The Case of the ACCOMMODATION Lately proposed by the BISHOP of DUMBLANE, To the Nonconforming Ministers examined.  
Wherein also The ancient Prostasia, or Episcopus Praeses, is considered; and the Solemn League and Covenant occasionally vindicat.  
Together With a Copy of the two LETTERS Herein reviewed.  
Whereunto also is subjoined an APPENDIX In Answer to a Narrative of the Issue of the Treaty anent Accommodation.  II. COR. XIII. V. VIII. For we can do nothing against the Truth, but for the Truth. 
Printed in the 〈◊〉 〈…〉   

The PREFACE.  
ALthough there be nothing more assured, both in the acknowledgement and experience of all, then that the most important events of this worlds concerns, do much depend upon, and are frequently turned by, the observation or neglect of certain midses and expedients only, yea greatly, recommended by this their subservient aptitude and influence; yet, on the other hand, it is no less evident, that in the matters of God, and of our souls everlasting wellbeing, even the Ordinances of life, by him thereto appointed, are, for the most part, slighted by an abstracting undervalue: But, as it is beyond all controversy that the full persuasion and just estimation of these high and glorious ends, whereunto they are designed, would quickly intend our care about all things and circumstances thereunto ordered in an agreeable proportion, and also extend our commanded circumspection to a fidelity even in the things that are least; so it is only unseriousness and insincerity in the main, together with the diversion of other temptations, that occasioneth all the indifferency, contempt and mockery, wherewith we find the simplicity & meanness of Gospel-institutions commonly entertained; and hence it is, that not only they are despised, and perverted by the vain pretenders to liberty, gallantry, decency, civil obedience or the like; But also they are all contending for them, under the specious affectations of more calm, sublime and serene contemplations, and the saucy reproaches of hot disputations and bitter wranglings is endeavoured to be eluded, and the things vilified into empty formalities, and thereby an inlet made, in the righteous judgement of God, to the delusions of men's inventions.  
How much of these truths may be remarked in the ensuing discourse, I shall not here anticipat by an unnecessary reflection; the point I aim at is to exhort every one, desirous to be faithful to God in the midst of this evil generation, wherein the strange variety and opposition of events that we have seen do suggest such strong temptations, and interest hath not more seduced men's minds unto an irreligious lukwarmness, than their Spirits are most perniciously debauched by wanton and wild cavillation, to study, in the first place, to have the mind enlightened with the true knowledge of the most High sovereignty, and most pure holiness of God, the most wondered love and marvellous condescendence of our Lord jesus Christ, and the great perfection of the holy Law, and excellency of all Gospel Ordinances; and next to have the heart established through the grace of God, by suitable faith and fear cleaving unto God with the whole soul and strength, and hating every vain and false way: Surely he that is thus qualified shall never be moved; but as he will be of a good, sound, and quick understanding in all things, so in these so much tossed debates, whereby the most part of this backsliden and light generation, at best only seeking therein the gratifications of their own curiosity, are many times sadly stumbled unto greater irreligion, he will easily discern and lay hold upon the will and way of the Lord, being convinced that the meanest of his matters are not of a lower appearance, then of a high and in estimable tendency.  
To such therefore it is that I recommend and submit the ensuing disquisition; (if the unconcerned world do laugh, if the foolish mock, & the wicked rage, yet, I hope, my work is with my God, & its fruit shall be to all the lovers of our Lord jesus Christ in sincerity) being moved by the excessive silence of the one, & the immoderate boasting of the other of the two parties engaged in this affair, to interpose for truth thus unequally treated, that by this poor essay it may be, in some measure, vindicat, and a check given to the pride and swelling words of the Adversaries, is all my aim. As for these of our opposites who may find themselves more nearly touched in the few sheets subjoined, if they think me therein transported to any excess I do assure them, that it is from the ungrateful violence of their provocation, and not at all the choice of my own inclination: I acknowledge also, that there are other Papers emitted by them, than the two that I do particularly review and annex, specially a long Letter supposed to be. G. B's. and written by way of amplification of the former: But seeing I do fully discuss his Text, & after trial discover that his excellent & noble friend's gold, as he speaks, is but dross, I hope he will easily pardon my not prosecuting a further fruitless search into what he calls his own ore. And thus I dismiss my Reader unto the perusal of what follows.   

READER,  
Before thou read be pleased to correct with a pen these Errata.  
PAg. 18, Lin. 29. read, probabilities. p. 19 l. 13. r. it's. p. 21. l. 29. r. Rule. p. 23. l. 15. r. an. p. 24. l. 13. r. preach. p. 28. l. 27. r. ordination. p. 29. l. 17. r. the p. 52. l. 2. what. r. with. p. 55. l. 17. with. r. which. p. 68 l. 31. r. revolutions. p. 68 l. 35. this, r. his. p. 72. l. 30. r. cussed. p. 73. l. 30. expressed, r. expelled. p. 74. l. 25. was, r. were. p. 79. l. 29. r. wisdom. p. 88 l. 6. preserve. r● prefer. p. 92 l. 18. he. r. the. ibid. l. 28. Master's r. Majesty. p. 106. l. 23. your, r. their. p. 109. l. 18. r. change. ibid. l. 29. r. enjoyed. p. 114. l. 13. r. piece. p. 115. l. 23. pretended, r. prepended. p. 118. l. 18. r. distinct.   

The Case of the ACCOMMODATION, Lately proposed by the BISHOP of DUMBLANE To the NONCONFORMING MINISTERS, Examined.  
Wherein also The ancient Prostasia, or Episcopus Praeses is considered, and the Solemn League and Covenant occasionally vindicat.  
SUch have been the high and stiff oppositions, and no less contrary and important consequences of Prelacy and Presbytery within this Church, that as their Accommodation may be very desirable to all our temporising pursuers of peace; so certainly it doth no less challenge the sincere and strict search of all the followers of Truth. Upon which consideration, having been induced to a more particular notice of the rise, procedure and issue of this affair, I am resolved, for the impartial vindication of the Lords ordinance of Government in his House, and our engadgements thereto; and in the conscience of that known precept, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to exhibit my observations upon it, with the calmeness and candour suitable to such an inquiry. And therefore, omitting to preface any thing upon the first proposal of this Treaty, and the methods of its prosecution that have since been practised, I shall take its terms from their most assured warrant, viz. the Articles lately given in at Paseley, to the Mimisters there convening, under the title, and of the tenor following,  

Articles proposed by the Bishop of Glasgow to the dissenting Brethren.  
1. THat if the dissenting Brothers will come to Presbyteries and Synods, they shall not only not be obliged to renounce their own private opinion anent Church-government, and swear or subscribe any thing thereto; But shall have liberty, at their entry to the said meeting, to declare and enter it in what form they please.  
2. That all Church affairs shall be managed, in Presbyteries or Synods, by the free vote of Presbyters, or the major part of them.  
3. If any difference fall out, in the Diocesian Synods, betwixt any of the Members thereof, it shall be lawful to appeal to a Provincial Synod, or their Committee.  
4. That Intrants being lawfully presented by the Patron, and duly tried by the Presbytery; there shall be a day agreed on by the Bishop and presbytery, for their meeting together for thei● solemn ordination and admission: at which there shall be one appointed to preach; and that it shall be at the Parish Church, where he is to be admitted; except in the case of impossibility, or extreme inconvenience: And if any difference fall in, touching that affair, it shall be referable to the Provincial Synods, or their Committee: as any other matter.  
5. It is not to be doubted, but my L. Commissioner his Grace will make good what he offered, anent the establishment of Presbyteries and Synods: and we trust his Grace will procure such security to these Brethren for declaring their judgement, that they may do it without any hazard, in contraveening any Law: and that the Bishop shall humbly and earnestly recommend this to his Grace.  
6. That no Intrant shall be engaged to any Canonical Oath or Subscription to the Bishop; and that his opinion, anent that Government, shall not prejudge him in this: but that it shall be free for him to declare.  
These being the conditions offered, in order to the intended Accommodation, it is evident, that for a due understanding of their import, we ought first to know what is the nature of these Meetings called Presbyteries, Synods, and Provincial Assemblies, to which the Brethren are invited: And for that end, we must not only transpose the fifth Article to the first place, and supply it with such other probabilities as may be had; but also arise a little higher, to remember the changes that we have lately seen; and from what, and to what they have carried us: For, seeing our joining in the present Presbyteries and Synods, with, or under Bishops, as they are offered to be reduced, is that which is principally demanded of us, it is so little possible, without this previous examination, rightly and fairly to define the case in contratraversie, that I can hardly acquit the preposterousness and deficiency in the Articles, of a greater error than a common mistake.  
The thing then which comes first to be noted in point of fact, and which I shall represent with that truth and impartiality, that I hope none shall deny it, is, that this Church, having in the Year 1638. abrogat and abjured the Government of the Kirk by Bishops, and set up Presbyterian Government in its purest simplicity and parity, we together with the renewing of the National Covenant, solemnly engaged, Constantly to adhere unto, and defend the true Religion then established, in Doctrine, Worship and Government, contrary to all the novations and corruptions from which it was at that time reform; and to labour by all means, for the purity and liberty of the Gospel, as it was established and professed before these novations. After which time the Church, in our acknowledgement, did enjoy a Ministry and Government truly Ecclesiastic, committed to them by, and depending upon our Lord jesus Christ alone, as King in Zion, and Head of his Church. Thereafter, by an Act Rescissory, it was declared and statute, by both King and Parliament, in the Year 1640. and 1641. agreeably to the Oath formerly taken, that the sole and only power and jurisdiction within this Kirk, did stand in the Kirk of God as it was then reform; and in the General, Provincial and Ptesbyterial Assemblies, with the Kirk Sessions established by Act. P. 1592. & in like manner, by the Solemn League and Covenant, entered into in the Year 1643. the whole Kingdom doth again swear to the preservation of the Reformed Religion of the Church of Scotland, in Doctrine, Worship, Discipline and Government; and to extirpate Popery, Prelacy, Schism, Superstition, profaneness, and whatsoever shall be found contrary to sound Doctrine, and the Power of Godliness: Which engagement, we are bound all the days of our life zealously and constantly to continow in, against all opposition; and to promove the same, according to our power. Thus matters stood, both in obligation and general observance, until the Year 1661.  
At which time, the Parliament then sitting, having prepared their way by exalting of the prerogative, in opposition to, and for the overthrow of the practices of bygone times, specially that of entering into Leagues and Bonds; they at one blow rescind all Parliaments after the year 1633. and the Government of the Church, being thereby wholly deprived of the civil sanction, and its continowance, by another Act, permitted and declared to be only precarious, during the King's pleasure: Afterward, all Ecclesiastic meetings in Synods, Presbytries and Sessions, are, by proclamation the 9 january 1662. discharged, until they should be authorized and ordered by the Archbishops and Bishops then nominat by his Majesty, upon their entering into the Government of their respective Sees. By which means, the former Government being overturned and razed unto the very foundation, at least as much as the wit and power of man could effectuate, the next thing that offers, is the new structure and frame that is raised in its place: And in the year 1662. the Parliament again meeting, by their first Act for re-establishing of the Government of the Church by Bishops, laying it for the ground, That the disposal of the external Government of the Church doth properly belong unto his Majesty, as an inherent right of the Crown, by virtue of his Supremacy, They do thereby redintegrat the estate of Bishops, not only to their places in Parliament, and their accustomed dignities and privileges; but also to their Episcopal function, Presidency in the Church, and power of Ordination, Censures and all Church-discipline to be performed by them, with the advice of such of the Clergy as they should find to be of known loyalty and prudence. And, for removing of all scruples, the Parliament doth further rescind all former Acts, by which the sole and only power and jurisdiction within this Church, doth stand in the Church, and its Assemblies; and all other Acts whatsomever, giving any Church-power, jurisdiction or Government to its Office-bearers or Meetings, other than that which acknowledgeth a dependence upon, and subordination unto the Sovereign Power of the King as Supreme; and which is to be regulated and authorized, in the exercise thereof, by the Bishops and Archbishops, who are to be accountable to his Majesty for their administration: And moreover, by the same Act, the Act 1592. (whereby Presbyterian Government was anciently confirmed, and which, by virtue of the above mentioned Act Rescissory, did now in so far, by the Act 1612. stand rescinded) in respect that it doth also limit the King's prerogative to be without prejudice or derogation to the privilege that God hath given to the Spiritual Office-bearers in the Kirk, concerning heads of Religion, Heresy, Excommunication, Collation, or Deprivation of Ministers, or any such like Censure, specially grounded in the Word of God. This Act, I say, 1592. is now for this reason totally annulled, in all the heads, articles and clauses thereof: from which Act of Restitution, although the nature of our present Church-constitution may be very obviously gathered; yet there are two other also, to the same purpose, of which I cannot but take notice. The one is that concerning a National Synod, wherein his Majesty, by virtue of his Supremacy, doth more absolutely appoint and determine upon the manner and members thereof, then if it were a mere civil Court, unquestionably dependent upon his Royal Authority; reserving to himself, aswell the proposal, as the final approbation of all matters to be therein treated. The other is the late Act 1669. asserting the Supremacy, whereby the Supreme Authority over all persons, & in all causes Ecclesiastic, is so fully declared to appertain to the King, and that by virtue thereof, he may dispose upon the Government and Persons Ecclesiastic; and enact concerning the Church's meetings and matters therein to be proposed, as he shall think fit, that a more absolute power in any thing can hardly be devised in his favours.  
These Acts lying so well together, I could not but lay them forth to a joint consideration. And from them, I suppose, it will be very evident, that the work of the last revolution, was not only an invasion made upon the Church's Government, by the setting up of Bishops, and their usurpation over Presbyteries and Synods, as happened in their former introduction, preceding the year 1612: But that the alteration made, is plainly fundamental: and that, by his Majesty's assuming all Church-power to himself, as the proper right and prerogative of the Crown, without so much as pretending, with the Pope, a Commission from jesus Christ for this effect; and conveying the same by these communications alone, which he is pleased to dispense; and to such persons and meetings as he thinketh good to appoint, and maketh to himself accountable; there is not so much as that Genus of Ecclesiastic Government recognosced by Presbytery, as only fountained in, and derived from our Lord as Head of the Church; let be its specification from our Classical form, at present to be found in being in this Church.  
But it may be said, that I seem to make a difference betwixt the former and the latter erection of Episcopal Government in this Church; and yet when Bishops were brought in, in the year 1606. the King's prerogative was, by the then Parliament, first enacted, and by the next Act, their restitution is thereon also founded; and in like manner, by the Act 1612. Presbyteries and Synods are turned to exercises of the Brethren, and Diocesian visitations; and the power of ordination, deposition, and excommunication is given to the Bishop: and to complete all, by the same Act, the Act 1592. was also rescinded: So that it appears, that betwixt the former practices, and the late establishment, there is no great disparity. 'Tis answered, the apparent resemblance of the things objected, is nevertheless accompanied by such real and material differences, that it doth only the more notably evince the strangeness of the methods, and nature of the present establishment, beyond all that the same designs in former times could suggest. King james was indeed bend for Prelacy, as all do acknowledge; but by seeking thereby to qualify and oversway the Government of the Church, in effect to subvert all Government, given by our Lord unto his Church, is an absurdity which his better understanding did prudently forbear; and nothing, save either the mystery of this growing iniquity, or the precipitancy of our times could have produced.  
Now that this is the true state of the difference betwixt our, and the former times, the particulars following will easily evince. And first, it is true, the Parliament 1606. doth, by their first Act, declare the King's prerogative, but only upon the narrative of the accession of the Crowns of England and Ireland, and in general, over all estates, persons, and causes, without the least derogation to the explication made in favours of the Church by the Parl. 1592. Whereas, in our days, this Supremacy hath been asserted, declared and exercised, in order to Ecclesiastic Persons, meetings and matters, not only far beyond any thing pretended to in civils'; but above all that ever was arrogate, either by Pope, or temporal Potentate. Next, by the second Act of the forementioned Parliament 1606. the Estate of Bishops is indeed restored; and that upon the ground of the King's prerogative: but to what? To ecclesiastic power, presidency, jurisdiction, etc. Fie! Not at all; but only to their former honours, dignities, prerogatives, privileges, livings, lands, teinds, rents, etc. And chiefly and especially against the Act of annexation. 1587. These, though unjustly bestowed, were yet proper subjects for a King and Parliament: as for other things, purely ecclesiastic, they rightly judged them to be without their line: Whereas, by the late Act. 1662. the King, with consent of the Estates, restores the Bishops, both to the same things, and also to the exercise of their Episcopal function, presidency, power of ordination, and others above rehearsed: declaring himself to be the proper and supreme Head, whence all Church-pover doth flow, and to whom the Bishops ought to be accountable: An attempt so impertinent to secular Powers, and subversive of the very subject matter of Ecclesiastic government; that the former times, not from any greater tenderness in these things, but merely from a clearer knowledge of their inconsistency, did not once dream of: and therefore, in the third place, King james, who knew well enough, that neither did his prerogative extend to the proper power and jurisdiction of the Church, nor could this be thereupon founded; and that for him to assume the disposal and dispensing thereof, was in effect to destroy it; although by virtue of his Supremacy, he restored the Bishops to their honours, temporalities and possessions; yet, as to the power Ecclesiastic by them acclaimed, he applied himself to compass the same only by the suffrage & determination of Church-assemblies: and accordingly we see the Act, Parliament, 1612. giving unto Bishops their Church-power and jurisdiction, not to be founded in, nor flow from the Supremacy; but to proceed simply, by way of ratification of an Act of a General assembly, made two years preceding; and by the same Act. 1612. The Act 1592. establishing aswel the Protestant Religion, as Presbiterian government, and also limiting the prerogative, as I have said, is only rescinded, in so far as the same is derogatory to the Articles then concluded: whereas, the King, with consent of Parliament, by the Act 1662. laying down the Supremacy for the basis, and ascrybing to himself the origin of Ecclesiastic power, restores the Bishops, in the same manner, as if they were his own Commissioners and Delegates. And to the effect the Supremacy may transcend all, the Act 1592. is totally rescinded, without so much as a reserve for the Protestant Religion; as is above declared. Fourthly, in former times, whatever were the errors and wrongs, either of Church, or State, or both, in the bringing in of Bishops; yet this is very certain and important, that the Church-assemblies, at first, convened by warrant of the Churches intrinsic power, and after, confirmed by the Parliament 1592. were not upon the change discontinued; but honest men did therein maintain both their right and possession, except in so far as the same were invaded, and they hindered by the Bishops their prevalency: whereas of late, not only were the former Presbytries and Synods raised & dissolved, but the new meetings, now convened in their place, were appointed to sit down, as they sold be authorized & ordered by the Bishops and Archbishops; who thereafter, are, by Act of Parliament, restored and impowered by the King, as supreme, over Persons and Causes Ecclesiastic, and declared Arbiter by right of his Crown in these matters: So that it is evident, that they both are called in his name, and do sit and act, by virtue of a power, acknowledging a subordination unto, and dependence upon his Sovereignty; by reason whereof, they are also to him made accountable. I grant, that for better concealing the mystery of this Supremacy & Prelacy, the present meetings were set up, for the most part, in the same bounds, & much under the same form and name with the old presbyteries and synods: But seeing their precarious dependence on Bishops, with the Bishops their proper & absolute subordination to the King, as Supreme over the Church, is undeniable from the above cited Act. 1662. that therefore the present Church-government, as it is freqently called in the late Acts of Parliament, so de facto, is his Majesty's government, and not that of our Lord jesus, who hath not invested him therewith, either by deputation or surrender, is evident above exception. Neither are these things so, only in the law and appointment, as is by some alleged; no, the frequent examples of Bishops, their deposing and suspending in Synods, after having asked, merely pro forma, the advice of a few next to them, without the vote of the whole; their renversing the deeds of Presbyteries, & controlling whole Synods by themselves alone, with his Majesty's granting of the High Commission, impowering Seculars to appoint Ministers to be censured by deposition and suspension, as well as ecclesiastics to punish by fining, consigning & imprisoning; his removing and placing Bishops at his pleasure; and his late granting a Commission of oversight or episcopacy, for the Diocese of Glasgow, to him who mostly scrupled at a Patent of the Bishopric, because of its temporality: These examples, I say, do clearly bring up our practice the full length of all enacted.  
Having thus explained the condition of our present Ecclesiastic constitution, in its authority, principles and practices, wholly different from any model that ever was seen in this Church, I think, were it not for the clearness of method, I might leave the description of the present Prebyteries and Synods, to the Readers own ingenuous collection: but tò render my discourse the more easy, I say, that the Presbiteries and Synods, which are now so termed amongst us, are meetings for Church-matters, convened by his Majesties call, acting by his authority, in a precarious dependence upon the Bishops, and absolute subordination to the Supremacy: and this definition, is so manefestly the result of what is premised and composed as it were of the Act of restitution, and supremacy, and proclamation so often mentioned, that none can deny it. Neither is it the present question, whether we may simply join in these meetings or not? For seeing, that not only this conjunction would be an acknowledgement of the supremacy, nothing different from, yea rather worse than the sitting in the High Commission, and an active submission to, and owning of Prelacy in its highest usurpation; But even the Articles of Accommodation, by offering a mitigation, do evidently suppose it to be inconsistent with Presbyterian principles: It is clear, that a simple unqualified Union, with and in these meetings, is not the case of the present debate.  
The point therefore that comes next to be examined, is, whether or not the Articles do indeed contain such condescensions and conditions, as may fully relieve us of our just exceptions? Which leads me to take notice of the Fifth Article (as I said before) in the first place, as that which appears to be most direct to this purpose: And the contents of it are; 'Tis not to be doubted, that my L, Commissioner his Grace will make good what he offered, ane●● the establishment of Presbyteries and Synods; and we trust, his Grace will procure such security to these brethren for declaring their judgement, that they may do it without any hazard in contraveening any Law● and that the Bishops shall humbly and earnestly commend this to his Grace. These are the terms of the Article, and for all that I have yet heard, I am not so doubtful of the Comissioner's performance, as I am still uncertain of what was offered: The Brethren, who conferred in the Abbey, told us, that Presbyteries were offered to be set up, as before the Year 1638. and that the Bishop should pass from his Negative voice, and so forth: But what may be the import of the first part of this offer, or how far it may conduce to the clearing of our Consciences, I confess I am still in the dark. That which the dissenting Brethren do, and every true Minister of jesus Christ ought to seek after, is a Court, meeting in the Name, and acting by the authority and rules of our Lord and Master: Any other Court called by the King, and acting by an authority derived from the Supremacy, If in matters properly Ecclesiastic, is but a complexed usurpation against Christ, whose the Government is, both in the Constituent and actors: If in Civils, than it is wholly without the Minister's Sphere, and not to be meddled in by them. Now that before the 1638. the Presbyteries and Synods then sitting, were, for the most part, our Lords Courts, in so far as they were by Succession the same with these, which at first, by warrant of Power by him given to his Church, did set up in his Name, and were not depraved from his institution by the Bishops their usurpation, and the subsequent corruptions, is not doubted. But these being lately discharged and discontinued, & I am sure, not intended to be again set down, either according to the first warrant and rule, or as they were purged after the 1638. but plainly by virtue of the Supremacy, and in resemblance to that conjunction of Prelacy and Presbytery, that was by Law established before the 1638. and consequently, both upon a wrong founda, tion, and in their most corrupt condition, I can not so much as● apprehend, what ease to scrupling consciences can be herein designed. I have indeed heard it sometimes alleged, for the reason of our present withdrawing, and in that di●●ering from the practice of our Predecessors under the last Bishops, that the then Presbyteries and Synods did meet by warrant of Law, which now they want: But this reason, is in its terms so extrinsic to that which a true Minister of jesus Christ ought mainly to regard, and in truth so groundless, the Act 1592. confirming the proper right of these meetings, being by the Act 1612. (though not totally, yet in so far as it was derogatory to the Articles therein set down,) rescinded and made void, that I cannot but judge both scruple & solution offered, impertinent. If therefore there be true dealing intended, and any real respect to conscience in this matter, it is evident, that it is neither by the re-authorizing of abrogat and abjured corruptions, nor yet by any new devised frame, by virtue of, and depending upon the Supremacy, that we can be cleared: But the only proposal to any good purpose that can be made in this behalf, should be of Synods and Presbyteries, founded upon our Lords warrant, and his Church's privilege; and consequently to restore them, either as they were first allowed by the Act 1592. or which is all one, in the condition wherein they were dissolved in the Year 1661. with an abolition of all inconsistent Acts and practices.  
But it may be said, if we be reponed to the same Estate wherein our Predecessors were, how can we prove disconforme in our practice? 'Tis answered, the dissolution and discontinuance of true Presbyteries with this new erection, first appointed to be authorized by the Archbishops and Bishops, and then settled upon the foot of the Supremacy, do so evidently difference the cases, according to what is already more fully declared, that this objection is of no moment. And if it be urged, that as a restitution repones against a discontinuance; so, if Presbyteries and Synods be really set up, it is but a peevish nicety to stick upon the formality how the same is done: the return is easy, viz. that it is not questioned, but a full and fair restitution doth indeed repone; and therefore, if it would please his Majesty to restore the Church, to its meetings and Privileges which it enjoyed in the Year 1661● the pretence of the Supremacie● for accomplishing the things if not really made the foundation of the Church's power, contrary to the very nature and being of the right restored, would prove no long demur. But as for the restitution offered, seeing it is not adjusted to our distress, but expressly referreth to a juncture, which was in itself very corrupt, and needed reformation; and whereunto, if bottomed upon the Supremacy, and not continuing on the old foundation, the faithful men of these days, had doubtless never joined; it is but ane empty conceit, no ways reaching the question in hand. From which ground, it is also evident, that as we have good reason to declare, that we might have continued in these judicatories, had they not been once raised and settled again upon a new basis; and that though a Bishop had come and obtruded himself upon us, we might have sit still, after a free protest given against his usurpation; so, G. B● endeavour, in a letter, supposed to be from him, persuading to this Accommodation, to represent this as a methaphysical nicety, of no more value, than the empty difference of sitting still, though a Bishop come in, and of sitting down again when a Bishop is already there; and yet acknowledging, in the same passage, the case to be different, if the Court & constitution of the judicatory be not the same, doth manifestly bewray the Doctor's gross inadvertency; & that the more to be regretted, that he is not afraid to obtest us, as before God, to answer for our sticking at such a punctilio, when yet he himself, in a short but untrue supposition of the samness of the former and present Episcopal courts, insinuateth a very obvious reason, rendering the difference very material and important.  
To be plain therefore, seeing the Supremacy, as at present established, hath clearly everted and swallowed up all true Ecclesiastick-government; and the Presbyteries and Synods now bearing that name, are only its unwarrantable Conventicles; unless that these prevailing floods of this prerogative be abated, and the true establishments of the government of the Lords house discovered; I do not see where the disire of any to be innocent can rest, or how the Lords faithful servants can be satisfied, and comply with this part of the overture. I might here add, that seeing there may be in some cases just reason for withdrawing, aswel because of the quality of the members, as the nature of the constitution, the rectification of the latter can as little in our case as in any be respected as a full ground of satisfaction: but the defectiveness of their Articles will more properly afterward come to be considered.  
And therefore I shall now go to the First, to see what is thereby further offered: and here we find it proposed, That, if the dissenting brethren will come to Presbyteries and Synods, they shall not only not be obliged to renounce their own private opinion, anent Church-government, and swear and subscrive any thing thereto; but shall have liberty, at there entry to the said meeting, to declare & enter it in what form they please. If I were inclined to use sharpness, I might on just ground say, that this Article, certainly to be understood of entering to sit & act, & not only to protest & testify, doth contain no better Salvo for our exceptions, then what, if admitted, will equally allow the same access to the Pope's Conclave, or any other the most unwarrantable and corrupt meeting upon earth; is as evident, as that a jesuitick reservation of opinion, and declaration without any effect, or a protestation contrary to fact, is thereby judged a sufficient exoneration. But to come to the purpose closely, I affirm that the Synods and Presbiteries, here invited to, are not truly such, but merely nominal and pretended: being in effect Courts authorized by Bishops, and subordinat to his Majesty in matters purely Ecclesiastic, over and about which he himself hath no such power. And for the former part of the assertion, the Acts & other things by me premised do abundantly clear it. As for the latter, that the King hath no such power in and over the Church; it being uncontroverted in the Presbyterian persuasion, and the Supremacy, made the ground of the abovementioned Act of Restitution, being to them a greater cause of offence, than any of these difficulties in this matter of conjunction with Presbyteries & Synods intended by the Accommodation; it was the part of the Accommodators, either by conviction or condescendence, to have removed it. However I may not digress; only I am assured, if these three things be considered, which I am ready to demonstrat against whatsoever Opponent; (1.) That this Ecclesiastic power is the sole prerogative of jesus Christ, whereof the administration was committed by our Lord to his Church, when no Magistrate was a Member thereof; and that upon the Magistrates becoming Christian, there is no ground adduceable whereupon it could accrease to him: (2.) That all the power of the Magistrate is, under God, from the People, and in such things over and about which the original power was to them competent, to which this Church-power can in no sort be reckoned. (3.) That all the extraordinary interpositions of good Kings and Emperors, in matters of Religion, did no ways flow from any inherent right or prerogative they had conversant in these matters; but were the pure product of necessity, sustained by the righteousness of the work, & deficiency of the more proper means. These things, I say, being duly considered, I am very confident, that all the pretensions of the Supremacy, will very quickly vanish: and therefore it inevitably follows, that, seeing the King's Supremacy is a high usurpation against our Lord & Master, all Courts depending thereon, and acknowledging the same, & partaking therein, what ever opinion a man do reserve, or whatever declaration be made anent it, must also be rejected.  
But here there ariseth a great noise and clamour, what! are the present Presbyteries and Synods no Presbyteries and Synods? then are the present Ministers no Presbyters? But their is no such haste; neither have these things any further connexion, then that the present Ministers are not Presbyters, in so far as the same denotes a power of ruling committed by jesus Christ, which truly I think in ingenuity they can not deny; specially seeing, that although they hold themselves to be Ministers by mission from Christ; yet they do nevertheless acknowledge their power of Ecclesiastic Government and jurisdiction to be from the King, on whom they grant that the Ministry, as to other things, doth not in such a manner depend: Whereupon it evidently followeth; that if the power of government, do as well and in the same manner flow from jesus Christ, as the power of order (as the Schools speak) doth; and that thereby true Presbyteries and Synods do only subsist; then, these meetings, which recognosce his Majesty as Supreme for and in the exercise of the power which they acclaime, can no more be truly such, than he who, by virtue of his Sovereign's mission, would pretend himself to be a Minister. But what need of more words; if the present conform Ministers, and there meetings, have disclained jesus Christ for their immediate Head, in matter of Government, and own no power thereof, but what acknowledgeth a dependence upon, and subordination to his Majesty as Supreme; wherewith nevertheless he himself is not at all vested; and if on the other hand, we do disallow all Church-Government, and meddlings and meetings thereof, which do not hold their commission and warrant from Christ alone, as the Head of the Body; what concurrence can we make, in on and the same Assembly? Or by what salvo may my sitting and acting be justified in a meeting, in the power whereof I hold it unlawful to partake? For my part, since, in the matter of Ecclesiastic Government, they do not hold the true Head, but have betaken themselves to another, to whom they do refer, & are accountable for all their power; if we, who in Conscience do both detest this usurpation, and disclaim all share in any power, save what our Lord hath committed unto us, desire to be excused from these Assemblies; I think, until they first convince us of our mistake in these things, they cannot rationally blame us for Separation. And therefore, what ever may be the effect of an entry, qualified either by declaration or protestation, in order to the freeing of the party from an apparent constructive accession, to certain accidental corruptions that may be in a meeting, to which he is otherwise obliged to join; yet sure I am, in this case, where the very constitution itself is so unwarrantable and corrupt, that none can actively partake therein, without sin; this remedy here offered is altogether insignificant.  
The next thing that here occurs, is, that although this reservation of opinion and declaration permitted, could be a salvo, as to the evils of the constitution; yet, without doubt, there is a consideration to be had, in such conjunctions, of the persons also with whom it is to be made. There may be an Assembly, nay a Presbytery or Synod of evil doers, which we are bound to hate; and even the Assembly of the wicked who enclosed him, and pierced his hands and his feet, wanted not a specious name, yea it was the house of his friends: sure no man will think that a simple protestation may warrant constant presence in these cases; but rather incline, with jeremiah, to leave and to draw from an assembly of treacherous men. What for assemblies the present Church-meetings are, I can be no more tender, than it is superflous to utter: only this I will say, that if it be once granted, that such may be the condition of a meeting, by reason of the quality of its members, that no declaration can warrant any fellowship therein; I am certain that the subsumption, viz. that such are the Courts to which we are invited, may be, to the satisfaction of all unbiased men, upon these sufficient grounds of notorious perjury, intrusion, profanity and insufficiency, unquestionably made out.  
But I proceed to the next Article, bearing, That all Church-affaires shall be managed, in Presbyteries and Synods, by the free vote of Presbyters, or the Major part of them. This is indeed the main & principal condescendence: and it is to this place, that, aswel for the satisfaction of such Brethren as possibly will not so easily, at first, admit of the foregoing reasons, as for a full answer to all that can be said for this Accommodation, I have reserved to discourse upon it at more length, and on all fair and probable Suppositions. In supplement therefore of this Article, and to take it in the most advantageous sense that the Proposers can desire, I add, that consistently therewith, it seems the Bishop is to be reduced to a constant Moderator: whence in prosecution of my declared purpose, waving any further exceptions against the nullity of the present Presbyteries and Synods, I clearly state the Question thus. Whether a constant Moderator, or fixed Proeslos, for term of life, in Church-meetings, be a thing in itself lawful? And how far it is by us admissible? And what compliance we may have ●or it? And because there are some papers gone abroad from the Bishop of Glasgow, as is supposed, upon this subject, and that the current of the speeches at Pasely whereof the same strain; I conceive, for rendering of the debate more certain, it will not be amiss, that I bring them to a particular and exact review.  
And in the beginning of these Papers, we find it asserted, That Episcopal Government, managed in conjunction with Presbyters in Presbyteries and Synods, is not contrary either to the rule of Scripture, or the example of the primitive Church; but agreeable to both. That this position doth hold forth no more than the lawfulness of an Episcopus Praeses, & that upon negative grounds, giving the asserter the easier part of defence, is obvious to the first observation. To have affirmed an obligation to this model, though the Author's choice had not been convenient: the thing which hath been, it is that which shall be, and an agreeableness to Scripture and antiquity, is for the time a very colourable pretention, and all that the Author dare adventure to affirm: But that as much may be said for a Presbyterian parity, exclusive of this presidency; I think our adversaries themselves will not deny: And it is very evident, that it is the thing they have no inclination to redargue. Which advantage, lying equally and fairly on our side, and being confirmed by possession strengthened by an Oath, and to the present conviction of all (mostly arising from the contrary effects of Episcopacy) sealed with the seal of good Gospel fruits, one of the great evidences produced by Paul for his Apostelship; how much it doth impugn the late change, and justify the aversion and noncompliance of all good men therewith; all rational men may discern. But, seeing our cause is not as theirs, leaning only to negative probalities, and the power wherewith it is supported, to deal clearly in this matter, though we do not pretend to a positive, express, and particular Scripture-precept, as well against the presidency, as for the parity pleaded; yet, that we have an equivalent divine warrant, more pregnant than what in other particulars is acknowledged for such, even by our Opposites: The following heads do plainly evince.  
And first, That jesus Christ King in Zion, sitting and ruling upon His Throne, to whom all Power is given, and who is the Head of the Body, when He ascended on high, sent forth His Apostles to gather, feed, and rule His Church, promising to be with them to the end of the World; and thereby hath appointed a Government in His house, suitable to these holy ends for which it is designed, is not more evidently founded upon the Scripture-grounds insinuat, then firm in its connexion and inference.  
2. As the Apostles and their Successors were the only perpetual Pastors ordained by our Lord; (for as for the mission of the Seventy, what ever allusions after Ages, according to their then model, did draw from it, without all peradventure, accòrding to is own tenor, it did expire before our Lords suffering) so they were by him constitute in an exact parity, as Brethren: and because of this equality, and the nature of their Ministry, our Lord forbids among them all distinction of authoritative Superiority, the very name of Rabbi and Master then abused, and all ambition & affectation of these or any other elating dignities and titles; but they are only commanded to outstripe and exceed on another, in that diligence and humility recommended to them in that common service, whereunto they were destined.  
3. According to this command given, so they conversed and behaved in the Church of God, without the least vestige of imparity, either in power or presidency: Nay on the contrary, with a manifest equality, except it be in some notes of apparent pre-eminence in these, by men esteemed inferior, expressly, as it seems recorded, to counterbalance the vanity of ambition of after Ages, who in favour of others, might imagine a Superiority. And such are the principal resort made to james, his moderating rather then Peter's in the meeting at jerusalem, Paul's resistance to Peter, and the right hand of fellowship given to him by james, Cephas and john, and the like.  
4. The pastors appointed by the Apostles being their successors, both in their ordinary power and blessing, whatever might be the inequality betwixt them and the Apostles, either from the immediacy and extent of the Apostles their mission, their infallible assistance and greater eminency of gifts, or by reason that the Apostles were the Lords chosen witnesses, and authors of conversion to most of them whom they ordained; yet, as to the perpetual and ordinary power given to, and transmitted by them in the Church, it is evident from Scripture, that, in that, they neither claimed nor exercised either superiority or presidency over other Ministers. Hence it is, that as they call and account them their brethren, partners, fellow-labourers, and themselves fellow-elders with them; so we find, that what in on place Paul ascribes to the laying on of his own hands, in another he attributes to the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery: And the same Paul, who was not a whit behind the very chiefest Apostles, receiving a solemn mission from a Presbytery, not consisting of Fellow-apostles, but of other Prophets and Teachers. Gifts there fore were indeed divers and unequal, and employments also were various in the days of the Apostles, according to the then exigence of a growing spreading Church: but that either among the Apostles themselves, or them and the Pastors by them ordained, or among the Pastors themselves there was the least imparity, in respect of that ordinary and standing power continued in the Church, as the passages mentioned do plainly confirm the negative; so there can no instance be adduced from Scripture in the contrary.  
We know Timothy, Titus, & the Angels of the Churches, are much talked of, as the first superior Bishops: and to this it is as easily reponed.  
1. That there is nothing enjoined or recommended in Paul's Epistles to Timothy, which is not proper for every Pastor, unless what is evidently referable to his office of an Evangelist there expressed.  
2. The command given to Titus to ordain Elders, was by way of express commission, and not in the least exclusive of the concurrence of other Elders where they might be found in the place.  
3 That it is in these very Epistles, more than any where else in Scripture, that both the names of Bishops and Elders are promiscuously used, and the thing and office thereby signified held forth to be the same.  
And lastly, that the known use & elegancy of the singular number for the plural, with the figurative speech and tenor of the seven Epistles in the Revelation, do no more allow the Angels, representing the Pastors, than the Stars signifying the same thing, nay or the Candlesticks the Churches, to be taken for single persons. But for further clearing of all these and like objections, I refer the Reader to the many Authors, by whom these things are more fully handled.  
These grounds then being all undoubtedly Scriptural, with what confidence can it be demanded, where doth the Scripture hold out a parity among Ministers? Or how can it be affirmed, that the Episcopus Praeses contended for, specially with his necessary presence in Ordination, as we will afterwards hear, is not contrary, but agreeable to the word of God? By all which it appears, that as our Presbyterian parity is plainly warranted, both by general Gospel-rules, and very express instances contained in Scripture; So the apparent lawfulness of any other form of man's devising, can be no justification thereof.  
But it is objected, If this ground be rejected, how will we maintain, or where will we find an express command or rule for our own model of Kirk-sessions, Presbyteries, Syonds Provincial and National, with a Commission of the Kirk, in their several dependencies and subordinations, and the changing of the moderator in these meetings, excepting that only of the Kirk-sessions, wherein the Minister doth constantly moderate; for without this express Kule, a Bishop or fixed Precedent may very well consist with that frame, which we conten● for: And it is really and actually so at this present in this Church?  
In answering this objection, I must begin with its latter part, which is so directly contradicted by the present constitution, both in its legal establishment, and known exercise, as I have already proven, that I marvel how it could escape any person of ordinary understanding. As for the main thing objected, having from the Scripture asserted the warrant of our parity, its difficulty is easily satisfied: for seeing that by Divine institution the Church is erected into one Society, and officers in an equal parity for its oversight and Government thereto appointed; And seeing that in every concession, the things natural and proper to what is conceded must be understood to be therein imported; the liberty and power of common counsel, together with the subordination of the parts to the whole, do thence necessarily result. The premises of which argument, being so consistently composed of Scripture and reason thereon dependent, I need not here enlarge in any explication. Sure I am, he who duly perpendeth these uncontrovertible Scripture-truths; That the Church is gathered into one body; that the Apostles together, the Pastors and Elders together are incharged with its oversight and rule; that the Spirit of the Prophets is subject unto the Prophets; and that where two or three are gathered together in the Lords Name, there he is in the midst of them; It is impossible he should remain doubtful of the Divine warrant and authority of our meetings. Conform to which truths and principles, we not only find, in the Acts of the Apostles, the Church governed by common counsel, but the same Meetings and Counsels inspired and directed by that humility, love and harmony, that no more than a chair man for the time, & no sixed moderator can therein be discerned. If these grounds were not both solidly and evidently conclusive of all necessary for me to prove, I might easily, without either worming or straining (as our moderatists phrase it) adduce and make out from Scripture precedents more exactly correspondent to our forms: But seeing the right and Privilege of common Counsel for Government, in order both to the whole and certain of the partest is by Scripture-practi●e obviously held forth; its extension to all the parts, and their subordination to the whole, doth so naturally and necessarily ●ollow, tha● I judge it superfluous to engage myself further into our adversaries scrupulous quibblings.  
Now, as for the Commission of the Kirk, whereof Scripture warrant is also required, seeing we do not hold it to be an ordinary Church-judicatorie; but do only regard it as a delegation from the preceding National-assembly elicit by extraordinary exigences, and precisely accountable to the next ensuing, It's right is so certainly parallel to that of every Committee, appointed by any meeting for dispatch, that unless it were alleged, that this power of commissionating is by Scripture inhibit; it must of necessity be understood to be founded in the same warrant with the Assemblies, from which it doth flow & receive its confirmation. I contend not, but our observance in practice might have had its own failings in this point: but seeing the excess in this matter, if any was, did probably flow from the mistake of a suppo●sed expediency; the evidence of its warrant and right use, by such and error in fact, cannot at all be impugned.  
But the ministers their being constantly moderators in Kirk-sessions, among the Elders joined with them for Discipline, is that which our adversaries do urge, as a great advantage for proving the lawfulness of the fixed Moderator in Presbyteries and Synods, and our inconsequence in denying the same. In the fond conceit of which argument, it hath been, and is so frequently by them inculcat, that here is a Presbyter, having a fixed presidency among presbyters, that I am sure it may ●ustly nauseat or move to laughter any indifferent observer.  
To begin therefore with this childish emphasis, taken from the term Presbyter, and the calling of the minister and parochial-elders, both of them presbyters; such indeed they are: but seeing the scripture doth warrant the office of our Ruling Elder, & also attributeth several other names to Ministers, agreeable to the main labour, and to these Parochial Elders, only that of Presbyters or Elders; and yet on the other hand, the classical Assemblies, principally consisting of Ministers, are commonly called Presbyteries: If use, for distinction, hath appropriate to these Parochial-elders the name of Elders, rather than that of Presbyters, what folly is it to think, that a contrary usurpation of names can be of any import; or wherefore do not our adversaries, if they have such a complaisance for these conceits, tell us further what a qstrange thing it is to see a Presbytery (for so a Kirck-session may well be termed) consisting only of one Minister and all the rest Laiks, as they speak, and withal reflect upon these more pungent retorsions nearer Home, viz. that in their way, a Bishop pretends to a-Superiority or presidency over many Bishops, and a single Presbyter must have the pre-eminence over his Fellow-presbyters.  
But leaving these fopperies, and taking words according to the determination of custom in such cases, in answer to what is material in the objection, I say (1.) That where there are two Ministers in a parish, they moderate in the Session by turns. (2) Where the Session doth consist of one Minister, both a preaing and a ruling Elder, and the other Elders of the Congregation, who are but his helpers in discipline, his different quality, with the double honour allowed to him by the Apostle, doth abundantly determine the moderatorship in his favours. (3.) If a Minister, who is the Pastor and teacher of the whole flock, do preside amongst the Elders of a secondary order, joined to him for his assistance; will it therefore follow, that one Minister should fixedly preside over many, in the same order with himself, and equally concerned in all the affairs of the meeting? What Logic can knit together such inferences?  
Having thus demonstrat from Scripture-pr●cepts and practices, and firm rational conclusions thence deducted, the command of our parity, with the warrantableness of our Courts and all their gradations, I am very confident, that we do thereby fully satisfy all the obligation to bring a clear command for these judicatories and their subordinations, which our affirming them to be of unquestionable divine right, & institutions undoubtedly flowing ●rom the Kingdom of jesus Christ in his Church, and the only lawful government thereof, do lay upon us. As for what the author allegeth against us, that we do affirm them to be the very Kingdom of Christ upon Earth, and the absolutely necessary, aswel as only lawful government of the Christian Church: what ever tumour may appear in such expressions, over and above the account I have given of the matter, it is his own devising, on purpose contrived, that he may represent us as high talkers, above the asserters of other forms; and yet we not only know that the commenders of Episcopacy, as the only true ancient Apostolic government of the Church, do speak at as high a rate, to say no more; but that their acting in its behalf doth indeed surpass all other measures, I am certain will easily be by all acknowledged, who consider how Presbytery is the only butt against which their malice & persecution is leveled, and that into this malice, all the zeal they ought to have against popery, profanity, atheism and irreligion seems to be converted; which stirring activity may also in this same Author, who, being in his Ministry rather a recluse monastic, is for its sake become a very busy Prelate, most obviously be instanced.  
Now, as by the grounds which I have adduced for our Presbyterian parity, the contrary repugnancy to Scripture rules of a fixed presidency is sufficiently held out; so I would gladly know, from what shadow of probability the Scripture agreeableness thereof is by our Author asserted. For my part, unless it be in the instance of a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Diotriphes, I know not where the least vestige of it is to be found. And therefore I say in the next place, in opposition to the second point affirmed, vice the non-contrariety and agreeableness of this Episcopus praeses to the example of the primitive Church, that though, in the second and third Centuries of the Church, this Prostasia could be more evidently discovered; yet, seeing the better pattern of the more pure and ancient times do hold out no such thing, but an equal parity among the Elders or Overseers (Bishops) of the Church of God, leveled by humility, and ordered by love and concord; and that this presidency did, in its tendency and progress, become the rise not only of aspiring Prelacy, but of the monstrous Papacy, it is evident that it is a mere humane invention, equally unwarrantable and dangerous. And here I might show how little light we have, even in the acknowledgement of some of our Adversaries, from History, or any other pure and credible Record of the Church's constitution in the Centuries mentioned; and that the more near to the days of the Apostles, and more uncorrupted any such testimony is found, as that of Clemens and Ireneus, (for as for Ignatius Epistles, even these of them that are of the best repute, I am sure no impartial Reader, who considers either the worth of the person, or the simplicity of the times, or the stile suitable to both, will judge them to be from such an Author) the more they homologat with Scripture in the Synonomie of Bishop and Presbyter, and the sameness of the office thereby signified: And I might also make it appear, how that ●or all the alteration and advance made towards Prelacy in the succeeding Centuries; yet the Fathers in these times, chiefly jerom, did affirm the same truth of the Apostolic times, and the Age immediately succeeding: But as I am too well persuaded, that pride was the first and most subtle and active corruption that did invade the Church; so I can very easily grant that a Protocathedria was thereby very early either occasioned, or usurped: and therefore omitting to insist, how that partly by design of the ambitious, partly by mistake against the factious it seemeth to have been introduced, I shall rather endeavour, by a few observes, so to discover the evil of its rise, and its worse tendencies, that in this above all, all men may perceive the perinciousness of humane inventions, how specious soever, when superadded to Gospel truth and simplicity.  
And first I say, that the alledgeance made for this prostasia, as conducing much to order and the cure of divisions, in so far as it respects its fixedness is a vain & empty pretence: for, seeing this fixedness as such importeth no more than the suspending of the more certain change of an annual or other termly election, unto that more uncertain one of term of life, and that sometimes this lat●er may notwithstanding happen to be more frequent than the fo●mer, it is obvious to any man's calm and serious reflection, that it is merely to the presidency, and not at all to this controverted quality in itself considered, that the advantages commended can be ascribed: And therefore as it is certain, that, the concern of order being once duly provided for by a suitable moderation, the more obnoxious the person moderating is to the suffrage of the Society, the less hazard of an ensuing abuse or usurpation; So it is very evident, that this superfluous fixedness, importing a certain degree of exemption, could only in the end prove a foment of pride and gratification of ambition, as the event itself to plainly verifies: of which if any man do yet doubt, let him consider Rome's Papacy, that under this pretence, fortified by Ierom's testimony, Cuncti (nempe Apostoli) claves regni caelorum accipiunt, tamen inter duodecem unus eligitur, ut capite consti●uto schismatis tollatur occasio, did not only arrogat to itself the Primacy, but to this day doth thereby veil its tyranny. I grant that power is a sovereign antidote against contentions and divisions: But if we measure it out by our own wisdom, with a regard only to this exigence, neither respecting the Lords warrant, nor the sufficiency of gifts and countenance of his blessing, it is very manifest that this rule may quickly lead us to surmount the Papacy and its implicit faith; and never suffer us to cease, until, by an absolute subjection, both Truth & Conscience be swallowed up of ignorance and stupidity. Let us therefore above all things in the matters of God study his own way: if we neglect this sure and excellent ordinance of a self-denied and lowly Gospel ministry, with these prescriptions of truth, humility and love● given to us as the remedies against all disorder, schism and heresy, and indulge to our own devices, where will we subsist? I need not represent the subtlety and presumption of men's delusions, specially for promoting that mystery of iniquity that worketh in Ecclesiastic aspire: If our blind probabilities were sufficient to authorise the means of peace and order; there is no question, carnal reason would again insinuat, according to the pretensions that raised the Papacy, and the frequent suggestions of our times in behalf of the Magistrate, that the proper and assured way to a firm establishment were to resolve either man's belief, or his obedience into the uncontrollable determinations either of the Pope, or of the Prince's But as the dispositions of the Sovereign and only wise God are not to be fathomed, let be regulat by our narrow and weak capacities; so ought we always to revere these peremptory and severe restraints, where with he hath bounded the darrings of vain reason, not so much as to think in these things above what is written; specially in the case in hand, when not only manifest disappointments, as to the ends pretended, but the worst of consequences have by a very visible progress openly discovered both the folly and prejudice of this presidency under question.  
For evincing whereof I observe .2. that as it is not unto this fixed presidency as such, but unto the more abounding grace of God, under these frequent and grievous persecutions wherewith the Church was then exercised, that the singular order, unity and charity of the primitive times is to be ascribed; So the gradual advance of this Prostasia, together with the joint and perpetual declines of true knowledge & piety, & concurring increase of pride, contention, irreligion & superstition, are very pregnant evidences of its vanity. I need not note that the first times to which this presidency can lay any claim were the purest; its first setting up, as most acknowledge, was in the second Centurie, in a simple Protocathedria to the Signior Presbyter: Shortly thereafter it turned to a Prostasia given by election; and then still ascending, even under the discountenance and persecution of the Heathenish powers and people, it did notwithstanding, what by wresting the election in many places from the Presbyters, and what by usurping the power of ordinantion and censures, advance to a very high degree of Prelacy: as is abundantly confirmed by what may be gathered from the Records of these times, and especially by good Cyprian his words to his Presbyters Epist. 6. A primordio Episcopatus mei, statui nihil sine consilio vestro privata sententia gerere: whereby as it were in opposition to the then corrupt custom of other Bishops, he plainly insinuateth his contrary resolution. Now what, under this progress of the Prostasia, still pretending to be a remedy, was the growth of the evils both of contentions, schisms and heresies (specially in the intervals of the Church's sufferings, wherewith these several degrees were manifestly attended, needeth not to be enforced by many instances. That of Victor as to superstition, contention and schism, who for a different observation of Pasch (a weighty point forsooth) did excommunicate the better half of the Christian world, may stand for a thousand: and as for Heresies, their catalogues are almost endless: But though its rise under so great pressures, doth very convincingly argue the strong and subtle Spirit working in its elevation; yet it was from the time of Constantin's Empire, and the rising of the Sun of prosperity upon the Church, that it did yet more evidently begin to discover itself in its proper colours: And from this period indeed it was, that, more and more exalting and explicating its powers, it ceased not, until through proud and fervid contentions of the prelates amongst themselves for precedency (more dangerous by far then all the petty contests that could arise among Presbyters) and these still varnished with he pretexts of unity, peace, and apostolic example, but really animat by pride and ambition, and accompanied with covetousness, luxury, neglect of truth, abounding of errors, superstition and irreligion, it at length arrived at the papacy; which, by its tyrannous infallibility and implicit faith, did in the end indeed bring forth, in the destroying of true knowledge and conscience, an apparent peace and unity, most like to that indifferency in the matters of religion, and surrender and abjection of conscience, which the abettors of our supremacy do, under the same plausible names and pretences, so much endeavour to introduce. This being then the growth, progress and product of this Prostasia & its lying pretence of remedying & preventing schism (in effect nothing else then the suitable revelation of that mystery which at first did more latently begin to work under its less discernible appearances) what judgement is to be made of it, I leave to every man's ingenuity.  
If it be objected, that although the ensuing of Prelacy and Papacy, and all their evils upon the ancient Episcopacy may give a colour to the premised discourse; yet it is easy in such matters to strain observations; and these consequences may be only its accidental and not its proper effects. 'Tis answered, not to insist upon the natural and gradual connexion of the things represented, more easy to be discerned by impartial reflection, then persuaded by superfluous arguing, it is very observable, First, that the great, if not the sole reason, that from the beginning hath been or can be alleged for the ●ixed presidency, viz. the ear of divisions, and prevention of schism, was that which in the righteous judgement of God, according to the deceivableness of unrighteousness, was still made use of for carrying on the Mystery of iniquity, until that at length it appeared in its own colours, and discovered its effects, infinitely more pernicious than the evils which it pretended to obviate. 2, That in matters Religious, the want of Divine institution, and consequently of our Lords promise and blessing, together with the actual following of bad fruits & effects, are a sufficient demonstration, that the thing questioned is thereof properly productive. I need not observe, that it is upon this ground that the Pope's Primacy and Headship is very justly charged with all Rome's Superstitions and abominations: If of old, I sent them not, therefore they shall not profit this People, was by the Spirit of the Lord made a sure and firm conclusion, shall not then the visible accomplishment, I appointed it not, and it hath not profited, but been attended with many grievous mischiefs, prove an evidence equally convincing?  
But it is said, admitting that this was indeed the course of its exaltation in these times yet the proposal of it being now made with a manifestly contrary design, and in effect to low and reduce Prelacy; the preceding representation is of no moment. 'Tis answered, I grant that this reduction is indeed given out to be the design of the alteration offered: But seeing it is in the Supremacy, more than in the Papacy in itself considered, that the strength and compliment of all corruption in Ecclesiastic Government, and the very end and design of Prelacy itself doth lie; and that the present offer of this presidency, is only a Politic draught, ●ending by the engaging of these who justly reclaim to sit & act in its Courts, to the more compendious and sure establishment of the same Supremacy, and rendering of its influences more effectual; it is evident that its project may possibly appear a more covert, but is in truth ra●her a more dangerous part of the same mystery. If then this fixed Praeses, at first set up in the Church, be a thing unwarrantable and anti-scriptural; that the Episcopus Praeses offered to us must be much more such, cannot be controverted; in as much as there are several material differences betwixt the one and the other all aggravating against the present proposal, as this short comparison of the two doth abundantly hold out. The Episcopus Praeses in ancient times was at least in the beginning chosen by the Presbytery over which he presided, and consequently was by them censurable; as also he did only preside over one, and that oftentimes a very small Classis, the taking of the election from the Presbyters, the exempting the then Episcopus Praeses from their control, and the superinduction of Metropolitans and Archbishops being all posterior inventions. whereas the Praeses poposed to us is to be nominat and appointed by his Majesty; and for any thing we know by him only deposable or removable: As also the least of them is to be over many Presbyteries or Classes, whereof any one is by far too large for a conscientious Gospel oversight, and two of them over several Synods, not to mention their extrinsic and absurd secularities, clearly incompatible both with the nature and work of their office. Which differences to be both certain and material, it were easy for me to make out: But since our rejecting of this Prostasia, doth proceed upon far more solid and comprehensive grounds, I shall not urge them: Only, that I may a little recreate my Reader, the return made at Pasely by a worthy Doctor, to that disparity of the present Praeses his being nominat by the King, is very observable; and after he had meenly declared the manners of old elections, and how the People sometime aswel as the Presbyters had an interest therein, and having made his answer, that the Church did then appoint and choose this Praeses, for want of a Christian Magistrate, with no better consequence than i● one should allege, that for the same reason the Church did then, and the Magistrate might now, ordain Ministers, he proceeded to prove the lawfulness of his Majesty's appointment and nomination, partly from the prerogative of universal Patron, competent to him jure coronae, and by Act of Parliament, and partly because that an inferior Patron by presenting a Minister to the Kirk of his presentation, doth thereby make him a Proestos over the parochial Elders. Was not this grave and judicious reasoning? But seeing the right of patronage is in itself a civil right (though indeed a sad incumberance to the Church) only respecting the benefice, by virtue whereof the Patron conferreth no Ecclesiastic power, or any thing pertaining to the office, but, in that regard, refers the person presented entirely to the tyral of the Church, which alone admits him to the function, and conveys to him any Ecclesiastic power thereto competent, I only wish the Doctor that reflection and sobriety as may hereafter prevent such phlegmatic mistakes.  
The next argument against this fixed presidency, and why we can not consent unto it, I take from the Oath of God that is upon us; not that I account these Covenants to be the main, if not the only, ground of Scrupling, as the Bishop allegeth to be by many of us pretended: No, I am more persuaded, that there is nothing sworn to, or renounced by us, in these engagements, which is not antecedently either duty or sin, then to be in love with their Arguments, who, from the determination that may arise from an oath in things within our power, do thence conclude against Episcopacy as in itself a thing indifferent, and by our oath only abjured. But seeing Covenant-breakers do now turn Covenant-interpreters, and it is the authors own undertaking to prove that a fixed presidency is not contrary to this our oath, and seeing that the same oath doth indeed superadd a special obligation, as we shall afterwards hear, I shall first show, that this Episcopus prese is by us abjured, and then review the author's observations in the contrary.  
And as to the first, it is not from the Solemn League and Covenant that we do only or yet principally conclude in this matter● no he who remembereth what I said in the beginning concerning our Reformation in the year .1638, and our renewing of the National Covenant, with the explication thereto subjoined, whereby, having found Presbyterian government with an equal parity, to be the government appointed by the Lord in his House; and that the same was formerly established by Oath in this Land; and having then restored it, we bind ourselves constantly to defend and adhere to the true Religion, as then reform from the novations and corruptions that had been introduced; whereof the government of the Church by Bishops, and their constant Moderatorship were reputed to be a part; and to labour by all lawful means to recover the purity and liberty of the Gospel as it was professed before the forsaid novations: he, I say, who remembereth these things, will easily grant, that it is upon this Oath, that our chief obligation depends, and it is to it that we are to refer our engagements by the League and Covenant, whereby we are bound to preserve the reformed Religion in the Church of Scotland, in Doctrine, Discipline, Worship and Government: so that the second Article of the League, binding to the extirpation of Popery, Prelacy, etc. And whatsoever shall be found contrary to ●ound Doctrine and the power of godliness, (whatever respect it may have to England and Ireland for the future yet) as to Scotland, it must more forcibly infer an abjuration of all these things already found to be such; whereupon it most evidently followeth● that Presbyterian government with its exact parity, being then the thing sworn by us to be preserved; and Episcopacy in all its degrees abjured, as novations contrary to Truth and Godliness: this fixed presidency offered, and our consenting thereto, is directly contrary to these Oaths and Engagements.  
But now, let us consider what the Papers say unto this point. And first we are told, That notwithstanding the many irregularities and violent ways of pressing and prosecuting o● it, yet to them who remain under the conscience of its obligation, and in that, seem invincibly perswaded● it is very pertinent, if true to declare the consistency of the present government even with that obligation. 'Tis answered, these insinuations of irregularity and violence being only general, without so much as a condescendency, let be any verification, I might very justly neglect them; but, being made by a person, who, after being eye witness to the courses which he reproacheth, did both take the Covenant himself, and administrat it to others; and now notwithstanding that all the cavillations and objections of adversaries have been answered without reply, hath under his hand renounced it, I can not pas●e them without ●ome admiration of such inconscionable insolence, of which ● do hereby defy the Author to acquit himself by any rational and probable instanced we ●ave indeed heard the proud calumnies of prevailing Adversaries but seeing these are certain truths viz. ● That this Landbeing in the beginning lawfully engaged in the National Covenant, did upon the occasion of the ensuing and growing defections and novations, very justly both renew and explain their engagements, and also censure such, who, by refusing their assent, did evidently declare their apostasy. 2. That not only the communion of Saints, but the very force of that obligement of constant defence and adherence, contained in the National, did so constrain us to make the League and Covenant, as the visibly necessary mean for that end, and without which conjunction the prelatic party in England, which had twice from thence perfidiously attac●qued us, prevailing there, had in all probability overwhelmed us, that the refusal of this second Covenant, by any who had taken the first, could not but be construed a breach thereof; and expose them to condign punishment, 3. That the countenance and confirmation of Authority being demanded, and unjustly refused, to that, for preservation and maintenance, whereof Government itself was set up, can not in reason make the deed so done, for want thereof unlawful. And 4. That the sufferings of recusants in our former times were, either for the merit or number of the delinquents, very small and inconsiderable, and have been by the renversing and persecutions of these la●e times so many degrees exceeded, that it is ashame for any person of ingenuity, by accusing the past and owning the present, to show such partiality. These I say, being certain truths and so fully held out by several writings on our side, it is impossible but, the same being duly prepended, all the vapour of this smoke must instantly vanish.  
But in the next place comes the Author's kindness and charity to relieve such, who labour under an apprehended inconsistency of these their Oaths with this fixed presidency, & in prosecution hereof, he sayeth, That if men would have the patience to inquire, this our Episcopacy will be found not to be the same with that abjured; for, that is the government of Bishops absolutely by themselves and their Delegates, Chancellors, Archdeacon's, etc. As it is expressed in the Article, & was on purpose expressed ●o difference that frame from other forms of Episcopacy, & particularly from that which is exercised by Bishops jointly with Presbyters in Presbyteries and Synods, which is now used in this Church. And here I might again take notice of the grossness of this mistake, supposing our present Church-government, because forsooth it is not exercised by Chancellors, Archdeacon's and the rest expressed in the second Article of the Covenant; therefore not to be that which was abjured, but a distinct from managed by Bishops jointly with Presbyters● whereas it is evident as the Sun-light, that our Parliament did not only in preparation to the late change make void the obligation of our Covenants, and all the Acts and Authority of former Parliaments, whereby Episcopacy had been abrogate: But also restore and redintegrat the estate of Bishops, to a more full enjoyment of Church- power and prerogatives then formerly was granted unto them, yea unto the sole possession and exercise thereof under his Majesty, above all that their Predecessors did ever acclaim: As both from the Act of Restitution, and the consequent practices of our Bishops I have already plainly evinced; that so it is beyond all controversy, that the same Episcopacy abjured, what ever it was, was by our late Parliament again restored.  
But Secondly admitting, that our present frame were in esse such as it is represented, or at least by the proposal of Accommodation offered: As the mistake or rather wilful error of this passage, doth borrow its colour and pretext from the second Article of the Covenant, obliging us to the extirpation of Popery and Prelacy, that is to say, etc. according to the description there set down; so, the thing obvious to be observed for clearing thereof is that in order to our case in Scotland it is not the obligation of this second Article to extirpate, that we are principally and in the first place to regard; but it is the positive engagement of the first, binding, as to Scotland, to preserve, and, as to England and Ireland, to reform, that is in a manner the key of the whole, in as much as by the Church of Scotland, and to endeavour the se●lement of the Church of England, the second Article is manifestly subjoined by way of execution, viz. that for attaining the ends of the first we should endeavour the extirpation of all things therein, either generally or specially enumerat, which two Articles, the one to preserve the then constitution of our Church, with so great contendings lately reform from this corruption, amongst others, of the Bishops their constant Moderatiship, and the other, to extirpate every thing found to be contrary to sound doctrine, and the Power of Godliness, as Episcopacy in all its degrees had been by our Church declared to be, doth certainly make up an obligation most directly opposite to, and inconsistent with this presidency re-obtruded.  
Thirdly, If their luk-warm Conciliators were as mindful to pay their vows to the most High, as they are bold to devour that which is holy, and after vows to make inquiry, in place of this impertinent wresting and misapplication of these obligements in the League and Covenant, which do more properly concern the at-that-time-unsetled Estate of England and Ireland, than the established condition of the Church of Scotland, as we shall immediately hear, they would rather consider their own and our obligations by the National Covenant, and how in that day of our distress, and wrestle from under the yoke of Prelacy, we swore unto the Lord to defend that Reformation whereunto we attained; and constantly to reject and labour against all these Novations and corruptions, from which we were then delivered: Under which Head of Novations and Corruptions, I am assured that every considerate person will so easily perceive this presidency and Moderatorship o● Bishops to have been abjured, that he will almost as much wonder at the heedless expositions of our Adversaries, put upon these Covenants, as pity the sin of their perjurious declaring against them. It is therefore certain, that as, since the Reformation, we had not in Scotland that species of Prelacy particularly described in the second Article of the Solemn League, but the same was therein insert, mainly in order to our neighbour Churches; so the Episcopal Government, at this day restored in Scotland, is the same, and worse than what we had before, and the presidency now proposed was one of these very corruptions against which we are bound for ever to preserve this Church at that time therefra reform.  
But the Author says, That the Presbyterians in England do generally take notice of this distinction, viz. That by the Covenant the Prelacy only therein described, and not moderate Episcopacy, that is, a form of Synodical Government conjunst with a fixed presidency is abjured. And for proving this assertion, he citys the two Papers of proposals to his Majesty by the Presbyterian Brethrens, Anno 1661. Master Baxter in his treatise of Church-government, and Theophilus Thimorcus, in his vindication of the Covenant not to be against all manner of Episcopacy, but that Prelacy only therein specified. It is answered; to measure our main obligation by the Covenant, in order to the Church of Sco●land by that part of it which was principally intended for the Churches of England and Ireland, is so gross and dull an inadvertency, that, I am sure, nothing, less than a judicial delusion could have made a man of the Author's knowledge and sobriety to lapse into it. Nay, seeing that he himself doth note, that when that Covenant was framed, there was no Episcopacy at all in being in Scotland but in England only. Is it not a wonder, that thence concluding that the extirpation of that frame only could then be meant & intended, his logic should so pitifully fail him as not to add, and from that Church alone where it was seated, which would have so clearly restricted the subject of that Article, that I am certain at on glance, he had discovered all his applications of it unto Scotland as its primary object to be impertinent. But where there hath appeared no conscience in keeping; why do we expect much sense in interpreting? And we all know, what kind of person it is of whom Solomon saith, that his eyes are in the ends of the earth. To bring him back therefore to the purpose, it is the obligation of the Church of Scotland & Members thereof in order to its self, anent which we do now inquire, & for clearing thereof it is granted, that by the Solemn League the Church of Scotland being then established, the preservation of that establishment, with the duty of extirpation in so far as is necessary thereunto, is only covenanted, which, though it do sufficiently exclude this fixed presidency, as contrary to that establishment, and also unto sound doctrine & the power of godliness; yet it is by the National Covenant & its subjoined explication whereby not only the Episcopal Government which then was amongst us, & is now restored & advanced, but the Bishops their constant Moderatorship, as a novation and corruption in this Church, is plainly abjured. By all which it is evident, that as the League and Covenant, being referred to the National, by which the establishment in the former sworn to be preserved was first settled, doth manifestly exclude this Episcopus Praeses; so the obligement in the League to extirpate the Prelacy therein described, only applicable to the Churches where it then was, is most improperly made use of for explaining our engagement in order to ourselves in the case controverted,  
Now as to the citations of the English Authors adduced, it is certain as to the present question we are not therein much concerned; they speak of the obligation of the Covenant in order to England, and how that Article of extirpation for that Church principally provided is to be understood, the thing that pertaineth to us is to consider, how far, either by the League and Covenant or any other engagement lying upon us, we are bound against all corruptions to the preservation of the setlement we then enjoyed, which are subjects quite distinct; and thereby this heap of citations gathered by the Author is by one blast dissipated. But lest it may appear hard that we should be bound to such a precise form in Scotland, and England in that same Covenant left to such a latitude, it is answered, not to reflect upon what might have been the secret designs of some unsound men in this matter which we neither were bound nor could distinctly know, this one thing is evident, that for us in Scotland, who could not expect that England, groaning to be delivered from Prelacy, should instantly upon our grant of assistance embrace Presbytery in all its forms, of which they had not full and exact knowledge and no experience; and withal, seeing we did hold Presbyterian government to be according to the word of God, and knew the common estimation then made in England of the Church's of Scotland, Geneva, the Netherlands, and France as the best reform; the obligation provided in the Covenant to endeavour England's reformation according to the word of God and the example of the best reformed Churches, with the Article of extirpation subjoined in its full extent, was certainly at that time all the assurance we could desire, and upon which we did very rationally relyea  
Neither is the same in the least impugned by that which is alleged out of the Authors cited; viz. That many grave men of the Assembly of Divines desired that the word Prelacy might be explained, because it was not all Episcopacy they were against; and therefore the particular description was subjoined: as also some members of Parliament scrupling the meaning of Prelacy, it was resolved with the consent of the Brothers in ●cotland, that the Oath was only intended against Prelacy, as then in being in England? And Mr Coleman administrating it unto the house of Lords di● so explain it: Because as it was indeed very consistent, that in so far as England had then attained, we should ●ave closed with them in a particular Oath for extirpating the evil discovered: And yet for a further advance rest upon the more general obligements, so surely and safely cautioned, until God should give further light; so the common acknowledgement of both parties, that the then Prelacy was only expressly abjured, and not all Episcopacy, seeing no species of Episcopacy was on the other hand either by them reserved, or by us consented to, doth nothing contradict why both the rejecting of all Episcopacy, & setting up of Presbytery might not still be covenanted unto under the general provisions: And therefore, seeing it is very agreeable both to Truth and Righteousness, that a Church convinced of evils, but not so enlightened as to the remedies; may covenante against the evils in particular, and also to endeavour a full reformation according to the word of God; and, by virtue of this general obligement, become bound to make a more exact search, anent the lawfulness or unlawfulness of things, anent which in the time of the covenanting they were more hesitant, and after discovery to reject even that which formerly they thought more probable, It is very evident that all the doubting in England anent moderate Episcopacy, at the time of these engagements, do nothing impede, why both they and we, in our respective stations, are not still obliged to reform that Church from all Episcopacy, and to extirpate it as contrary to the Doctrine, which is according to godliness. So that England's latitude, as to this point, is rather apparent then real, and our obligations in order to both Kingdoms are in effect objectiuè the same. I grant the Authors cited do understand the thing otherwise: but not to tell you that the proposals mentioned were neither made nor approven by all, nor belike by the soundest Presbyterians in England; that Mr Baxter is not singular in this only subject, and that Timorcus who hath done very well in his main subject, might have done better in this particular: one thing I am confident to affirm, that the ground which all of them lay down, viz. that all manner of Episcopacy was not by the Covenant particularly abjured, is most fallacious, in as much as, if it may be demonstrat from the word of God and experience, that all manner of Episcopacy is repugnant thereto and to the power of godliness, (as I am sure it may, and it hath been by me essayed) its non-abjuration in special doth nothing militat against the import of the other general Article.  
As for the other grounds contained in the Author's citations, viz. the agreeableness of this presidency to the scripture & primitive times, and the custom of our Kirk-sessions; they are already answered: & what Mr Baxter addeth anent the Superintendents & Visitors, which we had in Scotland in the beginning of the reformation, it is as easily removed by the then infancy of our Church, and extreme penury of Pastors, as his other argument from the temporary moderators, chosen by Synods for the occasion and to them accountable, is concludent as to the fixed precedents now under question.  
To these Authorities the Author subjoines that, Though we have the names of Dean, Chapter and Commissary, yet that none of these under that name exerce any part of the discipline, nor is this done by any other having delegation from the Bishops with a total exclusion of the community of Presbyters, which is a great part of the difference betwixt that model of Prelacy to be extirpate and this with us. Who would not pity such folly? who knows not that England's Prelacy was ever different from any Episcopacy that we had in this Church since the Reformation, (although by the way I must remind my Reader how much by the late restitution it is advanced) but if by the particular obligation to extirpate, contained in the second Article of the League, we be only bound to extirpate England's Prelacy, doth it therefore follow, that notwithstanding of the obligement to preserve Presbytery then settled in Scotland, and in general to extirpate every thing contrary to sound Doctrine and the Power of Godliness, and especially by virtue of the abjuration, made by us of our former Episcopacy in the National Covenant, that yet we are not bound to descent from & oppose the late restitution, whereby Presbyterian Govern. being overturned, the same, yea a worse bond of Episcopacy then what we abjured, is restored. Really these insinuations are so raw, that I am ashamed to meddle with them; & yet the Author's fancy (which all that know him, know to be in him a very overruling faculty) being once lesed with this mistake anent the Article for extirpation, he goes on and tells us, that he will not deny, that the generality of the people, yea even of Ministers in Scotland, might have understood that Article as against all Episcopacy. But if he will credit truth, he may be better informed, viz. that though the generality might very well, by the whole complexed tenor of that Article, understand all Episcopacy to be sworn against, yet it is most certain, that they still understood their principal binding engagement against it to flow from their abjuration in the year 1638. And their oath, in both the National, and League and Covenant, to preserve and adhere to Presbyterian parity then established: and therefore the new discovery here Pretended, as if the Covenant did admit in our Church a moderate Episcopacy, notwithstanding our obligement to extirpate prelacy, with all the ridiculous ●atle ensuing, concerning the genuine consistency of the words of the Article for extirpation, with such a qualified and distinctive sense, and also the meaning of many of the composers and imposers, for a moderate episcopacy different from that Prelacy, is but the continuance of the same delusion.  
But now I hope to awaken this Dreamer, who adds, That unless we make it appeare● that the Episcopacy now in question with us in Scotland is either contrary to the word, or to the mitigated sense of their own Oath, it would seem more suitable to Christian charity to yield to it, as tolerable at least, then to continue so inflexibly fast to their fi●st mistakes, etc. And with ●his I heartily close: and therefore seeing (not to repeat in this place w●at I have already proved, viz, that the Episcopacy now among us is not so much as Christ's, or true Ecclesiastick-government● but merely his Majesty's usurpation over the hou●e of God, which all men ought to abhor) I say, tha● seeing I have in some measure proven, that the Episcopacy in debate is contrary to the word, and (Whatever may be the impertinent mitigation offered of the Article to extirpate no ways proper to our purpose) that yet it is diametrally opposite to the ●ational Covenant, and our abjuration therein contained, and ●he first Article of the League, as above declared; I hope our Adversaries will cease to accuse us of want of charity & of inflexibilitie, but rat●er yield themselves to the conviction of the truth, specially to the obligation of our National Covenant, which our Author hath hitherto very fatally and foolishly forgotten: and thus I suppose the Bishop, receiving better information of our grounds, will at least cease from his presumptuous confidence, until ●e find out for us a more colourable solution.  
As to what is added in the Papers of the aversion of some in England against the Covenant, as being against all Episcopacy, it is evidently a strain of the former ravery; and therefore, misregarding both the objection and solution, I come to the next passage, wherein the Author, casting off all fear of God, reverence to the most learned and pious Assemblies that ever sat in Britain, respect due to as wise and honourable Parliaments as ever these Nations beheld, the good opinion and charity he ought to have for men and Christians truly such, and regard to his own credit, being once far engaged in these ways, proceeds without the least verification to give a character of the Covenant and its courses, made up of such reproaches of simplicity or cheatry against all engaged in it, perplexity and vexation of all that faithfully adhere to it, and insolent mocking at the overthrow of God's work and desolation of His Sanctuary, that malice itself could have uttered nothing more false and virulent. The truth is (saith he) that besides many other evils, the iniquity and unhappiness of such Oaths and Covenants lies much in this, that being commonly form by persons, that even amongst themselves are not fully of one mind, but have their different opinions and interests to serve, (and it was so even in this) they are commonly patched up of so many several Articles and Clauses, and these of so versatile and ambiguous terms, that they prove most wretched snares and thickets of briers and thorns to the Consciences of these that are engaged in them, and matter of endless contentions about their true s●nse, etc. Especially in some such alterations, as always may, and often do, even within a few years, follow after them; for the models and productions of such devices are not usually long-lived  
Thus he, And for justifying the censure which seriously I have without prejudice premised; I first inquire, why is there here such an insinuation prefaced of many other evils, whereof there is not one enumerat? Must we believe the Covenant to ebb worse than can be expressed, because the Accuser can prove nothing? And why is this accusation pretended to be in general of all such Covenants, when yet it is expressly intended against the League and Covenant? Is it because the Author would have us to reckon it amongst the worst of combinations? Or because he hath the same regard and faith for all Covenants, or at least t●at by such a general he may the better cover the pointednesse of his calumny only leveled at this.  
But taking all to be spoken of our Covenant, it is said, that it was framed by Persons amongst themselves not fully of one mind, but serving their different opinions and interests. But, 1. Whatever might have been the unsincerity and bias of a few Persons, as there is nothing perfect; yet that the Bodies of both the Parliaments, Assemblies, and People of these Nations, were acted in the matter of this League with such unanimity, straightness and zeal for Religion and Liberty, as can not readily be instanced in any Age or Nation, and could only be the effect of a Divine presence and assistance, is unto this day no less the comfort of its faithful Adherers, than the confusion of all its Adversaries. 2. As the matter it self was thus carried, so I can appeal to the remembrances of thousands, that the taking & renewing of our Covenants, both in this & our neighbour Land was attended with more sincere mournings, serious repentances, and solid conversions, than almost ●ath been in any dispensation of the Gospel since the da●es of the Apostles. 3. Admitting that the Persons and motives influencing this Covenant had been such as is represented, yet, I am persuaded that, such is the truth, righteousness, plainness, and consistency of all its Articles, that considering their brevity, the mighty parties engaging, and how circumstantiat, with their universal and most important concern, that which is offered to make its reproach, is the most visible Argument of the Lords overruling Providence, and evidence of the Covenants glory.  
But it is further alleged, That it is patched up of so many several Articles and clauses, and these too of so versatile and ambiguous terms, that it proves a most wretched snare. Certainly, in fair, yea in charitable, dealing, if the Author had intended either the information of the ignorant, or the conviction of the obstinate, or had but tendered his own repute, so broad and foul a challenge should at least have been qualified by a condescendence. It were easy for me to oppose one general to another; nor do I fear any loss from the inequality of our credit. But I am so persuaded, both from Conscience, Reason, and the common sense of all impartial men, of the falsehood of this calumny, that I am angry that, by this disappointment, he should robe me and our cause of so probable an advantage. I shall not resume the quibblings of the Oxfoord Doctors and others: I freely refer my Reader both to their writings and the answers they have received, yea to the Covenant itself for the best solution. If I may here guess at the Author's meaning by such circumstances as occur, the versatile ambiguity, he would objecte, is mostly in the certainty of the obligation of Reformation in order to England, (For as to the variety and generality of the many Articles and clauses that he mentions, within a little, we shall find him more particular) and as to this uncertainty, I have so fully evinced the lawfulness of the League in the matter of the extirpation Covenanted, wherein both parties did clearly agree, and the warrantableness of t●e general clause of Reformation being referred to such a certain Rule as the Word of God, and conformable example, that I am confident (whatever might be men's fraud or failing in the prosecution yet) the Covenant in this part cannot be accused either of uncertainty or ambiguity, without wounding thorough its sides the Scriptures of Truth with the same Darts.  
In the next place he tells us, That by reason of this variety and ambiguity, the Covenant becomes a most wretched snare, a thicket o● briers and thorns to Consciences, and a matter of endless contention, etc. Good Sir, why so severe? Sure, whatever ground of complaint others may have in this regards you, who have found a way through these briers and thorns, and are come out of this thicket with your coat rougher than at your entry, have none at all: And, no doubt, had all engaged in this Covenant been of a Conscience such as yours, it had been easy for them, by its serpentine subtlety, and irreligious indifferency, to have extricat themselves from greater difficulties. But the truth is, the Author hath wickedly broken the Covenant, and to disguise it, he would have the world believe, that all who remain faithful are caught in the briers, and detained against their wills. I shall not ask what these snares● thickets and contentions are, whereof he accuseth this engagement: It is below his dignity to be so put to it. We know that many● part openly part more covertly, have dealt very treacherously in this matter; & if thereafter, to palliate their perjury, they have moved debates anent it, is the Covenant therewith to be charged? One thing only I must say, that as many of these disputs have taken their various pretensions not from the Covenant itself, but from the word of God to which it refers, and which I wish the Author do not account liable to the same exceptions; so, of all the objections moved by such, who, in the succeeding alterations of Providence, have thereby endeavoured to excuse their unstedfastness, the Author, of all the greatest changeling, hath here given the poorest and meanest account, scarce sufficient to give a colour to his reproach: and this leads me to notice the great pretence of this complaint, viz, that in the revolutions we have seen the Covenant hath proven so uneasy. I shall not say that, in this, the very Scriptures of Truth may also be construed an hundred fold more uneasy: But of this I am most assured, that he, who, for himself and others, pleads for a compliant liberty for all these so contrary changes that are gone over us, must not only slack the bonds of the Covenant and the Command of God; but of all honesty and ingenuity among men: It remains therefore, that he that would be faithful, aswel as he that would live godly, must resolve to suffer persecution; the contradiction of sinners, and the cross of Christ have always been the great offence of a foolish world: but who, through uprightness and patience for this trouble, do attain unto the promised peace shall never be moved.  
As for the Authors observe, that the models & productions of such devices are not usually long-lived; we judge not by such appearances: our establishment is, that God liveth and reigneth, & our Lord is risen again & alive for evermore This was the primitive consolation: and who knoweth but he may also make this triumphing, as he hath made many the like● to be but for a moment.  
But now, when my Author hath run his first career against the League and Covenant, poor man, what is all this to Scotland's principal obligation against all manner of Episcopacy, viz. the bond of the National Covenant, entered into with so great unanimity, explained in such evident and certain terms, confirmed both by treaties and pacifications● and at last by the full authority both of King, Parliament and General Assembly? Certainly this is that which never entered into his thought, his indignation against the League doth so transport him, that there is nothing else which he seemeth to regard: and therefore he goes on, and first he insinuats an excuse for some who he says, in yeeldance to the power that pressed it, and in conformity to the general opinion of this Church, did take the● Covenant in the most moderate and least schismatic sense; sure, this is so suited to the Author's mistakes, that it must only be his own apology; his head still runs upon the Article for extirpation. And no doubt his sense thereof, aswel for Popery as Prelacy, is as moderate and little schismatic as may be; sor all know him to be large as catholic (in the common exception) as Christian. But as for the obligement to preserve the Reformed Religion of the Church of Scotland, which this debate mainly respects, I believe he is the first that ever thought it capable of two senses, let be to make choice of the more moderate.  
But next, he says, he cannot clear them of a great sin, that not only framed such an engine, but violently imposed it upon all ranks of men, not Ministers and other public persons only, but the whole body and community o● the people, thereby engaging such droves of poor ignorant persons to they know not what, and, to speak freely to such a hodge podge of various concernments, religious and ●i●ill, as Church discipline and Government, the privileges of Parliament, the liberties of the Subject, and condign punishment of Malignants; things hard enough for the wisest and learnedest to draw the just lines of: and therefore certainly, as far from the reach of poor country people's understanding, as from the true interest of their souls, and yet to tie them, by a religious and sacred Oath, either to know all these, or to contend for them blindfold without knowing them, Can there be instanced a grea●er oppression and tyranny over consciences then this? Thus he. A weighty accusation indeed if well founded. But though the simple reflection who the framers of the Covenant were, viz. the greatest, wisest, and most Religious Courts of the two Nations, not led by the nose by a Prelatic influence, which their sottish Clergy may not contradict; but using all liberty both of reason and suffrage, may make every one so advertent as to discover the absurdity of this exception: Yet, because it appears to be the Author's last reserve, I shall review it particularly; and, not to stand upon the deceitful phrase of framing engines which he useth, his first challenge is, that the Covenant was violently imposed upon all ranks, not only Ministers and public Persons, but upon the whole body and community of ●he Land. Certainly to take their words according to their obvious import, a man would think, it was by a few violent and monstruous Tyrants, who, rising up and prevailing against these Nations, did cudgel all ranks in them to the taking of this Covenant, whereas the known truth, that not only the Nations did by ●heir representatives unanimously, but by themselves, for the far greater part, cheerfully engage therein, doth render the calumny very palpable. 'Tis true there were a few that did refuse it, but supposing ●his to have been their single deserving (as for the most part it was not) yet their suffering was so just and notwithstanding moderate, and their number so small as I have above observed, that it cannot give any countenance to the exception.  
The next thing objected is, that droves of ignorant persons were engaged to they knew not what; and, to speak freely, to such a hodge podge of various concernements religious and civil, &c: who would forbear a ●ree and round reply to such a confident assertion? He cometh for●h in a simulat pity of poor ignorants, and a great resentment of their being by others abused, and yet I am bold to affirm, that he himself betrays as crass ignorance, in this passage, as is to be found in any among the droves he mentions, and (according to the same proportion) an imposing upon the belief of others superlatively presumptuous: And for proving of this, I only ask him, is not every soul bound by the Law of God to maintain his King, his Country, and his Neighbour's rights, prerogatives, and privileges? Who can deny it? But is he therefore bound to know them all, or to contend for them? Who seeth not the ridiculous vanity, if not blasphemy, of such an empty dilemma. To be clear therefore and distinct in this matter; to the conviction of the very stiffest Opponent, I say.  
1. That an oath, binding simply to particulars of mere fact, doth no doubt require, to the effect it may be sworn in Truth, Righteousness, and judgement, that the taker both know the things sworn to, and be persuaded that they are true and righteous: thus he who engageth by oath to certain specific privileges agreed unto, is, no doubt, in conscience first obliged to know both their nature and quality, else can not satisfy the forementioned command.  
2. On the other hand, if an oath do bind not to matters of mere fact, but to a certain duty, either generally or specially expressed, and in such a manner as clearly intimateth the antecedent rule, whereby it is determined, than this Oath being thus safely cautioned, and in effect only an accessary engagement, exciting and intending former obligations, but no ways extending them beyond their limits, the very notion of the duty in general is sufficient, without any further knowledge, to fit the person to bind his soul by such an Oath: for example, he who knoweth no more than the general notion of righteousness may no doubt lawfully swear to perform all righteousness, although for the time he do not so much as know its common astract precepts, let be the particular concrete deeds that may thereon depend: And the reason is, because, in effect, such an oath doth, in the first place, bind to endeavour more distinct and full knowledge, and so can not rationally be thought to suppose it.  
3. That in oaths assertory, which are o● a mixed nature, as condescending indeed on certain particulars, but yet only binding to their observance, under the notion, and in the supposition that they are righteous, although because of the condescendence it doth no doubt prerequire knowledge; yet righteousness being its determining and regulating object, it alloweth upon a better discovery, not only a rectification of the same particulars without perjury, but also an extension of the Oath to such things, which, being for the time unknown, do afterward fall within its rule and line: thus, if, upon a particular occasion, I swear to my neighbour to maintain his rights, as it doth indeed bind, in the first place, to the definite defence of these which occasioned the Oath, yet so as to admit of an alteration in any thing that shall be afterward found not to be righteous, and consequently no right; so no doubt, as to all his supervenient rights, though afterward only coming to my knowledge, the same Oath doth very justly extend its obligation.  
4. As the foregoing rules do abundantly explain the matter of this Oath, with what measure of knowledge it both supposeth and importeth; so the limitation and restriction, to the ingagers' place and calling, doth make it in such sort accessary to the former duties incumbent to him, that, in effect both as to the knowledge and performance whereto it binds, it rather intends than ampliats their predetermined obligation. I might have added, in this place, that every affirmative Oath, whether particular or general, doth undoubtedly, in the first place and most obviously, bind nega●ivè; that is, that the person swearing shall do nothing contrary to, nor obstruct that whereunto he is positively bound. But this is a thing in itself so evident, that though it may be of use in the explication in hand; yet I conceive it sufficient to have observed its omission.  
And further, both for illustration and application, I shall adduce no other examples than the things objected. And first, passing the mention here made of things religious and civil, which, no doubt, may be very consistently both commanded and engaged unto together, the swearing of the people to Church- discipline and government is instanced. But if Christ hath in his Church appointed both, and if all Christians be bound to maintain them, as they are thereto called, I am very certain, that to oblige them in their place and calling thereto by oath cannot be disproven. But it may be said, that by the Covenant the people became obliged to a particular species of government, of which, in probability, they could not know all the parts, let be to know their warrant. 'Tis answered, the corruptions of Episcopacy having had such an universally grievous influence upon all ranks, and these, with the opposite true form of Presbytery, having been so expressly and plainly laid open and abjured, in the year. 1637. 16●8. And 1639. as the people ought in duty to have had a competent knowledge in these matters; so it is very assured, that their knowledge therein was abundantly clear and distinct, as the very considerable remains of it to this day do evince.  
The second instance is made of the privileges of Parliament, liberties of the subject, and condign punishment of Malignants. But seeing the King's authority, to the defence whereof the Covenant doth also bind ', doth undoubtedly include all the righteous prerogatives of the Crown, which are as far, if not more, removed from the knowledge of the common people, than the other heads mentioned, wherefore were they omitted in the condescendence? Is it not because the duty of allegiance binding unto the same things, and whereunto certainly all may lawfully swear, is in effect, liable to the same exception? 2. Although this Oath, in order to privileges and liberties, be not merely indefinite, binding to righteous privileges and liberties in general, to which no doubt every on may lawfully swear; but also assertory of such privileges and liberties, as were at that time by the arbitrary course of adversaries more especially drawn in question; yet were these privileges then not only upon the same occasion generally known, as concerning, in effect, the very being of Parliaments, and just freedom of men; but in such manner engaged unto, under the notion of righteous, & what the limitation of the ingagers' place and calling, that it is most manifest, that this Article of the Covenant hath both righteousness, for its formal & regulating object, and also that it neither supposeth nor obligeth any man to more knowledge, then either de facto he had before, or is obliged to have by the antecedent duty of his particular vocation: So that the import of this part of the Covenant being plainly the same, with that either of our allegiance to the King, or of every citizen to the corporation whereof he is a member, viz, that we all maintain and preserve the prerogatives & rights, which in our station we know or aught to know to be such, and to be righteously such, the absurdity here endeavoured to be fastened upon the Covenant, as tying either to know simply, or to contend blindfold, is but an empty pitiful vanity. 3. As to that of the condign punishment of Malignants, it is abundantly explicable by the same rule: for the men so termed, having, by their mischief, made themselves but too well known, and we being tied to the discovery, only as righteous, & in our place & calling, it is as little possible to tax this or any other the like obligement in the Covenant of excess for its generality, as an Oath to perform all righteousness, wherein, no doubt, all these things are included, & which, without question, all men may lawfully make, albeit they are neither bound to know nor perform any other deeds, than such as their place and calling do require of them.  
Which grounds adduced, with what might be further her alleged from the mutual Covenants both of men & nations, wherein they lawfully engage both offensively & defensively to maintain others rights, without so much as the necessity of a particular inquiry thereinto for the time, do, without all peradventure, most convincingly redargue these weak quibblings bo●h of gross ignorance and calumny. What shall we then say to t●e folly and bitterness of these reproaches, whereby this Author, upon no better reason than what doth equally militat against all our general obligations either to God or man, is pleased to asperse the Covenant, as an hodge podge of various concernments religious and civil? What? Can not these thing lie easily enough together in an Oath, which yet are all comprehended in the Law of God? Are the Churches true Government, the righteous privileges of Parliaments and liberties of the Subject, and the duty of endeavouring in our place and calling that evil do●rs may be punished, and the rebels purged out of the Land (upon whom, by the law of God, the hand of all the people is commanded to be) the great concerns both of Religion and Righteousness, things either impertinent to any, or in themselves incompatible? Or is it because that our Author hath, by confounding and trampling upon all these things, and betraying at this time the Church's government unto the supremacy, as formerly under the Usurpers, he little regarded either the Subjects liberty or his Prince his Authority, and is known to have always his pretended charity as contracted towards zealous godly protestants, as dilated unto irreligious papists and prelatists, polluted his own conscience, and rendered it unclean, that therefore even this sacred Oath is become unclean and nauseating unto him; what can he reply to these things? Or can he assign us a better reason for his assertion.  
He says, It is hard enough for the wisest and learnedest to draw the just lines of these things, and to give plain definitions of them. But will it therefore follow, that none but such have any concernment in, or obligation to them: No, this were in effect an inference no less, nay more absurd, then to allege that none are bound, or may swear to maintain his Majesty's authority, but such as can draw the just lines of all his prerogatives; or rather that none are obliged to defend his person, but such as can draw his picture to the life. It is therefore certain, that, as all men have undoubtedly an interest more or less remote in these matters● so they either really have, or aught to have, a knowledge proportionable to their engagement thereto, to which an Oath for confirmation is most properly accessary.  
The Author adds that These things are as far from the reach of poor Country People's understanding, as from the true interest of their souls. And O how desirable is it, that this, the one thing necessary, were indeed the special and main care of all men; but to offer to confine poor People's knowledge and obligations to their souls interest alone, with an aim so palpable to have all other things abandoned to lust and tyranny, according to the great design of these adversaries, against which this Covenant was engaged in, savours more of hypocrisy then true spirituality: And therefore I say. 1. that the true Discipline and Government of God's House are in themselves, and have been experimented to be, of such important influence, as to the promoving the great work and ends of the Gospel, the great concern of God's glory, and wherein no doubt the interest of all souls is involved, that whatever may be in this pretence of abstraction and self- confinement; yet he must needs be of a very Gallio- temper that careth for none of these things. 2. Although privileges and liberties, and the punishment of Malignants have no such direct tendency; yet I am not only assured that, in the then juncture of affairs, their defence was of notable subservience to the preservation and reformation of Religion principally covenanted; but that of themselves, and as to the main of their import, they are so much within the reach of the sense, let be the knowledge, of the meanest of men, that to take them off from their concernment therein, and engagement thereto, by the insinuation of their souls true interest, will be judged by all ingenuous persons a very cunning and deceitful impertinency.  
Now from the premises that we have heard, the Author concludes in these terms, So that to ty them viz. the common people) by a religious & sacred Oath, either to know all these, or to contend for them blindfold without knowing them, can there be instanced a greater oppression & tyranny over Conscience then this? etc. But seeing it is most certain, that the Oath doth neither tye to know all these, nor yet to contend for them blindfold; but, being entered into from the universal feeling of all ranks of the invasions made and threatened both against Religion and Liberty, did, according to the nature of all such assertory and accessary Covenants, only bind every on in his place and calling, and suitably to that measure of knowledge, which he either had, or aught to have, of such general and important concerns to stand to their defence against the common enemy; the ignorance and insolence of this inference doth in deep astonishment only prompt me to say, the Lord rebuke the O Adversary, The Lord, who hath chosen this poor Church, rebuke thee; Is not the small remnant of the faithful as a brand plucked out of t●e fire?  
But behold how he wipes his mouth; Certainly (says he) they who now govern in this Church cannot be charged with any thing near or like unto it. No? All pious, holy, tender souls. But seeing I have removed the calumny, the subject of the comparison I will not recriminat; yet we must hear a little of the men's praise, viz. That whatever they require of Intrants, they neither require subscriptions nor Oaths of Minister's already entered, far less of the whole People. But 1. Seeing there can be no solid distinguishing reason given for this practice, we must conclude Policy to be the only motive of this pretended moderation. 2. The Oath, with the Act 1612. prescribed to be taken of Intrants, is so plainly and truly chargeable with a lax dubious and ensnaring generality, that, I am certain, all the light and knowledge, to be found in the most of these who conform to it, will not prevent the Authors being confounded with his own argument. I shall not tell you that therein they swear to the Supremacy, an infinite mystery of iniquity; But the point wherein this Oath is really peccant, in all the foul reproaches, wherewith the Covenant is falsely loaded, is, that thereby they are bound to defend all jurisdictions, Privileges, Preeminencies, and Authorities granted and belonging to his Highness, or united to his Royal Crown: Whereby it is clear that they are not only obliged positiuè to whatsoever Privileges and Prerogatives granted and belonging to the King, without the distinction of righteous or unrighteous; but also without any restriction to their place & callings. Now (not to retort the Authors impertinencies, as if this Oath did tie all Intrants either to know all these things, or to contend for them, blindfold without knowing them) whether this be lawful & righteous, & whether the common People be more knowing in their own Liberties and their representatives Privileges, or conforming Ministers in his Majesty's sublime prerogatives and extensive jurisdictions, I leave it to every impartial discerner. But 3. What strange hodge podge indeed do we find in this engagement! all things spiritual, ecclesiastic, and temporal confounded in the Supremacy, is not enough; but the poor Intrant must further abjure all foreign Powers and ●urisdictions, swear to defend all his Majesty's Authorities and Privileges, acknowledge upon Oath, that he holds the Church and his possession of it (if of the King's presentation) under God, of his Majesty, doing homage unto the King (and not unto God) for the same (if at the presentation of another) under God, by the King, of the Patron thereof: And lastly swear obedience to his Ordinary in all lawful things, even his Majesty's authority, though just now so fully recognosced, not excepted. Is not this an odd medley to be huddled up in a sacred oath? Whereof whether every Article therein be more impertinent for an Intrant Minister of the Gospel, or in itself more obscure and indistinct, really I can not define?  
But the Author goes on and tells us that It were ingenuously done to take some notice of any point of moderation, or any thing else commendable even in our enemies, and not to take any party in the World for the absolute Standart and unfailing rule of truth and righteousness in all things. And so it were indeed; but I freely appeal to all ingenuous men, if ever they heard ingenuity exhorted to, by two such disingenuous insinuations. As first, to recommend the moderation of a party, who, after that they themselves had perjuriously broken their Covenant both to God and their Brethren, did in such manner instigat the Powers to rigours, exclusions, and persecutions, against all who in conscience did only refuse to own and countenance their wicked Apostasy, as had almost ruined a great part of the Kingdom and did at length weary the very Actors. And next to give out as if we were so implicitly wedded to our party, whereof the least Argument or vestige hath not been made appear, no nor is so much as alleged, but but as all men do sufficiently know these restraints of want of power in the Clergies and of better considerations in our Rulers, that have produced the apparent quiet, which is here pretended for moderation; so, we hope that, by a full manifestation of the truth and righteousness of our way, we have in such sort commended ourselves to every man's conscience in the sighed of God, as there to leave this accuser of the brethren convicted and confounded bo●h ●or his open perjury and craft● calumny.  
But the Author, as it seems, fearing such a reply● provided a retreat, concluding But oh! who would not long for the shadows of the evening, and ●o b● at rest from all these poor, childish, trifling contests? I shall not say, that since he walks so much in darkness, it is little wonder that he long for shaddes: But of this I am very certain, that if he had laboured as seriously upon his Master's mission, to reconcile souls unto God, as he seemeth to have traveled upon his Majesty's commission ● to patch up a sinful Accommodation, his hope of rest had been both more sweet and more assured; and, in place of the shadows of ●he evening, he might have promised to himself the l●ght inaccessible, for his everlasting refreshment. But seeing these very poor, childish trifling contests, whereby he would cunningly decry all the just oppositions of the faithful to his evil course, are in effect his own devices against the kingdom of our Lord jesus, the day wherein every man shall receive his own reward, according to his own labour, shall make his work manifest, when the fire shall try it: And I heartily wish that the burning thereof may be all his loss.  
After the body of one of these Letters, we have a Postscript that is to say (for all the longings for rest we just now heard of) another whife: As we know who once charactered the Lords Servants, when with much travel labouring in his work; and herein the Author, complementing wi●h an Apology ot●er Churches (joining Rome with England as is most supposible) wherein Episcopal-government is otherwise exercised, wishes that ●he Argument ad hominem (as he calls it) by him used, may be brought to the knowledge of such as know least of it, and need it most. And one part of his wish, I am sure, I have served by a very candid representation; If the event misgive he must blame himself, his design is to allay men's extreme fervour by the consideration that this very form, which to us is hateful, is to English Presbyterians desirable; and that upon inquiry, the Reformed Churches abroad will be found ●o be much of the same opinion. But seeing I have already demonstrat our present form, as established and exercised, to be not only mere Prelacy, but the very absurd usurpation of t●e Supremacy; and have also at large excepted against ●he fixed Presidency of late proposed, and showed both what the soundest Presbyterians in England do think, and all of them ought to think anent it; Why doth our Author, by such weak repe●itions, pretend, under the name of ex●reme fervour, to condemn an aversion, which alas is in all to remiss? One thing, I shall only add, that whatever may be the thoughts of Presbyterians in England ● yet, sure I am that, their engagements in order to Scotland are the same with ours; and what these do import is already sufficiently declared. As for the Reformed Church's, I neither decline nor use their testimonies: We are fixed on surer foundations; yet of this I am most persuaded, that as abstracted general questions, are but lame and blind discussions of cases of this nature; so, wherever our case shall be fully and clearly represented, we shall report the assent of all the lovers of our Lord jesus Ch●ist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in incorruptness.  
But we are told, that perhaps it were not only lawful, but expedient that these, who now govern in ●his Church, should in some ins●ances use a little mo●e authority than they do, provided they applied their power ●o advance what is good, and not at all against the tru●h, but always for it: And that all things being so far out of course, the present condition of our Church (B● reason of the irreligion and profanity that are gone forth from its Prophets unto the whole Land) Doth require an extraordinary remedy I wish the Author were as sensible of ●he cause, as he seems to be of the symptoms of the malady; but to think that the present Church-governors', in the conviction of all sober observers, the main, if not the only, Authors of this mischief, should be entrusted with the cure; what more hopeless, or what more ridiculous? I grant the cautions subjoined. viz, that they applied their power, always for, and not against the truth, if made effectual, would indeed secure the event: But seeing they only promise by supposing it, and consequently are equally doubtful with it, and really such as may recommend the most unwarrantable and improper mean that can be devised, it is evident that this empty probability concludeth nothing: Let the Pope, or some thing worse, be set up, in the supposition that he do not apply his power to obstruct, but to advance what is good, and not against, but for the truth, no question there would thence arise a consequential expedience and advantage: But thence to argue for the lawfulness of such an appointment, were plainly to ranverse all reason and righteousness. As it is therefore from our Lords own warrant and blessing, that we are principally to attend the success of his ordinances; so, where these cannot be made appear, as in the case of our present Church-government, and on the other hand, the ensuing of Atheism and profanity cannot be denied, the conclusion, t●at ●hey are to be imputed to the nature of the present establishment, is beyond contradiction.  
But our Author says, That ●hese bad fruits are ra●her to be imputed to the schism made by withdrawing f●om the Government: For there is not a greater enemy in ●he Wo●ld to the Power of Religion, than the wranglings and bitter contentions that are raised about the external forms of it. 'Tis answered, divisions being in themselves always mutual, yea and separation, in some cases, commanded and necessary, to conclude against the thing in common, that which is only peculiar to a particular species, were grossly to confound the commanded out-coming of the People of God from Babylon, with t●e most sinful departing of the worst of Heretics: It is not therefore separation or withdrawing, in the abstract, but in its complexe causes, conditions & tendency, that we are to regard: he who, in t●e fear of God, out of a desire to keep himself pure, and for a testimony against evil-doers, withdraweth from such as walk disorderly, & from men of corrupt minds destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godlinesse● doth no less obey the will of God, than he who through proud and bitter contention flowing from some carnal principle and design, breaking the unity of the Spirit and bond of peace doth wickedly contemn our Lord's new commandment of love. Now, whether the present Prelates & their Dependants, who, for perfidious breach of Covenant with God & man, invading● and usurping over God's House, and ejecting & persecuting their faithful brothers, are justly disowned and discountenanced of all good men, or such, who, having no encouragement from either the call, promise, or presence of God, do, in a tender fear not to partake of other men's sins, abstain from the Assemblies of these evil doers, be from the former grounds more to be blamed for the present withdrawing let all men judge. But as it is not possession● attained by falsehood and violence, that makes a right, and the injurious expeller, and n●t ●he expelled, is, certainly, the sinful and schismatic divider; so, that the strange perfidy● pride, cruelty, avarice & profanity of the Prelates, and their abettors and dependers, professing to be the guides of, yea and having their livelihood and wealth by Religion, and yet for the most part not studying so much as to veil their lewdness with a mask of hypocrisy, have rendered Religion itself contemptible, except with a few, who stand at a distance with this horrible thing, is undeniable in its own evidence.  
As for the enmity of contentions anent external forms to the Power of Religion, if there be really a worth and singular benefit in such forms & ordinances that our Lord hath appointed for subservient means to the great end of the Gospel, and as visible & certain a prejudice and evil influence in men's corrupt novations, all-contendings about these matters cannot be implicity censured as bitter wranglings and enmity to the Power of Religion, without the just accusation of a luke warm indifferency in the high concerns of the Gospel: He who judgeth not the purity and liberty of Gospel ordinances worthy to be contended for● will hardly persuade a rational man that ever he will strive for the Faith of the Gospel. But 2. We heartily renounce and disown all wranglings and bitter contention, it is by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of his patience, & of our testimony, that we hope to overc●me; if these be accounted contentious, it is but a small share of the Lords sufferings, compared to these reproaches of rebellion and sedition, wherewith he● and his followers have been slandered. It is rather my regrete, that, in a time of such backsliding we have not moe saying, from the same reason, with jeremiah, Woe is us men of strife, and men of contention to the whole Earth But the peevish Policy of such, who after that, by perjury, contention and violence, they have imposed and pressed their own forms and inventions, and, by the same practices, seated themselves in the possession of what they designed, do in effect retain the same peremptory rigour, and do only decry contention, that they may mock men from an● just opposition to their courses, doth not merit any further notice: He who calmly, and impartially considers this whole matter will easily perceive, that it is neither contention, separation, nor division, things in themselves reciprocal of a middle signification, that are simply to be condemned: But it is from pride, perverseness, and other evil mixtures and designs, that both their evil and scandal do proceed: And on which side these are to be found'st a small reflection may satisfy every inquirer.  
But now, after all the vehemence we have heard, the Author● on purpose to amuse where he cannot prevail, Falls a wondering to see wise and good men make so great reckoning of certain metaphysical exceptions against some little modes and formalities of difference in the Government, and se● so little value upon so great a thing as is the peace of the Church ● 'tanswered, The redargution, implied in the bosom of this exclamations doth so palpably occur, that I cannot dissemble the Apostles observation thereby so obviously suggested, viz. That evil men and seducers wax worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived; for while in their deceive they tell us, that not only our reasonings are bare metaphysical exceptions, but that even the things contended for are mere words and formalities; how do they themselves appear to be deceived, who press the●e very ●ord● & formalities● more than the weightiest affairs in Religion? It being without controversy, that if the argument were equally balanced, it wou●d begin at home, & by surceassing the pursuit of such vain trifles, thereby most effectually frustrate the contrary defences: But the truth is, whatever the appearances are, neither are we, nor the Author, mistaken upon the matter: A constant fixed Praeses on his part, were certainly as little worth all the stir and vexation made about him, as the Bishops their insignificant Dignities and Ceremonies were a cause inferior to the late wars, which they did mostly occasion: And it were a folly insufferable for wise men● so desirous of ease, to set so little value upon so great a thing, as is the peace of both Church and State, disturbed by the present Episcopacy and this presidency offered: But seeing it is evident, that the thing designed by this proposals is a compliance with the present establishment, not only to the relaxing of conscience and the bonds of former engagements, but to the suppression and extirpation of the true Government of God's House, the acknowledging of, and submitting unto the Supremacy, more absurdly contrary to the Power and Liberty of the Gospel, than its instrument Prelacy, which we have expressly and particularly abjured, can the Author reasonably find fault, if he rencontre in us an opposition commensurat both to the value of the prize, and the measure of his own instance? If men, for poor perishing interests, do endeavour at so high a rate to introduce their modes and inventions, for no other end imaginable● then that by the contrivance and influence thereof, they may have the Gospel Ministry and Kingdom of our Lord still in subjection unto their lusts and pleasures, Should not the lovers of God's Glory and of their own salvation, the proper and great ends of all Christ's institutions, more vigorously resist all these their intended corruptions?  
I ma● not here stand to discuss the specious and flattering pretensions held out by our Adversaries, as if mere subtleties were by us opposed to the solid good of the Church's peace: Certainly he, who remembereth how, in the ancient times of the Church, Satan was very cunning to set the mystery of iniquity on foot, from the smallest and least suspicious beginnings, & yet thence, by more subtle and metaphysical methods than these which our Author undervalved, to carry it on to the very revelation of the Man of sin, and withal considereth in our own late experience the mien entry, as Kirk-commissioners and constant Moderators, with the sudden elevation and corruption, of King james his Prelates, unless he do very supinely misregard the intimation of all present circumstances, specially that of an al-swaying Supremacy already regnant, can neither be ignorant of, nor catched by such devices.  
But the Peace of the Church is of great value; Thus they, who have troubled and overturned the righteous Peace of a well settled Church, are not ashamed to make their possession, attained by wrong and violence, a plea for their security in their evil way; and after that, by breaking their Oath and Covenant, & ranversing the Lords Work and Ministry, they have got what the● desired, and used force and compulsion against conscientious Nonconformists, until they are wearied, now they come forth to practise by flatteries a few Sirens, with charms of peace, canting in Nazianzen's words, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to try if these entice may be more successful, and by a strangely comprehensive spirituality both of truth and error, telling us, that when one saith he is for Bishops, another I am for Presbytery, that we are carnal; as if the Apostles censure of a divisive respect of persons were equally against the discrimination of things which the Lord himself hath certainly distinguished: But as, in the competition of peace, the heathens saying, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, might have admonished the Author, and seeing that that peace is only precious, which is founded in, & designed for truth; so when it is merely pretended for procuring a sinful compliance with an evil course, it is but an empty delusion. We know whose practice it was to heal the hurt of the Lords People slightly, saying peace, peace, when there was no peace: To pretend for, nay to pursue seriously after peace, without regard to Truth, Righteousness, and Reconciliation with God, is only a precipitant error, and lying vision: But he who stands in the Counsel of the Lord, and causeth his People to hear His Words, should turn them from their evil way, and from the evil of their doings: And when the loud and harsh noises of our debates shall be turned into the sweetersound of united mourning and lamenting after the Lord, then, and not before, may we look that the Lord will return and cause his face to shine on us, and restore unto us his favour, the fountain and blessing of all other blessings: This is the only way, to show ourselves real supplicants for peace; & indeed to remove all the obstructions that may disappoint its firm enjoyment: Nay, this is the mean whereby the sincere seekers of the ●ord, do, even in the midst of tribulation, attain to that superexcelling Peace of God, which surely establisheth, and that joy, which no man takes from them.  
But the Author still longing for and hastening to outward peace, not that which the Lord left and gave to his followers, exhorteth unto a temper receptive of it, and that is, great meekness and charity; and, no doubt, in their right applications these are most beautiful graces: but as they seem here to be proposed, for the preposterous courting of this world's peace's I fear that they are not only unseasonably recommended, in exclusion of the love of Truth and zeal of God, incompatible with the Author's evil courses, but, with an extension of charity to rejoice in iniquity, and meekness towards wickedness beyond their known and just measures. It is true whatsoever party or opinion we follow in this matter, the ba●ge, by which we must be known to be ●ollowers of jesus Christ, is ●his, that we love on another; Yet ● must take the liberty to say, first, that in this point to confound persons and things, on purpose to transfer that love and charity we owe the former to t●e latter, though never so detestable, is but a silly sophism. He who rightly estimateth Christian love will readily acknowledge, that oftentimes the wounds of a friend may be faithful, when his kisses would prove deceitful Next, that though the Author would alleviat our present differences, as amounting to no more than opinions and humours; yet I do really conceive some of them to be o that imports as to judge a perverse and stated enemy, asserting t●e Supremacy to the manifest denial of Christ's Kingdom and Government in His house, not to merit the privilege of one of his Disciples; nay, that in order to such, David's profession, Do not I hate them, O Lord, that hate thee? And, am not I grieved, O Lord, with them that rise up against thee? I hate them with perfect hatred; I count them mine enemies, may rather become our duty. And thence it is, that although this Law of love be indeed of Divine right, & therefore would not be broken by bitter passion and revile & rooted ha●reds, fo● things in dispute betwixt us; Yet, sure I am, it doth as certainly admit of the foregoing exceptions, as the things questioned are to us without doubt, and only drawn in debate by the perverse dispute of corrupt men: Not that I think that, even in matters most certain, bit●er passion, revile, and rooted hatreds or malice are allowable; nay, this is rather my Author's supposition, and his insinuation, as if we were indeed guilty of these things, is abundantly obvious. But as I am truly persuaded, that all ●hese are in every case unworthy either of truth or a Christian temper; so I am assured, an impartial discerner will find no less of vain contempt & saucy undervaluiug couched in the Author's affected smoothness, than there doth appear of passion in the most impotent railing; and therefore, if for the rod of pride found in his mouth, I have sometime used a rod for his back; I hope both its justice and expedience will clear me of any injury.  
But he goeth on, However, are we Christians? Then doubtless the things wherein we agree, are incomparably greater than these wherein we disagree, and therefore, in all reason, should be more powerful to unite us then the other to divide us. Thus I have heard that the Bishop of Glasgow, in answer to a person expressing his fears of the return of Popery, told him, what then? We shall still be Christians; a notable use of Christian charity upon the pretext and possession of the name, to give way and countenance to corruptions manifestly tending to the subversion of the thing. But as a real agreement in t●e greater things of Christianity would certainly prove an infallible mean of reconciliation to most of our differences, and where it cannot reach the full cure, should nevertheless still treat and handle with all tenderness; so it is without controversy, that, on the otherhand, even the same reality, let be its simulat profession, is so far from persuading to aforbearance or compliance in case of sin, ingredient in incident contests, that it both admitteth descent, and frequently requireth a contrary testimony and necessary withdrawing as more suitable thereto. But wherefore should I urge such deceitful generals? must we, of necessity, sin with all Christians, or else divide from them; or if we unite with them, must we therefore sin and comply with all their errors and defections? And now, for a just retortion the Author, I hope, by his question, doth imply that we are also Christians: Nay, 'tis like, he denieth not but some of us are Christ's Ministers; why then are we so hardly dealt with? Why ejected, banished, imprisoned, and confined ●or disagreeing in things far inferior to t●ese, wherein we agree; yea in his own acceptation, but modes and formalities? How will he excuse this inconsequence and inequality? Or doth he think, that ●he vain pretence of Authority abused against us● doth preponderat to this his great consideration, or that it will be an Apology for his so active concurrence.  
But, after the manner of the conference at Pasly, he is not for debate● when it cometh to a reply; and therefore here restraineth himself with this advice, that if we love either our own or the Church's Peace, we should most carefully avoid two things, the bestowing of too great zeal upon small things, and too much confidence of opinion upon doubtful ●hings. But if his own practice may have any more credit than his words, it is easy, according to his acceptation of Peace, both to redargue this his advice of falsehood, and also to exhibit a more true account of his method: For, as in the small and doubtful things by him acknowledged, for such, it is most certain, that, on his side, he hath of late shown a greater zeal and confidence, than ever he did heretofore in all the●e strange revelutions, and important occasions of testimony, both against error and profanity, that have happened in the space of his Ministry; and yet no man doubteth but that he is for his own and the Church's peace; so it is evident that his want of zeal ●or God, together with his compliance with the uppermost power for the time, have been his only advantages. But why trifle I with such a person? If we love either our own or the Churches true peace, let us first love our Lord jesus Christ; for He is our peace; His Righteousness, Ministry and Ordinances for these are the means of it: accounting nothing small or doubtful which he hath appointed in order thereunto, and wherein the great ends of the glory of God, and salvation of souls, are visibly concerned. Whether the things in controversy be such or not, I need not again affirm It is indeed a mad thing to rush on hard and boldly in the da●k, and such a pertinent reflection, in t●e close of the example, which the Author hath given us of it, attended with so little application, is an evidence beyond all other confirmation. But he that followeth the Lord shall not walk in darkness.  
And now the Author, for a conclusion of this Paper, tells us, And we all know what kind of person it is, of whom Solomon sayeth, that he rageth and is confident. And really if I had but the half of the Author's confidence, I think I could point out the very man. 'Tis true a weak monastic spirit long habituat to an affected abstraction & stoicism, may render a man less capable of stronger passions, and consequently, for a time, exempt him from these ruder eruptions of rage; but whether he rage or laugh there is no rest: and if appearances hold according to the influences, which his last promotion seems to have had upon his dormant corruption, 'tis like, we may very shortly have a prelatic experiment of both. It is enough for us, that the Lord is our light and our strength, and none that love his righteous cause shall ever be assamed.  
Now follows the second Paper, or Letter, almost of the same strain, and therefore I shall content myself to review it more succinctly. After the Author hath excused his not adducing of a positive divine warrant for his moderate Episcopacy, by demanding of us the like for our Church-assemblies and their subordinations, which I have already fully answered, he bringeth us in, objecting, that we are not against a fixed Precedent or Bishop● or whatever else he be called, our question is about their power. And to this he answereth, entreating The question may he so stated● for he trusteth that the Bishops shall not be found desirous, to usurp any undue power, but ready rather to aba●e of that powe● which is reasonable, and conform even to primitive Episcopacy, then that a schism should therefore be continued in this Church. It is answered, the Author is mistaken, in the very entry, in as-much as we do not only question the power, but are directly against the pre-eminence of a fixed Praeses: for seeing the thing is in itself unwarrantable, and hath proven in the Church, a mere fomentation of pride, and, in its tendency, been inductive of the highest usurpations, as I have showed, and is therefore by us expressly abjured, how can we in conscience again admit of it? 2. (Not to examine subtly and strictly the import of the word power) seeing its fixedness and its concomitant dignity, that in a great part doth advance this moderatorship, which otherwise would be only an office, unto a superority, and thereto add an influence of power, is rather a begging of the question; and therefore though in Civils this fixedness, with its many other prerogatives and powers, be, by reason of the subject matter and expediency of humane affairs, very lawful and allowable; yet in ecclesiastics, the very same reason of the different nature of the things, with the constitution of a Gospel-Ministry, and the contradistinction, which our Lord himself hath founded betwixt it and the manner of civil governments, do clearly render this fixed presidency an undue gravamen, impinging upon the brotherly parity, and just liberty of his Ministers. And certainly, if the necessary privileges of the naked office, viz. that of proposing, directing the consultation● stating the question, ask of opinions and votes, and the casting vote, in case of equality, be of such noment in the conduct of affa●res, that all the liberty of the Assembly, and unfixedness and accountablenesse of the Chairman, are scarce sufficient to secure them from abuse; to enforce them by a fixation, contrary to the Lords appointment of a ministerial parity, is not more unwarrantable than inconvenient. But 3. As these reasons do militat against the controverted Presidency in its greatest simplicity; so the Presidency now offered unto us, for all the abatements pretended, being still that of a Bishop absolutely at this Majesty's nomination, not accountable to these over whom he presides, vested with great temporalities● and, lastly wholly dependent upon the beck of the Supremacy, is, without all question, a thing most anti-scriptural, unreasonable, & disconform to all pure antiquity. Now, that thus it is● both as to the reality of the thing offered● & the censure I have passed upon it. I here openly challenge the Author and all his partakers, if they dare adventure to contradict me: What other construction can therefore be made of the alleged condescendences, then that in such a mixture they are only empty foolish pretensions? And what other judgement can be given upon the Authors offer to abate of his reasonable power, warranted by primitive example, then that the obligation of reason and pure antiquity are no less false than the offer made is simulat and elusory.  
But seeing the Author, for all the warrants pretended● doth at least acknowledge himself not to be thereby astricted, but that he can come & go in their matters at his pleasure; if he do indeed sincerely hate schism, as he professeth, let h●m also confess the violence done both to our consciences and persons in such free & arbitrary things, nay, in his Dialect, trifles, and repent of his late inconsiderate accession.  
Passing therefore his deluded belief of the Bishops their not being desirous to usurp any undue power, but rather to abate contrary to their continual practice, & the Church's experience, now for the space of 1200 years & upwards; and evidently repugnant to the manifest conviction of all the circumstances of our case, I go on to his next supposition, viz. That though Bishops do stretch their power some what beyond their line, yet, let all the World judge, whether Ministers are for that engaged to leave their stations, and withdraw from these meetings for discipline which themselves approve. And to this the answer is obvious, that neither the sinful thrusting in of Bishops, nor yet their excessive stretchin●s are the principal causes of our leaving and withdrawing: When in former times. K. james introduced Prelates into this Church, and they from time to time extended their usurpations, many of the ●ords faithful servants in these days did neither desert nor withdraw; but continuing with much steadfastness, did constantly resist and testify against all the corruptions, then invading the true Church-government, whereof they were possessed. But, as the Author doth here fallaciously join our leaving of our stations (Which is false, we having been thence violently expelled) And our withdrawing from their meetings, groundlessly alleged to be by us approven; (which we hold to be a necessary duty) So, whoever considereth the manner of the late overturning by summary ejecting of many of us, dissolving all our Church Assemblies, establishing a new government, not in, but over, the Church by the King and his prelates, wherein we never had any place, will easily be convinced● that we are not more calumniously accused by these, who would have their own crime to be our sin of leaving our stations, then clearly justifiable for withdrawing from these their Courts, which are wholly dependent on the Supremacy, and very corrupt Assemblies, which we never approved; but have expressly abjured. It is not therefore (as G. B. apprehends it) only by reason of the Bishop's undue assuming of the Presidency in these meetings; nor yet because we are by them restrained in, and debarred from, the exercise of our power in ordination and excommunication (although these be very material grievances) that we do abstain from their Courts: No; but the plain truth is, that, over and above the foregoing cause, we hold the very constitution to be so much altered from that of a true Eccleasiastick judicatory, called in our Lords Name, and acting by his authority, unto meetings appointed merely by the King, and recognoscing his Supremacy, that we judge our not conveening therein ought not to be so much as termed a privative withdrawing; but that it is in effect a negative disowning of them as of Assemblies, wherein we never had either part or place: which being a ground by himself acknowledged, as I ●ave above observed, the Doctor's argument, that the Ministry is a complexe power, and that as some of us have accepted a liberty to preach, administer the Sacraments, and exercise discipline congregationally, without liberty to meet in Presbyteries and ordain; so they may come to presbyteries, notwithstanding they should be excluded f●om the full excercise of all their power; is, by reason of the nonexistence of the subject, viz. true Presbyteries, utterly cut off: besides, that it also labours of a manifest inconsequence; in as much as a Minister's doing, in the first case, all that he is permitted, and only forbearing where a vis major doth impede, is no just ground to infer that therefore, in the second case, he may come to a meetings and there by surceasing the exercise of his function, and making himself a c●pher, for strengthening & increasing of the Bishop's usurpation, in effect, tacitly surrender the power that he is bound to maintain: which tacit surrender I do really judge to be more strongly implied, a●d of a more sinistruous consequence, then can be purged by a naked protestation, especially the same being precontrived & capitulat; Whereby, without doubt, the significancy of this remedy, mostly commended by the necessity and as it were the surprisal of the exigent not admitting of any other, is greatly diminished & impaired Notwithstanding of all which, this man, whose manner is to multiply assertions without reason, tells ●s, in this place, that, When he hath streached his subtlety on the tenterhooks, he can not devise, why we may not join in these meetings under the abovementioned restraint: and again concludes, that if after all that he hath said, we do still scruple, either we must be darkened, or he must have owls eyes to see clearly where there is no light.  
But it were endless to take notice of all his tattle, and therefore I return to my Author, who proceeds in his charge against many of us for separating from the public worship and whole communion of of the Church, because of some degree of wrong done them, as they think, in that point of pours ● It is answered, although to render a solid reason of men's practices, specially when the same are only negative forbearances, whereunto even the forbearers scrupling and doubting doth in a manner and ●or the time oblige, be not my undertaking; yet, that the accusation here implied is very unjust, both in the extent and cause of the separation objected, is no hard matter to make out.  
And, first, it is certain that the allegiance, that many of us separate from the public worship and whole communion of the Church, hath no better ground, then that some of us, because of a just detestation of the perjury, intrusion, profanity, and insufficiency of the Curates, do withdraw from their Ministry, specially, our true Ministers still remaining, though removed to corners, and our attendance on the Curates their Ministry being expressly required as a due acknowledgement of, and compliance with, his Majesty's government Eccleastick (O strange!) and Civil: now, whether this reason will infer the conclusion made against us, or on the contrary, doth not rather warrant the abstinence, reproached as sinful separation, to be duty, let the impartial judge. I shall not tell you, that ●the assuming of the name of the Church, and accusing discountenancers of Separation, have been the common artifices, by which every prevailing sect or party have endeavoured to render their opposites odious: But of this I am very assured, that until the Author do prove, that the possession of God's house, which the Curates have taken to themselves, and the concurrence of Authority, wherewith they are supported, doth make them and their meetings, the only Church, his objection of separation is lame and inconcludent. And therefore, seeing that the broken Ministry, scattered Flocks, and secret meetings of the Lords faithful people in this Land, are still his true Church, both suffering and witnessing against the defection and intrusion of transgressors; and seeing that the forbearance, excepted against, is only the effect of a just and hesitant aversation against the pretended Ministry, without either disproving the substance of the Worship, or rejecting and dividing from others that find a greater liberty, his charge of separation is, in this its extent, palpably iniquous.  
As for the cause assigned for ●ur alleged withdrawing, not from their Ecclesiastic Courts (for this point is already discussed) but from the public Worship & Church-communion. viz. That it is because of some degree of wrong done us, as we think, in the point of power; ●oth the known truth of the matter, and what I have already said, do plainly disprove it: The perjury, intrusion, profanity and insufficiency mentioned, can not be in this manner palliate. And I heart'ly wish, that the Author, who labours so much by his extenuation to cloak the Apostasy, whereby he and others have rebelled against God, broken the Covenant and changed the Ordinances, would yet seriously consider, that God will not thus be mocked. I grant there may be cases, Wherein we may sufficiently acquit ourselves by a free declaring of our opinion, and a modest desiring and waiting for a redress, and so continuing in the performance of our own duty, though others do, or seem to transgress theirs. But as it were ridiculous, to make this a salvo for all cases, and, in effect, it doth only hold, where our silence at another's transgression by breaking that command, Thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy brother and not suffer sin upon him, may strengthen the sinner's hand, and scandalise others; So, I have already proven, the insinuation here made of our deserting of our duty, to be such an absurd calumny, and the compliance required of us such a manifest partaking in other men's sins, that I wonder at the Author's disingenuity and weakness, in attacking us by such generals.  
What can be then said to what he subjoines, viz. Otherwise if we think ourselves obliged for every thing that is, or that we judge, faulty in other persons, or the frame of things in the Church, to relinquish either our communion with, or our station in it, what will there be but endless swarms of separation and division in any Church under the sun. Surely this, as to us, must be a very pertinent and convincing reflection; seing● in the undervaluing sense of any Papist, it would as easily redargue all the Protestant Churches of their separation from Rome. But if in certain clear exigences, either of testifying against, or not partaking of, other men's sins, there may be a necessity of a proportional withdrawing, are therefore all measures broken, and must we be held for relinquishers on every occasion? Or because we are violently expressed, must we therefore be repute wilful deserters? Who would not pity such dissolute folly? And yet it is all the concludency of the Author's Argument, whereby he would represent us as Patronizers of endless divisions: But if he mind to deal seriously in this matter, all we desire is, that he would first lay down his rules, that we may know the latitude of his comprehension, and then fairly subsume against us, and if I do not unanswerably prove either his excess in the former, or calumny in the latter than let him glory over us.  
In the next place, he again essays to remove the great stick, as he terms it, the Covenant, and here waving, forsooth, its irregularities, whereof, notwithstanding their insinuat weight, number and influence, upon such wise and good men as himself, he neither doth adduce, nor can he make out one. And supposing the Oath still to be binding, and that the present Episcopacy in the Church is the same that was abjured, he tells us, that the Article against it doth only oblige every man, in his calling and station, to extirpate it; but not to extirpate themselves out o● their calling and station, if such an Episcopacy shall be introduced and continued against their will. 'Tis answered, not to repete what I have so often declared, anent the present constitution, quite different in its establishment and many degrees worse than the former, and our obligation by the Covenant against it, the whole of this objection is very readily granted: But seeing it is notour● that the far greater part of us were at once, by Proclamation cast out both of our places, pulpits, and parishes, and that our former Church-assemblies, being all at once in the same manner suppressed, we never had any station in these present meetings pretending to the succession, this pitiful quibbling, as if we had extirpate ourselves, when we was in effect expulsed, i● but a poor and weak mint at wit● altogether insufficient to colour its obvious impertinency. As to what doth here ensue for proving, that the pre●ent Episcopal-government is not the same with that which by the Covenant we abjured, and concerning the acceptation that it would find in England, I am sure I have considered it at that length, and discussed it upon such evident and certain grounds, as neither the Author's reason nor his prejudice, his impartiality nor partiality, with all the patience he wished us, and impatience which he himself often showeth, will be able satisfyingly to remove● Whether then the things mentioned in this place by the Author, be indeed truths, as he allegeth, or gross errors and mistakes, as I have evinced, and his discerning in them● though the best he hath sound, or on the contrary a palpable delusions I willingly leave it to the Readers ingenuity.  
He saith, if they be truths ● he is sure, they are pertinent truths, towards the healing of our sad divisions. ●ut when he shall make as much serious search after the cause, as he seemeth to be sensible of the effects, than I am sure he shall acknowledge them to be not only untruths, but most impertinent. However, if any list to be contentions, he wisheth he could say of this Church● we have no such custom. And this wish I confess, is very consequent to both the Author's opinion and design: For, as we have heard him undervalue the Ordinance and Oath of God, though most convincingly sealed amongst us by the Lord's Power and presence, unto modes and trifles, to the effect he may gain to a compliance, where he can not prevail by his simulat condescendencies; so, at present, supposing them to be as little material, as the length or shortness of the excrementitious hair, he endeavours to enervat all the just opposition of the faithful with the reproach of strange contention. But seeing the things that we contend for do really merit that immovable steadfastness and constant perseverance, so much commended by our Lords command, and the example of all his followers, we hope the custom of perfidious time-serving, which the Prelates have so much practised in this distracted Church, shall never be able to counterbalance it: And therefore as these men have by their vain, carnal and violent contentions, at best for their formalities, but● in effect, for fulfilling their sinful lusts and affections, not only dis-edified● but destroyed and subverted the Church of God in this Land, and disobeyed and disgraced the Prince of Peace, whom they pretend to follow; so let us, as the fearers of the God of truth, and true lovers of our Lord jesus, who is the Truth and also our Peace, considering his example, so much the more endure contradiction, despise shame and reproach, fight ●he good fight, keep the faith, and hold fast our integrity, that we may attain unto that Crown of righteousness, which the Lord the righteous judge shall give at that day unto all that love his appearing.  
And now remaineth the Author's one word, which, he is sure is undeniable, and he thinks very considerable, and it is, that he that cannot join with the present frame of this Church (And if you please to bring the matter nearer, with the terms of the present Accommodation) could not have lived in the Communion of the Christian Church in the time of the first most famous general Assembly of it, the Conncil of Nice; yea, to go no higher, though safely I might, (says he) he must as certainly have separated from the whole catholic Church in the days of the holy Bishop and Martyr Cyprian, upon this very scruple of the Government, as Novatus did upon another occasion. Whence the Author doth draw his assurance, and whereon it is that he would have us to bestow our consideration, I wish he had been more explicit: That in the times to which he refers there was an Episcopacy well advanced in the Church, and consequently a corruption contracted in its government, and yet by all quietly comported with, I do not deny; and to this, if it should be replied● that there is a huge disparity betwixt a corruption contracted in lawful government, still holding the head and substance, by our Lord's authority given to His Church, the worst that can be supposed of these primitive times, and a Government fundamentally corrupt, deriving all its power from him to whom it doth not belong, and founded in an Antichristian supremacy, the certain character of the present constitution; I am confident, the Author would not be able to make any satisfying re●urn: But, the true account of the matter is, that in these ancient times, this Prostasia having crept in, and from small beginnings, and under very specious pretences, grown up insensibly in the Church, and the mystery therein secretly working not having openly disclosed itself, it is little wonder that, though by the more discerning the evil might be feared, yet never the less, no remedy offering, it was not directly opposed; whereas, in our days, this latent corruption, with its most pernicious tendency and bitterfruits, being fully discovered, and thereupon by us solemnly ejected and abjured, and now on●● re-obtruded, under the guilding of some apparent condescendencies, the better to suppress the true Government of God's house, which we are bound to preserve, and for establishing the Supremacy, the very consummation of this iniquity. Certainly these things do import a most manifest difference. I shall not here stand to clear, how that an Oath, though taken upon a matter antecedently binding, doth nevertheless in such manner superinduce a ●urther obligation, as doth not only more strictly bind to vigilance and circumspection, but also to a measure of zeal against defection, beyond the opposition to that same material transgression formerly required: nor need I to put any in mind, how that the sacrificing to the Lord in the high places, permitted without reproof to Samuel, David, and Solomon, before the building of the Temple, did afterward make an exception from the integrity of succeeding Princes. Certainly, to judge that the continuance of an evil, and a relapse into it are of the same nature, and that at this time we may have the same compliance with this episcopal Presidency, which once it found in the Church, under quite different circumstances, were grossly to confound times, despise warnings, trample upon deliverances, and violate the Oath of God, nay further, to contradict even the principles of these times mentioned, and that to that height, that I am assured, were the same ancient Christians, boasted of, on li●e, to see the sad effects that have ensued upon their well-meaning practices, and the patrociny which is thence taken, for the backsliding and overturning of our dayes● their godly sorrow would work in them a carefulness, a clearing of themselves, an indignation, a fear, a vehement desire, a zeal, yea, and a revenge above all the detestation that our Author and his followers do commonly calumniat as fury amongst us. And Cyprian in place of his particular above cited Constitute &c. opposed to the then aspiring Prela●y, would become a Presbyterian of the strictest form: and therefore, though I do not own these accusations of schism & total breach of communion with the Church, wherein the Author is pleased to state and phrase the difference of present practice, from that of the ancient Church; But on the contrary, I have often and plainly declared, that the sin attending the compliance urged is the plain cause and measure of our withdrawing: Yet that our abstaining from the present Church-meetings, so widely differing from these of the ancient Church, and environed with circumstances no less variant, doth not give ground to so much as that seeming opposition in practice, which the Author objects; But on the contrary, is the very same, which all the faithful therein would have chosen, upon the like exigence, I am confident, all true and serious observers will very readily acknowledge; and consequently that this the Authors one and last word, notwithstanding of the enforcing epithets of undeniable and very considerable, wherewith he seconds it, is nevertheless nothing singular from all the rest premised.  
Having thus largely digressed in the review of these Papers, and therein discussed most of the arguments used for this Accommodation; it remains that I follow forth the second Article, where I left: And though, for the better reaching of the outmost of our Adversaries pretensions, I have supposed Prelacy to be thereby reduced to a simple Presidency, and, in this sense, argued against it; yet since it is certain, that the nomination and election of the Episcopus Praeses, who when present is to preside, and when absent, doth, at best, only permit a precarious suffection, is not to be committed to the Presbyteries suffrage, but absolutely reserved to his Majesty; and, next, that the general of, all Church-affaires, and what may be meant by management, whether the decision only, when proposed to the Assembly, or both the proposing and deciding, do seem to require a further explication. I think the Article is further liable to these exceptions. I shall not here repeat, what I have said against the unwarrantableness and inevitable prejudice of the abridgement of t●e Churches just liberty, in the choice of its Moderators, in its several Assemblies, and his Majesty's usurpation in this point; the thing which I at present note as defective, and which was also much desiderat, is a clear explanation, whether the power and liberty of proposing be aswel offered in this Article to the free vote of the meetings, as the power of deciding seems thereby to be conceded; or whether, according to the scheme of our National Synod, as now settled by Authority of Parliament, the power of proposing is not still to be the privilege of the constant moderator● or rather his Majesty's prerogative to be exercised by the mere intervention of the fixed Praeses as his instrument. I shall not criticise, nor ask how the proposal came to be set down in these terms, That all Church-affaires shall he managed in Presbyteries & Synods by their free vote, rather than thus, that they shall be managed by Presbyteries & Synods & their free vote. Only this I may affirm, that the second member of my doubt is no less probable, & consonant to the tenor and prescript of the Act mentioned, then evidently elusory of all the other liberties proposed. But wherefore do I hesitat in these smaller matters● The thing here principally to be observed is, that as, by the present establishment, annexing Church power and jurisdiction, to the King's Crown and Prerogative, and thereby subverting all true Church-government, and making the pretended Presbyteries and Synods only the ●ing and the Prelates their pitiful. Conventicles, the first Article inviting to Presbyteries & Synods is rendered vain and void, & all its cautions impertinent; So the Supremacy, now more than ever prevalent● is with this second article, and all the offer of liberty therein held out, plainly inconsistent: for proof whereof, I only desire that the two may be impartially compared. The Article says, that all Church-affaires shall be managed in Presbyteries or Synods by their free vote. And the Act of Supremacy statutes that his majesty may enact, concerning all meetings and matters Ecclesiastic, what in his Royal misdome he shall think fit. How then can these two consist? or in what manner can they be reconciled? If these Meetings and the power of the Supremacy were both of the same kind, and did stand in the same line, I know the subordination of Synods and Presbyteries to General Assemblies might easily explain the difficulty, but seeing a subordination of this ●ort betwixt these Courts and this high prerogative, would, in effect, destroy their true being and essence; and, on the other hand, to imagine that by this Accommodation, there is any derogation of the Supremacy intended so much as to be connived at, were foolish and presumptuous. It is clear that the Supremacy, and the liberty here pretended cannot rationally be composed; if therefore the Accommodators would deal uprightly in this affair, let them first show us where these Presbyteries and Synods are, to which they would have us to come, and next cause us to understand the tru●h and reality of the just liberty they seem to offer, and then boast of their condescendencies. But while they suppose things for uncontroverted grounds, which are warrantably and plainly by us denied, and then would engage us by a form of specious concessions, wanting all real foundation, they only discover their own palpable weakness or more unpardonnable disingenuity.  
The third Article bears, If any difference fall out in the diocesian Synods betwixt any of the members thereof it shall be lawful to appeal to a Provincial or their Committee. That this Provincial is founded upon, and overswayed by the Supremacy; and thereby manifestly disprovable, as neither a true Ecclesiastick-Court, nor enjoying any competent measure of power & liberty, is abundantly confirmed by the arguments above adduced against the preceding articles. The singularites that here occur are, that the constitution of a Provincial Assembly, being a Court not in use amongst us, should have been expressly declared. 2. That if we may guess at this by Usher's reduction, and according to the present establishment, it must consist of members viz. the Bishops and Deans or constant Moderators of the province, both more unwarrantable as to their office, and corrupt in their practices then the ordinary constituents of inferior meetings. 3. That this provincial is to have a Committie which being yet very unlawfully established for a perpetual Court, can only conduce to the greater strengthening of the Archbishop's primacy, and the oversway of the subjected Assemblies: But seeing the Bishop, in his last conference, hath passed from this Article, I shall not pursue it any further; only the gradation here traced of Presbyteries, Synods, and Provincial Assemblies moveth me to inquire, wherefore no mention of National Assemblies, a Court not only the Supreme in that scale, but so distinctly defined by a particular Act, viz. Act 4. 1663. in its Members, methods of procedor, and extent of power, that I cannot judge its omission accidental and undesigned; nay in effect it is a reserve which doth so unquestionably secure the whole interests and designs of Prelacy, and so evidently redargue all the proposals made of a trepanning mockery, that as I seriously marvel, how the Accommodators, knowing of this ultimate resort, so strongly complicated of all the strength of the Supremacy and Prelacy, did not extend their other concessions to all things else that could be demurred; so I am no less to seek, wherefore the Brethren, who treated, did except so little against it. I need not here exhibit any long description of this Court, which I have several times above mentioned: The Act is full and plain to the meanest capacity: The King, in the very entry, assumes to himself not the indiction only (Which was all that, after long contendings, the more consistent usurpation of former times did by the Act 1612. ascribe unto him) but the constitution of this National Synod, whereby having named and appointed the members and the Archbishop of S. Andrews for Precedent, with an express limitation of the time and place of their meeting to his Majesty's order, and of the matters to be treated and determined, concerning Doctrine, Worship, Discipline and Government, to his Royal pleasure, to be signified in write to the Precedent above named. The ●ing, with the advice of the Estates, confirmeth the same, as the lawful constitution of our Church-assemblies, provided that the King or his Commissioner be always present, and that no Act or O●der be owned as such, but that which shall be agreed upon by the Precedent and major part of the members, and not contrary to the King's prerogative, or law of the Kingdom. And lastly, that no Act, matter or cause be debated, consulted, and concluded, but what shall be allowed and confirmed by his Majesty or his Commissioner for the time. Now, I say, this Act and Constitution still standing & remaining, let any ingenuous person declare singly, what he thinketh all the proposals so long tinckled upon can signify, or what liberty have the dissenting Presbyterian brethren, which may not hereby be restrained and rendered ineffectual? And what abatement is there condescended unto of the exorbitant powers of Prelacy, which is not here either formally or virtually repaired? And, in a word, what good can we expect by any Accommodation, which may not by this frame be certainly frustrate and made void. I have not, in this place, noted the strange and palpable usurpations of the Supremacy against the Lord, and over his Church, which this device and project containe●; because, as, in all the parts and passages of our present establishment, the vestiges of that wickedness are very conspicuous; so, it is in this Act that they are visible in their highest exaltation.  
From all which it may very easily be gathered that the Bishop's policy, in his silence on this point, was no less necessary for the carrying on of his intention, than the reservation of the thing the very colluvies of all corruption of Church-government● deriving its influence and perversions unto all inferior and subordinat Assemblies, doth render all the other overtures of agreement elufory and insignificant.  
The fourth Article is, that Intrants being lawfully presented by the Patron and ●●ly tried by the Presbytery, there shall be a day agreed upon by the Bishop and Presbytery, for their meeting together for their solemn ordination and admission, at which there shall be one appointed to preach, and that it shall be at the parish Church where he is to be admitted, except in the case of impossibility, or extreme inconveniency; and if any difference fall in touching that affair, it shall be referable to the provincial Synod, or the Committee, as any other matter. This is the Article, but there is nothing sound, the very entry offends; not that I judge that for the single cause of Patronages being restored, and presentations made requisite for intituling to a stipend or benefice, Intrants (all other things being plain) should stand off and may not lawfully enter that way; No, though patronages be indeed in themselves a heavy grievance, and in their exercise, for the most part, partial and sinful, and upon these grounds, by an express Act in the year 1649. abolished; yet to Intrants otherwise innocent they are certainly only the greatest injury. But the thing I except, is, 1. That according to this proposal it seems Ministers formerly lawfully called and ordained, and now wrongfully outed, shall have no regress to the exercise of their Ministry, save by this method, which certainly in these circumstances can not but render the pressure far more uneasy. 2. What shall become of Patronages pertaining to Bishops, and of other Churches which are of their patrimony? Certainly this is a point not so far without our line, but at least in a conjunction with the many other things that justly grieve us it may make a part of our regrete.  
But I proceed to take notice of the manner of Ordination here described, and passing the trial previously appointed, It is proposed that there shall be a day agreed upon by the Bishop and Presbytery for their meeting together, for the solemn ordination of Intrants: By which it is evident, that it is not the vote of the plurality, that in this matter, can make a determination; no, the Bishop and Presbytery must both agree to this appointment, the whole Presbytery cannot overrule him in it. And here I cannot but observe the cunning slieness of this draught. The Bishop in all his discourses and treaties hath still, in this point of Ordination, kept himself in the clouds; To assume to himself the sole power of Ordination or a negative voice and part in it is more than all his musty alledgeances, from obscure antiquity, and declining purity, for his fixed presidency, will amount unto; and to descend to posterior Ages of the Church, would be of a consequence no less dangerous, as to the many corruptions that then were crept in, than the ascending to the prior times of scripture light would prove contrary to this prelatic arrogance. On the other hand, seeing both the humour and design of Episcopacy engage him to be principal in the action of Ordination, therein to be subject to the determination of the susfrage of the Presbytery, is nothing agreeable, and can not be digested. And what variety in his discourses this halting ambiguity hath produced, I leave it to such as have had the opportunity to observe: But now that we have him in write, it is worth our pains to consider the contrivance.  
We have heard, in the second Article, that he is willing that Chnrch-matters be managed in Presbyteries and Synods by the vote of the plurality, a fair insinuation that the matter of Ordination shall be in the same manner transacted: And in this Article he leaves the trial to the Presbytery, consents that, if possible, the Ordination be at the parish Church, where one shall be appointed to preach, and, lastly, is content differences falling in be referred to the Superior Courts; all fair generals. But wherefore no mention who shall be the actual ordainers, whether the Bishop and whole Presbytery, or the Bishop alone in behalf and as Mederator of the Presbytery, or the Bishop alone as indeed something greater (whether as in a superior order, or only in a higher degree is but a School nicety) then either a Presbyter, or the Presbytery, & to whose office this part doth properly belong? And, as to these things, though we be left in the dark, yet many palpable indications lead us to feel this last to be the thing designed, against which, if I might now stand to debate, I could show this not only to be contrary to Evangelic parity and simplicity and Apostolic practice, and destitute even of these pretended testimonies of the next Ages for a fixed prostasia; but that it hath been one of the main impostures of the prelatic Spirit, first injuriously to usurp, and then mysteriously to involve the matter of Ordination, that the Bishops might have the dignity to be its proper dispensators and the mystery of iniquity be the more thereby advanced.  
But the point here most remarkable is, that apprehending his condescendencies might render him, as being obnoxious to the plurality of voices, of less power and influence in this affair, Behold how craftily he goeth about to salve his negative, which he may not, for fear of a discovery, plainly own, and that is, by making the appointment of the day for ordaining to depend on his and the Presbyteries joint agreement, wherein if he please to be a dissenter, It is certain that his not assenting to this circumstance will be of no less consequence for his purpose, then if he had reserved unto himself an inhibiting veto, upon the substance of the whole business.  
Now, that this power, in what sort soever by him couched and covered, is not to be allowed, his want of any sufficient warrant for it doth abundantly evinced And further what the Scripture and Apostolic rule in this affair is, these few considerations may in this place satisfy.  
1. That the power of Ordinantion is certainly annexed to, & dependent upon, the pastoral charge; for, seeing that the cure committed to the Apostles, and by them to succeeding Pastors, could not be perpetuat without a succession, the evident reason of the thing itself, with the import of that command, The things that thou hast heard of me, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also, do plainly persuade the assertion.  
2. As we find in Scripture the Apostles and others upon occasion by themselves alone ordaining, so wherever a concurrence did offer, we may observe the Act to be always jointly done and administrat; so we find the twelve jointly ordaining and laying their hands upon the seven Deacons, without any prerogative acclaimed by Peter, who yet, if falsehoods may be compared, hath more apparent grounds in Scripture for his Primacy, then can be showed for the Presidency of any Bishop. Next we have the fraternity of Prophets and Teachers at Antioch sending forth and imposing hands upou Barnabas and Saul, by a like equal conjunction.  
3. It is said of Paul and Barnabas that they (in a plural union) Did ordain Elders in every Church  
And 4. it is manifest that Paul, by reason of his concurrence with other Presbyters in the Ordination of Timothy, doth attribute the same act indifferently to his own hands and, to the hands of the Presbytery. Which Scripture-grounds being joined to the want of any probable reason for this singularity, and the manifestly woeful and sad consequences of this Episcopal imparity with the present unquestionable design of bearing down the just liberty and authority of the Lord's Ministers, in a convenient Subserviency to men's lusts and wickedness, by the stiff and inflexible retaining of this privilege, do, I am confident, make out the eccentrick pre-eminence acclaimed to be not only in itself unlawful, but by our solemn Oaths to maintain Presbytery, and extirpate every thing that shall be found to be contrary to sound Doctrine and the power of godliness perpetually abjured. Seeing therefore that this Article doth certainly imply this corruption, as I have above declared, that it can have no better acceptance from us, than the preceding, needeth no further reasoning. As for the other trifling circumstances, whereby the principal thing in it, is endeavoured to be palliate, they do not merit any more special inquiry.  
The fifth Article is, It is not to be ●oub●ed but the Lord Commissioner will make good what he offered anent the establishment of Presbyteries and Synods; and we trust his Grace will procure such security to the Brethren for declaring their judgement, that they may do it without any hazard in counterveening any law, and that the Bishop shall humbly and earnestly recommend this to his Grace. This Article made up of uncertain assurances, ridiculous trusts, and the Bishop's conformable undertaking, is already by me sufficiently examined, in the very entry of this discourse; and there told, that what the Commissioner did undertake anent the establishment of Presbyteries, I did not exactly know; but if it was that which is reported, viz, that they should be set up as preceding the 1638. I thought it could contribute nothing to the removal of our just exceptions. I shall not here offend the Reader by a vain repetition; but seeing the grounds formerly laid down are very material, and yet by the most part little adverted to, it will not be amiss that, after the full and plain account I have given of these matters, I again run over them; and  
1. That according to the principles of truth, Presbyteries are not founded in any humane establishment, but in the right and Authority which our Lord hath given unto his Church, is our constant persuasion: so that, though the accessary confirmation and countenance of the powers may be of great use to, and no less acceptance with the Church, yet it is no part of their original right.  
2. Before the 1638. and even until the Year 1661. Presbyteries were founded and did continue in this Church, not by virtue of any Act of parliament, whereby they were properly authorized; but upon the basis of that intrinseck right, which I have already mentioned. Thus having convened and settled themselves shortly after the Reformation, they continued their possession uninterrupted until the Year 1661. It is true, they obtained the confirmation of King and Parliament in the Year 1592. as also in the Year 1612. many corruptions introduced, and invasions made by the Prelates upon the rights and privileges of these Assemblies, were b● the same Authority, ratified and approven: but as by the latter Act their being was not totally dissolved; so it is not unto the former that they do owe their fundamental establishment.  
3. All that can be probably gathered from what is promised, is, that possibly to some such apparent mixture of Episcopacy and Presbytery, now to be form, as did result from t●e intrusion of Prelates upon Presbyteries, before the 1638. the civil sanction may be interposed: But since now the case is vastly altered, and that in effect, at present, there is not so much as any kind of true Ecclesiastick-government or meeting to be found among the Prelates and their Dependants; nay, that all we are to expect is some hodge podge device of Supremacy accommodat to its desires, and directly and absolutely subjected to its pretended omnipotency, it is clear and certain, that this mistaken project can afford us no clearing: If any man judge me uncharitable, how glad would I be to be found really in ●he wrong? But seeing it is evident, that the Supremacy is rather more and more ascendent, and that there is not the least probability either of its mitigation, or of the rescission of the Act for Restitution, etc. Anno 1662. and yet far less the retreating of the Proclamation january 1662. dissolving Presbyteries, and of their, and their true members reestablishment, all requisite to give the Lord Commissioner's offer (if any such was made) a genuine and satisfactory meaning, why should we preserve an illusive charity to plain and solid ingenuity.  
But if any man will still contend, the comparing together of the first and second part of this Article, I am certain, will prove sufficient to convince the most inflexible opiniaster. In the first part, It is not doubted, but the King's Commissioner will make good his offer, viz. to set up Presbyteries as before 1638 In the second, it is hoped, that he will procure due security to the Brethren in the free declaration of their judgement. But if true Presbyteries be rightly restored this security is clearly superfluous; and if they shall not be restored in that integrity, but by virtue of the Supremacy, on which they depend, reduced to the figure of the then model, by authorising the above mentioned mixture, it is evident, that in place of resolution, we have only an arbitrary politic alteration, a compliance wherewith no declaration & protestation can in any wise purge, as I have already fully proven: And this is indeed one of the reasons, why I termed the Bishops trust ridiculous. But yet I confess there are other causes that do more provoke me to this character, the one is, that it should be imagined, that Governors will give an antecedent licence to transgress laws, which nevertheless in all probability they have not the least intention to repeal; the other is, that the Bishop should suppose that a testimony, requisite upon the account of duty, may be either forborn or suspended, for want of an assured immunity; whereas it is most certain, that wherever faithfulness to God doth require our appearance, though in the things that are least, the fear of man, that bringeth a snare, is not to be regarded, much less to be therewith balanced. I acknowledge indeed, that the faint and pusillanimous dealing of some of the Brethren, who conferred, in making this their scruple, seems to have drawn from the Bishop this insinuat sollution, and I should verily have taken it for a scornful indulgence, if he had not to his hope adjoined the promise of his humble and earnest intercession. But seeing it is to be by all regreted, & we hope shall be by the decliners themselves bitterly mourned for, that being in so just and so good a cause not only called, but in effect openly provoked and baffled to give an answer which reasons, to the demand made unto them, they did not so sanctify the Lord God in their hearts, and with their tongues, as to show a readiness thereto with meekness and fear, let be to give a testimony for God in such an important exigence, it is evident that this pitiful caveat with the promise annexed are at best but the effects of a carnal condescendence unto a sinful fear. If the Lord call for our confession, who ever heard that that, which is its special grace, even the obvious apprehension of hazard, should be its hindrance? Nay, who is man in that case of whom we should be afraid? But and if the Lord require it not, this is certainly a foolish antidote to a vain solicitude.  
And thus we are arrived at the sixth & last Article, That no Intrant shall be engaged to any canonical oath, or subscription unto the Bishop; and that his opinion anent tha● government shall not prejudge him in this, but it shall be free for him to declare. And this is truly the only fair condescendence that of them all hath any thing of a just ease; But seeing it is very inadequat to the main difficulty, and for an apparent liberty of opinion doth certainly tend, according to the late morality of these times, to involve us in many sinful and inconsistent practices, I shall not further urge it.  
And now having finished the examination of these six Articles, & therein, amongst many other empty pretensions, and inextricable ambiguities, rencountered a most cunning & viperous invective against the League and Covenant, consisting of the like number, as if it were a mere politic complication of doubts and snares, for the more clear redargution of the Author's presumption and malice, I cannot but desire my Reader, impartially to consider both, and what, and with what success boht of us have objected, and, I am confident, that though an all most infinite over proportion of matter for importance, aswel as variety, the greatest diversity of humours, interests, opinions, nay and almost of Nations, that ever concurred in one treaty, with the no less disproportion of parts and abilities in us, the two Antagonists, do every way increase and accumulat the disadvantages on my part; yet it will appear, that such is the power and virtue of a righteous cause that where in the attacking the Covenant the Author hath carried back nothing but his own shame and our scorn, the truth, not I, hath, on the other side, dissipated and routed his Articles with an entire victory, which if he or any man account vain, or a preposterous triumph, it is only truth's confidence, and I do hereby confirm it with a no less resolute defiance.  
Hitherto I have examined this overture of Accommodation, according to its terms contained in the above-written Articles. As for the exceptions that may be made against it from its contrivance, tendency, and circumstances, the inconveniencies that would ensue upon it, and other more remote arguments, they are so easily deduceable from the preceding grounds, that it were superfluous to prosecute them by any more distinct proposal. That we may therefore, once for all, review and sum up the manifold and manifest evils of this device, not more conceited and boasted of by its contrivers, the Servants of men, then deservedly rejected by all the true Ministers of our Lord jesus Christ: Notwithstanding of all the specious pretexts and fair smoothe that have been adhibite for triming up this Accommodation to an alluring and taking condescendence; yet, I am persuaded, that who ever seriously ponders what hath been said upon it, will be quickly convinced that the difficulties following do still remain as invincible impediments to all conscientious men.  
First, That a conjunction with and in the present Church meetings, is a certain acknowledgement of, and participation with the present Ecclesiastick-government, which in effect is not truly such, but a mere politic constitution wholly dependent upon, and resolving in the Supremacy, wherein no faithful Minister can take part,  
Secon●ly, That this conjunction doth evidently infer a consent and submission to this Supremacy, as arrant an usurpation upon the Kingdom of jesus Christ in and over his Church, as ever did dare the King of ●ings, and Lord of Lords in any age.  
Thirdly, That though this consent could not be objected, yet such is the present elevation of this all-swaying Prerogative, not intended to be depressed, that all other concessions, though in themselves satisfying, would thereby be deprived of any consistent assurance; and rendered wholly elusory. And really, when I reflect upon these particulars, I cannot forbear to ask, with what conscience can Ministers rather partake in Church-meetings framed by, and under the power of the Supremacy, then if the Bishops were therein still to domineer after the rate of the highest Prelacy? Or what delusion can be more ridiculous, than that men excepting against meetings, because of the Bishop's usurpation therein, should upon the vacating and reassuming of this power by the King as Supreme, be thereby enticed unto a compliance.  
But, Fourthly, as these meetings are founded upon, and absolutely subjected unto the Supremacy; so the often cited Proclamation, and Act of Restitution tell us, that they are authorized and ordered by the Archbishop and Bishop; and consequently do in such manner derive their Authority from them, that the Members do only act therein as the Bishops their Delegates, or rather as the subdelegates of his Majesty's Delegates, a strange accumulation of absurdities, which, I am certain, this constitution standing, cannot be salved by any overture whatsomever.  
Fifthly, The meetings, whereunto we are invited, do consist of ●uch members for their perjurious intrusion, and canonical servitude (to say nothing of their more extrinseck delinquencies of profanity, insufficiency, and irreligion) as may not only warrant a non-conjunction, but a positive separation. And certainly if the lower degree of these crimes, in the time of the former Bishops, did even, under that different constitution, offend some of the Lords faithful servants to an abhorrent with drawing, how much more should their brimful measures in our days, with the duty of a testimony, which our Covenant, and men's unparallelled backslidings, do now require, justify our detestation? It is true G. B. tells us that under this there may be a fear in us, that we shall not carry things as we would, which he thinks, is very little suitable to the patience we p●ead for: But really, so long as our will is moved and directed by the Rules, and in order to the ends, which our Lord hath appointed to these Courts, I see not how this fear can be condemned, as either ambitious, or disagreeable to our principles.  
Sixtly, Notwithstanding of any thing conceded by the Articles, and over and above all that hath been said against an Ep●scopus Praeses, even in the most moderate acceptation, the bishop as offered to be reduced, is repugnant both to Scripture, purer antiquity, and our solemn Oaths and Engagements, inconsistent with he principles of Presbytery, and in effect very little lowed from any of these powers and heights which he acclaimes, in as much as he is still at the King's nomination and not subject to either the censure or control of the meetings, over which he doth preside. 2. He retaineth all his vain and absurd temporalities. 3. As constant Moderator the power of proposing and the method of handling and voting any matter controverted, with the care and direction of the execution of any sentence pronounced, pertaineth to him solely. 4. For any thing as yet declared, the Bishop must have at least a more eminent power and suffrage, in the matter of Ordination and Excommunication: and, in this point, not only the Articles are most suspiciously reserved and obscure, but if we take notice of the Accomodators their other discourses and writings, we have little reason to doubt that the power of both is to abide with him, as it was established by the Act 1612. and observed before 1638. So that, in my opinion, all the ease offered by the Accommodation may be very quickly calculat; and in a word amounts to this only, that where now these meetings, do by a precarious tolerance consult and determine in lesser matters, and in things more weighty, do rather prepare and ripen to the Bishop's decision, who also ordains and censures with very little ceremony, by this Treaty and its Articles, over and above the wretched salvo of a pactioned and contrariant protestation, this tolerance is to be changed into a more assured liberty, as to the Bishop, but every whit as dependent upon the King as Supreme; And the acts of ordination and excommunication are to be passed and performed, more publicly and with greater solemnity. Which observation, I must confess, is to me so obvious, that it hath been always attended with no less persuasion, that if the Bishop did not judge our consciences as peevish and fickle, as he asteemeth the matters in difference frivolous and empty trifles, he would not have this risced his own reputation, in all the business and stir he hath made about such a nothing of condescendence. Of which I am the more confirmed, that though the papers which I have discussed were by the Bishop acknowledged to have been written some years ago, and do all along conclude a conformity to the present establishment; yet the Bishop very justly, though imprudently, supposing the case to be still the same, hath made much use of them of late without the least alteration to engage us unto the terms of his new agreement.  
Seventhly, This Accommodation utterly disowns & cuts off the Ruling Elder, an officer not only clearly warranted from Scripture and the nature of the Church's constitution, and singularly commended by his usefulness; but in some respect countenanced even by the mixtures we see in his Master's ecclesiastic commission.  
Eightly, The Terms offered being proposed with this express condition, (Episcopacy being always preserved) and in effect so fully retaining the substance of all the corruptions and grievances of that model and frame, by us very solemnly and often abjured both by the National and the Solemn League and Covenant, to close and comply therewith were, at least, to desert the Lords cause, by casting away the word of his patience in this hour of temptation's and to give ourselves to that detestable indifferency and neutrality, which we have by Oath so enixly renounced.  
Ninthly, The embracing of this pretended coalition, but real suppression of Presbyterian Governments would not only be a total surrender of that interest unto the will of its adversaries; but engage us into snares contests, offences, and temptations, that may be better foreseen than they can be numbered, let be prevented. The Authors propone peace, as the scope of their overture, and yet they know, nay do expressly provide a liberty for the differences and protestations, that must necessarily ensue: What a strange method have we here of composing strife, neither by removing the grounds, nor separating the parties; but plainly, by joining them in their declared opposition and sworn contrary endeavours, of the one to mantain, and the other to extirpate, to exasperate the feuds? And is not this one reflection sufficient to redargue the insincerity of this whole project, and to inform all men, that it is not union, but the very extinction of Presbytery that is thereby designed?  
I shall not here note, that the Brethren, being once brought in to these meetings, where there will be infallibly, no less discord than inequality, it is not to be doubted, but the hatred, envy and jealousies of the stronger against the weaker would in this juncture, so fertile of occasions, soon procure the latter to be deposed and ejected. And that by a power, which they could not so well disowne. But this, I am sure, would in that event fall out so acceptably to the patient, that I shall not, at presents reckon it as an inconvenience. The evils more to be considered are, that as no conscientious man can rationally hold out the smallest benefit or use of edification, that can arise to the Church of Christ by this so heterogeneous, distracted, and unequal association; so, what can be thence expected, except either the temptation of continual heats, sorrows and offences, or rather, according to the present too visible decay, the cooling of zeal, the declining to luke warmness, the ensnaring of consciences, conniving at corrupt Acts and practices, the partaking of other men's sins, and the evil example, stumbling and grief, that will thereon redound to all the fearers of God and lovers of his righteous cause. I do not here make mention of the offence of the people, as some do, who use it as an argument, yea their main one, that this Accommodation being displeasing by provoking them to withdraw from such as close with it would defeat its own design. No, if the thing be righteous and otherwise expedient, to indulge to humours is indeed a vain popularity: And I am heartily sorry, that good men, in so good a cause, should have bewrayed so great weakness, as by insinuating a false charge of humour against the people, to have not only discovered their own pusillanimity, but furnished the adversary with so fair and plausible an advantage. But leaving them, in this point, to. G. B' s correction, and him also to his vain illusion, as if herein he had overcome a great part of our strength, The offence, that I fear, & prognostic from a compliance with this Accommodation, is quite of another nature, viz. that now, in this baksliding time, such a bad and influencing example may be of dangerous consequence to remove them from their steadfastness. And how tender of the soul concernment of the Brethren, and fearful of that woe, which even he who is the blessing of all Nations hath denounced against them, by whom offences come, every sincere Christ an aught in this point, to be, I hope all interested will seriously consider.  
But now it is full time to conclude. And therefore I say, that ●eeing the terms of this Accommodation are ambiguous, defective and sinful, its design and tendency most pernicious to the true Government of God's House, and the Kingdom of jesus Christ, and its whole fabric and frame, to the conviction of all discerning men, only forged out by necessity and Policy, and smoothed by delusion and hypocrisy, on purpose to catch a small remnant of the Lords faithful Ministers, witnesses against the present backslidings & thereby, if possible, for ever to suppress the restoring of the work of God in the Land, I judge it ought to be rejected as a vain ensnaring invention: So that, although the hatchers should be thereby wrathfully irritat, & this cockatrice egg should break out into a viper; yet better it be crushed for our suffering, then sinfully eaten to our death & destruction. The reproaches of ungovernable and unpeacable may indeed be bitter unto ingenuous spirits, let be sincere lovers of the Prince of peace, and the persecution of men may possibly proceed to afflict and vex: But seeing that, through Satan and the world their known enmity against the Lord and all his followers, these things are, in place of the opprobry, become rather the badge of truth, Only let our conversation be as becometh the Gospel, and let us stand fast in one spirit with one mind striving together for the pure ordinances of God's house once given unto us, nothing terrified by our adversaries, which is to them an evident token of perdition, but to us of salvation and that of God: for unto the faithful it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake. There is, I confess, one temptation, which doth more speciously insinuate, and that is, the loss of the liberty of the Gospel, which men may possibly, in their displeasure, abridge or totally take from us: But as this solicitude is not more praise worthy, when devolved on our Lord and master, then subtly deceitful, when its application is, spare thyself, So let none of these things move us, Neither let us reckon our lives dear unto ourselves, so that we may finish our course with joy, and the Ministry, which we have received of the Lord jesus. Let therefore truth, simplicity and godly sincerity be our main study, and faith & entire submission our only establishment, knowing, and on this resting, that not only his peace here shall be our portion and the end everlasting life: But that God can as easily of our ashes raise up Ministers to himself, as of stones Children to Abraham. And that he who hath glorified his name, will glorify it again. AMEN.   
FINIS.   

The Copy of two LETTERS, Commonly repute to have been written by the Bishop of DUMBLANE, at least by him communicate to several Friends.  

The first Letter.  
SIR,  
in the late Conference I had with your Friend, the sum of what I said was this.  
1. That Episcopal-Government, managed in conjunction with Presbyters in Presbyteries and Synods, is not contrary either to the rule of Scripture, or the example of the primitive Church, but most agreeable to both.  
2. Yea, it is not contrary to that very Covenant, which is pretended by so many as the main, if not the only reason of their scrupling: And for their sakes it is necessary to add this. For notwithstanding the many irregularities both in the matter and form of that Covenant, and the illegal and violent ways of pressing and prosecuting of it, yet to them who remain under the Conscience of its full force and obligation, and in that seem invincibly persuaded, it is certainly most pertinent, if it be true, to declare the consistence of the present Government even with that obligation. And as both these assertions, I believe upon the exactest (if impartial and impassionat) inquiry, will be found to be in themselves true; so they are owned by the generality of the Presbyterians in England; as themselves have published their opinion in print under this Title, Two Papers of proposals humbly presented to his Majesty by the Reverend Ministers of the Presbyterian persuasion, Printed at London Anno 1661. Besides other passages in these Papers to the same purpose, Page 11, and 12. are these words, And as these are our general ends and motives, so we are induced to insist upon the form of a Synodical Government, conjunct with a fixed Presidency or Episcopacy, for these reasons.  
1. We have reason to believe that no other terms will be so generally agreed on, etc.  
2. It being agreeable to the Scripture & primitive Government, is likeliest to be the way of a more universal concord, if ever the Churches on Earth arrive to such a blessing; However it will be most acceptable to God, and well informed Consciences..  
3. It will promote the practice of Discipline & Godliness without disorder, and promote order without hindering Discipline and Godliness.  
4. And it is not to be silenced (though in some respect we are loath to menton it) that it will save the Nation from the violation of their solemn vow and Covenant, without wronging the Church at all, or breaking any other Oath, etc. And a little after they add, that the Prelacy disclaimed in that Covenant, was the engrossing o● the sole Power of Ordination and jurisdiction, & exercising of the whole Discipline absolutely by Bishops themselves and there Delegates, Chancellors, Surrogates, and Officials, etc. Excluding wholly the Pastors of Particular Churches from all share in it. And there is one of prime note amongst them, who, in a large Treatise of Church-Government, doth clearly evince, that this was the mind both of the Parliament of England, and of the Assembly of Divines at Westminster, as they themselves did expressly declare it, in the admitting of the Covenant, That they understand it not to be against all Episcopacy, but only against the particular frame, as it is worded in the Article itself: For our principal model in England, and the way of managing of it, whatsoever is amiss (and it can be no wrong to make that supposition concerning any Church on Earth) or whatsoever they apprehend to be amiss, though it may be upon mistake, the Brethren that are dissatisfied, had possibly better acquitted their duty by free admonitions and significations of their own sense in all things, then by leaving of their station, which is the one thing that hath made the breach (I fear) very hard to cure, and in humane appearance near to incurable: But there is much charity due to them, as following the dictat of their own Conscience; And they owe, and, I hope, pay the same back again to these that do the same in another way; & whatsoever may be the readiest & happiest way of reuniting those that are mutually so minded, the Lord reveal it to them in due time. This one word I shall add, That this difference should arise to so great a height, may seem somewhat strange to a●y man that calmly considers, that there is in this Church no change at all, neither in the Doctrine nor worship, no nor in the substance of the Discipline itself: But when it falls on matters easily inflammable, how little a spark, how great a fire will it kindle?  
Because every on hath not the Book I have transcribed here Mr Baxter's own words. Baxt. of Church- Government. 3. P. C. 1. P. 276.  
An Episcopacy desirable for the Reformation and Peace of the Churches. A fixed Precedent durante vitâ, P. 297. P. 330. But some will say, We are engaged against all Prelacy by Covenant, and therefore cannot yield to so much as you do without perjury. Ans. That this is utterly untrue, I thus demonstrate.  
1. When that Covenant was presented to the Assembly with the bare name of Prelacy joined to Popery, many grave and reverend Divines desired that the word Prelacy might be explained, because it was not all Episcopacy they were against, and thereupon the following concatenation in the Parenthesis was given by way of explication in these words. That is Church- Government by Arch- Bishops, Bishops, there Chancellors and Commissaries, Deans and Chapters, Arch- Deans, and all the other Ecclesiastical Officers depending on that hierarchy. By which it appears, that it was only the English Hierarchy, or frame that was covenanted against, and that which was then existent, that was taken down.  
2. When the House of Lords took the Covenant, Mr Thomas Coleman, that gave it them, did so explain it, and profess that it was not their intent to Covenant against all Episcopacy, and upon this explication it was taken; and certainly the Parliament was most capable of giving the due sense of it, because it was they that did impose it.  
3. And it could not be all Episcopacy that was excluded, because, a Parochial Episcopacy was at the same time used and approved commonly here in England.  
4. And in Scotland they had used the help of visiters for the Reformation of their Churches, committing the care of a Country, or Circuit to some one man, which was as high a sort of Episcopacy, at least as any I am pleading for. Besides that they had Moderators in all their Synods, which were temporary Bishops.  
5. Also the chief Divines o● the late Assembly at Westminster, that recommended that Covenant to the Nations, have professed there own judgements for such a moderate Episcopacy as I am here defending, and therefore never intended the exclusion of this by Covenant.  
After he adds, As we have Prelacy to bewar of, so we have the contrary extreme to avoid, and the Church's peace (if it may be) to procure; And as we must not take down the Ministry, lest it prepare men for Episcopacy; so neither must we be against any profitable exercise of the Ministry, or desirable order amongst them for fear of introducing Prelacy. Thus far Baxter's own words.  
There is another that hath write a Treatise on purpose, & that zealous & strict enough, touching the obligation of the League and Covenant under the name of Theophilus Timorcus. And yet therein it is expressly asserted, that however, at first, it might appear, that the Parliament had renounced all Episcopacy, yet upon exacter inquiry, is was evident to the Author, that, that very scruple was made by some members in Parliament, and resolved (with the consent of their Brethren in Scotland) that the Covenant was only intended against Prelacy, as than it was in being in England, leaving a latitude for Episcopacy, etc.  
It would be noted, that when that Covenant was framed, there was no Episcopacy at all in being in Scotland, but in England only; so that the extirpation of that frame only could then be meant and intended. Likewise it would be considered, that though there is in Scotland at present the name of Dean, and Chapter, and Commissaries, yet that none of t●ose at all do exerce any part of the Discipline under that name, neither any other as Chancellor or Surrogat etc. by delegation from Bishops, with a total exclusion of the community of Presbyters from all power and share in it, which is the great point of difference betwixt that model and this with us, and imports so much as to the main of Discipline. I do not deny, that the generality of the People, yea even of Ministers in Scotland, when they took the Covenant might likewise understand that Article, as against all Episcopacy whatsoever, even the most moderate, especially if it should be restored under the express name of Bishops and Archbishops, never considering how different the nature, and model, and way o● exercising it may be, though under the same names, and that the due regulating of the thing is much more to be regarded, then either the retaining or altering of the name. But though they did not then consider any such thing, yet certainly it concerns them now to consider it, when it is represented to them, that not only the words of the Oath itself do very genuinly consist with such a qualified & distinctive sense, but that the very Composers or Empowers of it, or a considerable part of them, did so understand and intend it. And unless they make it appear, that the Episcopacy now in question with us in Scotland is either contrary to the word, or to that mitigated sense of their own Oath, it would seem more suitable to Christian charity & moderation, rather to yield to it as tolerable, at least, then to continue so inflexibly fast to their first mistakes and excessive zeal, as for love of it to divide from their Church, and break the bond of peace.  
It may likewise be granted, that some learned men in England, who refused to take the Covenant, did possibly except against that Article of it, as signifying the total renounciation and abolition of all Episcopacy; And seeing that was the real event and consequent of it, and they having many other strong and weighty reasons for refusing it, it is no wonder that they were little curious to inquire what past amongst the contrivers of it, and what distinction or different senses either the words of that Article might admit, or those contrivers might intend by them. And the truth is, that besides many other evils, the iniquity and unhappiness of such Oaths and Covenants lies much in this, that, being commonly framed by persons that, even amongst themselves, are not ●ully of one mind, but have there different opinions and interests to serve (and it was so even in this) they are commonly patched up of so many several Articles & clauses, & those too o● so versatile & ambiguous terms, that they prove most wretched snares, thickets of briers & thorns to the Consciences of those that are engaged in them, & matter of endless contentions & disputs amongst them about the true sense and intendment, & the tye & obligements of those doubtful clauses, especially in some such alterations & revolutions of affairs as always may, & often do, even within few Years follow after them; for the models and productions of such devices are not usually long Lived. And whatsoever may be said for their excuse in whole or in part, who, in yeeldance to the power that pressed it, and the general opinion of this Church at that time, did take that Covenant in the most moderate & least schismatical sense that the terms can admit; yet I know not what can be said to clear them of a very great sin, that not only framed such an engine, but violently imposed it upon all ranks of men, not Ministers & other public persons only, but the whole body & community of the People, thereby engaging such droves of poor ignorant persons, to they know not what, &, to speak freely, to such a hodge podge of various concernments, Religious and Civil, as Church-Discipline and Government, the Privileges of Parliament and Liberties of Subjects, & condign punishment of Malignants, things hard enough for the wisest and learnedest to draw the just lines of, and to give plain definitions and decisions of them, & therefore certainly as far off from the reach of poor country People's understanding, as from the true interest of their souls; & yet to tie them by a Religious and sacred Oath either to know all these, or to contend for them blindfold without knowing them, can there be instanced a greater oppression and tyranny over Consciences then this? Certainly they that now govern in this Church cannot be charged with any thing near or like unto it; for whatsoever they require of intrants to the Ministry, they require neither subscriptions nor Oaths of Ministers already entered, and far less of the whole body of the People; and it were ingenuously done to take some notice of any point of moderation, or whatsoever else is really commendable even in those we account our greatest enemies, & not to take any part in the World for the absolute Standard and unfailing rule of truth and righteousness in all things.  
But oh who would not long for the shadows of the evening, and to be at rest from all these poor childish trifling contests.  

POSTSCRIPT.  
WHatsoever was the occasion of copying out the passages cited in this Paper, & of adding these few thoughts that then occurred touching that subject, I would have neither of them understode as intended any way to reflect upon or judge other Churches where this Government is otherwise exercised; but what is here said is only argumentum ad hominem, & Particularly adapted to the Persons, and notions, and scruples we have to do withal in this Church. And though this is de figned to come to very few hands, yet I wish that what is here represented were by some better way brought to the notice of such as know least of it and need it most● that if it be posfible, their extreme fervour might be somewhat allayed by this consideration, that this very form of Government, which is so hateful to them, is by the Presbyterians of the Neighbour Kingdom accounted a thing, not only tolerable, but desirable: And I might add, that, upon due enquiry, the reformed Churches abroad will be found in a great part much of the same opinion; Yea, I am not afraid to say yet further, that I think there is good reason to believe, that it were not only Lawful for these that now govern in this Church but, if prejudice hindered not, might prove expedient and useful for the good of the Church itself, that they did use in some instances a little more authority nor they do, and yet might still be very far off from proud and tyrannical domination, never applying their power to obstruct what is good, but to advance it, and not at all against the truth, but always for it, and while they do so, the Atheism and profanness that abounds cannot reasonably be imputed to the nature of the Government, as too commonly it is by some, but rather to the schism that is made by withdrawing and dividing from it: For there is not a greater enemy in the World to the power of Religion than the wranglings and bitter contentions that are caused about the external forms of it. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Nazianzen pathetically begins one of his orations for peace. I confess I have sometime wondered to see some wise and good men, after all that can be said to them, make so great reckoning of certain Metaphysical exceptions against foam little words & formalities of difference in the Government, and set so little a value upon so great a thing as is the peace of the Church. Oh when shall the loud and harsh noises of our debates be turned to the sweeter sound of united prayers for this blessed peace, that we might cry with one heart and voice to the God of peace, who alone can give it, Pacem te poscimus omnes: and if we be real supplicants for it, we would beware of being the disappointers of our own desires, and of obstructing the blessing we pray for, and therefore would mainly study a temper receptive of it, and that is great meekness and charity, and certainly whatsoever party or opinion we follow in this matter, the badge by which we must be known to be followers of jesus Christ is this, that we love one another, and that law unquestionably is of divine right, and therefore would not be broken by bitter passion and revile, and rooted hatreds one against another for things about which the right is in dispute betwixt us; and however that be, are we Christians? Then doubtless the things wherein we agree are incomparablely greater than these wherein we disagree, and therefore in all reason should he more powerful to unite us, than the other to divide us. But to restrain myself, and stop here, if we love both our own and the Church's peace, there be two things I conceive we should most carefully avoid, the bestowing of too great zeal upon small things, and too much fidence of opinion upon doubtful things: It is a mad thing to rush on hard and boldly in the dark, and we all know what kind of person it is of whom Solomon says, That he rages and is confident.    

The second Letter.  
SIR,  
The question betwixt us, is not concerning Bishops governing absolutely by themselves and their delegates, but concerning Bishops governing in conjunction with Presbyters in Presbyteries and Synods of which we affirm.  
That it is neither contrary to the Scriptures, nor the example of the primitive Church, but must agreeable to both: If any think otherways, let them produce their evidences of Scripture and antiquity. If they say, it is not enough to make such a form lawful, that it is not contrary to Scripture, but there ought to be an express command or rule in Scripture to warrant it, they will sure be so just, as to be subject to the same Law themselves. Let them then produce such an express command or rule for their own model of Kirk-sessions, Presbyteries, Synods Provincial & National, and a commission of the Kirk in their several dependences and subordinations for the ordinary and constant government and exercise of discipline in the Church, and the necessary changing of the moderators in these meetings, excepting only that of the Ki●k-session, wherein the Minister is constanly to moderate; for without such an express rule as this, a Bishop or fixed Precedent may very well consist with that whole from they contend for; And it is really and actually so at this present in this Church, and they stand so much the rather obliged to bring a clear command for these judicatories, and their subordinations, because they affirm them to be of unquestionable divine right, and the very Kingdom of Christ upon earth, and the only lawful and absolutely necessary Government of the Christian Church, whereas the asserters of other forms do not usually speak so big. If they shall say, they are not against a fixed Precedent or Bishop, or call him what you will (for to contest about names, especially in so grave a matter, is trivial and childish) but that the question is about their pow●r, than we beg that it may be so. Let that be all the question betwixt us, and then we hope the controversy will be quickly ended; for we trust we shall be found not at all desireous to usurp or effect any undue power, but rather to abate of that power which is reasonable and conform even to primitive Episcopacy, then that a schism should continue in this Church upon that score. But be it supposed, that Bisbops do stretch their power somewhat beyond their line, let all the World judge, whether Ministers are for that engaged to leave their Station and withdraw from those meetings of the Church, which themselves approve of, for the exercise of Discipline, yea and (as many of them have done) to separate from the public Worship, and whole communion of the Church, because of some degree of wrong done them (as they think) in that point of power, or wether they had not sufficiently acquitted themselves, and discharged there Consciences by free declaring of their opinion concerning that matter, & modestly desiring the redress of it; & patiently waiting for it, though it be not presently redressed, & continuing in the performance of their own duty to their power, though others above them, or about them, do transgress theirs, or seem at least to them to do so; otherwise if we think ourselves obliged for every thing that is, or that we judge faulty in other persons, or in the frame of things, to relinquish either the communion of it, or our station in it, what will there be but endless swarms of separations and divisions in any Church under the Sun.  
But there is one thing in this business of ours that sticks after all the rest. The Covenant. As to that, waving all the irregularities of it, though so many and so great, that in the judgement of divers, both wise and good men, they seem to annul the obligation of it, suppose it still to bind all that took it, and suppose likewise, that the present Episcopacy in this Church is that same that was abjured in that Covenant; yet the Article relating thereto obliges each one only to this, to endeavour whithin there calling and station, if such an Episcopacy shall be introduced and continued against their will. But the truth is, if men would have the patience to inquire into it, and consider the thing without prejudice and partiality, this our Episcopacy will be found, not to be the same with that abjured in that Covenant: For that is the Government of Bishops and Archbishops absolutely by themselves and their Delegates, Chancellors, Archdeacon's, Officials, etc. as it is expressed in the very words of the Article, and was on purpose so expressed, to difference that frame from other forms of Episcopacy● and particularly from that which is exercised by Bishops jointly with Presbyters in Presbyteries and Synods, and that is it which is now used in this Church. And that the Presbyterians in England do generally take notice of this difference, and to that degree, as to account the one model contrary to the Covenant, and the other, not contrary to it, b●t very well agreeing with it, is a thing that none can deny, nor any that uses diligence to inquire can be ignorant of, for it is clear in divers treatises extant in print. These things, to my best discerning, are truths; and if they be indeed so, I am sure are pertinent truths, toward the healing of our sad divisions; but if any like to be contentious, I wish I could say of this Church, we have no such custom: But this certainly may be said, that there is no custom doth more disedifie the Churches of God, and less become the followers of the Prince of peace. I shall only add on word which I am sure is undeniable, and I think is ve●y considerable, that he that cannot join with the present frame of this Church, could not have lived in the communion of the Christian Church in ●he time of the first most famous General Assembly of it, the Council of Nice, yea (to go no higher up, ●ho●gh safely I might) he must as certainly have separated from the whole Catholic Church in the days of the holy Bishop and Martyr Cyprian upon this ve●y scruple of the Government, as Novatus did upon another occasion.    

An APPENDIX In Answer to a Narrative of the Issue of the Treaty anent Accommodation.  
SInce the finishing of these sheets, I have seen a narrative of the last passage a●d issue of this Treaty for Accommodation, which again engageth me to take my pen. And in this Discourse, the Author (and 'tis like one of the two, whom I have already rencountered) premising the Articles that we have heard, exhibiteth the words, and manner of the brethren's refusal to close therewith, and then resumeth the Accommodators their Arguments, concluding with a short additional reflecction, upon both our Covenants.  
And as for the first part, touching the brethren's refusal and their declining to give in their reasons, or to debate the matter without an express command, I do neither contradict nor apologise. Only of this I am assured, that whatever influence, the manifold transgressions and mighty sins of the present times, the intractableness of adversaries, or the hopeless self-conceit of the party with whom they dealt, might have had upon their prudence to keep silence; yet neither can a cause, so righteous and evident, be there throw justly prejudged, nor will the duty of a testimony, for God and his Truth in so clear on exigent, be thereby satisfied.  
The Arguments by the Author resumed, are little or nothing different from these, that I have already discussed, and when I come to re-examine them, I shall take them rather as they shall fall in then as they lie.  
But seeing that both the strain of this Paper, and certain other grounds of conjecture, do probably in●inuat, that the Accommodators, rather than to fail of a design so advantageous, may possibly abate their terms, to the most taking condescendence, and make all the stress of the controversy, to fall upon the lawfulness or unlawfulness of a fixed Praeses, it will not be amiss, that for the better defeating of this contrivance, we resume the Question; & supposing this Precedent to be both eligible & deposible by the very meetings over which he presides, and waving all o●her singularities, inquire a little more accuratly into the nature of his office, and wherein its differences from an ambulatory Moderator do precisely consist.  
And first we may observe in general, that although there be nothing more frequent in the mouths of our Opposites, then in the pursuance of their present purpose, to undervalue the difference inquired into, unto the almost nothing of a formality, depending merely upon the diversity of the periods of the two Moderators their duration; yet in other cases of the like nature, wherein they, or any persons else, do conceive themselves to be concerned, what contrary contendings and reasonings doth a little interest elicit? I need not allege particular ins●ances, he who seriously considereth, how that there is no Court, Society, or Incorporation so mien, whereof the Members, upon the alteration of their Privilege, either by usurpation among themselves, or by extrinsic imposing of others, from a chairman freely elected during pleasure, unto a Praeses fixed ad vitam, would not complain of a great and material innovation, will in the matter of Courts institute by God and not by man, and that in order to things of an everlasting consequence, be easily satisfied, either of the delusion, or more hurtful design of the former pretence; so that a man may well conclude that it is because, that neither the great Author, nor the principal ends of these meetings, are duly regarded, that therefore the Ordinances themselves, are accordingly slighted.  
2. I observe, that the Origen and warrant of a Moderator in Church-meetings, is not from any particular positive Scripture-precept or rule given anent●●; but being a thing by clear evidence, necessary for the concern of order, and the right expeding of affairs, its immediate rise, comes to be referred to the common providence of reason, and is only reductiuè, and in s● far of divine institution, as the Courts whereunto the office belongeth, are founded upon that Authority, and do require this moderation, as an expedient needful to the right management of your business; which ground being in itself manifest, and such as may be examplified in many other instances● and also fortified by apostolic practice, doth abundantly make out my assertion, and yet confirm the institution, with a sufficient impress of God's appointment. Only it may be remembered, that wherever this rational necessity taketh place in divine ordinances, as its exigence is the precise measure and warrant of any thing thereby introduced; so if this limi● be once ●lighted and transgressed, we not only tacitly impeach the holy and wise counsel of God, in ordering his own matters, but in effect cast open a door, to all that the weakness and wantonness of human invention, and ca●nal reason, shall please therein to devise: and how displeasing this is in God's sight, and of what dangerous consequence, no serious christian needeth to be advertised.  
3. I observe, that as there is a vast difference, betwixt the entrusting of a person with an employment, by a revocable mandat, and the vesting of him with a ri●ht and power, to exprese the same for term of life; so it is in this, that ●he diversity of the fixed Praeses, and ambulatory Moderator, doth mainly stand. For clearing of which position, it may be considered, that seeing the distinction of right and dominion, from a precarious use, doth mostly arise from, and it is valued by the certain continuance of the former, consequent to the nature of the thing, which in the later, subject to another's arbitrary interruption, is not to be found; how in the case of this presidency, fixedness, doth superinduce a kind of propriety, to which the changeable Moderator can lay no claim, is very easy to be apprehended. He who by a permissive benevolence doth only enjoy for an uncertain season, may nevertheless have a very full and plenary use; but that this enjoyment is obnoxious to another's pleasure, whereas that of right, the subject remaining, can only be terminat by the owner's consent or deed, is the great disparity, whereby not only these titles are in themselves distinguished, but from which, the power of a free disposal, peculiar to right, doth undoubtedlie flow. Whence it may be further collected, that as the free civil abuse (so to speak) as well as the use, is founded in, and warranted by the nature of right, and the independency from the will of any other, which it imports; so the fixedness of any power or office, doth certainly in so far, notably capacitat the person therein stated, to a more free and incontrollable exercise. What difference Lawyers do make, Inter cum qui jure suo, & illum qui beneficio tantum alieno jurisdictionem habet, and what a latitude of power, is by them assigned ●o the former, which unto the second, for this very cause, they make incompetent, is not for one to dip further into, then may conduce for the illustration of common reason. Only, as he who is elected to an ordinary office of fixed presidency ad vitam, may well and truly be said, to be jure suo Praeses, whereas the other, who is thereto chosen by a commission, as it w●re, during pleasure, and no longer, doth by the same rule alieno tantum beneficio praesidere; so, that this fixedness, imported by the jus suum, arising from the investiture of the office, doth considerably advance the Episcopus Praeses, and discriminat him from a Moderator, nominat only during pleasure, and absolutely depending upon the beneplacitum of his constituents, n●edeth no further explication.  
I have hitherto for avoiding confusion, opposed to the fixed Praeses a Moderator appointed simply during pleasure, if any man think that this doth not so exactly quadrat to our custom, where by our moderators were chosen, f●r a definite space, & that by this certain designation he appeareth not to be much different from him that is ordained for time of life. It is answered, it is not the simple omission, or adjection of a certain space, that is to be regarded in this matter, a person may be commissionat, not only ind●finitlie, but also with the expression of a prefixed time, and yet in both cases merely during pleasure, just as in a precarious concession, which though it may be qualified with the convention of a certain term, yet Lawy●rs say, it is of no force to restrain the granters revocation; but the true point of the difference, doth plainly stand in this, that the office of presidency once being declared to be fixed, and so made a right of its own nature, not otherwise terminable, then with the Praeses his life, as his continuance therein, is from the nature of his right, and cannot be understood to flow merely from the electors their free pleasure, like to the case of a trust committed by simple mandat; so he is no more obnoxious to their revocation, than any other person, having a grant from a community of an ordinary superior office during his life, can be turned out of it, at the granters arbitrement; whereas, on the other hand, there being no such constant office established, the person called simply to officiat, whether indefinitely or for a set time, attaineth to no right, but the same remaineth entirely with the meeting electing, and he is absolutely subjected to their determination. By which also it further appears, and may conduce for the better uptaking of this distinction, that as in this second case, the right abides with the presbytery, and the naked exercise of moderation, is entrusted to the person thereto appointed; so in the former, the erecting of this presidency, unto an ordinary fixed office, is without question a manifest derogation from, and abridgement of, the Presbyteries antecedent privilege, so that in sum, it may be certainly and evidently concluded, that as the erecting of a superior office, by a perpetual constitution, and thereby retrinching the constituents their original power, and making to the person therewith invested, a proper right, notwithstanding that the actual nomination and election of persons to that office, may still remain with them, doth clearly and exceedingly differ, from a commission given by way of mandat (though for the exercise of the same employment,) whether indefinitely, or for a certain space, neither diminishing the mandators their inherent power, nor granting to the person commissionat, any certain right; so the offices of the constant Pro●stos, and the Presbyterian Moderator, are by the same methods and rules, as remotely distinguished.  
If it be further objected, That I seem to forget, that even the fixed, Praeses, is not accountable, but may be removed upon his delinquency, and that ad vitam, which doth much impair the difference here assigned, I shall not, in answering, divert my Reader to the doubt, whether this Praeses may be removed from his presidency upon peculiar and lesser faults, not inferring a remove from his ministry, or whether, according to the perpetual custom in this case, these deprivations are not to be divided, which certainly contributeth much to the Praeses his establishment. But seeing the common & notore distinction of an appointment ad vitam or culpam, or only, durante beneplacito, doth sufficiently insinuat the solution, it is obvious, that though an ordinary office given ad vitam, may according to the evident rules of right and reason (which do in no case permit the same to be absolute, or exempt it from all control) be takan away, upon a just ground of forfeiture, duly, tried and proven; yet the disparity of a commission, given merely ad beneplacitum, and revocable at pleasure, without so much as the necessity of alleging a reason, is abundantly manifest, and plainly establisheth the distinction now in agitation; and in a word, to be removable from a trust ad libitum, and deposible from a right only, pro culpa, are so sensibly different, that the objection doth not deserve any further answer. Only, that the influence thereof upon practice, or upon the right or wrong management of affairs, may be the better apprehended, it would be considered, that almost in every trust and employment, let be in this which we treat of, there are, below that excess of malversation, which can be charged and proven to be a fault to conclude a removel, a great many inferior degrees of maladministration, which though by reason of their quality, they do not amount to a just cause of rejection, yet may nevertheless be of singular prejudice, and just as a free election doth deliberate upon proper and improper, so may these smaller transgressions, very rationally require a charge, without meriting deposition. Whence it easily follows, that beside the diminution of the Presbyteries power and privilege, this fixed Proestos, doth also impose upon them, an inconvenient restriction of their just liberty of change, which in many cases may prove singularly prejudicial.  
4. I observe, That as the fixed Praeses is constitute, not by an arbitrary mandat, but by a proper right, resulting from the erection of the office, in the manner that I have described; so the office itself, consisting in a priority of direction and conduct, it certainly thereunto addeth a peculiar dignity. I say the office consisting in a priority of direction; for that there are subservient offices, such as that of a Clerk or Recorder, which may be fixed, and enjoined by a proper right, and have also the general esteem of praise worthy employments, and yet do not entitle to any eminency, is sufficiently explained, and its difficulty removed out of my way, by the simple proposal. But the thing here remarked, and wherein the difference of the Proestos and Presbyerian Moderator is further apparent, is, that the former hath by virtue of his right of presidency a concomitant special honour above his Brethren, which cannot be denied to him, without a gross solecism in prelatic heraldry. The temporary Moderator is indeed attended by an agreeable respect; but as he is vested with no proper right to the place, wherein he simply officiats, by the Assemblies free nomination, and as its instrument and mouth, which during pleasure, it chooseth for the more orderly management of its affairs; so the estimation and honour that accompanieth the employment, is of no higher degree, and equally transient; whereas the fixed Praeses, being rather set up to be a head for Governing the assembly and its actions, must of necessity on this account, be adorned with a more high and permanent dignity.  
But it may be objected, that it is an easy matter to represent the controverted Praeses in as diminishing characters, and by saying, that he simply officiats, at least enters unto the office by the free vote of the meeting, and as its mouth, and not its head, by them thereto elected for time of life, to resolve all the difference of the two, and this eminency of respect appropriate to the fixed, unto the bare speciality of the distinct period set to his continuance, and no doubt words are easily turned; but as it must be acknowledged, that these things, viz. for one to be set, though by a free suffrage, in a place form and erected in an ordinary office, with its known special powers and privileges, and to possess by the right thence resulting; and to be entrusted with the same employment, but only by the way of a free and revocable mandat and commission, absolutely depending at the constituents pleasure, are widely distant; so, particular distinguishing qualities of the Proestos, in his proper right and power, his exemption from an arbitrary removal, and his more advanced dignity, are thereby notably declared. And therefore, seeing he doth enjoy his place jure suo, (as Lawyers speak) and doth not precariouslie hang ●or the continuance of its exercise, upon the Presbyteries free and simple goodwill, as our changeable Moderators do, he cannot in this respect be said to be only an instrument for order, dignified with no higher esteem, but is in ●ffect by virtue of his right, and the power thereto pertaining, rendered the chief and head, and accompanied with a peculiar honour inseparable from such a Superiority.  
If it be further alleged, that even in our own custom, the Moderator once elected did always continue out his cou●se, and that it is not so easy to give one instance of this arbitrary putting off, here so much spoken of; I shall not answer, that his time b●ing short, and not ad vitam, there could scarce be any necessity for making of such changes: But the truth is, the not making thereof is so far ●rom impugning, that it much commends the differences by me explained; for if the quality of the office, as by us used, the certain time thereto appointed, and the Presbyteries reserve of an absolute control, have been of that efficacy, as even to prevent the occasions of exercising this la●t privilege, no doubt it is more concludent in our behalf, then if the Presbyteries had made many removes. It is not therefore, as I said before, the electing a●d designing for a c●rtain space, and a not altering observance, that do signify any thing in this affair; no, but as the Presbyteries retaining of the absolute power over their Moderator, is both their privilege by the Lord's appointment; and also the great check of all abuses, incident through his weakness or malice; so it is the setting up of a Praeses over them, with a power appertaining to him, as his proper right during life, and not committed to him by a revocable mandat, that not only elevates the Episcopus Praeses to his distinguishing Superiority and Dignity, but in effect, contains the seminal cause of most of the evils that have thereon ensued.  
Now from these things thus explained, the differences of the fixed Praeses ●rom our Moderator, appear manifestly to be. 1. That the former imports an ordinary settled office, including a proper right, and power to the person thereto appointed; whereas the later doth only imply a bare exercise, wholly dependent upon the Presbyteries pleasure. 2. That the setting up of the first, doth derogat from the Presbyteries right, by transferring it upon him; whereas after the nomination of the second, the Presbyteries right remaineth still entire, and neither is, nor can be impaired by the intrusting of a particular Member with its mere actual exercise. 3. The fixed Praeses deprives the Presbytery of a great measure of their liberty, he being exempted from their arbitrary control and power of changing; whereas our Moderator is altogether obnoxious to their determination. 4. The fixed Praeses is created by a deed convoying a right; whereas our Moderator is made by simple mandat, imparting nothing, save a precarious trust. 5. I● an allusion may add light, the Praeses is set up as it were to be Head; whereas the Moderator is in a manner only appointed to be the Mouth of the meeting. 6. The Praeses his right and power and Superiority, do necessarily attribute unto him a special eminency of dignity; whereas our Moderator, his naked ministerial exercise, cannot pretend to any higher respect. And 7. The Praeses from the nature of his right, continueth ad vitam or ad culpam; whereas the Moderator, having no right, hath no other assurance or lace, than the Presbyteries beneplacitum.  
These differences then (though among themselves rather formally then really distinct) holding out the proper characteristics of the Proestos contended for, as indeed they are, and must necessarily be admitted by all, before I fall to disprove him by further reasoning, it will not be amiss, that for the better clearing of what singular moment these his signal advantages, above our Moderator, may be in the matters wherein they are conversant, I shortly note the several parts of the office. And 1. It is the Moderators part, to propose matters to be considered. 2. To direct consultations. 3. To moderate debates. 4. To interrogat opinions. 5. To ask the votes. 6. To determine in the case of equality, by his casting suffrage. 7. To appoint extraordinary diets: Which being all certain beyond controversy, I only wish that the true value of their influence, may be as gravely pondered in the present question for guarding against any exorbitant power, whereby in these spiritual Courts and matters, they have often, been and may be still very dangerously abused and depraved, as we see men in their worldly concerns seriously attended to the things not only of the like, but of a far inferior consequence.  
Having thus delineat the proprieties of this Episcopus Praeses, as I suppose with a satisfying perspicuity, what clearing it may give to the main inquiry, concerning the lawfulness or unlawfulness of this place and office, falls next under consideration.  
And in answer thereto, I distinctly affirm, that the place and office of a fixed Praeses, or constant Moderator, is unwarrantable, and positivelie unlawful. Which assertion, seeing it importeth the plain contradiction of my Author's first consideration, viz. that there is no command in scripture, for changing of Moderators in meetings of Presbyteries, nor no precept, nor rule of Scripture, contrary to the office of a Bishop, as a fixed Precedent in Synods, the confutation thereof, will be the best confirmation of my position.  
Only I must premise, that seeing the Author proposeth the two Members of his consideration, as if in effect coincident, and that, if there be a precept in Scripture, contrary to the office of a Bishop as a fixed Praeses, the necessity of a change of Mederators, doth from the acknowledged exigence of order necessarily ensue, his insinuat demand of a precept in Scripture for changing of Moderators, aswel as of a rule, contrary to the office of a fixed Precedent, is captiously superfluous. Holding me therefore to that part, that there are precepts and ●ules in Scripture, contrary to the office of a Bishop, as a fixed Precedent, the grounds that in my former Discourse I have thence adduced, to prove the absolute and lowly parity, commanded by our Lord to his Apostles, and all succeeding Ministers, if they do stand firm, do undoubtedlie evince it: For s●eing that our Author doth in his third consideration, use it as a main Argument, That there is no particular command for an absolute parity of Presbyters, adding, If it be, let it be produced, and it will end the controversy, It is as evident from his concession, as from the unquestionable opposition of an exact parity, and the majority of this office of presidency, that by the establishing of the first, the second is subverted. Now that our Lord hath commanded an absolute parity of Presbyters, If I make it appear from the original precepts, given to the Apostles, without controversy not only the Antecessors of all succeeding Presbyters, in their ordinary ministry, but the persons to whom, as representing the perpetual ministry, ordained by Christ in his Church, the Rules and directions thereto proper were delivered, I hope the transferring of the command, from the Apostles to succeeding Presbyters, will be of no difficulty. Let us then in this search after the Lords will in this matter, humbly and meekly consider what he himself hath therein delivered. And as, for my own part, I am very far removed from the temptations of interest, that commonly do sway and oversway in it; so I am confident, that all men equally removed from the passions and prejudices thence arising, will in this divine light, find a most assured determination.  
Our Lord then having upon several occasions, particularly that reasoning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which of them should be greatest, and the suit of a Proedria, or a prerogative-seat presented by Zebedees' two Sons, and their Mother, dehorted the twelve from all affectation of more eminent authority or dignity among themselves, not only by reducing them to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and innocent simplicity of children, and proponing to them the example of his own lowliness and humility, both in his personal deportment, a●d in the manner of his administration, but also by removing the very subject itself, and warning them, that they ought to be so ●ar from looking a●ter any Superiority of Rule or Authority, one over another, that the greatness of the greatest, was to be Servant of all, and industry and humility, their praise and exaltation. He telleth them further, that as he alone was their Master, so all they were Brothers; and accordingly we find them all equally commissionat to the work of the ministry, Math. 2●. 19 alike vested with the power of Discipline, john. 20. 23. and in this parity acting, officiating and associating others to themselves, in several undenaible instances. These things being evident in the Gospel records, verily when I reflect upon them, I cannot but marvel, what it is, that can here be desiderat. The Disciples contend who shall be greatest, and our Lords answer is, If any man desire to be first, the same shall be last of all: and that the least among them, the same should be great: By which, as it is clearly intimat, that the greatness which they aspired unto, was none other than a primacy or presidency of one above his fellows; so it is manifest, that our Lord doth not in his return so much condemn their ambition, as by a total remove of all greatness, the subject of the competition, and converting their contest for grandeur, into an emulation of lowliness and diligence, fairly confute it. I grant, that according to their more rude & carnal apprehension of our Lord's Kingdom, the time of this debate, it is very likely, that it was incited & managed by agreeable passions and fancies; but yet seeing he doth not plainly direct his return, to undeceive them of that delusion, but rather carrieth his command further, to inform their judgements, and form there mind, by an instruction suited to the true work & station wherein he was to leave them; that, even in that they were to look after no stated Primacy or Majority, but consequently to re●  
But here our Author reclaimeth, and in his fourth consideration saith, That this parity cannot be concluded from our Saviour's command, It shall not be so with you, nor any other of his holy injunctions of moderation, humility meekness; for that would destroy all Church-government, and all Superiority of Pastors, over other Elders and Deacons, and over their People; If all imparity of Rule in Ecclesiastic Persons, were inconsistent with these great Laws of our holy profession, the Apostles themselves, would have been the first most signal transgressors. It is answered; If from the Text, It shall not be so with you, I were contending for an absolute parity, in all respects, among all Church-officers and Members, in as much as thereby all their distinction, with the whole oversight of Pastors, should be taken away, without doubt the objection would be unanswerably concludent; but seeing the divisions of Church-officers in extraordinary and ordinary, and of the ordinary, in Pastors, Elders and Deacons, with the imparity thence resulting, is not so much as by us questioned, the laxeness of such arguing doth merit a more severe censure, then at present I am inclined to use. It is therefore to be considered, that as the several powers, offices and gifts, by our Lord institute in, and given unto his Church, with their beautiful order and subordination, are by us very cheerfully acknowledged, and no constructive imparity, that may be thence in●inferred, in the least doubted; so neither is the same a proper imparity, a thing only incident to Officers of the same kind; Nor (if it were) is it the imparity at present under debate, which being an imparity of place, or other the like privilege, attribute to one, exclusive of others of the same order, is the only subject of the controversy: Which standing thus in plain terms, whether or not our Lord, by appointing his Apostles, and their successors the Ministers of the Gospel, in the same equality of power, as Brethren, and quelling all there competitions about the majority and preference, by reducing them to the low degree of Servants, without any distinction, except what may arise from a greater measure of humility and diligence, hath thereby discharged all imparity of power and presidency among them: I am confident, that not only the simple proposal doth conclude the affirmative, but render the absurdity here objected against it widely impertinent.  
I say then, for a distinct answer. 1. That the parity by us pleaded, is not indeed to be concluded from any of our Lords holy injunctions of Moderation, humility and meekness; to insinuat the tontrarie to be our assertion, is not only a plain calumny, seeing all men know, that the highest as well as the lowest of men, constitute in lawful degrees, are liable to these sacred instructions, but also a desingenuous artifice, to make it be thought, that we take the command, it shall not be so among you, for a mere precept of that kind, and thereby surrender one of our main arguments; in as much, as it is rather from the intimation it contains of the Apostles their future condition, then from any precept of humility that may be thence inferred, that it strongly concludeth my position.  
2. Although the command, It shall not be so among you, doth not prohibit the different orders and degrees of Church-officers, whether extraordinary or ordinary of our Lord's appointment, which both manifest reason, and the genuine import of the antithesis do plainly evince; yet that all that superior eminency and coactive authority, whereby the Princes, and great ones of the earth, are properly from others distinguished, is here removed from Church administrations, and Lordly Prelacy, with all its privileges and dignities, thereby discharged, is obvious to the meanest capacity.  
3. As these words, It shall not be so among you, do in the first place clear the nature and manner of ecclesiastic, in opposition to secular rule; So it is from the ensuring ampliation, but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your Minister etc. that consistentlie with the former declaration, the parity by us pleaded, of officers in the same order, & all imparity whatsoever among Church-officers, resulting merely from a greater eminency of place and dignity, is utterly excluded. I say, resulting merely from a greater eminency etc. For that Apostles & Evangelists, in respect of their extraordinary qualities and employments, and Pastors and ruling Elders, in respect of their different charges, are stated in a kind of imparity, is not at all controverted; but the question being plainly concerning the lawfulness of an imparity not from any special power, trust or gift given by our Lord, but from an higher place and dignity, having no other foundation, than a greater measure, and larger interest in the Government conferred by man, upon the person therewith vested, I affirm, that not only among officers of the same kind and order, but among all Church-officers whatsoever, this is an imparity of rule, in ecclesiastic persons, as little countenanced by the superiority of Pastors over ●ther Elders and deacons', and the whole s●ock, or by the Apostles their practice, as our Lord's discourse and command to the twelve, upon the suit of the brothers, doth certainly condemn that Proedrie whereunto they pretended.  
As for our Author's anticipation, viz. that to say the Apostles were extraordinary persons, would upon the supposition of their imparity in the point of rule, say nothing, but that they were extraordinary transgressors, it is like many other his mistakes, wherein th● glances of an inconsiderate fancy, do very visiliet preoccupy his judgement; for seeing the imparity which our Lord doth condemn and we do disown, is an imparity consi●●ing in the inequality of place and dignity, in one and the same order, and not that imparity, which ariseth from an extraordinary office, power or gift of our Lords ordaining, it is evident that the imparity of the Apostles, extraordinary officers. compared with ordinary Presbyters, doth not in the least contradict; and that the Author, by imagining the answer, of their being extraordinary persons, to import no more than that they were extraordinary transgressors, doth only show his extraordinary inadvertence. And really when I consider, that notwithstanding the different orders of offices, which Christ hath ordained in the Church, he hath nevertheless most expressly stated his Apostles, and in their persons all succeeding Pastors, in an exact equality, and clearly discharged all pretensions, to any sort of majority, or preference among them, and that even our adversaries themselves, do not maintain their Episcopus Praeses, by any claim of succession to these superior officers, at first by our Lord institute, I do not only wonder, to find my Author in this objection so foolishly and rawly confounding the imparity of place and pre-eminence, in one and the same order, by us from God's word rejected, with the imparity of orders by the Lord established, but am fully of the opinion, that the more eminent degree of a fixed Precedent is yet more unreasonable, than the distin & order of superior prelates, although in the seeming acknowledgement of our very adversaries, destitute of all satisfying pretences.  
For as much then as our Lord, had very clearly and positively commanded the parity of his Apostles, and in them, of all his Ministers, by declaring them to be Brethren, in direct opposition to that pharisaic pride, which might have tempted them to the like affectation, and further, doth adduce his own bles●ed example, that by the consideration of his Ministerial lowliness, in the manner both of his administration and conversation, compared with the infinite excellency of his person, power and dignity, he might the more effectually obviate all imaginable temptations, & utterly ruin the very thoughts of any inequality of a stated superiority amongst them; let us with all fear, and reverence, acknowledge his holy wisdom and appointment, and constantly disown and reject the vanity of all contrary inventions, specially, seeing it is mo●t certain, that however men may endeavour by specious pretex●s to obscure the prohibition, and to palliate this corruption, yet its wicked, pernicious and abominable effects and consequences, have rendered it, to all the sincere lovers of our Lord jesus, palpably odious.  
That which doth next occur, is two objections in the Author's second and seventh consideration. The one, That the fixed presidency of Bishops in Synods, hath as much warrant as the fixed moderating of a Presbyter, in a Kirk-session of ruling Elders; The other, That it can as little be quarrelled, for want of an express command in Scripture, as Kirk-sessions, Presbyteries, Synods and National assemblies, and their Commissions, which with their several subordination, are nevertheless by us pretended to be of divine institution. But having in the former Treatise, by showing the Scriptural, and most rational disparity of the first case, and the undeniable grounds of divine right and institution for the second, fully answered all that is here excepted, I will not now detain my Reader, by any superfluous repetition or addition.  
The fi●t thing asserted by the Author, is, that if the thing itself be lawful, the appropriating of the name of Bishop, to the superior Presbyter, cannot make it unlawful, though these two names be indifferently used in the scripture, Thus the Author loves to quibble. We say, that not only these two names, are indifferently used in Scripture, but that they are used as signifying one and the same thing, without the least insinuation of a more proper application, either of the one or the other, to any thing distinct; & thence do strongly infer, that aftertimes did very unwarrantably and contrary to Scripture-grounds, divide both the things and names: And this our Author, doth very lightly turn over, as if all the question anent a divine warrant for the identity or distinction of Bishops and Presbyter were only a plea of words; and whether the names of Bishop and Presbyter, in Scripture commonly and promiscouslie used, might lawfully afterwards be severally appropriate, without the least notice taken, that in Scripture the use of the words is no more common, than the thing the same; and that therefore the separation afterwards made, was a mere human invention. But he adds for a reason, that the names are in the same manner used in some primitive writers, who in other passages do clearly own the different degree of Bishops over Presbyters, and were themselves of that degree. What then? A man may indeed hence conclude, that in the times succeeding the purest, with the distinction introduced of a superior Bishop over a Presbyter, the names, beside th●ir common use, became to be usurped to peculiar significations; but seeing this manner of writing, observed in these primitive writters, doth no ways hold in sacred write, whence we ought to search for our warrant, and wherein there is no passage which doth in the least favour the different degree of Bishops over presbyters, what can be gathered from these indigested reflectious, save this, that the primitive times soon varied from th● primitive simplicity, and consequently swerved from the primitive purity. Seeing then, that all the weakness of this argument, is from the Author his own mistake, to take notice of his attempt, to baffle the reasoning from this Topick, as too weak and unworthy of any serious persons insisti●g upon it, were in effect, to be ridiculously serious in his follies.  
But he proceeds to tell us in his sixth assertion, That it is yet more strange to be offended, with the solemn way of blessing, or consecrating Bishops, to that presidency with the imposition of hands; as if a grave and solemn admission, to a high and holy employment, were apt to unhallow it, and being in appearance so proper an instrument, of making it the better, should yet effectually make it the worse. How the Author com●s to term it strange, yea more strange, that we should be offended with a practice, which yet, for all his suprisal, by reason of our offence, he himself dar not distinctly avow, might be to us really so, were it not that our experience of his methods, doth abundantly satisfy us, that all the arts of insinuation are familiar unto him. The thing he here points at, is without doubt to justify the peculiar ordination of his Bishop, or Episcopus Praeses, knowing, that a distinct ordination, doth certainly require and infer, things altogether incononsistent with his description o● his Episcopus Praeses, he therefore endeavours to smooth it over, as if all considerable in the case, were only a more solemn way of blessing, or consecrating of Bishops to their presidency. But not to stand with him upon the matter of words, the things that we are indeed offended at, are. 1. That where in his Episcopal consecration, both the words, manner and whole form of a special ordination are most exactly used, yet he would have us to believe, that all transacted by this performance, is only a more solemn benediction; if any man inquire the Difference; that more solemn lawful action, if capable of a solemn benediction, is known and obvious; whereas, although Ordination be accompanied with benediction, yet both the notation of the word, and reason itself do plainly intimat, that it is not formally a benediction, but that its principal act, as it is performed by men, is a Ministerial conserring in the name, person● and Authority of jesus Christ, of a special Church-office, and consequently, that it supposeth aswel the office itself, as the manner of its conveyance, to depend upon our Lord's institution, and warrant: Whereby it is evident, that either this place of presidency, being only a humane contrivance, upon the pretence of order of a superior eminency, for the better conduct of common administration, cannot at all bear or admit of it, or that under the proposal of this presidency, it is in effect, not only a higher degree, but a higher order o● Church-officers, that is intended to be introduced: Which how pernicious it hath proven, and may yet again prove to the Ghurch of Christ, both the proud usurpations of Prelacy, & the heights of Papacy, do sufficiently testify.  
But the second thing that offends us is, that admitting the thing were really performed by way of a solemn blessing, in the manner represented; yet seeing this presidency, being repugnant to our Lords command, is not an holy, but an unhallowed employment, any form of benediction, that can be thereto used, is not only destitute of any promise, but a profanation of the holiness of God, which he jealously loveth. We do not therefore condemn this conservation, as if we judged, that a grave and solemn admission, to a high and holy employment, were apt to unhallow it; no, this alledgeance doth too grossly and caloumniouslie beg the question. But seeing it is certain, that the Author will as soon prove gain to be godliness, as he will rationally persuade that this high employment is holy, it is evident, that his grave and solemn admission, is as little apt to hollow it, or to be a proper instrument of making it better, as the consecration of the high places was of old, when they were commanded to be destroyed, in itself allowable, or unto the Lord acceptable.  
The next thing we meet with is, That the degree or power of Bishops, beyond other Presbyters, is certainly, not to be so fitly measured by any other rule, as by the received practice of the primitive Church, and canons of the most ancient Counsels. Very right; why should not their origin and warrant, and the measure and rule of their power go together? But seeing we have found this primitive practice, to be dislonant from, and contrary to the truth and simplicity of the Gospel, the first and chief rule, the Author must pardon us, in this matter, to disown both his rule and measures, and to hold us to this only unerring canon; yet seeing he hath been pleased in his deep ingenuity to acquaint us with that, wherein we account ourselves but little concerned, it will not be amiss, that for our warning we take particular notice of the discovery: He adds then, That by the forementioned practice and canons, it will undoubtedly be found that they had not only some such particular power (as what, I know not) but exortem & eminen●em potestatem, as Hierom speaks: A man might hitherto have thought, that if not all, yet the main thing acclaimed by the Author to his Episcopus Praeses, was a power of constant Moderation in Church meetings: But here, lest (as I apprehend) he should frustrate his solemn consecration, or rather the special ordination, which he hath just now asserted, he deals a great deal more plainly, and tells us, not only in general of such a measure of power, as may be gathered from primitive practice, and ancient canons, which certainly may be as large, as the most favourable conjecture, from any probable pretence of either of these within the first three or four centuries of the declination of the primeve purity, pleaseth to form it; but that by these same rules, beside a certain particular power, which he doth not specify, they should have potestatem exortem & eminentem, and this no doubt, in a congruous enough construction of the frequent hyperboles used by the fathers on this subject, may arise as high as either ambition or interest shall please to to screw it. This being then the ambiguous and lax comprehension of the Author's measures, what hath been the sincerity of this Treaty, or what might have been the issue of an assenting close to it, I suppose it may be obvious to every man's reason. For my own part, as I look upon this superior Episcopacy, from the very fi●st degree of its ascending, to have been in all the steps of its progress, the continual decline o● pure christianity, and advance of the Antichristian papacy; and as I am convinced from clear Scripture light, and undeniable experience, that all the pretences made ●or it, and its power and privileges, either from the practices, graces, virtues or sufferings of those Centuries, wherein it had its first rise and growth, are only the involutions of that strange mystery, whereby it most secretly and subtly proceeded to its most prodigious manifestation, in the revelation of the Man of sin; so I am persuaded in the same evidence, that the accommodating of faithful men with it, under whatsomever pretext whithin this land, shall quickly, either prove the readvancing of its pride, domination and wickedness, or else the greater establishment of the supremacy, to the as infallible prejudice and ruin of the power and purity of Religion, the Devils grand design in all these unwarranted contrivances.  
But the Author adds for a salvo to these just fears, that the foregoing passage may suggest, that if the Spirit of our meek and lowly master, did more possess the minds both of Bishops and Presbyters, there would certainly be little or no dispute, but the sweet contest of striving who should yield most, and give most honour the one to the other. Thus we find him always a high pretender to Gospel rules, when they seem to make for his advantage: If he once attain to the possession of what either his fancy or interest do recommend to him, then, according to the strain of the former letters, how full is he of the high eulogies of peace, & of earnest longings after it; how hateful & odious is contention & hatred, nay, it is the main antichristian character; and in the same manner now that he is for Episcopacy & its eminency, how sweetly would he seem to commend the spirit of our meek & lowly Master. But seeing it is without all controversy, that if this spirit were indeed prevalent, not only our disputs & contests about their matters would cease, but the very subject o● them, being at best a vain invention pretending to order, would be totally removed, my hearty wish and desire is, that the Author would rather endeavour to witness his sincerity, by a through and absolute conformity, then by such partial applications.  
The 9 and last consideration, which the Author offers, is anent the great and known moderation of all the late Reformers, the present reformed Churches, and of the presbyterian brothers in England concerning the episcopacy now in question. But having before answered this abundantly, I am not so much swayed with such alledgeances as here to make repetitions. Only he says, It is wonderful, that we should affect so exorbitant an height of Zeal, and fervour in this point, so far beyond what can be found in any of these we have named, or any other society or party of men in the whole Christian world, either of our own former times. 'Tis answered, the zeal of God is so rare a thing, in this evil and hipocritical generation, and it and the world's wonder do so often trist, that I am only sorry, that we have not provoked the Author and all men to more of it; and that our reproach for Christ, and consequently the matter of our rejoicing, should amount to no more in midst of such backslidings and perverseness, then to the just and slender charge of a singular affected fervour. But yet the author saith, that this is an excess not to be found in the whole Christian world beside. And if he cannot condescend on any instance, clothed with our circumstances, and exactly parallel to our case, is it not as manifest, that the generality of this boast, is a mere empty inconcludent flourish. If he love to plead with such arguments, let him produce me any one of all these Churches, Societies or Parties which he musters up, that after having experimented the evil and bitter fruits of episcopacy, and searched after its origin and warrant, unto a clear conviction of its want of divine institution, and full discovery of the delusion of its rise, and the wickedness of its tendency, did in a manner unanimouslly, both by law, canon and oath abrogat and reform from it: and when by the politic influence of Court designs and State projects, and the practices of the Devil and his instruments, the same episcopacy was restored seven times worse than of before, and so with a most plenary confirmation of all these grievances, formerly objected against it, did in the most pure and conspicuous zeal of God, that ever acted in any Nation, reject this corrupt plant, and bind themselves to maintain the true Ordinance of God, introduced in its place, and extirpate every thing thereto opposite, by a most solemn Covenant; and in consequence thereof, enjoy the Gospel in very observable power and plenty, until that by as gross perjury and violence, as ever the Sun beheld, this Covenant is again condemned, the Lords work and Ordinance subsubverted, and this old Episcopacy, not only with a sevenfold, but with a seventy and sevenfold increase of all its corruptions and wickednesses re-esstablished; and lastly the Supremacy, the compliment of all Ecclesiastical usurpations, with an explication broader than all the pretensions of the Papacy, is superadded. For the better securing of all which abominations, after full proof made of all that abused authority and power could do against a faithful nonconforming remnant, policy at length doth instruct to propose an Accommodation, upon terms, seemingly indeed condescending, but really corroborative of the present establishment, and most visibly suppressive of any relics of dissent, or opposition, which possibly might revive against it. Now let the Author, I say, produce us an instance of any Church or Society, thus circumstantiat, & if not only, the faithful remnant therein, but the generality of all the serious fearers of God, and true lovers of our Lord jesus, shall not give their suffrage on our side, nay the case being thus proposed, as in truth it stands, if even these, to whom he appeals, do not clearly declare for us, then let us bear the scorn of singularity, and what worse he shall please to cast upon us forever.  
But lest the Author imagine, that what I have here represented, with an especial regard to the strengthening of the Lords People in this Land, to whom none of these things are hidden or unknown, doth rather proceed from an apprehension of a cross verdict upon the simple question of the fixed presidency, from the Persons and Churches to whom he refers, I grant, that amongst the Reformers, and in those Churches mentioned, there may be found good men, who, not being led by the concernment of their own condition unto a more near and strict examination of the thing, and rather comparing its appearing moderation with the exorbitancies of Prelacy, then reducing matters to their first institution, have written of it more indulgently and respectfully: But as it hath not been the experimented and trying ca●e of any Christian Church, as it hath been of ours, and as the Authors that seem to favour it, do all of them agree, that it is not of divine institution, but do unanimously recomend it upon that account; so I am confident, that if the examples of the same Reformers and Churches, in occurrences of less importance, may found a probable conjecture, it may very fairly thence be concluded, that if they had been, or were now stated in the same circumstances with us, they would as far exceed us in this faint and languishing zeal, whereof we are accused, as by the Author we are now construed to exceed them. With what truth, reason or civility then the Author is pleased, according to the dull affectations of his oraculous wit, to tell the World, that there is no reason can be given of this our zeal, unless that word of the Roman Philosopher, Superstitio est error insanus, it is no hard matter to judge: But if he account it superstition for us, a●ter our most convincing experiences of the woeful evils of his episcopacy, and no inferior persuasion, that the way of Presbytery is of divine appointment, in this matter to adhere constantly to Scripture rules, and Covenant engagements, we freely confess with the Apostle Paul, that after the way, which he calleth supestition, so we fear the God of our Fathers, and love our Lord jesus Christ; believing all things that are written, and having hope also towards God, who in the midst of the years can, and may revive his work. In which profession, though the Author do judge us to be beside ourselves, yet we are ascertained, that not only all the faithful, that have any conscience in these things, but also all ingenuous men, will answer for us, that Sir, we are not mad, but speak forth the words of truth and soberness.  
It remains, that I consider the Author's additional reflection upon our two Covenants. And as to what he prefaces, of his having sufficiently cleared, that the Article of the League touching prelacy, as it is there specified, doth not at all concern the Episcopacy in question, I believe I have as sufficiently cleared, both the Author's impertinency in this restriction, and also the unquestionable concern of both our covenants, from other heads, in the episcopacy controverted. But here he insinuats, that of late he is informed, That we now fly to the other Article of the Covenant, engaging us to maintain the Discipline and Government of the Church of Scotland, as it was then in being, and hereupon he wishes, that we would impartially consider, weather the present Episcopacy be inconsistent with that Discipline & Government, or if it will not rather be found to be corroborative and perfective of it, as apt to keep it in more union, & so to make it stronger, and more lasting than it formerly proved, or likely would be, if it were again restored. It is answered. It is not here objected, that by swearing to maintain the then established Discipline and Government, we did not virtually renounce, and abjure the present controverted Episcopacy; no, both the Reformation that had then so recently preceded, and the Reformation that hath since so directly overturned it, do make this point too evident to be denied by the Author, or any pretending to common sense. But the sum of what is here proposed is, that we were not well advised in that our Oath, as having thereby excluded a special mean for the preservation of that which we mostly intended. In return whereunto, I need not say, that every inconsideration is not an just exception to make void an Oath; the Authors own inconsideration in this very allegiance is too manifest, to reduce us to that straight. He saith in effect, That the present Episcopacy is not inconsistent with Presbyterian Government. And is it not a lamentable thing, that their Churches and Nations should have been so long in so fatal a distraction, merely for want of such a happy discovery; nay that the very vexed Bishops, should not for their own peace, have been so wise, as still to bear with and maintain a thing nothing repugnant to their pretensions? But to be a little more serious, I say true Presbyterian-government doth not admit, amongst the Lords Ministers, of any stated imparity, either in power, prerogative or presidency, one, or all of which is the very form of the controver●ed Episcopacy; therefore they are (what all men hitherto constantly deemed them to be) utterly inconsistent. But the Author says, That Episcopacy by preserving union, is perfective of Presbytery. And I grant that any lawful mean preserving Union, is indeed perfective of this, as of all other Government: But seeing that Episcopacy is not only not at all a mean subservient to Presbytery or its Union, what ever it may be to Government, or its Union in general, but is also in itself unwarrantable and unlawful, and in effect as to Union, never found to be otherwise more conducible than Presbytery, but either by the destroying, or tyrannous suppressing of truth and the love thereof, by which the right side of all contentions are maintained, I can scarce refrain from censuring the Authors fore going observe, as pitifully groundless. It is true, our Presbytery did not retain union as it was desired; but what then? If our corruptions and sins do either frustrate the efficacy, or avert the blessing of the best of means, is therefore the mean itself to be condemned? Or if where the Lord hath left no choice, a mean shall be devised by man more promising in appearance, as to that wherein the mean ordained hath not, through our fault, been so successful, and withal, if this invention shall be infallibly attended with far more pernicious consequences, ought we either in conscience, or prudence, to shuffle out the former, to make place for the later? Certainly as these things do exactly quadrat to the case of our accidental differences here objected, so the changing of the Lords ordinance for a humane device, upon such a pretence, is liker to Ieroboam's policy, who for the establishment and quiet of his Kingdom, set up his Calves in lieu of the Lords Sanctuary, than that parity and straightness of heavenly wisdom, which the Lord requires. I might here add, that the want of the Lords blessing, and the parties their greater power, and, for the most part, insolent pride, being duly cousidered, the Oligarchik model of the Author's Episcopoacie, seems to be far more obnoxious to the objected divisions, than the lowly and equal Presbytery, that our Lord hath institute: And that de facto, there is nothing in that state whereunto we can refer their prevention, except unto the over-awe either o● the papal Tyranny, or of a more absurd Supremacy, which we see every where to be the ultimat progress of these vain delusions: But having formerly met with almost the same alledgeancee, I proceed.  
The Author adds, And again they would consider, that if the substance be salved in the present model, their obligation is abundantly preserved. 'Tis Ans. Seeing the thing to be principally attended, both in the interpretation and observation of an Oath, is that which was chiefly intended in the framing and taking of it, and which is indeed the substance of the Oath, although of its subject abstractly considered it may be only a circumstance, the distinction as here applied appears to be more captious than pertinent. Now that the thing chiefly intended in that article, to preserve the Discipline and Government of the Church of Scotland, as then in being, was to preserve Presbytery from the reinvasion of all these corruptious, from which it had been before so lately vindicat and reform; and that of these corruptious, the controverted presidency or constant Moderatorship was one, and that the very first, is so certain and notour, that I cannot but marvel at the Authors so perverse dispute in the contrary. But he says, If no chip nor circumstance of the then Presbyterian government might be altered even to the better, then is the next part of the Article anent uniformity, according to the word of God, and the example of the best reformed Churches, illusorie, and a perfect cheat, in as much as though the same rule should in order to uniformity call for an alteration, yet there could be no receding from the then frame of the Church of Scotland.  
Thus the Author according to his accustomed deceit, when he would persuade to an alteration, notwithstanding that he and his associates, do manifestly intend and prosecut it with all the might and craft that they can adhibit, yet for to delude us to a compliance, s●icketh not, by insinuating the things in controversy to be but chips and circumstances, flatly to contradict and condemn the violence of their own practices. But, seeing that I have already proven from clear Scripture & undeniable reason, that this constant presidency, in steed of being a chip or circumstance, is in effect repugnant to that parity which our Lorth hath commanded, and wherein true Presbytery is essentially founded, and therefore was by us ejected, and the discipline and Government, sworn to be preserved in the Covenant, established in its place, 'tis evident that all here excepted by the Author is but a mere cavillation. In answer whereunto, it may well be affirmed, that it ●aires with the Covenant as with the Truth itself; no such redargution of all calumnies objected as by its own evidence. The article questioned, binds in the first place to the preservation of the reformed Religion in the Church of Scotland, in Doctrine, Worship, Discipline and Government against the common enemy; wherein, it is certain, that as the truth in all the heads discovered by divine light, and after much wrestling recovered from men's corruptions, was directly and plainly engaged unto; so such extrinseck and lesser circumstances, as are in their own nature variable, and only determinable by a prudence regulat by the General Scripture-rules of order and edification, and were not at that time either questioned or reform, are not in this obliton of our Oath otherwise comprehended, or thereby rendered unalterable.  
In the next place, the Article obliges to the endeavour of reformation in the Kingdoms of England and Ireland in the same points, according to the word of God, and the example of the best reformed Churches: Which qualification adjected, although through the deceitfulness of men, it hath given the principal occasion both to perversions and calumnies, yet I am assured, that as in itself it is most sound and rational; so it may testify on our part a most fair and ingenuous candour: in as much, as although the Englishes did first seek to us, and willingly & freely engaged with us, to the maintenance of the reformation whereunto we had then attained; y●t in the confidence of the truth wherein it was bottomed, and that it might appear to the world, how little we were either addicted to any thing as our own, or inclined to abuse and impose upon their distress, we agreed to Covenant to the endeavours of their reformation, not precisely according to our example, though we vere fully persuaded of its divine warrant, but according to the unerring rule of the word of God: (to which we were always, and are still ready to submit all our engagements and persuasions) and the example of the best reformed Churches, the best arbiter of all exterior indifferences.  
Now after this cause, follows the obligation to Uniformity in these terms, And shall endeavour to bring the Churches of God in the three Kingdoms, to the nearest conjunction and uniformity, etc. Which being the part of our Oath, whereon our Author doth at present trifle, I shall not trouble my Reader to rectify his misrepresentation, as if it were the common work of uniformity, and not England's particular Reformation, that were referred to the Word of God: But seeing by the obvious tenor of the whole Article, the preservation of the reformed Religion in Scotland, and the Reformation of England and Ireland, according to the Word of God, are premised as midses conducing, and tendencies certainly concentring in this conjunction wished for, I am confident, every ingenuous man must acknowledge both the consistency of our Oath, and the vanity of our adversaries sophistry. And therefore it is answered.  
1. That suppose, the intended uniformity and conjunction did require an alteration; yet seeing the disconformity of either part, maketh place for it, & even perfection itself & imperfection, by reason of their disconformity, are capable of such a design, the necessity of an alteration to be made on both parts cannot be thence inferred. So that the Author's conclusion, from the unalterableness of Scotland's frame, that the Article of uniformity is illusory, and in plain terms a perfect cheat, is pitifully claudicant, and unworthy of both his judgement and gravity.  
2. Although that the things Covenanted to be preserved in Scotland, as being very acuratly tried and convincingly found to be agreeable to the word of God, are in effect both from their warrant, and our Oath unalterable; yet, seeing that by reason of our sublunary state, there are several external circumstances attending the worship, aswell as the discipline and Government of the Church, neither positively determined by the word of God, nor comprehended in this our Oath for preservation; that in these, there is a latitude on all parts left to the improvement of providence, and gratification of charity, for the more easy and happy obtaining of the uniformity Covenanted, is in itself evident, and the very subject and intendment of this last clause, as to any thing which may be thereby imported over & above what the preceding parts of the article do contain. But,  
3. The palpabl● fallacy of the Author's objection, is, that he falsely supposeth, not only that the word of God may in order to uniformity call for an alteration in Scotland's frame covenanted to be preserved, but that even the swearers of this oath did thereto refer, as not being fully ascertained and ultimately determined as to the congruity of that very establishment which in the same article they swear to mantain: whereas, it is manifest from the tenor of the article and all other circumstances, that as we in Scotland were assuredly persuaded, that the things whereunto we had attained, and which we swear to preserve, were according to the word of God, and England also by concurring with us in the same engagement did thereunto assent; so it was in the same common persuasion, that we engaged to endeavour England's reformation according to the same rule, and did, in the holding and not altering of these obligations with a just accommodation of undetermined circumstances, jointly vow and hope for the above mentioned uniformity.  
4. As the certain conformity of Scotland's then reformation to the word of God, doth directly contradict the Author's supposition, and the alterableness of the then constitution of Government in so far as we are sworn to preserve it, is very consistent with the vowed uniformity whereby the Author's argument is utterly ruined; so we do constantly acknowledge the same word of God to be the supreme and unerring rule, whereunto we heartily submit; and therefore, if the Author can show that this rule, either upon the account of uniformity or any other, doth require an alteration of that Government whereunto we are bound, it is in vain to redargue us from pretended inconsistencies in the words and contexture of our Oath, seeing this is a direct and plain method by which we are most willing to be tried.  
The Author adds, that if no hoof or hair of the Scottish model can be altered, though both Scripture, the example of the best reformed Churches, and the vowed uniformity should require it, than ought it in stead of according to the word of God, etc. to be rather according to the present form of the Church of Scotland. But 1. Waving the fraud and scorn of the Author's hooves and hairs, whereof it is certain, that his fixed Presidency, unless so far as it is an excrementitious superfluity, can be called none, why doth the Author cavil? If the Scripture and the example of the best Reformed Churches, do require an alteration of our model, let him show it, and there is an end. 2. I have already given a clear account, wherefore the ingagment in the Covenant to Reformation in England did refer to the word of God etc. rather than to any particular example. 3. If upon the matter, England's covenanted Reformation in Discipline & Government according to the Word of God, etc. do in effect resolve in an exact conformity to our then constitution, doth it therefore follow, that this part of our Oath is either a cheat or an abuse? God forbid; the Rule is too sacred to give ground to such a consequence: And certainly the Author's second thoughts will correct his rashness.  
But the Author subjoines, that how this understanding of the Rule of England's Reformation according to the Word of God, as certainly introductive of the than Scottish model, would have passed with our English Brethren, and particularly with these present at the framing of that Covenant, may easily be imagined. It is answered 1. The question here mainly agitat, is, neither how the Englishes understood the ingagment of the Covenant in order to their own Reformation, nor yet what may be its real import, but plainly what we stand bound to by virtue of that article, obliging us to preserve the Reformed Religion in the Church of Scotland in Doctrine, Worship, Discipline and Government; and that thereby we are obliged to disown and reject the Author's Episcopacy and fixed Presidency, from which our Government was at that time expressly reform, is that which I am persuaded he himself dare not seriously deny. 2. Whatever meaning interest, passion or prejudice may possibly devise, yet that the words, according to the Word of God, etc. are in themselves most plain, safe and sound cannot be controverted. But 3. That under this very form of words both England did give, and Scotland did obtain a sufficient assurance for the setting up of Presbyterian Government in England as it was at that time established in Scotland, is no hard matter to explain; in as much, as not only the Word of God, the declared Rule, doth thereto strictly and antecedentlie tie, as hath been made out; but whoever herewith considered the knowledge the Englishes had of our then constitution, the affectionate sympathy they had testified, both in our labour and victory whereby it was attained, their frequent and significant insinuations in public, in private, in print and in speeches to this purpose, their express engaging to the preservation of our frame, their brotherly covenanting and concurring with us for the cause of God, and many other circumstances, will without hesitation conclude, that we had as pregnant grounds of persuasion of there being like minded with us in this matter, as could be demanded or expected by ingenuous men, from a nation at that time so unsettled and discomposed. And therefore, seeing there was nothing for several years preceding, more clearly and distinctly held forth by us, then that we judged the form of Government then in being among us, to be the only Church Government agreeable to the word of God, I think we may well take the Author's suggestion, as if the Englishes would never have passed this sense and meaning of the words, according to the word of God, to be only a cunning hint, to colour a confidence which cannot be avowed. It is true, that in process of time, the love of truth and zeal of God did much abate, & error abound in that Nation; whence to many who desired a suitable licence, the just severity of Presbytery became uneasy and odious: but as that doth nothing convel the former arguments by me adduced, so it is no less true, that the sounder and better part of England, not carried away by the present defection, do still own Presbyterian Government as by us asserted, to be the only Government that our Lord has appointed in his Church.  
But our Author tells us, yea, it is not unknown how careful one of the English Commissioners was to have that clause inserted, according to the word of God, and how secure he thought himself and his Country by that expression from the inroade of Scottish Presbytery upon them notwithstanding that former Article premised in favours of it. Well, admit this to be a truth, what then? ● If one of them was a deceaver, & deceived & yet manifestly taken in his own craftiness, what is either the work or the Covenant the worse? If confident errors or treacheries be sufficient to confute the truth the Author needed not have called this witness to his assistance; but seeing it is most certain that whoever that person was, and whatever might have been his peculiar opinion, and communication or correspondence with the author in it, neither was there any such thing openly declared or treated, nor hath it the least foundation in the words under debate; but on the contrary is by them as manifestly confured, as the Author now is, to what he formerly professed most repugnant: the thing is scarce worthy this my reflection; and yet behold the conclusion, that the Author draws from it.  
Thus, saith he, were the Contrivers of that Covenant bussied in patching it up, to outwit one another by words and clauses, how inco●herent and discordant soever, to salve their different interests and opinions, and to make it strong in odium tertii, how weak soever it might prove to discerning men, by disagreeing and jarring with itself, and a very Babel, by the divided and confused language of its Architects. And thus our Author having abandoned all Conscience of the Oath of God, doth also cast off all shame, and in his envy standeth not openly to contradict and blaspheme. If he had premised any thing to give so much as a colour to this incoherence, discordance and confusion objected; somewhat in excuse of such conclusion might be indulged to his passion and interest: But when nothing hath been alleged, except a blind conjecture of some persons their different apprehensions of the soundest and plainest form of words, contrary to the undeniable evidence of the truth it sel●, and from which inconvenience the most pure light of divine revelation hath not been exempted, upon their grounds to infer an accusation against the holy Covenant in the terms we have heard, can only be the effect of a most wicked indignation and apostatick malice. Lord bow down thine ear and hear, open Lord thine eyes, and see, and hear the words of this man, who hath set himself to reproach thy truth and wo●k, which thou hast manifestly owned; and save I beseech thee thy People out of the hands of these evil men, that all the Churches may know, that thou art the holy Lo●d God of truth, who searcheth the reins and heart. And therefore in return to this contempt and scorn, I shall only here briefly add to what I have in the former Discourse observed to this purpose. 1. That all the forged ambiguities and inconsistencies, that either the deceit of Hypocrites, or perverseness of open adversaries, have hitherto laboured to fix upon the words and frame of this Oath, are not only the fate of truth, but according to its proper virtue, by the serious consideration thereof in its own light, most readily and satisfyingly salved. 2. As the Covenant was attended by a most signal power, and presence from on high; so it's sincere prosecution, was constantly blessed with a very beautiful concord; and whoever divided from its genuine meaning and purpose, did quickly also abandon the reverence and regard thereof, which he once professed. 3. That not only the forsakers of the Covenant do relinquish it without repentance, and for the most part, by the irritation of their own guilt and shame, are exasperate to irrational railing and rage: but if the revile and persecutions of the ungodly World, be the badge of truth, the Covenant hath from the beginning been thereby very notably confirmed; and all its true followers may herein rejoice and be exceeding glade, as being by the Lord pronounced blessed. 4. That as the beauty and glory of the work of God, were very visibly promoted both by the Covenant and its contrivers, and confusion formerly, and calamity and wasting consumption now, the certain and manifest effects of men's swerving and backsliding from it: and as in that furious storm that broke off and destroyed the branches, the root of the Kingdom was by this bond made sure, until the time of our restitution wherein it made the first and most airly appearance; so the remembrance of these things, may yet be ground of hope, that the Lord will arise and have mercy upon Zion, and in place of the Babel-confusions wherewith these Masters of confusion and rebuilders of Babylon do upbraid us, cause his work appear unto his Servants and his glory unto their Children.  
In the last place, the Author saith, He heareth that some take the Romish Hierarchy in the National Covenant, for the same with our present Episcopacy; and that by virtue of the Gloss of Glasgow which yet, he saith, doth grossly corrupt the Text: For the Romish Hierarchy is the Romish Hierarchy, and no other; nor hath any man, or assembly of men, even such as have most of the spirit in them, power to bind a sense upon the words, so different from, and opposite to their clear and genuine signification. I cannot here in the close insist on all the impertinencies huddled up in these few lines, though by the Romish hierarchy abjured in the National Covenant, there is no doubt meaned, not only Rome's proper hierarchy, usurping and pretending to a domination over us: but also, all such like corruption in Ecclesiastic government, whether in its rise, growth or consummation, under which it is manifest, that the controverted Episcopacy as being the first workings of that mystery, must necessarily be comprehended. Yet it was not by this clause alone of this Covenant, that this Episcopacy was conceived to be abjured amongst us; in as much, as the argument that may be gathered from it for this abjuration, is both cumulative and concludent above exception, viz. that albeit, that it doth principally relate to heads of doctrine, and the maintenance of the truth therein contrary to the errors of popery, yet it doth also extend itself against all manner of Superstition & corruption: and therefore doth not only reject the Pope's worldly monarchy and wicked Hierarchy, whereby, without question, all the degrees, occasions & tendencies, either of worldly domination, or undue Elation of Christ's Ministers over his flock, or among themselves are disclaimed; but thereby we do expressly join ourselves to the Church of Scotland as then reform in doctrine, faith, religion and discipline, promising and swearing by the great name of the Lord our God, that we shall continue in the obedience of the doctrine and Discipline of this Kirk, and shall defend the same according to our vocation and power all the days of our lives. Under which heads, especially that of Discipline, according to the usual phrase of these times, as it is without controversy, that the Government then in being was contained; so if we consider, that the taking and subscribing of this Covenant in the year 1581. and 1590. was designedly enjoined by the general Assembly for the confirmation of Presbiterian Government then completly perfected, and unanimously agreed to in the year 1581. and universally settled and established in the year 1590.: it is not possible, that in this matter any shadow of scruple should remain.  
I might here add for a further evidence, that when within a few years' thereafrer, King james and his Court-faction took upon them to innovat that form, by the introduction of Kirk-commissioners, and constant Moderators or fixed precedents; the faithful who opposed these courses did, as it appears by their writings and public protestations yet extant, very freely testify against them, as perjurious defections and breaches of the oath of God: which is an undeniable proof of the sense wherein it was taken. But the plain and obvious account of this oath, which I have already exhibit, is more than sufficient, to vindicat the consonancy and soundness of that interpretation made by the forementioned Assembly, against the author's identick and ridiculous reasoning, to wit, that therefore the Romish hierarchy in that Oath cannot contain the present episcopacy, because forsooth, the Romish hierarchy is the Romish hierarchy, And no less ignorant and lascivient confidence, whereby he goeth about, not only impudently to decry a most certain and clear explication as gross and shameful, but impertinently to defy or mock the Spirit of the Lord, and all thereby conducted. I might in this place moreover subjoine, that admitting, for the Author's more full redargution, that the Assembly had lap●ed in their exposition; yet seeing it was materially agreeable to truth, & we are thereunto bound by our sacred oath, not so much assertory of the justness of the explanation, as positiuè, renouncing the thing therein contained; this error in the manner, could not by any rule dissolve the force of our oath, but the certainty and lawfulness of our abjuration by this oath, both of Prelacy and Episcopacy, and all their aspiring degrees, hath been already by me so largely and evidently declared, that any addition were altogether superfluous.  
As for what the Author tells us in the last place, that the Presbyterian brethren in former times did not think themselves by that Covenant obliged to Separate from the Synods wherein Bishops presided, as their practices do evidence. I am persuaded I have so abundantly cleared the difference of their case from ours, and thereby reconciled their and our practices in a most agreeable consistency, that the very simple noticing of this reflection may almost be accounted an excess. I might here add that if Presbyterian government were offered to be truly restored upon its own proper● foundation, and no thing imposed beside this constant Precedent, both eligible & deposible by the Courts, wherein he moderats; the practice of withdrawing would be liable to more probable exceptions but seeing the very lowest condescendence that probably can be conjectured, is immensly distant from this hypothesis; and the exigence of a testimony flowing from our present unrepented backslidings, with the far more probable ensuing of evil then good, upon a conjunction with the persons, and in the other circumstances obvious in our present condition, do according to these grounds and rules declared in my first Discourse, still persuade to a humble, tender, prudent and witnessing separation, I do here put a period to these debates.  
FINIS.