;equentlie no Per&s;on or Per&s;ons what&s;omever by virtue of any Delegation from them, can ju&s;tlie claim a Power to be the Judges of our Lives and Doctrine, according to what we have expre&s;&s;ed in the Queries given in to this Committee, the Tenor whereof is</HI> ut &s;upra.</P>
<P><HI>To the which Queries we have received no &s;atisfactory An&s;wer; and in re|gard that they have manife&s;tly &s;tated them&s;elves as Parties again&s;t the&s;e of our Character and Per&s;wa&s;ion;</HI> Therefore <HI>for maintaining the Liberties of this National Church, and for many other Rea&s;ons moving us thereto, which we are re&s;olved in due time to publi&s;h to the World, we find our &s;elves obliged unanimou&s;ly to te&s;tify again&s;t the pretended Eccle&s;ia&s;tick Authority of this Committee, and to prote&s;t again&s;t all their Proceedings, Acts and Sentences in the Quality of an Eccle&s;ia&s;tick Judicatorie, and to appeal to their Maje&s;ties K.</HI> William <HI>and Q.</HI> Mary, <HI>as Supreme Judges under God within the&s;e Do|minions, and to the next lawfullie con&s;titute and orderlie called General A&s;&s;emblie of this National Church. And we do hereby prote&s;t again&s;t any Sentence pa&s;t or to be pa&s;t again&s;t any of our Number that are cited or may be cited before this Committee, and do appeal to their Maje&s;ties as &s;aid is: And this we do not as if we would protect any that are trulie guiltie, (if any &s;uch be amongst us) nor as if we would not give all due Deference to this Com|mittee, in &s;ubmitting to them, if they clothed them&s;elves only with a Delegation from the Civil Power: But that we cannot (until we be re&s;olved in the above|written Scruples) acknowledg any Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Power or Juri&s;diction in this Committee, or their Con&s;tituents, to be Judges of any of our Number. And finally, we prote&s;t that this our Prote&s;tation and Appeal, together with the Queries above-mentioned, as they were given in before entring this Prote&s;tation, be in&s;erted</HI> verbatim <HI>in the Records of this Committee,</HI> ad futuram rema|nentiam. <HI>Sic &s;ub&s;cribitur.</HI></P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="part">
<PB N="22" REF="14">
<HEAD>Reflections <HI>on the Prote&s;tation.</HI></HEAD>
<P>THis Prote&s;tation referring to the Queries above-mentioned for the Rea&s;ons of it, it follows naturally that the Reader &s;hould be referred to the Reflections upon tho&s;e Queries, where he will find their Rea&s;ons confidered. So that all that remains now to be done is, to con&s;ider the Deference which the Queri&s;ts pretend to the Civil Govern|ment, and any other Rea&s;on which may perhaps have e&s;cap'd them in their Que|ries.</P>
<P>Whatever regard they may pretend to the Civil Government, it's plain that they do manife&s;tly impugn its Authority in a very &s;awcy and undecent manner, by denying the Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Juri&s;diction of the General A&s;&s;emblies &s;ince the Revolution, tho the &s;ame be e&s;tabli&s;hed in them by the King and Par|liament, as far as Human Law can do it; and yet the Queri&s;ts have not &s;o much as one honourable Expre&s;&s;ion of Deference to the Sanction of the Civil Government confirm|ing their Divine and Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Right, which is &s;o much the more remarkable, and the greater Proof of Di&s;re&s;pect to the Civil Government in them, becau&s;e, as was hinted before, the whole Party in the late Reigns did, by Act of Parliament, lodg &s;uch a Power in the King's own Per&s;on, <HI>that he might by virtue of the Supremacy, and an inherent Right of the Crown, order the Government of the Church, enact and emit &s;uch Con&s;titutions, Acts and Orders con|cerning Church-Admini&s;trations, Per&s;ons, Meetings and Matters, as he in his Royal Wi&s;dom &s;hall think &s;it.</HI> Now if the Party had believed that the Government of the Church was of Divine In&s;titution, they dur&s;t never have allowed the King &s;uch an ample Power concerning it, nor have &s;ubmitted to it: And if they do be|lieve that the King has really &s;uch a Power as is here expre&s;&s;ed, how comes it that they do not &s;ubmit to the Church-Government, as it is now e&s;tabli&s;h'd by their pre&s;ent Maje&s;ties and the Parliament? And &s;eeing they do in &s;uch an ob&s;tinate manner prote&s;t again&s;t the Authority of the General A&s;&s;emblies, who, be&s;ides their Eccle&s;ia&s;tical and Divine Right to the Juri&s;diction over the National Church, have all the Civil Right which the King and Parliament can give, it mu&s;t nece&s;&s;arily fol|low, that either they think King <HI>William</HI> and Queen <HI>Mary</HI> have not &s;o good a Right to order the Government of the Church, as the late Kings had; that his Right is dimini&s;h'd by the Concurrence of the Parliament; or that the A&s;&s;emblies pretending to a Divine Right, together with the Civil Right, makes it un|lawful for them to &s;ubmit. The two for|mer they will not own, tho there's rea&s;on to think the main Objection lies there; but they are a&s;ham'd, or at lea&s;t &s;hy to own it openly, becau&s;e that would render them un|worthy of the Government's Protection, and make the People cry out, Shame upon them, that they &s;hould have by Act of Parliament allowed more Power to <HI>Profane</HI> and <HI>Popi&s;h Princes</HI> in Church-Matters, than they will al|low to <HI>Pious</HI> and <HI>Prote&s;tant Princes:</HI> and therefore we will &s;uppo&s;e that the main Scru|ple is, becau&s;e the A&s;&s;embly do al&s;o plead a Divine Right, which they mu&s;t deny, either becau&s;e they want Bi&s;hops; and if &s;o, they do both deny a Power of Juri&s;diction to mo&s;t if not all of the Reformed Churches in <HI>Europe;</HI> for none of them have &s;uch Bi&s;hops as theirs were even as to Matters of Juri&s;|diction; and al&s;o condemn them&s;elves for offering to &s;ubmit to and concur with that Government as they did in 1690. and if they &s;cruple their Authority becau&s;e they had not Delegates from all the Prelatical Clergy of <HI>Scotland,</HI> it has been an&s;wered already.</P>
<P>But to be plain with them, if their former Principle of the King's having &s;uch a Power by virtue of the Supremacy, and as an inhe|rent of the Crown, be true, then they ought
<PB N="23" REF="14">to obey their pre&s;ent Maje&s;ties, who have &s;et|tled Presbyterian-Government in <HI>Scotland</HI> as mo&s;t agreeable to the Word of God; for &s;o they have enacted it: or if that former Prin|ciple of theirs was fal&s;e, then in Con&s;cience they ought to publi&s;h to the World that they declare it &s;o; and in that Ca&s;e they mu&s;t allow that the Presbyterian Mini&s;ters had rea&s;on to be &s;hy in admitting them into a Share of the Church-Government, becau&s;e of their cor|rupt Principles and Practices concerning it.</P>
<P>But if they think that the King alone has that Power, and that they cannot &s;ubmit to the pre&s;ent Acts concerning the Church, be|cau&s;e they are enacted by and with the Ad|vice of the Parliament, then it &s;hows plainly how little Deference they have to the Go|vernment who would &s;et the two con&s;titu|ent Parts in oppo&s;ition to one another: for that the Government of <HI>Scotland</HI> is by King and Parliament, and no other, there's no Man able to deny; though the Prelatical Party did their utmo&s;t Endeavour to overturn it in the two late Reigns, and throw us into the bot|tomle&s;s Gulph of an Ab&s;olute Monarchy, by giving the King &s;uch Power both in Civil and Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Affairs, that Parliaments would have been thereby quite de&s;troy'd. The Power they gave the Kings in Church-Affairs, we have ju&s;t now heard; and for that in Civil-Affairs, we refer to the 18th Act of the Parliament held by the D. of <HI>York;</HI> wherein it was enacted, that all Juri&s;diction doth &s;o re&s;ide in his Maje&s;ty, that he may by him&s;elf, or any commi&s;&s;ionated by him, take Cogni|zance, and give Deci&s;ion of any Ca&s;es or Cau&s;es he plea&s;es.</P>
<P>Now by their Appealing to their Ma|je&s;ties without any mention of the Parlia|ment, by who&s;e Advice and Con&s;ent the Laws again&s;t the Matter of their Prote&s;ta|tion were enacted; it's plain that they de|&s;ign, by a &s;eeming Exce&s;s of Zeal for the Prerogative, to break the very Fundamen|tal Con&s;titution of our Government: as if their Maje&s;ties, according to the former Doctrine and Politicks of their Party, could of them&s;elves revoke tho&s;e Laws, or totally di&s;pen&s;e with the Execution of them, without the Authority of the Parliament. And yet at the &s;ame time they are &s;o im|pudent, as to accu&s;e their Maje&s;ties of hav|ing call'd an irregular and ill-con&s;tituted A&s;&s;embly, and to prote&s;t again&s;t all the Acts and Proceedings of the late A&s;&s;embly, and their Committee, which acted as Eccle&s;ia|&s;tical Judicatories by their Maje&s;ties Autho|rity; who in the <HI>Act of Parliament &s;ettling Presbyterian Government, have expre&s;ly authoriz'd the Presbyterian Mini&s;ters to appoint Vi&s;itors, and purge out &s;candalous and in&s;ufficient Mini&s;ters, and to &s;u&s;pend and deprive &s;uch as are contuma|cious and proven guilty:</HI> By which the Com|mittee might legally deprive all the Que|ri&s;ts, and they in Con&s;cience &s;hould be obli|ged to &s;ubmit, as having referr'd the Ca&s;e to their Maje&s;ties as &s;upreme Judges under God, &s;eeing they have g<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">en their Judg|ment thus in that very Act, as al&s;o, <Q>That Presbyterian Government is mo&s;t agree|able to the Word of God, mo&s;t conducive to the Advancement of true Piety and Godline&s;s, and e&s;tabli&s;hing the Peace of the Realm.</Q> And by another Act of that &s;ame Parliament, have aboli&s;h'd the Supremacy, and left the Church in power to hold her own A&s;&s;emblies as Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Judicato|ries. So that here's the Judgment of their Maje&s;ties, to whom our Queri&s;ts have ap|peal'd, fully again&s;t them. And if they de|cline the Authority of the A&s;&s;embly be|cau&s;e they do not only act by their Maje&s;ties Authority, but claim a Privilege of acting of them&s;elves by Divine Right, then they plainly declare them&s;elves Era&s;tians, and not only condemn us, but the Church of <HI>England;</HI> who&s;e Prolocutor, in her la&s;t Con|vocation, did argue again&s;t making any Al|teration in her Con&s;titution, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> alledging that it was Apo&s;tolical: and if our Queri&s;ts be Era&s;tians in their Principles, they do &s;till contradict their Principles by their Practice, in not &s;ubmitting to that Church-Con&s;titu|tion which is &s;ettled by the Magi&s;trates Au|thority. So that in plain terms, our Anta|goni&s;ts &s;eem wholly to be influenc'd by Hu|mour and Intere&s;t, and have nothing of Sted|fa&s;tne&s;s either in Principle or Practice.</P>
<PB N="24" REF="15">
<P> One of the Rea&s;ons given by the Que|ri&s;ts for their Prote&s;tation is, becau&s;e the Presbyterian Mini&s;ters have manife&s;tly &s;tated them&s;elves as Parties again&s;t tho&s;e of their Character and Per&s;wa&s;ion, which is a ma|nife&s;t Untruth; for the A&s;&s;embly in 1690, declared, as hath been already &s;aid, that they would <HI>depo&s;e no Incumbents &s;imply for their Judg|ment concerning Church-Government, nor yet urge Re-ordination upon them:</HI> and it is very well known, that not one hath been hitherto turn'd out by any Judicatory Civil or Ec|cle&s;ia&s;tick, but either upon the account of their Di&s;affection to the Civil Government, or &s;candalous Life. So that this Pretence is a meer Subterfuge, and maliciou&s;ly in|&s;i&s;ted upon to render the Church of <HI>Scot|land</HI> odious to the Church of <HI>England,</HI> that &s;o tho&s;e of that Party might have more plau&s;ible Pretexts to &s;olicite his Maje&s;ty a|gain&s;t the Scots Presbyterians. But &s;uppo|&s;ing that it were true, this Objection of theirs will militate as much again&s;t them|&s;elves as again&s;t us, and more; for we could on much better Ground except again&s;t their &s;itting as Judges upon us, becau&s;e they did plainly &s;tate them&s;elves as Parties, and would oblige us to an expre&s;s Renunciation of our Principles; whereas there is no &s;uch thing requir'd of them. But however, if &s;uch Objections be allowed, then the great|e&s;t of Hereticks &s;hall e&s;cape; for they can truly &s;ay, that the Orthodox do manife&s;tly &s;tate them&s;elves as Parties again&s;t tho&s;e of their Character and Per&s;wa&s;ion, and yet this does not incapacitate them from being Jud|ges, no more than tho&s;e who declare them|&s;elves for K. <HI>William,</HI> are uncapable of judging tho&s;e who are accus'd of trea&s;onable De&s;igns to bring in the late K. <HI>James.</HI></P>
<P>But of all things this is the mo&s;t &s;urpri|zing, that the Queri&s;ts &s;hould have the Bold|ne&s;s to appeal to their Maje&s;ties again&s;t them&s;elves; for it's plain that the A&s;&s;embly, whom they decline as Judges, are con&s;titu|ted &s;uch by their Maje&s;ties Authority, and by and with the Advice and Con&s;ent of that Parliament which &s;ettled the Crown on their Maje&s;ties Head: whence it's apparent, that they &s;trike at the very Foundation of the Civil Government, and not only charge their Maje&s;ties with a gro&s;s Piece of Male-admi|ni&s;tration in calling a di&s;orderly and ill-con|&s;tituted A&s;&s;embly to tyrannize over the Clergy, but di&s;own the Authority of King and Parliament in the mo&s;t audacious and in&s;olent Manner that can be, by their im|mode&s;t and &s;editious Prote&s;tation, which in the late Reigns would have co&s;t them their Liberties if not their Lives; for Mr. <HI>James Guthry</HI> was beheaded becau&s;e he di&s;own'd that unlimited Supremacy in Church-Affairs, which the Prelati&s;ts did afterwards grant to their Kings: and the Queri&s;ts do here in plain Terms di&s;own the Authority of both King and Parliament to re&s;tore tho&s;e Pre&s;|byterian Mini&s;ters to their Right, from which they were in a tyrannical and illegal Manner ejected by the Council, and the Bi&s;hops and their Clergy obtruded upon the Church, con|trary to the Inclinations of the generality of the People, as has been a&s;&s;erted by Authority of the pre&s;ent Parliament; and without the Peoples Con&s;ent, Mini&s;ters can never be duly po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ed of Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Juri&s;diction. Chri&s;t makes his People a willing People in the Day of his Power, and does not impower his Amba&s;&s;adors to exerci&s;e a Tyranny over them again&s;t their Wills: &s;o that if any be refractory, and refu&s;e to &s;ubmit to the Cen|&s;ures of the Church, they are to be e&s;teem'd as Heathens and Publicans; and if the Que|ri&s;ts and their Adherents &s;hould continue ob&s;tinate, and refu&s;e to come into the Bo|&s;om of the Church upon &s;uch-ea&s;y Terms of Conformity as are now enjoin'd, all that they do is but to declare them&s;elves no Mem|bers of the National Church, &s;eeing they re|fu&s;e to embrace either her Doctrine or Di&s;|cipline. But by what Laws, Divine or Hu|mane, they and their &s;aid Adherents, who do not make up the tenth Part of the Nati|on, &s;hould take upon them the Name of the National Church, they would do well to in|form the World.</P>
<P>This leads me to another of the Rea&s;ons for their Prote&s;tation, <HI>viz.</HI> That they may
<PB N="25" REF="15">maintain the Liberties of that National Church.</P>
<P>This is truly plea&s;ant, that they &s;hould pretend to be the only Patriots for the Pri|vileges of the National Church, whom the Body of the Church in that Nation have voted to be the great and in&s;upportable Grie|vance of the &s;ame. This is ju&s;t like the late King's Declarations, wherein he pre|tends a mighty Zeal for the Freedom and Liberties of the Nations which have by their Repre&s;entatives dethron'd him for en|deavouring to en&s;lave them. But &s;eeing the&s;e Gentlemen will not allow the Gene|ral A&s;&s;embly to be the true Repre&s;entative of the National Church, becau&s;e they have not Delegats from the Prelatical Curats and their Adherents, they would do well to &s;how us the Deputations which they have from the Body of Prote&s;tants in the Nation to re|pre&s;ent them, and prote&s;t &s;o &s;trenuou&s;ly for their Liberties. And &s;eeing the Queri&s;ts pretend &s;o highly to maintain the Liberties of the National Church, we are willing that the World &s;hould judg whether they or the Presbyterians have maintained them be&s;t.</P>
<P>The Presbyterians ever &s;ince the Refor|mation have pleaded, and often &s;uffered for maintaining the Privilege of the Church to hold her own Courts, and be Judges of the Doctrine and Di&s;cipline of the Church. Whereas the Epi&s;copalians have always &s;ub|jected the &s;ame to their Princes, how cor|rupt &s;oever either in Practice or Principle: and thus K. <HI>Ch.</HI> 2d, though a di&s;&s;olute vici|ous Prince, was <HI>impowered to emit and enact &s;uch Con&s;titutions and Orders concerning Church-Admini&s;trations, Per&s;ons, Meetings and Matters, as he in his Wi&s;dom &s;hould think fit, without &s;o much as taking the Advice and Con&s;ent of his Parliament;</HI> and K. <HI>James</HI> the 7th, though a profe&s;&s;ed Papi&s;t, had the &s;ame Power: So that the National Church had no Privilege neither to will nor to do in any thing con|cerning <HI>Church-Con&s;titutions, Admini&s;trations, Per&s;ons, Meetings,</HI> or <HI>Matters;</HI> for the Pre|lates, with their Clergy and Adherents, had made an ab&s;olute Surrender of them by that Act: whereas the Presbyterians, as Mr. <HI>Guthry</HI> above-mentioned, and others, cho&s;e rather to &s;uffer Death, and to undergo a &s;avage Per&s;ecution, than either con&s;ent or &s;ubmit to &s;uch a manife&s;t betraying of the Privileges of the National Church: and that the Epi&s;co|palians may be &s;en&s;ible what a horrid Piece of Treachery this Surrender of theirs was, let them peru&s;e the following Declaration of their Head K. <HI>James</HI> VI. upon the Subject|matter; which he wrote with his own Hand, and &s;igned and delivered it to the Commi&s;&s;io|ners of the Church of <HI>Scotland</HI> at <HI>Linlithgow, December</HI> 7. 1585.</P>
<P><Q>I for my part &s;hall never, neither my Po&s;terity ought, ever cite, &s;ummon or ap|prehend any Pa&s;tor or Preacher for Mat|ters of Doctrine in Religion, Salvation, Here&s;ies, or true Interpretation of the Scripture: But according to my fir&s;t Act, which confirmeth the Liberty of Preach|ing the Word, Mini&s;tration of the Sacra|ments, I avouch the &s;ame to be a Matter meer Eccle&s;ia&s;tical, and altogether imper|tinent to my Calling. Therefore never &s;hall I, nor ever ought they, I mean my Po&s;terity, acclaim any Power or Juri&s;|diction in the fore&s;aids. &mdash; And after: Chri&s;t &s;aying <HI>Dic Eccle&s;iae,</HI> and one only Man &s;tealing that Dint in a quiet Hole, the Act of Parliament reduceth the Sen|tence for Informality and Nullity of Pro|ce&s;s; not as Judges whether the Excom|munication was grounded on good and ju&s;t Cau&s;es or not, but as Witne&s;&s;es that it was unformally proceeded again&s;t the Warrant of God's Word, Example of all Reformed Kirks, and your own particular Cu&s;tom in this Country. &mdash; And after: I acclaim not to my &s;elf to be Judg of Doctrine in Religion, Salvation, Here&s;ies, or true Interpretation of Scripture. &mdash; And after: My Intention is not to meddle with Excommunication, neither acclaim I to my &s;elf, or my Heirs, Power in any thing that is meer Eccle&s;ia&s;tical, and not <GAP DESC="foreign">, nor with any thing that God's Word hath &s;imply devolved in the Hands of his Kirk. And to conclude, I confe&s;s and acknow|ledg
<PB N="26" REF="16">Chri&s;t Je&s;us to be Head and Law-giver to the &s;ame. And what&s;oever Per&s;ons do attribute to them&s;elves as Head of the Kirk, and not as Members, to &s;u&s;pend or alter any thing that the Word of God hath only remitted to them, that Man I &s;ay committeth manife&s;t Idolatry, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></Q></P>
<P>Now we &s;ee that this Learned Prince di&s;|claims any &s;uch Power to belong to him&s;elf or his Succe&s;&s;ors, as our Prelati&s;ts conierr'd upon his two Grand&s;ons; and he ab&s;olutely declines being a Judg in Doctrine: and yet our Queri&s;ts appeal to their pre&s;ent Maje&s;ties as the &s;upreme Judges without any Excep|tion, though they have been graciou&s;ly plea|&s;ed to aboli&s;h that Act of Supremacy which did con&s;titute them &s;uch; and as there's all the Rea&s;on of the World to believe, upon the very &s;ame Principle that K. <HI>James</HI> di&s;|claimed it. But our Prelati&s;ts will have them to retain it whether they will or not, even again&s;t the Touch of their own Scepter; not out of any Good will to them, as is mani|fe&s;t from the Carriage of the Party &s;ince the Revolution, but meerly to in&s;inuate a malicious Reflection upon the Presbyterians, as if they did not allow their Maje&s;ties their full Power. Whatever Noi&s;e the Faction may make as if they propos'd the&s;e Que|ries meerly from Scruples of Con&s;cience; the Presbyterians are not &s;o ignorant of their Intrigues as they imagine, but know very well that the Hand of <HI>Joab</HI> is in the Affair, and by whom, and what Motives they are influenc'd and manag'd: and though the Point be too tender to be here in&s;i&s;ted on, yet they may plea&s;e to take notice of &s;o much in plain Scots, that they have been di&s;ap|pointed in their De&s;ign of Rabbling, and now they betake them&s;elves to revile the Committee and their Con&s;tituents.</P>
<P>One thing more I cannot pa&s;s over, <HI>viz.</HI> that the Queri&s;ts pretend that they don't decline the Committee's Authority with any De&s;ign to protect &s;uch as are truly guilty a|mong&s;t them, if there be any &s;uch; and yet Mr<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> <HI>Chrevey,</HI> the Clerk, or principal Man of their General Meeting, was judicially cited before the Committee, and did accordingly appear, and made &s;everal An&s;wers in his Cau&s;e before them; which he ought not to have done if he had reckoned them an un|lawful Judicatory: And whether it does not look very &s;u&s;picious, that he and the re&s;t of the Queri&s;ts were afraid of being found truly guilty, when though he had by his appearing and an&s;wering, own'd the Authority of the Judicatory; that yet he and they &s;hould de|cline it, and prote&s;t again&s;t it, before they proceeded to Sentence.</P>
<P>&mdash; And what rea&s;on they have to decline the Authority of the Committee as Parties, will appear further from the In&s;tructions gi|ven by the A&s;&s;embly to the Committee in 1690, with which tho&s;e of the pre&s;ent Com|mittee do without doubt run parallel, <HI>viz.</HI> <Q>That none of them &s;hall be removed, but &s;uch as are either In&s;ufficient, Scandalous, Erroneous, or &s;upinely Negligent; and that tho&s;e of them be admitted to Mini|&s;terial Communion, who upon due Trial &s;hall be found Orthodox, Able, Godly, Peaceable and Loyal; and that &s;uch who &s;hall be found to have received Wrong in any inferiour Judicatory, &s;hould be du|ly redre&s;&s;ed. &mdash; That they be very cautious of receiving Informations again&s;t the late Conformi&s;ts, and that they proceed in the Matter of Cen&s;ure very deliberately; &s;o as none may have ju&s;t Cau&s;e to com|plain of their Rigidity.</Q></P>
<P>And that this Committee, again&s;t whom they cavil, have behaved them&s;elves accord|ing to the&s;e In&s;tructions, appears from their receiving into Mini&s;terial Communion at <HI>A|berdeen,</HI> the Per&s;ons named in the Li&s;t, being &s;uch as were of the very be&s;t of their Party, and of good E&s;teem for their Learning and Piety: Who&s;e Compliance does fret and enrage the factious Queri&s;ts and others; who let them pretend what they will, endeavour to conceal Corruption both in Principle and Practice, under the Covert of their Prote&s;ta|tion.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="part">
<PB N="27" REF="16">
<HEAD>Prote&s;tation of Mr. <HI>William Dunlop</HI> Principal of the College of <HI>Gla&s;gow,</HI> again&s;t Mr. <HI>James Gordon</HI> and others.</HEAD>
<P>I <HI>Mr.</HI> William Dunlop <HI>Principal of the College of</HI> Gla&s;gow, <HI>and one of the Members of the Committee of the la&s;t General A&s;&s;emblie of this Church, Do prote&s;t and declare, That the Paper now given in by Mr.</HI> James Gordon <HI>In|cumbent at</HI> Banchory, <HI>Mr.</HI> Thomas Crevey <HI>Incumbent at</HI> Newhills, <HI>and o|thers their Brethren, may not be regarded, nor any way retard this Committee's Procedor in any of the Affairs committed to them, in re&s;pect that this Commit|tee are clothed with their Power from the la&s;t General A&s;&s;emblie: Which A&s;&s;em|blie was lawfullie indicted and held, and was a free and lawful General A&s;&s;em|blie, conform to all the Laws and Rules of this Church and Nation, whether Ci|vil or Eccle&s;ia&s;tick; and again&s;t either the indicting or holding of which A&s;&s;em|blie, or the Power and Authoritie thereof, none of the&s;e Appellants, nor any o|thers of their pretended Per&s;wa&s;ion, did make any publick Prote&s;t, or give in to the &s;ame, any Rea&s;ons again&s;t their Proceedings, or again&s;t the &s;aids A&s;&s;em|blie's clothing this Committee with the Power given thereunto. And in re&s;pect the &s;aids Mr.</HI> James Gordon, <HI>and others here pre&s;ent, do pretend to come as commi&s;&s;ionat from a collective Body and Meeting of Mini&s;ters; which Body of Mini&s;ters have no Power and Authority by any of the Lawes and Rules of this Church and Kingdom to be &s;uch, nor have given the&s;e Proofs of their Loyalty to their Maje&s;ties of their owning and &s;ubmitting to the Government of the Church now by Law e&s;tabli&s;hed, as the Law doth require. And lykewayes in re&s;pect that the&s;e Appellants, except Mr.</HI> Thomas Crevey, <HI>doe come into this Judicatorie without being lawfullie called thereunto, and doe by their Appeal impugne the lawfull Authoritie of the &s;ame: And as to Mr.</HI> Crevey, <HI>in re|&s;pect that he having been lawfullie cited to appear before this Judicatorie, to an&s;wer for &s;everal things laid to his Charge, hath &s;i&s;ted him&s;elf judiciallie before this Committee, and made &s;everal An&s;wers</HI> in cau&s;a, <HI>and yet</HI> ante latam &s;ententiam, <HI>hath given in this pretended Appeal. And lykewayes in re&s;pect that all the&s;e pretended Appellants give no Rea&s;ons for their Appeal, but put in Queries to this Committee, challenging the Authoritie of the &s;ame by Law e&s;tabli&s;hed: In re&s;pect whereof, and for other Rea&s;ons which I &s;hall humblie offer to this Committee when thereunto required, I do prote&s;t that the Committee may proceed to di&s;cu&s;s the Lybel again&s;t Mr.</HI> Thomas Crevey, <HI>and perform all the other Tru&s;t repo&s;ed in them. And de&s;iring that this my Declaration and Pro|te&s;tation may be recorded in the Regi&s;ters of this Committee, there to remain.</HI></P>
<P>Hereupon I take In&s;truments, <HI>Sic Sub&s;cribitur,</HI> Will. Dunlop.</P>
<PB N="28" REF="17">
<P> AT <HI>Dundee</HI> Mr. <HI>John Chry&s;ti&s;on</HI> Mini&s;ter at <HI>Lyth,</HI> was received into Mini&s;terial Comma|nion, and Mr. <HI>David Ogilvy</HI> at <HI>Aberbrothock</HI> was received as Probationer: Mr. <HI>Henry Scrim&s;or</HI> his Relation to <HI>Dundee</HI> was declared null by virtue of his Demi&s;&s;ion at the Se&s;&s;ion 5th <HI>November</HI> 90, from the Pulpit 11th <HI>November;</HI> and by a Letter to the Provo&s;t. Mr. <HI>George Graham</HI> Incumbent at <HI>Inneraritie</HI> was depo&s;ed for Drunkenne&s;s. <HI>Nota,</HI> He did not appear be|fore the Committee, although he was in <HI>Dundee</HI> that Day; again&s;t which he was <HI>pro &s;ecundo</HI> cited, but on that &s;ame Day he was drunk in the Town, which particular Act was proven before the Committee be&s;yde many other.</P>
<DIV2 TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Affairs at <HI>Aberdeen.</HI></HEAD>
<P>AFter all due legall and u&s;uall Steps of Procedor had been ob&s;erved;</P>
<P>Ye&s;terday being the 8th of <HI>July,</HI> the Elders and Deacons of the new Town of <HI>Aber|deen</HI> were publicklie admitted, and this Day con&s;titut them&s;elves into a Se&s;&s;ion.</P>
<P>Ye&s;terday al&s;o one of the Charges was declared vacant, and Intimation made to all concerned in the Calling of a Mini&s;ter, to meet together on Wedne&s;day next.</P>
<P>Ye&s;terday lykewi&s;e the Church of the old Town (after the reading of Mr. <HI>Francis Ro&s;s</HI> his Sentence) was declared vacant, he di&s;charged to preach any more there; and Intimation made to all Per&s;ons concerned, to give in Li&s;ts of Per&s;ons to be Elders and Deacons.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 TYPE="section">
<HEAD>A Li&s;t of Per&s;ons received into Mini&s;terial Communion at <HI>Aberdeen.</HI></HEAD>
<P>MR. <HI>David Lind&s;ay</HI> at <HI>Drumaik,</HI> Mr. <HI>George Ander&s;on</HI> at <HI>Tarves,</HI> Mr. <HI>William Chalmer</HI> at <HI>Gartley,</HI> Mr. <HI>William Frazer</HI> at <HI>Stairs,</HI> Mr. <HI>William Thom&s;on</HI> at <HI>Auchindore,</HI> Mr. <HI>William John&s;ton</HI> at <HI>Kern,</HI> Mr. <HI>William Garioch</HI> at <HI>Kennethmont:</HI> Who being all in the Synod of <HI>Aber|deen,</HI> are to be erected in a Presbytrie on Wedne&s;day next. Mr. <HI>Patrick Innes</HI> at <HI>Bamff</HI> in the Synod of <HI>Murray,</HI> is al&s;o received. Mr. <HI>John Auchterlonie</HI> at <HI>Fordoun</HI> hath applyed, but is delayed till the Committee return to <HI>Dundee,</HI> becau&s;e he is in the Synod of <HI>Angus.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 TYPE="section">
<HEAD>A Li&s;t of tho&s;e who&s;e Pa&s;toral Relation to the re&s;pective Churches following, was declared null, they di&s;charged to preach any more in them, becau&s;e they had no Title or Right, but what a Call without the Interpo&s;ition of the Autho|rity of any Church-Judicatorie gave them; <HI>viz.</HI></HEAD>
<P>MR. <HI>Alexander Jami&s;on</HI> and Mr. <HI>Andrew Dalgarnoe</HI> Competitors for <HI>Tyrie,</HI> Mr. <HI>Francis Ro&s;&s;e</HI> at old <HI>Aberdeen,</HI> Mr. <HI>Robert Forquhar</HI> at <HI>Eccle&s;greig,</HI> Mr. <HI>Andrew Honyman</HI> Pro|bationer at <HI>Kinne&s;s,</HI> Mr. <HI>Alexander Thom&s;on</HI> at <HI>Terntric,</HI> Mr. <HI>John Turin</HI> at <HI>Inch,</HI> Mr. <HI>James Whyte</HI> at <HI>Strichen,</HI> Mr. <HI>James Chein</HI> at <HI>Raithen,</HI> Mr. <HI>John Hou&s;ton</HI> at <HI>Lonmay.</HI></P>
<P>Mr. <HI>William Mackay</HI> is tran&s;ported from <HI>Dornoch</HI> to <HI>Cromdale.</HI></P>
<TRAILER>FINIS.</TRAILER>
</DIV2>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="part">
<PB N="1" REF="17" MS="y">
<HEAD>The <HI>Repre&s;entation</HI> of the Committee of the A&s;&s;embly for the North of <HI>Scotland,</HI> to the Privy-Council of that Kingdom.</HEAD>
<HEAD TYPE="sub"><HI>With &s;ome</HI> Queries, <HI>by another Hand, propo&s;ed to &s;uch Church-of</HI>-England-<HI>Men as are Advocates for the Scots Epi&s;copalians.</HI></HEAD>
<P>THE publi&s;hing of the following <HI>Repre|&s;entation,</HI> &amp;c. &s;o &s;uddenly after the <HI>Re|flections upon the Scots Epi&s;copal Queries and Pro|te&s;tation,</HI> may perhaps be look'd upon by &s;ome as an Effect of intemperate Heat: To &s;uch I &s;hall only &s;ay, That the unwearied Endeavours of our Adver&s;aries to mi&s;repre|&s;ent the Church of <HI>Scotland,</HI> and the Inte|re&s;t which they make among&s;t tho&s;e of the highe&s;t Dignity of the Church of <HI>England,</HI> to &s;olicite their Maje&s;ties again&s;t the Scots Presbyterians, and lay &s;uch Mi&s;repre&s;enta|tions before them as Matters of Truth, ren|ders it highly nece&s;&s;ary to publi&s;h the fol|lowing Paper, that the World may have a farther ta&s;te of the di&s;ingenuous Practices of the Scots Epi&s;copalians, and that the mo|derate Church-of-<HI>England</HI>-Men may them|&s;elves be Judges, Whether tho&s;e of their Communion, who &s;olicite their Maje&s;ties again&s;t the Church of <HI>Scotland,</HI> do not therein prefer their own peevi&s;h Humour to their Maje&s;ties Intere&s;t?</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="part">
<HEAD>To the Right Honourable the Lord High Chancellor, and remanent Lords of their Maje&s;ties Privy-Council of <HI>Scotland.</HI> The Com|mittee of the General A&s;&s;embly for the North,</HEAD>
<OPENER>Humbly &s;heweth,</OPENER>
<P>THAT whereas the la&s;t General A&s;|&s;embly of this National Church, did grant Commi&s;&s;ion to a com|petent Number of Mini&s;ters and Elders for vi&s;iting the North, impowering them to purge and to plant Churches on the other &s;ide the River <HI>Tay;</HI> and to do and de|termine in &s;everal other Matters, according to the Tenour of their Commi&s;&s;ion, which was drawn up and adju&s;ted to the &s;atisfaction of their Maje&s;ties Commi&s;&s;ioner pre&s;ent in the A&s;&s;embly in all Points. Conform where|unto we having made a Progre&s;s through the North; and in all our Actings, which were &s;incerely de&s;igned for the Advancement of the Go&s;pel, the Quiet of the Church, for the promoting of their Maje&s;ties Intere&s;t, and the Publick Peace kept within Bounds pre&s;cribed to us. Yet the Refractorine&s;s of &s;everal Per&s;ons ju&s;tly cen&s;ured by us, with &s;ome other Occurrents, wherein we conceived the Authority of their Maje&s;ties Laws and Government, as well as that of the Church, to be deeply concerned, do oblige us to lay before your Lord&s;hips the Particulars following.</P>
<PB N="2" REF="18">
<P> <HI>Fir&s;t;</HI> That notwith&s;tanding &s;everal Mi|ni&s;ters have, after gro&s;s and uncontroverted Scandals objected and proven again&s;t them, been cen&s;ured with Depo&s;ition, yet they pre&s;um'd to Preach, and exerci&s;e their Mi|ni&s;terial Function, in contempt of all Au|thority, both Civil and Eccle&s;ia&s;tick: Such as Mr. <HI>Geo. Graham,</HI> late Incumbent of <HI>Inne|rarity,</HI> depo&s;ed for habitual Drunkenne&s;s, ag|gravated with mo&s;t &s;candalous Circum&s;tan|ces. Mr. <HI>John Le&s;ly</HI> at <HI>Rothes,</HI> depo&s;ed for habitual Swearing, and horrid Cur&s;ings and Imprecations. Mr. <HI>James Smith</HI> at <HI>Killimore-We&s;ter,</HI> for habitual Drunkenne&s;s; and Mr. <HI>George Seaton</HI> at <HI>Auchterle&s;&s;e,</HI> for habitual Drunkenne&s;s, &s;upine Negligence, and mali|cious &s;tirring up of Variance and Strife a|mong his Pari&s;hioners and Neighbours.</P>
<P><HI>Secondly;</HI> That though upon exact trial, it was found that &s;everal Mini&s;ters and Prea|chers had intruded into Churches vacant, not only again&s;t good Order, but to the hin|drance of the regular planting of the &s;aid Churches, and therefore were di&s;charged to preach any more there until orderly ad|mitted, yet they continued to preach &s;till, in contempt of the Sentences pa&s;t again&s;t them; &s;uch as Mr. <HI>James Gordon</HI> Younger, at <HI>Foverane;</HI> and others: Which Contempt ought &s;o much the more to be noticed by your Lord&s;hips, that now through the Care of this Commi&s;&s;ion, who have taken in thir|teen Di&s;&s;enting Mini&s;ters to the Presbyte|rian Mini&s;ters formerly in tho&s;e Bounds, Presbyteries are duly e&s;tabli&s;hed within convenient Precincts; &s;o as all the Churches vacant in the&s;e Parts may, upon an ea&s;y Ap|plication, be regularly provided.</P>
<P><HI>Thirdly;</HI> That &s;everal Mini&s;ters deprived by your Lord&s;hips for their Di&s;affection, do neverthele&s;s, contrary to your Lord&s;hips Sentence, and to the Act of Parliament 1690, whereby they are ordained fir&s;t to qualify them&s;elves in the Terms of the &s;aid Act, continue to preach in vacant and other Churches, in contempt of the &s;aid Act: Such as Mr. <HI>John Matters,</HI> late Incumbent at <HI>Ceres,</HI> intruding him&s;elf upon <HI>Elliot.</HI> Dr. <HI>John Nichol&s;on,</HI> late at <HI>Errol;</HI> Mr. <HI>Will. Ra|tray,</HI> late at <HI>Cargill;</HI> Mr. <HI>David Ander&s;on,</HI> late at <HI>Perth:</HI> All intruding upon <HI>Kil&s;pindy,</HI> pre|&s;uming to preach there, and at other Pla|ces.</P>
<P><HI>Fourthly;</HI> Notwith&s;tanding of the Abo|lition of Prelacy, and the &s;ettling of Pre&s;|byterian Government in this Church, yet neverthele&s;s Per&s;ons have received Orders from &s;ome of the late Bi&s;hops, and there|upon u&s;urped the Mini&s;terial Function, and intruded into Churches: Such as Mr. <HI>John Auchterlonie</HI> in <HI>Aberlenno,</HI> and Mr. <HI>Gideon Gu|thry</HI> Diaconat, in <HI>April</HI> la&s;t.</P>
<P><HI>Fifthly;</HI> That notwith&s;tanding our Com|mi&s;&s;ion was legally given and authori&s;ed by the General A&s;&s;embly of this National Church, e&s;tabli&s;hed by Law, and counte|nanced by their Maje&s;ties High Commi&s;&s;io|rer; yet at <HI>Aberdeen</HI> twelve Mini&s;ters, where|of one only was cited before us, took the boldne&s;s to give in a Paper, under the Title of <HI>Queries,</HI> plainly que&s;tioning, not only our Authority, but the Authority of the Law whereby the Government of this Church is &s;ettled: And though they got a very moderate and rational An&s;wer, yet they prote&s;ted again&s;t us, and appeal'd from the Commi&s;&s;ion, and that in the Name of the whole Mini&s;ters benorth <HI>Tay,</HI> though they &s;hewed no Warrant from them. And further, they appeal'd to their Maje&s;ties Protection, albeit never &s;o much as cited as &s;aid is, and that they them&s;elves have not &s;o much as taken the Oath of Allegiance to entitle them to this Protection. So that the Contrivance was evidently Factious, to &s;tir up and animate all &s;uch as are di&s;affected a|gain&s;t the Government, both Civil and Ec|cle&s;ia&s;tick. And thus at <HI>Innerne&s;s,</HI> four|teen other Mini&s;ters did officiou&s;ly give in a Paper of Adherence to the <HI>Aberdeen</HI> Pa|per, and made their Prote&s;t and Appeal in a ruder manner.</P>
<PB N="3" REF="18">
<P> <HI>Sixthly;</HI> That when the Committee did &s;ummon Witne&s;&s;es, particularly again&s;t Mr. <HI>Andrew Abercromby</HI> at <HI>Tarlen,</HI> a Per&s;on infa|mous through all that Country, by rea&s;on of his &s;candalous and flagitious Life, yet the Witne&s;&s;es were kept back; which may be of bad Example, unle&s;s your Lord&s;hips pre&s;cribe &s;ome compul&s;ory Method in time coming.</P>
<P><HI>Seventhly;</HI> That notwith&s;tanding that Pre&s;|byterian Government is &s;ettled by Act of Parliament, and the Exerci&s;e thereof lodged in the Hands of the Mini&s;ters and Elders therein &s;et down, yet many of the Epi&s;copal Clergy in the North, do u&s;urp Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Authority, and keep their own Meetings, where they licen&s;e Preachers, order Admi&s;&s;ion of Mini&s;ters, &s;upply Va|cancies, and do other Acts of Order and Di&s;cipline, contrary to the Law, and tend|ing to the e&s;tabli&s;hment of a Schi&s;m in the Church, and to the vi&s;ible Prejudice of their Maje&s;ties Intere&s;t.</P>
<P><HI>Eighthly;</HI> That the Havers of Keys of &s;e|veral Vacant Churches, did refu&s;e to make them forth-coming to the Committee; which was both again&s;t Law, and your Lord|&s;hips frequent Acts and Orders: And thus the Keys of the Kirks of <HI>Elliot</HI> and <HI>Kil&s;pindie</HI> were refu&s;ed by .... Havers thereof.</P>
<P><HI>Ninthly;</HI> That in all Churches where the Wor&s;hip of God is performed, there ought to be no di&s;orderly Interruption, upon any Pretence what&s;oever: Yet in the Church of <HI>Old Aberdeen,</HI> &s;everal in&s;olent Per&s;ons have pre&s;umed to interrupt the Wor&s;hip of God, by offering at their own Hand another Piece of Wor&s;hip mo&s;t un&s;ea&s;onably, to the ma|nife&s;t profanation of the Publick Wor&s;hip, and great di&s;turbance of the Congregation, who gave no Compliance to the &s;aid Di&s;|order: Which being manife&s;tly Factious, and in all probability fomented by Per&s;ons di&s;affected, doth not only occa&s;ion great Scandal, but is very like to grow to higher Degrees of In&s;olence if not timely re&s;train|ed.</P>
<P>And &s;eeing that the happy Succe&s;s that we have had, thr&ocirc; the Ble&s;&s;ing of God, in the&s;e Parts, by taking in and gaining a good Num|ber of Mini&s;ters, and di&s;po&s;ing others to fol|low their Example, and by recommending our Moderation to all the Well-affected in tho&s;e Parts, and &s;ettling &s;everal Churches and Presbyteries, to the great Benefit of the Go|&s;pel, and the Advancement of their Maje|&s;ties Intere&s;t: Which doth in a manner wholly depend upon your Lord&s;hips inter|po&s;ing in the Premi&s;&s;es, and giving unto the Church and its Authority, that Coun|tenance and A&s;&s;i&s;tance which the Law or|dains, and your Lord&s;hips know to be &s;o nece&s;&s;ary.</P>
<P>May it therefore plea&s;e your Lord&s;hips to take the Premi&s;&s;es into your &s;erious Con&s;i|deration, to apply &s;uch due Remedies to the above-mentioned Evils as the Law allows, and your Lord&s;hips &s;hall find mo&s;t proper, e&s;pecially &s;ince we can confidently aver, that any Oppo&s;ition or Di&s;countenance we met with in tho&s;e Parts, was only from Per&s;ons notoriou&s;ly di&s;affected to their Maje&s;ties Go|vernment, and principally upon that Ac|count; and that where-ever Mini&s;ters, par|takers of the pre&s;ent Church-Government, are &s;ettled in the North, or have acce&s;s to preach in tho&s;e Bounds, there's a &s;en&s;ible growing of Affection among the People, to the Civil as well as to the Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Go|vernment.</P>
<CLOSER>And your Lord&s;hips Petitioners &s;hall ever pray.</CLOSER>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="part">
<PB N="4" REF="19">
<HEAD>Some <HI>Queries</HI> propounded to &s;uch Church-of<HI>-England-</HI>Men as are Advocates for the Scots Epi&s;copal Clergy.</HEAD>
<P N="1">1. WHether the King and Parliament of <HI>Scotland</HI> have not as much Power to &s;ettle &s;uch a Government in the Church of <HI>Scotland,</HI> as is mo&s;t &s;utable to the Incli|nations of the People, as the King and Par|liament of <HI>England</HI> have to &s;ettle &s;uch an one in the Church of <HI>England?</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. And if &s;o, How it comes to pa&s;s that they offer to meddle in Affairs belonging to the Church of <HI>Scotland,</HI> and &s;olicite to have a Party &s;till continued, not only in Benefices, but in the Exerci&s;e of Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Juri&s;|diction, who refu&s;e to qualify them&s;elves according to Law?</P>
<P N="3">3. Whether they would not highly re&s;ent it, if the Church of <HI>Scotland</HI> &s;hould &s;olicite for &s;uch things in favour of the Di&s;&s;enters from the Church of <HI>England?</HI></P>
<P N="4">4. Seeing the Church of <HI>Scotland</HI> does no &s;uch thing, whether Scots Men have not ju&s;t Cau&s;e to &s;u&s;pect that tho&s;e Engli&s;h Men who are &s;o bold as to interpo&s;e in Affairs that are already determined by the King and Parlia|ment of <HI>Scotland,</HI> have a mind to revive the old Preten&s;ions of our Crown's being held in Fee of theirs, and that our Church ought to be &s;ubject to theirs?</P>
<P N="5">5. Whether or not, &s;eeing that Matter hath been determined long ago by the Point of the Sword, Pre&s;cription of Time, and the Union of the Crowns, the Kingdom of <HI>Scotland</HI> may not expect as much Ju&s;tice from the King and Parliament of <HI>England,</HI> again&s;t &s;uch Incendiaries, if they &s;hould make Application for it now, as they ob|tain'd again&s;t others of the like &s;ort, both in Church and State, within the Memory of Man?</P>
<P N="6">6. Whether the moderate Church-of-<HI>England</HI>-Men have not rea&s;on to &s;u&s;pect that Part of the Plot reaches them, &s;eeing they were al&s;o per&s;ecuted under the Notion of <HI>Whigs</HI> and <HI>Trimmers</HI> in the late Reigns, when the Scots Presbyterians were under the Hatches, e&s;pecially &s;eeing the Scots Epi&s;co|palians are generally in the late King's In|tere&s;t <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 span"> &s;ome of their greate&s;t Pa|tro<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 span"> have lately writ to the King, <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 span">, to their fal&s;e Repre&s;entation of Affa<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="4 letters">, <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 word"> tho&s;e who endeavoured to have &s;uch Men only in Places of Power and Tru&s;t, as concurr'd in the Murder of my Lord <HI>Ru&s;&s;el,</HI> and &s;uch other worthy Church-of-<HI>England</HI>-Men in the late Reigns?</P>
<P N="7">7. Whether it's po&s;&s;ible that they can be &s;o far impos'd upon, as to think that the Scots Epi&s;copalians decline Conformity to Presbyterian Government in Point of Con|&s;cience; when it appears by Parl. 2. Act 1. <HI>Car.</HI> II. that it was the Opinion of the Party then, that the ordering of the Government of the Church did properly belong to his Maje&s;ty and Succe&s;&s;ors; and that the Re|pre&s;entatives of the Party did offer to &s;ub|mit to, and concur with Presbyterian Go|vernment, by their <HI>Formula</HI> in 1690, if their &s;igning of the <HI>Confe&s;&s;ion of Faith</HI> could have been di&s;pens'd with?</P>
<P N="8">8. Whether the Scots Epi&s;copalians be not guilty of very gro&s;s Di&s;&s;imulation, in pretending a Deference to the Civil Govern|ment, when they act &s;o contemptuou&s;ly a|gain&s;t the Acts of Parliament and Council in &s;o many things, as appears by the Com|mittee's <HI>Repre&s;entation?</HI></P>
<P>This being judged &s;ufficient at pre&s;ent, tho&s;e who de&s;ire a farther Account of the Party, are referred to the An&s;wer to the <HI>Scots Presbyterian Eloquence,</HI> the Continuation of it, the <HI>Scots Epi&s;copal Innocence,</HI> and the <HI>Reflections on their Queries and Prote&s;tation,</HI> all &s;old by the Book&s;ellers of <HI>London</HI> and <HI>We&s;t|min&s;ter.</HI></P>
<TRAILER>FINIS.</TRAILER>
</DIV1>
</BODY>
</TEXT>
</EEBO>
</ETS>
