THE Queries and Protestation OF THE Scots Episcopal Clergy AGAINST THE AUTHORITY OF THE Presbyterian General Assemblies and Committees, given in to the Committee of the General Assembly at Aberdeen, June 29th, 1694.  
Together with the Committee's Answer and Proceedings; with REFLECTIONS upon the QUERIES, &c.  
By a lay-man of the Church of Scotland.  1 Cor. 11.16. {αβγδ}. 
London, Printed in the Year 1694.   

The PREFACE.  
THE Cause of publishing the following Queries and Reflections upon them, is to obviate Misrepresentations, and set things in their true Light, it having been the constant practise of the Scots Prelatists and their Friends here, not only to put false Glosses upon things, but really to publish Untruths, as Matter of Fact, ever since the Revolution, by which they impose upon those who are Strangers to Scots Affairs. The Truth of this cannot be denied by any who consider the Pamphlets which they have published from time to time against the Church of Scotland, as by Law established, both in relation to particular Ministers and Members, and the Acts and Proceedings of her General Assemblies and Committees: Nor is it unknown how some Persons of no mean Character did industriously misrepresent the Act for settling the Quiet and Peace of the Church, which was enacted in the last Session of Parliament at Edinburgh, June 12, 1693. before it appeared in print, on purpose to render their Proceedings odious to the Church of England; and the Opposition made to the sitting of the last General Assembly, who authorised the Committee here treated of, as also the Tricks which were endeavoured to be put upon them when they were called, are still fresh in the Memory of every one concerned: So that these things, together with the Weight of the following Queries, not in themselves, but as being concerted by a General Meeting of the Episcopal Clergy in the North of Scotland, for themselves and their Adherents, will justify the publishing of them to the World; and that there may be a true Relation of the Matter of Fact on both sides, here is also an Account of the Committee's Answer and Proceedings.  
As to what concerns the Reflections, though the judicious and prudent Answer of the Committee, and the pertinent Protestation of Mr. Dunlop, are sufficient to satisfy those who are acquainted with our Affairs, and the legal and orderly Procedure of the Judicatories of our Church, yet something further was thought necessary to inform People here, amongst whom the Queries and Protestation of the Episcopal Party have made a Noise, whereas there was no notice taken of the Committee's Answer, nor the other Protestation; those who transmitted the Account of the one from Edinburgh, to those who did sand it in the public News and otherwise, through this Kingdom, having either suppressed it out of Ignorance or Design. The Necessity of these Reflections, such as they are, will further appear to those who consider the Humour and Carriage of the Faction's Adherents in this place, being such as lay hold of every Opportunity to calumniate the Church of Scotland, and by Consequence improve those Queries, &c. as a special Occasion of begging and running about with their malicious Tattle amongst the Church-of-England-Clergy, and others to whom they know such things to be acceptable: and therefore the Author of the following Reflections, out of pure Zeal for the Government of his Country, as at present established both in Church and State, thought it incumbent on him to throw in his Mite; but does solemnly protest that he has neither Commission, Concurrence, nor Connivance from the Committee, nor any of their Number, nor indeed from any Minister or Ministers in Scotland, for what he has done herein, which he thinks fit to declare, to obviate the Misrepresentations of the opposite Party; and that no Mismanagement of his, though he be conscious of no other but Weakness, may be imputed to his own Party, whose Pardon he hopes that he may also obtain, though his meddling in their Affairs may seem officious, seeing he hath so ingenuously declared his Motive, and that he supporses his Reflections may keep the Adversaries in play for a while, till the Committee, or some deputed by them, shall be at leisure to take their Queries into Consideration, if they think that they deserve so much of their time.  
What's to be said further at present is, that all moderate Church-of England-men, into whose Hands this may fall, would do well to take notice, that those who pretend to be of their Party in Scotland, don't contend now for the Order of Bishops, it being apparent that they do, neither in the Formula which they offered to sign in 1690, nor in the present Queries, make any mention of the Abolition of that Order, as a Cause of their declining Conformity to the Church of Scotland: Nor is their Renunciation of Episcopacy or Passive Obedience required, though we were obliged to renounce Presbytery, and the Lawfulness of defensive Arms, or else we could not comform to their Church-Establishment; for not only the Abjuration of the solemn League and Covenant, but a Conformity to the Church, as owning the King's Supremacy, and the Government of the Church by Bishops, were expressly required by Acts of Parliament, Sess. 2. Act 3, and 5. Parl. 1. Car. 2. Sess. 3. Act 2. whereas in effect there's nothing required of them by the Act for Settling the Peace of the Church, June, 1693. but what they did seemingly concede by the Formula above-mentioned: And though they pretend to raise new Scruples now, as in their Queries, &c. it will appear by the following Reflections, that they themselves did practise those things which they condemn in others. And whereas it may possibly be alleged, that they forbear making mention of the Abolition of Episcopacy, or requiring its Restitution as a Term of their Conformity, out of Deference to the Government, that cannot be the Reason; for those things which they impugn have also the Sanction of the Civil Government.  
But to conclude, those of the Church of England are likewise desired to consider, whether they themselves would not be shy of admitting such as refuse either to own the Government or Doctrine of their Church; and therefore whether it be not very reasonable in the Church of Scotland, to be wary how they admit those Men into her Judicatories, who not only refuse Submission to her Government and Doctrine, but by their Influence, those who adhered to her were in the late Reigns exposed to Impoverishment, Banishment, Fining, Confining, Imprisonment, Torture, and Death itself; it being no less than a Capital Crime, by their Laws, for any Presbyterian Minister to preach, Act 8. Parl. 1. Jac. 7. and no Man could farm either House or Land without agreeing to a Clause in his Lease, obliging him and his Family to Conformity under exorbitant Penalties: And Landlords and Masters were to put away their Tenants and Servants without warning, if they went to Meetings, Act. 24. Parl. 1. Jac. 7. and the Act in 1681, when the D. of York was Commissioner. Now if these Laws and others which the present Parliament have declared to be impious, together with the Acts of Council which were yet more bloody and barbarous, as empowering the Souldiers to examine and kill any Man they met, if they did not give satisfying Answers to their Questions, be duly considered, it's referred to the judgement of any discreet Man, whether it would be prudent for the Presbyterian Ministers to take the Party who solicited those Laws into the Assemblies of their Church, without comforming to the Terms required by the Act of Parliament, June 12, 1693. viz. that they should take the Oath of Allegiance and Assurance, sign the Confession of Faith as their own, and promise to submit to, concur with, and never to endeavour the Subversion of the present Church-Government; which cannot appear to be harsh Terms to any Man who will seriously consider the Formula that the Party did offer to sign in 1690. which, because it is often referred unto in the following Reflections, and that it plainly demonstrates the Unstedfastness and Shuffling of the Party, if compared with their present Queries, it's thought sit here to exhibit.  
I A. B. do sincerely declare and promise, that I will submit to the Presbyterian Government of the Church, as it is now established in this Kingdom by their Majesties K. William and Q. Mary, by Presbyteries, Provincial Synods, and General Assemblies; and that I will, as becomes a Minister of the Gospel, hearty concur with the said Government for suppressing of Sin and Wickedness, promoting Piety, and purging of the Church of all erroneous and scandalous Men. And I do further promise, that I will subscribe the Confession of Faith, and larger and shorter Catechism, now confirmed by Act of Parliament, as containing the Doctrine of the Protestant Religion professed in this Kingdom.  
Now let the Querists answer, whether here be not a plain Offer to submit to the Presbyterian Government, without any mention of the Objections insisted upon in their present Queries? whether they do not own here that there were scandalous and erroneous Ministers amongst them, which now they are so loth to confess? whether they did not here acknowledge the Authority of the Presbyterians to purge out those Ministers, whereas now they protest against their having any such Power? whether they did not prevaricate with the Civil Government in offering those Terms, and yet refuse to comform according to the Act of June 12, 1693? and whether their offering to sign the Confession of Faith as the Doctrine of the Protestant Religion professed in the Kingdom, while they refused to sign the same as the Confession of their own Faith, was not a silly and gross piece of Dissimulation?   

Names of the delegates commissionat by the General Meeting at Aberdeen upon the 5th Day of June 1694. for presenting the Queries, &c. to the Committee at Aberdeen, are as follows:  

MR. John Forbes person of Kincairden.  
Mr. Thomas Robertson person of Clatt.  
Mr. Alexander Lunan person of Davi●t.  
Mr. Patrick Harvy person of Forgon.  
Mr. Alexander Gellie person of Fordyce.  
Mr. Alexander Barclay Minister at Peterhead.  
Mr. Alexander clerk Minister at Methlick.  
Mr. Alexander Mill Minister at Udnie.   
Together with all the Ministers of the Presbytery of Aberdeen, &c. Of which Number of delegates, these were present; and did give in the said Queries to the Committee foresaid, upon the 29th Day of June in the Year foresaid, viz.  

Mr. Thomas Robertson person of Clatt.  
Mr. Alexander Lunan person of Daviot.  
Mr. Alexander clerk Minister at Methlick.  
Mr. Alexander Mill Minister at Udnie.   

And these of the Presbytery of Aberdeen, viz.  
Mr. James Gordon person of Banchory-davinick.  
Mr. George White Minister at Maryculter.  
Mr. John Duntop Minister at Skeen.  
Mr. George Smith Minister at Kinellar.  
Mr. Gilbert Ramsey Minister at Dyee.  
Mr. George Seton Minister at Uppermachan.  
Mr. Richard Metland Minister at Nigg.  
Mr. Thomas Crevey Minister at Newhills.   
Sic Subscribitur, M. Chrevey Clericus.   

At the King's College-Kirk of Aberdeen, the 5th of June 1694.  
THe which Day being met the Ministers of the diocese of Aberdeen, together with delegates from the dioceses of Murray, Ross, Caithnes and Orknay, and from the shires of Mairns and Angus; for consulting anent the necessary Affairs of the Church in this Juncture: And understanding that the Committee of the late Presbiterian assembly for the North, is to sit at Aberdeen once in this Month; Did therfore nominate and choose the Brethren after-mentioned, viz. Mr. John Forbes person of Kincairden, Mr. Thomas Robertson person of Clatt, Mr. Alexander Lunan person of Daviot, Mr. Alexander Gellie person of Fordyce, Mr. Patrick Harvie Minister of Forgon, Mr. Alexander Barclay Minister at Peterhead, Mr. Alexander clerk Minister at Methlick, Mr. Alexander Mill Minister at Udnie: Together with all the Brethren of the Presbitrie of Aberdeen; together also with any others of other Presbitries or dioceses who may be upon the Place for the time, or any three or one of them as their Commissioners and Representatives, With full Power, warrant, and Commission to them to compear before the said Committee when ever it shall happen any of their Number to be cited before them: And in their Name to present to them some Queries or Proposals concerted by them at their said Meeting, relating to the ecclesiastic Authority and Jurisdiction of the said Committee, and to demand Answers and Resolutions thereunto, and all other things to act and do relative to the Churches interest, pro re nata. And to establish and constitut Procurators one or more in their Name, To compear in their Absence, and to act before the said Committee as fully and freely as if all and every one of them were personally present themselves. And appoynted one Extract of this Act to be given to the forsaids Commissioners, under the Clerk of the Meetings Hand, for their warrant and Commission. Extracted forth of the Records of the Meeting above specified.  
Sic Subscribitur, M. Chrevey Clericus.   

Reflections on the Meeting of the Episcopal Clergy at Aberdeen.  
THE Gentlemen who composed this Meeting, having entertained the Committee of the General Assembly with Queries, will not I hope take it amiss to have a little of the same Entertainment themselves, and may certainly give a very agreeable Diversion to the public, if they will be pleased to answer the following Queries, viz.  
By what Authority they met? for by the Authority of their present Majesties they could not meet; and if by the Authority of the late King, whether or not their Meeting was not Rebellion? If neither by the Authority of the late King, nor their present Majesties, how they came to act contrary to their former Principles, viz. that all Convocations of the Lieges, without the King's Authority, is Rebellion? If they be Frastians in their Principle, according as their Party did swear, and profess themselves to be by the late Oath of Supremacy, and the 14 Act of Parl. 2. Car. 2. how came they to contradict this Principle by calling an Assembly of the Church without the Magistrates Concurrence? If K. William and Q. Mary be Ch. 2d's lawful Successors, to whom by virtue of the Supremacy and the Inherent Right of the Crown, the Ordering of the Government of the Church, &c. doth properly belong, how comes it to pass that they meet in Opposition to the Committee of the Assembly which has their Majesties Authority to visit and purge the Church, &c. and not only meet in Opposition to them, but decline the Authority of them and their Constituents? If K. William and Q. Mary be not K. Ch. 2d's lawful Successors, how can the Querists appeal to them as the only Supreme Judges in these Dominions? And seeing they appeal to them as the only supreme Judges, why they don't acquiesce in their judgement, which they have solemnly given by Act of Parliament, viz. in lodging the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction of the National Church, by Act. 5. Sess. 2. of this present Parliament, on the Presbyterian Ministers, outed since 1661, and such as they have received or shall receive; and empowering them to appoint Visitors to purge the Church, suspend and deprive? &c. And seeing the Committee which the Querists oppose have such a Power, whether they might not in Law deprive the said Querists for their Contumacy? And seeing they have not deprived them, whether they have not behaved themselves with more Moderation towards the Querists, than their Party did toward the Presbyterians? And whether the Presbyterian Ministers were not beheaded, hanged, &c. in the late Reigns, for less Opposition to the Government? The Querists would oblige the public further to answer, whether or not their Meeting in this Manner, without the late King James's Authority, if they still own his Title, be not a direct Breach of their Oath of Allegiance, wherein they were sworn to maintain his Jurisdiction over all Persons, and in all Causes, against all Persons whatsoever? And if they own their present Majesties Authority, how they can acquit themselves of that Oath to King James, seeing they did also take the Declaration, that it was not lawful to resist his Majesty, or any commissionated by him, on any Pretence whatsoever? And if they own that to have been a false Principle, why they did not declare so to the World, exhibit their Reasons, and avow their Repentance for swearing such a rash Oath? And further their Answer is desired, whether their assembling about Church-matters, in this manner, without the Consent of the Civil Magistrate, be not an express owning of the inherent and intrinsic Right of the Church; for maintaining of which their Party did persecute the Presbyterians to Death in the late Reigns? whether such a Meeting of such Persons who have not given those Proofs of their Loyalty to their Majesties that the Law requires, especially when called on purpose to oppose a Committee clothed with their Majesty's Authority, be agreeable to the Principles of Passive Obedience, and not actual Resistance? and how that can be called the Assembly of a Church, which consists only of pretended Pastors, without delegates from the People?   

Some Proposals from the Ministers of the diocese of Aberdeen, for themselves, and in Name of the whole Episcopal Clergy within this Kingdom, who concur with them to the Committee of the late Presbyterian Assembly, now sitting at Aberdeen, upon the 29th of June, 1694.  

Query I. WHereas, according to the Principles of Presbyterian Government, there ought be no higher Degree of Pastors in the Church than Presbyters, and all Presbyters are equal in Power and Authority, we desire to know by what Divine and ecclesiastic Right these fifty or sixty surviving Presbyterian Ministers, not being in actual Charge within this Kingdom, did take upon them the Exercise of the whole ecclesiastic Power of this National Church, and have exerced a more full and absolute Authority and Jurisdiction over their Brethren, nine hundred or a thousand Ministers, who were in Office when Episcopacy was abolished, than ever the Bishops pretended to, who never claimed a Power to make Acts concerning the Church, without Consent of its Ministers.  
Reflections upon the First Query.  
THE Design of this Query is, to charge the Committee of the Assembly with acting contrary to Presbyterian Principles, and exercising a more absolute Authority over their Brethren, the Episcopal Ministers, than ever the Bishops pretended to.  
The Arguments on which they would found the first Part of the Charge are, because the Commission owns no higher Pastors in the Church than Presbyters, and that all those are equal in Power; and yet fifty or sixty surviving Presbyterian Ministers, not being in actual Charge within this Kingdom, did take upon them the Exercise of the whole ecclesiastic Power.  
As to the first Part of the Argument, it seems altogether frivolous, and cannot infer the least Contrariety to Presbyterian Principles, that because they own no higher Pastors in the Church than Presbyters, therefore Presbyters should take upon them the Exercise of the whole ecclesiastic Power: for it's natural to conclude, that seeing they own none higher, therefore they must needs think that the ecclesiastic Power devolves on them.  
Nor is the second Argument any thing more concludent to prove the Committee's contradicting their own Principles, than as if one should argue thus, because all the Members of the House of Commons are of equal Power, therefore the Commons, or a Committee of their own Number, have no Power over a faulty Member or Members: or because the Members of the Assembly which met at Jerusalem, had not in their single Capacities any Power over one another, as Apostle over Apostle, or Elder over Elder, therefore when gathered together as an Assembly, they had no Power, neither of themselves, nor by a Committee, to censure a faulty Member or Members.  
Then as to the third and strongest Part of the Argument, that fifty or sixty of the surviving Presbyterian Ministers, not being in actual Charge within this Kingdom, did take upon them the Charge of the whole ecclesiastic Power:  
It may be answered, 1st. That the Case is falsely and maliciously stated; for those fifty or sixty surviving Ministers did not take upon themselves that Charge de novo, at the Abolition of Prelacy, but were only restored to the free Exercise of that Charge, which by the Iniquity of the late Times, and the Prelatical Persecution, they were unjustly deprived of, but had continued in the Possession and practise of it, as Providence afforded them Opportunity, in private.  
2dly. That they did not take the Charge aforesaid upon themselves, but the free Exercise of the same was restored to them by the Parliament, in conjunction with such others as they should think fit to take in.  
3dly. That the Episcopalians, by denying them to have been in actual Charge at the Revolution, would have done well to have explained their Meaning: If by not being in actual Charge they intend their not being settled in Parish-Churches, it may be granted without any Damage to their Cause: For by the practise of the Prelatists themselves, a Man may be in officio, though not in beneficio; and if he be in officio, he may certainly perform what belongs to his Office. And by their own Concession( Q. 2.) the Power of Discipline and Government is inseparable from the Power of Preaching; so that until it be proved that they were justly deprived of the Power of Preaching, they must still allow them to have been in actual Charge. And by Consequence this Part of their Argument falls to the Ground.  
Then as to that Part of it, that fifty or sixty Presbyterian Ministers should exercise the whole ecclesiastic Power of the National Church; besides what may be said to justify them from Theological topics, they have a very strong Argument from politics, by which the Prelatists ought to be satisfied, according to their own Concession in their Protestation, as shall be evinced anon.  
For fifty or sixty Presbyterian Ministers may very well take upon them the Exercise of the whole ecclesiastic Power of a Nation, when the Representatives of that Nation, in Parliament assembled, will own no other to have any Right thereunto: and for this Reason, as appears still by the Vote of the Convention, that the Bishops and their Clergy were the great and insupportable Grievance of the Nation. And for this Cause, together with the Consideration of the illegal Method used in turning out the Presbyterian Ministers in 1660, and 1661. of which there were only those fifty or sixty alive at the Revolution, their Majesties, by Advice of their Parliament, after the settling of the Church-Government had hung above a Year in suspense, did settle the same upon those fifty or sixty Presbyterian Ministers, and such as they should admit; so that according to the Appeal which the Prelatists have made in their Protestation to King William and Queen Mary, as Supreme Judges under God in these Dominions, they ought to rest satisfied in their Determination by the Touch of the sceptre in Parliament, which is the only authoritative way by which they can determine Cases of that Consequence; though by this Appeal it would seem that our Prelatists are of another Mind. It's in vain for them to think of evading, by supposing that their Majesties were surprised into that Assent, for they were sufficiently satisfied how Matters stood; and all the Arguments that could be urged for the Episcopal Party, were represented and set off to the best Advantage, by the Viscount of T—, and others of their Champions, and backed by the Interest of the high-flown Church-men here; so that if their Majesties had not been fully convinced of the Truth of what was represented to them by their Grand Council, the Parliament, as to what Form of Church-Government was best for Scotland, it's not reasonable to think that ever they would have given their Royal Assent to that Act. So that if these Gentlemen had either any due Regard to the Dignity of Scots Parliaments, the impugning of whose Acts is no less than Treason; or if they had any real Deference to the judgement of their Majesties, to whom they appeal, they would never be so bold, to say no worse, to appeal to them in a Matter which they have already determined in the most solemn and legal manner that can be, and much less to protest against the General Assembly of the Church or their Committee, as exercising Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction, tho not altogether by, yet with their Majesties Authority. And if the Party had but the least Remnant of Modesty, they would be ashamed to aver that the Presbyterians exercise a more full and absolute Authority and Jurisdiction over their Brethren, nine hundred or a thousand Ministers, who were in Office when Episcopacy was abolished, than ever the Bishops pretended to, who never claimed a Power to make Acts concerning the Church, without Consent of its Ministers.  
It being very well known, that though the Bishops, to please the People, kept up a Form of Presbyteries and Synods, by whose Advice they pretended to make Acts; yet those Presbyteries and Synods were never allowed that Freedom and Liberty which they themselves desired, but were directly lorded over by the Bishops; of which the Scuffle which happened betwixt them and their Ciergy, about a Convocation in 1674. or thereabouts, as I take it, was a convincing Instance, for the poor Curates were forced at last to submit. Whereas it is evident that the Presbyterians do neither claim nor exercise any such absolute Jurisdiction over their Episcopal Brethren, the Assembly in 1690 having expressly declared that they would depose no Incumbents simply for their judgement concerning Church-Government, nor yet urge Recordination upon them. Nor can they give any Instances that they have acted contrary to this Declaration, all of those that have hitherto been turned out being found really scandalous, or refusing to own their present Majesties; whereas the Presbyterians turned out in 1660, and 1661, could neither be accused as scandalous in their Conversation, Heterodox in their Doctrine, or of refusing to own King Charles II. and yet the Prelatical Council turned them out merely because they would not submit to the Bishops, by whose Influence afterwards it was enacted, Parl. 1. Sess. 2. Act. 2. Car. 2. that all Petitions, Writing, Printing, Praying, Remonstrating or Preaching, showing any Dislike of the Government of the Church by Bishops, was seditious. So that the World may judge of the Truth of those Mens Assertion, who say, that the Presbyterians do exercise a more full and absolute Authority and Jurisdiction over them, than ever the Bishops pretended to, who not only solicited the above-mentioned Act, but concurred with their Authority to establish it into a Law. And seeing our Adversaries do own that the Bishops never made any Acts without the Consent of their Clergy, we would pray them to answer then, whether this does not plainly give the lye to all their Pretensions of Moderation towards the Presbyterians in the late Reigns, which they magnified so much in some of their Pamphlets since the Revolution.  
They may, perhaps, object, that the Bishops did not do this in their Ecclesiastical Capacity, but as Members of Parliament. To which it may easily be replied, that they sit in Parliament as Bishops, which is their Ecclesiastical Capacity; but whether they did it in that Capacity or not, it's all one upon the matter; for, according to these Gentlemens Allegation, they did not concur to make such Acts relating to the Church, without Consent of their Clergy: and if they did it without their Concurrence, then they lorded it over them and the Presbyterians both: so that they have brought themselves into a Dilemma, let them get out of it which way they can.  
It may be further answered, as to their charging the Presbyterians with exercising a more absolute Jurisdiction over the Episcopal Ministers than the Bishops did, that without any Breach of Charity, if we consider the practise and Designs of the Scots Bishops, it was neither their Interest nor Inclination to inquire into the Doctrine and Conversation of their Clergy; for Looseness of practise and Errors in Doctrine, such as Arminianism, &c. were the Path-road to Popery and Slavery: for the advancing of which the Generality of our Scots Bishops did concur with the Court, as most, if not all of them who were in Office at the Revolution, do adhere to the late King still, and the Northern Parts of the Kingdom, where these refractory Clergy-men do now reside: as they are most opposite to this Government both in Church and State, so they did comply with the Courses of the late Reigns most of any. And whereas they pretend that the Bishops did not make any Acts concerning the Church, without the Consent of its Ministers; we answer, that if they demanded any Consent, it was only from those who owned their Jurisdiction, and not from the Presbyterian Ministers: and they cannot deny but the Presbyterian Assemblies act with the Advice and Consent of all that own their Jurisdiction. So that the Episcopal Party condemn their own practise by condemning us. All the Difference that can be alleged is, that those Episcopal Ministers who complain thus, are still in their Churches, whereas the Presbyterians were thrown out; which is merely the Fruits of the Government's Mildness, and does not one whit alter the Case, except they will allege, which they never did hitherto, that none can be Ministers but such as are fixed in particular Congregations: And in truth this is but a very sorry Requital to the Presbyterians for their Moderation in suffering them to continue in the Churches, whence they could have as easily ejected them as they did vote them the great and insupportable Grievance of the Nation; that nothing will satisfy them, except they be admitted into the Judicatories of the Church, to embroil Affairs and overtun it afresh: And because they seem to lay such mighty Weight upon their being in Office when Episcopacy was abolished; they may remember that the Presbyterians were also in Office, in their sense, when Episcopacy was set up, without the Consent of the Ministers then in Office.  
Then as to that part of the Query, by what Divine or Ecclesiastical Right those fifty or sixty Ministers took upon them the Charge above-mentioned:  
It hath been answered already, that they never lost that Right, tho they were obstructed in the Exercise of it by Force; and as in general Defections, when the number of the Faithful is always the least, yet the Right is preserved in those few that continue faithful; so the case was here, the smallness of their Number is no Argument against the Justice of their Cause: For the Scriptures acquaint us, that the Witnesses for the Truth were reduced to two,( that is, a small, tho sufficient Number in Law to confirm the Truth) while the whole World wondered after the Beast; and we have often heard of unus Athanasius contra totum Orbem. The Waldenses were but few in Number compared with the Multitude of Idolaters, and yet the Succession of Church was preserved in them. The Arians of old, and the Papists of late did brag of their Multitude, but that was never allowed by the Orthodox as a concluding Argument. Chrysostom ad Pop. Antioch. hom. 26. says, Quid mihi cum multitudine malo unum pretiosum Lapidem quam obolos multos. Et hom. 40. Elias unus erat, said totus Mundus non dignus erat qui rependeretur ei. Greg. Nazian. Orat. 25. contra Arianos. Ubi sunt, inquit, qui Ecclesiam multitudine definiunt,& parvum Gregem despicantur? This Comparison it's probable will be rejected as odious, and savouring too much of a censorious Spirit: but whoever will be at the Pains to consider, that the Divine Institution of the Order of Presbyters is agreed on among all Christians in general, while that of any superior Order is granted by the most Learned of the Episcopal Party themselves to be merely of Human Right; and then if we take a view of the solemn Obligations which the Kingdom of Scotland lay under to have preserved the Protestant Doctrine, and Presbyterian Government in that Church, the undue Methods taken to reintroduce Prelacy there, by the most notorious Perjury that ever was heard of under Heaven; the Deluge of Profanity which accompanied that Change; the Laws for establishing it, which this present Parliament have voted to be impious, and the unhallowed Means and Instruments made use of to support and maintain the Scots Episcopacy: then if we consider the slackening of the Reins of all public Discipline, together with the manifest decay of the Power of Godliness, and the Hatred which was evidenced against it by most of the Scots Bishops and their Clergy; when at the same time they concurred with their utmost Power to bring the Nations under a Popish Government, to the manifest hazard of our Civil and Religious Liberties: and if to this we add the visible Inclination which that Party have still to the late King James, tho in League with the French King, and never to be restored but by the sworn Enemy of our Religion; the Doctrine of which they do apparently disown by refusing to sign the Confession of Faith: I say, that if all those things be considered, it will appear with undeniable Evidence, that our Scots Prelatists were and are engaged in a dreadful Defection, and joined in Issue and Interest with Babylon, tho God by his Word and Providence did call aloud for his People to come out of her. Which Reflection being founded upon undeniable Matter of Fact, can offend no unprejudiced Person, who will allow themselves time to consider of it; and therefore the Case being thus, and the Parliament of Scotland which was called by his present Majesty King William, whom God hath in a wonderful manner raised up to support and maintain the Protestant Interest, which was ready to sink, having, as already hinted, voted the Scots Bishops and their Clergy, to be the great and insupportable Grievance of the Nation, let no Man tax me with being uncharitable, if I say that the Prelatical Party, having divested themselves of all pretences to Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction by their Defection, it must necessary remain in those Presbyterian Ministers who continued faithful: and that this was the sense of the Body of Protestants in the Nation, appeared by the unanimous Vote of their Representatives, who rejected the Bishops and their Clergy as an unsupportable Grievance; and by Law did establish the Exercise of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction in those few Presbyterian Ministers, and such as they should admit: so that here's all that can be requisite to prove their Divine and ecclesiastic Right to the Jurisdiction of the National Church. They had their Mission and Ordination as Ministers by the Hands of the Presbytery, which, in foro Ecclesiae, does regularly constitute them Ambassadors of Jesus Christ, and the Nation by their Representatives have submitted themselves to their Jurisdidiction, as such: So that there is nothing wanting to clear their Right, either by Laws Divine or Human.   

Query II. Since according to their own Principles, the Power of preaching the Gospel, and administering the Sacraments, and the Power of Discipline and Government are inseparable in the Office of a Pastor; Quaeritur, If that Constitution of Church-Government be lawful, which excludes the greatest part of the Pastors of the Church from having any share in the Government thereof?  
Reflections on the Second Query.  
THE Design of this Query is, first, to fix upon the Presbyterians an Inconsistency with their own Principles, in excluding the greatest part of the Ministers of that Church from any share in the Government, tho they own that the Power of Preaching, and the Power of Discipline are inseparable. And in the next place, to prove that the present Constitution of the Church-Government is unlawful upon that Account.  
As to the first: They may remember that it was the practise of their own Church as well as of ours, to admit Probationers to preach without allowing them the Power of Discipline; whence it appears that this Reflection upon us is not duly cautioned, nor can it infer any Inconsistency with our Principles. But what if we should answer their Question with another; Whether do they think that the Apostle, tho he was glad that Christ was preached out of Envy, would have admitted those envious Preachers into the Judicatories of the Church, to debate upon those Matters whereof they themselves were accused?  
But this Reflection of theirs will appear still more unreasonable, if we consider;  
1. That tho the Presbyterians thought it fit to connive at their preaching, yet they never gave them any formal Allowance to preach; so that their denying them any share in the Discipline, seeing they never had their Allowance to preach, cannot infer any Contradiction in the Presbyterians to the Principle above-mentioned.  
3. That it were highly imprudent, to say no worse, for the Assembly to admit those Men into a share of the Government of the Church, whom the Representatives of the Nation, who are the Body of that Church, did vote to be the insupportable Grievance of the Nation, which is a flagrant Scandal, whence the Party have never purged themselves; and it will be allowed by the Prelatists that Ministers under a Scandal, may be suspended ab Officio: so that they have no reason to complain when they are only debarred from part of that which they pretend to be their Office, whereas they might have justly been excluded from the whole.  
4. That for the Presbyterian Ministers to admit those Men into a share of the Church-Government, who during this time that they have been allowed to preach since the Revolution, which is more than enough for Probation, have given no Evidences of their Amendment, nor Inclination to comply with the Terms of Conformity enjoined by the Act of Parliament: I say, for the Presbyterian Ministers to admit those Men, were to betray the Trust which God and the Government have reposed in them, and to break down the Hedges and let in the Foxes to spoil the Vines: And if they should do so, how could they justify themselves, or answer the Reproaches which the Civil Government might upbraid them with; that when they had lodged the Government of the Church upon themselves, they let in their own Enemies and those of the State, to overturn it?  
From all which it will appear, that it can reflect nothing of Unlawfulness upon the Constitution of the Church-Government, that the Presbyterians exclude those from any share in it, who, tho they look upon themselves as the mayor Part of the Pastors, are accused by the People in Parliament as the insupportable Grievance of the Nation, who therefore deprived them of any share of the Church-Government, and left it to the Presbyterian Ministers, to take such of them in as they should think fit upon Probation, which gave the said Presbyterian Ministers a Civil Right: and as to the Divine Ecclesiastic● Right, it was touched before.   

Query III. SEeing no Assembly of Church-Officers can justly claim any Authority or Jurisdiction over a Church, wherein that Church is not duly represented; and a Church cannot be represented in an Assembly in which their delegates are not allowed to sit: And that by the Constitution of this Church, a General Assembly doth consist of Commissioners from all the Presbytries within the Kingdom. Quaeritur, How the late Presbyterian Assemblies can be owned for lawful General Assemblies of this Church, since they consisted entirely of the Presbyterian Party; and the Presbytries of this diocese, and several others within this Kingdom had no Commissioners present at these Assemblies, nor had they a Call to sand any?  
Reflections on the Third Query.  
THE Design of this Query is, to impugn the Authority of the General Assemblies, because they allege that the Church was not duly represented in them, as consisting wholly of the Presbyterian Party, and wanting Delegates from the diocese of Aberdeen, and several others.  
These Gentlemen are not ware that the Objection may be retorted upon themselves with more advantage, and therefore they would do well to consider how they can justify the Authority of any of their Synods under the Bishops, to which none were admitted but those of their own Party; and in which the Body of the Church was never represented, there being no Elders to represent the People: so that they had not the Concurrence of the Nation as we have in our Assemblies, where the People are not tyrannized over, but cheerfully concur with what is done, according to that Pattern in the 15th of the Acts. And as to the wanting of Delegates from some dioceses which are either refractory, or uncapable of sending, upon the account above-mentioned, it will no more prejudg the Right of the rest, than the Obstinacy of some Rebellious Counties can invalidate the Acts of Parliament of a whole Kingdom, to which they sand no Members; for in all such cases the Right remains in the Majority of the sound Part: So that this Objection, however weighty it may have been esteemed by our Adversaries, has nothing of Solidity in it. And whereas they might insist upon their not having a Call to sand any Delegates to the Assembly; it hath been answered already, that they were rendered uncapable of it by the general Accusation of the Kingdom by their Representatives; and it was never known in the World, that the Accused Party should be suffered to be Judges in their own Cause. But supposing that the Assembly should have called upon them to sand in their Delegates, their practise makes it plain that they would have declined, their Authority, and embroiled the poor Remainders of the Church which had escaped the Tyranny of the last Reigns, into vain and endless Janglings and Debates. Nor was it reasonable to think, that a Party who had solicited and promoted the Execution of those impious Laws against the Presbyterians, would ever concur to the Establishment of their Discipline, which they had laboured to destroy with so much Violence: so that either for the Parliament, or the General Assembly to have called on the Episcopal Party to sand Delegates to sit in their Ecclesiastical Judicatories for establishing the Government of the Church, had been just the same, as if they should have sent for all the known Jacobites in the Nation to have sat in Parliament for settling the Crown on King William and Queen Mary. But our Querists may please to take notice further, That tho they assume to themselves and their Party, the specious Name of Pastors of the Church, the People to whom they pretended that Relation, did by their Representatives disown it, and accused them as an insupportable Grievance, and restored those to the Possession of the Jurisdiction who had the best Right, and upon whose Charges the Querists Party were Intruders, having neither sought nor obtained the Consent of the People, or any Ecclesiastical Judicatory; but entred upon the Churches of the Presbyterian Ministers, who were turned out without either Accusation, Citation, Conviction, Sentence, or a Hearing allowed them.   

Query IV. SInce by the Principles already mentioned, all Pastors have an equal Right to share in the Government of that Church whereof they are Members and Office-bearers: And since the whole Body of the Pastors of this Church, who were in Office at the time of the Abolishment of Episcopacy, cannot be charged with Ignorance, gross Error, Immorality of Life, or supine Negligence in their Office; We cannot understand how the Constitution of the present Church-Government, and late Assemblies, can be justified by the Presbyterian Ministers but upon this Supposition, that the whole Body of Pastors foresaid, are either no Ministers of the Gospel, or such corrupt ones upon the account of their Principles and practise, in relation to Church-Government, as that they are not worthy to be trusted with the Exercise of that Power which belongs to the Pastoral Office: which we cannot own without either renouncing our ministry, and declaring all the Acts of our Ministerial Function null and voided.  
Reflections on the Fourth Query.  
THE Design of this Query, is to vindicate the Body of the Episcopal Clergy from Ignorance, Gross Error, Immorality or Negligence in their Office; and to fix upon the Presbyterians that they cannot deny them a Share in the Church-Government, except they either look upon them as no Ministers, or such corrupt ones upon the account of their Principles and Practices, in Relation to the Government of the Church, as that they are not worthy to be trusted with the Exercise of it: Which( say they) they cannot own without renouncing their Ministry, and declaring all their Ministerial Acts voided and null.  
As to their Vindication, it comes unseasonably; for they ought to have put it into the Convention of States and Parliament when they voted the Bishops and their Clergy the great and insupportable Grievance of the Nation: which seeing they did not do then, there was all the reason of the World to take it pro confesso; and seeing they are charged so heavily by the Representatives of the Nation, it were a piece of very great Injustice to suppose that August Assembly to be Liars or Calumniators, and not able to make good their Charge: and therefore until such time as they be purged by as good Authority as they are accused, they cannot charge the Presbyterian Ministers as being uncharitable for thinking them unworthy of any Share in the Church-Government; especially seeing they were so far from disproving the Charge, that they made it good to the View of the World: all their Bishops adhering to the late King, several of the Clergy joining in Arms against their present Majesties, above Two hundred of them being actually deprived by the Civil Government for refusing to own their Majesties. And the present Querists, by their Queries and Protestation, do manifestly strike at the Root of the Government both in Church and State; as shall be made to appear more fully afterwards.  
And whereas they allege, that they cannot be charged with gross Error: It seems they have forgot that such of them as made Application to the Assembly, refused to sign the Confession of Faith, as containing sound Doctrine against Arminianism, Socinianism and Popery; by which they did virtually charge themselves with gross Errors; and their silly Proposal of offering to sign that Confession, as containing the Doctrine of the Protestant Religion professed in the Kingdom of Scotland, but not as their own Doctrine, fixes the Suspicion of Error upon them with more force still: upon which account, their Majesties did with Advice and Consent of the Estates of Parliament, June 12th 1693, enact, That no Minister or Preacher be admitted or continued unless he sign the said Confession as that of his own Faith, and the Doctrine that he will constantly adhere to. So that it can scarcely be determined whether it be more impudent or ridiculous in those Querists, to blame the Presbyterian Ministers for not admitting them to the Exercise of the Church-Government contrary to the Laws, when it is not in their Power to do it: and it may justly be admired, with what Confidence those Men can desire to be admitted to the Exercise of the Government of the Church of Scotland, when they refused to sign the Confession of Faith which they own to contain the Doctrine of the Protestant Religion professed in Scotland, as the Confession of their own Faith; especially when it's known that their Brethren of the Church of England admit no Ministers into their Church without testifying their Assent and Consent to the 39 Articles, &c.  
Then as to Immoralities which they pretend they cannot be charged with: They would do well to remember, that not only many of their Number were guilty, and accordingly accused of gross Immoralities, such as are hateful to be name, but their Bishops, who according to them, were the most essential Part of their Church, were generally Men of ill Morals, and Arch-bishop Paterson in particular is accused as such by Mr. Gordon one of the Querists, in his Book called the Reformed Bishop: And is it not very well known, that the two late Heads of their Church, from whence they derived all their Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction, were grossly immoral, and their Church never so honest as to reprove them for it, in order to reform them, or prevent the Corruption of Manners amongst the People who were depraved by their bad Example, which makes their whole Body chargeable with the general profanity that abounds to this very day in the Nation? And they may be pleased to remember further, that besides those Sorts of Immoralities which are generally owned to be such, they are chargeable with those of another nature; as the Breach of that Solemn League and Covenant which many of them did personally sign, and were thereby obliged to resist Popery and Prelacy, and maintain the Privileges of Parliament; and yet they avowedly broken through all those Ties by submitting to, and pleading for Prelacy, and preaching up the King's Prerogative over the Parliament and all Laws: so that by their Concurrence, the late King, when D. of York, though a Papist, sat in their Parliaments as Commissioner, without qualifying himself according to Law; and being by their Interest advanced to the Throne, took upon him, by his Proclamations, to cass and annul what Laws he pleased. Then, I suppose, they may also remember their taking of the self-contradictory Oath, called the Test, in K. Charles the seconds time, which the honestest of their Party refused: And all of them took the Declaration, that it was unlawful to resist the King, or any having his Commission. Notwithstanding of which, they offer to join with this Government, without giving the World any account of their Reasons why, or acknowledging their former Error. Their shuffling with the Church of England, by pretending to be mighty Zealots for her Discipline and Ceremonies, and yet offering in their Test or Declaration to submit to, and concur with the Presbyterian Government as at present established in the Kingdom of Scotland, is also known. And now they shuffle with the Presbyterians again, and pretend they are not satisfied in their Consciences with their Government, though about two Years ago they declared by their Formula, that they could submit to it, and concur with it. Nor can they deny their Prevarication with their present Majesties, pretending that they would take the Oaths to be faithful to them, if the same were also imposed upon the Presbyterians; and they refused them notwithstanding of the Presbyterians being enjoined by Law to take them. So that if the Querists had given themselves leave to remember those things, they might quickly have been satisfied, that the Presbyterians had ground enough to charge them with Immoralities; and because of their past and present Levity, to suspect their future Fidelity. For who can put any Confidence in a Party of Men, that have hitherto proved so unsteadfast and false to all Interests that ever they engaged with?  
As for the Presbyterian Ministers looking upon the Episcopal Clergy to be either no Ministers of the Gospel, or such corrupt ones upon the account of their Principles and practise in relation to Church-Government, as they are not worthy to be trusted with the Exercise of that Power which belongs to the Pastoral Office:  
These Gentlemen may remember that they were not entrusted with the full Exercise of Discipline by their own Bishops; and Mr. Hickeringill, in his Ceremony-Monger, p. 124. says that he and his Brethren of the Church of England are suffered indeed to preach or to feed; but as to Church-Discipline, they are so many cyphers; and the Bishops take from their Brethren the Presbyters, half the Work of a Presbyter. So that the Querists reflect upon their own Bishops, and their Brethren of the Church of England, as much, if not more, than upon us: for they withhold the Exercise of Discipline from them, as thinking it no Part of their Office, though the Scots Bishops to please the People did allow their Clergy some more share; but the Presbyterians only withhold it as from Persons under a temporary Incapacity, till such time as they give Proof of their being worthy of it: and this is a farther Proof of what was formerly asserted, that even the Episcopal Party themselves don't think the Power of Preaching and Discipline at all times unseparable; and yet we suppose, that both the English and Scots Bishops looked upon their inferior Clergy as Ministers, notwithstanding of their detaining the Power of Discipline from them.  
The Querists do also know very well, that the Presbyterians don't look upon a Prelate to be an Officer of Divine Institution; nor having the Power of Ordination either singly in his own Person, or so as that Presbyters cannot do it without him. And Mr. Hickeringill, Cerem. Monger, p. 108. though himself an actual Minister of the Church of England, calls the Prelatical Ordination a Schismatizing from Scripture, and all the Protestants of the World. And yet though the Presbyterians don't think this Manner of Ordination Scriptural; our Querists may see that they don't impose a Re-ordination upon them, nor declare their Ministerial Acts voided and null: for the Assembly held in 1690, declared, as I said before, that they would not depose any Man for his Opinion in Church-Government, nor urge Re-ordination upon them. And though the Presbyterians are also of Opinion that Episcopal Collation, and a Patron's Presentation, are not sufficient to entitle any Man to be Pastor of a particular Parish; yet they are far from treating the Episcopal Clergy as no Ministers: and yet the Querists would enviously insinuate so much, that they may render them odious to the Church of England; though if they should have treated them as no Ministers, it had been but quid pro quo, and upon much better Grounds than the Prelatical Party of England and Scotland both do treat them as such, by enjoining Re-ordination upon all Presbyters that have not been Episcopally ordained, though at the same time they accept of Romish Priests without it; by which we have as much Reason as Mr. Hickeringhill, to say, that they schismatize from the Scriptures and all Protestants of the World. And this does also make it evident, that the Presbyterians have good Ground to charge the Querists with corrupt Principles as to the Government of the Church, seeing their Bishops did all solicit and concur with the Act of Parliament in 1670. Declaring all Ordination of Ministers since 1661, which hath not been by Bishops, null and invalid, and that they are no Ministers that are otherwise ordained. And the whole Episcopal Clergy must, according to the Querists former Position that their Bishops made no Acts relating to the Church without the Consent of their Presbyters, have given their Concurrence with the Bishops to procure this Act: Therefore seeing the Presbyterian Ministers have but too good Ground to think that the Prelatists look upon them as no Ministers, they had no reason to be sudden in admitting any of that Party into a share of the Church-Government.  
But as a farther Ground to suspect their corrupt Principles on that Head, they may remember, that when their Party was triumphant, they procured it to be enacted, Parl. 2. Act. 1. Car. 2. That by Virtue of the Supremacy the ordering of the Government of the Church doth properly belong to his Majesty and Successors, as an inherent Right of the Crown; and that he may enact and emit such Constitutions, Acts and Orders concerning Church-Administrations, Persons, Meetings and Matters, as he in his Royal Wisdom shall think fit. Now they know very well, that the Presbyterians look upon this as a very corrupt Principle; and accordingly this was annulled by the Abolition of the Supremacy in this Reign: and this Act being procured and submitted unto by all the Prelatists, they are justly chargeable with it as their Principle, though their present practise is diametrically opposite; for according to this Principle they ought to submit to the present Constitution of the Church-Government, if they believed such a Power to be inherent in the Crown, and due to all King Charles the seconds Successors: For that the present Constitution is settled by their Majesties and the Parliament, cannot be denied; so that they have no way to avoid this Contradiction betwixt that Principle and their present practise, but either to say, that they have changed their Principle on that Head, which apparently they have not; for in their Protestation they appeal to the King and Queen as Supreme judge under God in these Dominions; which being the Words of the abolished Act of Supremacy, gives us reason to think that they believe that Right to be in their Majesties still: or else, notwithstanding of all their Pretences, they must think that their Majesties are not Charles the seconds lawful Successors, and consequently to have no Right to that Power, which it's more than probable is the real, though not the pretended Cause. And if they do still hold this Principle, it will be worth their while to consider how they could justify that trifling Opposition to King James's Liberty of Conscience, which they valued themselves upon in some of their Pamphlets here since the Revolution: or, if they own their general and stupid Submission at that time, how came they to behave themselves so mildly and quietly under the Regulations made then in Church-Affairs by a Popish Prince, when they are so very nice and scrupulous now to submit to Constitutions enacted by a Protestant sovereign, for the Security of the Protestant Religion? whereas that Declaration of King James gave a very ample Liberty to the Papists, and yet they made no Protestation against it, as now against the Committee of the Assembly, and the Assembly itself, which act with their present Majesties Authority.  
Then having made it appear that the Presbyterians don't look upon them as no Ministers, inasmuch as they don't urge Re-ordination upon them, the Querists have no Reason to think that their submitting to such Terms as the Law requires, though it may infer that they can comply with another Form of Government and Discipline than what they formerly owned, that therefore it declares the Acts of their Ministerial Function null and voided: Or supposing that they should hereby own that they were formerly corrupt in Principle and practise as to Church-Government, it does not therefore follow that their Ministerial Acts are null and voided; for they know that when those who have taken Orders in the Church of Rome are admitted by them, yet they don't declare all their former Ministerial Acts null and voided, though they acknowledge their former corrupt Principles and Practices as to Church-Government, else they should rebaptize all such as are converted from Popery, which they do not.  
Then as to their corrupt Practices in the Discipline of the Church, the Querists must needs be sensible of the remissness of their whole Party, as to the putting of that in Exercise; whence it came to pass that Profanity is now arrived to such height, that it seems not remediable by any thing less than Omnipotence. And though the Querists will not own it, yet we dare appeal to their own Consciences, whether they do not know it to be true, that the Generality of all those of their Party, who persecuted us with so much Fury, were openly wicked, and yet caressed by the governing Part of their Church, and looked upon as its best Friends.  
And now that there has been occasion to touch their Persecution, the Querists may please to consider further, whether the Presbyterians have not reason to be shy of admitting those Men into the Government of the Church, who by their Numbers may out-vote them, or their Unstedfastness betray them; and if the Throne should happen to be filled with such a Prince as some of those who were lately upon it, would join with them to overturn the present Government of the Church, under pretence that the Majority of the Pastors and People were for Episcopacy: which, considering the Reason of State, given by the late Convention for abolishing Prelacy, because contrary to the Inclinations of the Generality of the People, would carry the same Appearance of Reason on the other side, to re-establish it; and in that case the Presbyterians would be under a Necessity either of defending their Constitution by the Sword, or submitting to such a horrid and inhuman Persecution as were those in the late Reigns.   

Query V. Quaeritur, Whether the annual Office of Ruling( not Preaching) Elders, chosen out among the People, and joined with Ministers in Kirk-Sessions, Presbyteries, Provincial and General Assemblies, and their Committees, to assist and concur with them in the Exercise of Discipline and Government, can be warrantably affirmed to be of Divine Institution? And if any Footstep of such an Office doth appear in the practise of the ancient Church; or any plain convincing Proof of its Institution can be produced out of the Scriptures: And if this Office be not of Divine Institution, whether a Judicatory consisting in part of such Officers pretending to Divine Institution, and to act by Warrant and Commission from Jesus Christ, be a lawful Judicatory?  
Reflections on the Fifth Query.  
THE Design of this Query is to prove Presbyterian Government unlawful, because they admit of Ruling Elders in all the Judicatories of the Church, there being no Footstep of any such Officer to be found either in the Scripture or Antiquity, as they would insinuate.  
We are glad to find this Principle granted by the Querists, that Judicatories, consisting in part of such Officers as do but pretend to Divine Institution, are therefore unlawful Judicatories. Their Brethren the Bishops of England, and the Courts kept under them, will scarcely perhaps give them Thanks for this Hypothesis, because Mr. Hickeringhill, Cerem. 'mong. p. 108. calls the Apparitors, Samners, Registers, Proctors, Canonists, Lay-Vicars, Vicar Generals, Commissaries, Officials, Surrogates, &c. which are Officers in the English Ecclesiastical Judicatories, by some other Name than Officers of Divine Institution: And at the same time it justifies the Nonconformity of the Scots Presbyterians in the late Reigns, who could never see it proved, that the Scots prelates were Officers of Divine Institution, though their Brains were almost beat out, because their Eye-sight was no better; insomuch that a small matter would have persuaded them that there was something more than a Poetical Fancy in the following Distich, composed by the learned and ingenious Andrew Marvel Esq; in his Loyal Scot, 
Instead of all the Plagues had Bishops come,  
Without doubt Pharaoh bad sent Israel home.  which it's supposed the Author meant of Scots Bishops.  
But as to the Ruling Elders, if the Querists had given themselves the Trouble of reading Mr. Guthry's little Tractate, what the London Ministers have writ concerning them in the Jus Divinum Regiminis Ecclesiastici, or what Dr. own writ lately on that Head, they would have found such Arguments for the Divine Institution of Ruling Elders, as were never yet answered: and seeing they have been in print, some of them for many Years, it had been worth our Querists while to have confuted them before they came to put this Query to the Committee, who they knew had neither Time nor Authority to enter into such Disputes.  
In the next place, the Querists would do well to answer these following Queries, viz. Where was this Objection, and all the other four, against the Lawfulness of the present Constitution of the Church of Scotland, when their Party did offer, by their Formula in 1690, to submit to and concur with the Presbyterian Government as it is at present established in the Church of Scotland? How it came to be lawful for them to comply then and not now? and whether they did not know all those things as to the Government of the Church of Scotland then, that they object against it now? and if they did, as no doubt they must, why did they not put in such a Distinction in their Formula, as to the Government of the Church, as they did then concerning the Doctrine? and whether or not they have not some more hidden Scruples which they can bring out by piecemeal, and dally with the Church and State till such time as they see whether the late King, with the Assistance of Lewis XIV. can re-establish the Scots Prelacy?  
But the Divine Institution of Ruling Elders being confidently impugn'd by the Querists, it's thought fit, lest they or their Party should triumph too much, to hint at a few Arguments to prove it, referring those who have a mind to be fully satisfied concerning it, to the three Books before-mentioned.  
But before we come to the Arguments, it may be necessary to describe what this Ruling Elder is, because that Officer is not so well known in this Kingdom as in Scotland.  
The Ruling Elder then is one chosen from amongst the People of more than ordinary Gifts and Piety, to assist the Pastor in examining those that come to the Lord's Table, in visiting the Sick, causing the Acts of Church-Judicatories to be put in execution, admonishing People privately of their Duty; and if they prove refractory, to bring the Matter before the Minister and the rest of the Elders: They are frequently to visit Families, instruct the Ignorant, exhort the Negligent, admonish the Slothful, rebuk those who walk disorderly, comfort the Afflicted, establish the Wavering, encourage those that do well; and, in short, to see Piety and Godliness promoted in Families: And for the more convenient Discharge of those Duties, every Elder has his particular quarter of the Parish assigned him; and they and the Minister meet once a Week, or oftener, pro re nata, to give an Account of their Charge. Then as to their Office in higher Judicatories, one of the most eminent in a Parish assists in the Presbytery and Provincial Synod; and a few from every Presbytery assist in the General Assembly. These are the Officers, and this their Office, which our Episcopal Querists think sufficient to render the Presbyterian Constitution unlawful, which is no very promising Evidence of their Friendship to the promoting of an Universal Piety and Reformation.  
But to come to the Divine Institution of these Officers:  
The first Argument is from Rom. 12.6, 7, 8. Having then Gifts— Let us wait on our ministering, be that teacheth on teaching, he that exhorteth on Exhortation, he that giveth let him do it with Simplicity, he that RULETH with Diligence, he that sheweth Mercy with cheerfulness. Where he that ruleth is distinguished from Doctor, Pastor and Deacon, and all of them are called the Gifts of God; which does necessary infer a Divine Institution of him that ruleth, as well as of him that teacheth and giveth. Nor is this the Sense of the Scots Presbyterians alone, but of Pareus, Piscator, Calvin and Beza, upon the place.  
The second is from 1 Cor. 12.8.— God hath set some in the Church, first Apostles, secondly Prophets, thirdly Teachers, afterwards Powers, then Gifts of Healing, Helps, GOVERNMENTS, kinds of Tongues. Here Governments are clearly said to be of Divine Institution, as a thing peculiar and distinct from other Church-Officers, who had also a Power of Government, as Apostles, Prophets, Teachers; b●t Government was not all that belonged to their Office, as it was the whole of the Ruling Elders. And from the Nature and Necessity of Government it will appear that the Governments here mentioned were not Temporary and Extraordinary, as that of Apostles, Tongues, Gifts of Healing, &c.  
The third Argument is from 1 Tim. 5.17. Let the Elders that rule well, be counted worthy of double Honour, especially they that labour in the Word and Doctrine: Where a ruling Elder distinct from him that labours in the Word and Doctrine, is plainly held forth.  
It's true that there are Exceptions against the Arguments from these Texts, both by Episcopalians and Erastians; but they are sufficiently answered by the London Ministers in the Jus Divinum Regiminis, and Mr. Gillespie in his Aaron's Rod, whither those that desire farther Satisfaction are referred; it being inconsistent with the designed Brevity to insert them here.  
Then as to that part of the Query, Whether there be any Footstep of these Officers in Antiquity? If the Querists please to red Ambrose's Comment on 1 Tim. 5.1. Tertullian in the 34th Chaper of his Apology. Basiliu● Magnus on Isa. 3.2. Jerome on that same place, Augustin's Epistle 137. Gregory contrae Celsum, lib. 3. Aug. L. 3. contra Crescent. cap. 56. they will find that the Christian Church had them in the Primitive Times. And Ambrose, as cited by Calvin, on 1 Tim. 5.17. complains, that that Custom grew obsolete by the Sloth, or rather Pride of the Teachers or Doctors, while they alone would seem to be eminent; than which a better Reason cannot be assigned, why these Officers were laid aside by our Scots Prelates, tho a shadow of them were still kept up in particular Parishes to please the People: which shows that the Querists do act mala fide when they reckon our Government unlawful for that which was practised in their own.  
Another of their Cavils against these Officers is, that they are Annual. But the Querists would have found no room for this Objection, if they had considered what Mr. Guthry says, pag. 33. of his Treatise of Ruling Elders and Deacons, viz. That Elders once lawfully called to the Office, and having Gifts from God meet to exercise the same, unless they be removed therefrom because of Miscarriage, are still Elders: Tho haply in Congregations, where many qualified Men may be found, some may be permitted for a time to surcease from the Exercise of the Charge, and others be put in their room, as was among the Levites under the Law in serving the Temple by Courses. And to this we may add, that the Condition of most Congregations or Parishes being such, that they cannot allow a Maintenance for those Elders; and that many times Providence calls upon them to remove from one Parish to another, it's but highly reasonable that all those who are qualified in a Parish should bear this Office by turns, according as they are regularly called.    

The Epilogue to the Queries.  
THese are some of the most weighty Scruples which we have in our Consciences anent the Ecclesiastical Authority of the Committee deputed from the late Presbyterian Assembly, and these we propose not out of any fear of being tried in relation to our Life and Doctrine; in which we are willing to submit ourselves to an impartial Trial by any competent Judicatory Civil or ecclesiastic within this Kingdom: Nor, as if we would not have a due Regard to this Committee, if they clothed themselves with a Delegation from the Civil Power: But that we cannot( until we be resolved in these Scruples) without betraying the Liberties of this National Church, acknowledge any ecclesiastic Power or Jurisdiction in this Committee, or their Constituents, to be Judges of any of our Number. And therefore, We hope the Members of this Committee will either desist from any farther Procedor against us, or else give us a satisfactory Answer to these Proposals, which we have good ground to expect from them; since it is both just and reasonable in itself, and well-becoming the Character they own of Gospel-Ministers, that they should satisfy the Consciences of the scrupulous concerning their Authority and Jurisdiction before they urge them to submit thereunto: And that in regard the Assembly in their Instructions to the Commission, have required the same to take all due Pains to inform, convince and satisfy such as think that they have receded from their known Principles.  
These Queries were concerted by the General Meeting at Old Aberdeen.  
Sic subscribitur, M. Chrevey, Clericus.   

Reflections on the Epilogue to the Queries.  
WHether these Scruples be weighty or not, and whether most of them do not as much condemn the Practices of their own Church as that of the Presbyterians, let those who impartially peruse the foregoing Reflections be Judges. And whether the Presbyterians have not reason to think that Error in Doctrine, and Scandal in practise have not a considerable Influence in their declining a Trial, let what hath been charged on the whole Party from undeniable Matter of Fact determine: Or, whether the Committee was not a competent Judicatory, both as to Civil and Ecclesiastical Right, when the General Assembly of the Church, from whom they had their Authority, are owned by the Representatives of all the Protestants in the Nation, assembled in a Parliamentary way, to have the only Right of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction, let law and Divinity decide. And consequently whether it be just and reasonable to think that their submitting to the Committee, or their Constituents, would have been a betraying of the Liberties of the National Church, when the General Assembly are in full Parliament nationally clothed with a National Right; and the far greatest part of the Nation do calmly acquiesce and testify their Concurrence, by sending their Delegates, the ruling Elders, from the several Quarters of the Nation to sit in the Assembly.  
The Querists would also do well to consider with what Confidence they and their Constituents can take upon them the Name of the National Church, when the Bishops from whom they had their Pastoral Authority are vomited out by the Convention, as the great and insupportable Grievance of the Nation: When in their General Meeting, as they call it, at old Aberdeen, they had no Delegates to represent the People, or testify their Consent; and when the greatest part of the People, in most parts of the Nation, at least of those who by Gospel-Rules are capable of being admitted to enjoy all Ordinances in the Church, have both by their Representatives in Parliament, and their own practise throughout the Kingdom, testified their general dislike of the Bishops and their Clergy. And let them answer whether this arrogating to themselves the Government of the Church without the Churches Consent, be not a lording it over God's Heritage; of which Name they have injuriously bereft the People, and appropriated the same to themselves under the Greek Title of Clergy, but perhaps not without a special Providence, that their Prelacy might be clearly evinced to be that prohibited Lording it over God's Heritage, seeing they alone, si Diis placet, will needs be called so; and that their Prelates lorded it over them, is beyond Contradiction.  
Their pretended Deference to the Civil Power will fall properly under the Reflections upon their Protestation. But here it's fit to take notice of the Weakness of the Reasons from which they pretended to hope that the Committee should either give a satisfactory Answer to their Queries, or desist from proceeding against them.  
1. Because according to them they had no Ecclesiastical Authority, tho all their Objections against it were either mistaken Matters of Fact, or such as did more strongly militate against that Ecclesiastical Authority which they themselves did practise and own; and if there be any of their Objections which don't fall under those two Heads, they were answered in Print many Years ago. So that the Committee, tho they had both had Time and Commission to dispute with them, might very well have referred them thither, or demanded Replies to those Answers before they had given themselves any farther Trouble. Whence it appears, that the Querists had rather a design to cavil and gain time, than any desire to be satisfied in their Consciences. But further, if Cavils and Exceptions to Ecclesiastical Judicatories ought to suspend their Procedure, then heretics and schismatics should never want an invincible Argument.  
2. Because they own the Character of Gospel-Ministers, which would seem to imply that tho they own it, yet they don't deserve it; and this cannot be understood as a wresting of their Sense, if we consider their former Act of Parliament, declaring all those who were not Episcopally ordained, to be no Ministers. And in this Case let any Man judge whether the Committee had any reason to stop their Procedure against them. But further, the Querists would do well to consider, whether it be any way contrary to the Character of Gospel-Ministers to proceed to Censure against Delinquents, because they are contentious, and will insist either upon Falsities, or Objections answered over and over. And I am persuaded that to any unbiased Man these Queries will appear to proceed more from Contention than Scruple, if they consider that the weightiest of them were answered long ago, that others of them did directly condemn their own practise, and that the Party have several times since the Revolution, offered Submission to the Government of the Church without mentioning any of them: and therefore, seeing there is very great Ground to think that these Queries had their Rise from Contention, the apostles Answer is plain, But if any Man be contentions, we have no such Custom, neither the Churches of God.  
3. Because of the Assembly's Instructions, for which peruse the Committee's Answer in the Negative.   

The Committee's Answer to the Queries.  
THE Committee finding that the Questions proposed do strike at the Root of Presbyterian Government, and the present Establishment thereof according to the Laws of this Kingdom, and do overturn the Authority of this Committee, with which they are entrusted by the Assembly, Do judge it not becoming and suitable to the Trust reposed in this Judicatory, to enter in Debate with any particular Persons few or more about the Constitution and Power of the present established Government of this Church. And, Do think that if it had indeed been Satisfaction to their own Consciences which they desired, they both might have long before this time, and yet may take more proper and obvious Measures for that end. Besides that, the Committee have other urging and important Work committed by the General Assembly to them, which cannot allow them so much Time for Debates and Disputes, as the Matter proposed would require, nor have they any Commission for that Effect.   

Protestation and Appeal given in at Aberdeen upon the 29th Day of June 1694, under form of Instrument, to the Committee of the late Presbyterian Assembly, by the Ministers Delegat for that end from the diocese of Aberdeen, for themselves, and in the Name of all their Adherents.  
WE the Ministers of the dioceses of Aberdeen, Murray, Rosse, Caithness, Orkney, and of the shires of Angus and Mairns, Do hereby declare that we cannot own the Assemblies of our Presbyterian Brethren since the last Establishment of their Government, to have been the full and lawful Representatives of this National Church; and consequently no Person or Persons whatsomever by virtue of any Delegation from them, can justly claim a Power to be the Judges of our Lives and Doctrine, according to what we have expressed in the Queries given in to this Committee, the Tenor whereof is ut supra.  
To the which Queries we have received no satisfactory Answer; and in regard that they have manifestly stated themselves as Parties against these of our Character and persuasion; Therefore for maintaining the Liberties of this National Church, and for many other Reasons moving us thereto, which we are resolved in due time to publish to the World, we find ourselves obliged unanimously to testify against the pretended ecclesiastic Authority of this Committee, and to protest against all their Proceedings, Acts and Sentences in the Quality of an ecclesiastic judicatory, and to appeal to their Majesties K. William and Q. Mary, as Supreme Judges under God within these Dominions, and to the next lawfully constitute and orderly called General assembly of this National Church. And we do hereby protest against any Sentence past or to be past against any of our Number that are cited or may be cited before this Committee, and do appeal to their Majesties as said is: And this we do not as if we would protect any that are truly guilty,( if any such be amongst us) nor as if we would not give all due Deference to this Committee, in submitting to them, if they clothed themselves only with a Delegation from the Civil Power: But that we cannot( until we be resolved in the abovewritten Scruples) acknowledge any Ecclesiastical Power or Jurisdiction in this Committee, or their Constituents, to be Judges of any of our Number. And finally, we protest that this our Protestation and Appeal, together with the Queries above-mentioned, as they were given in before entering this Protestation, be inserted verbatim in the Records of this Committee, ad futuram remanentiam. Sic subscribitur.   

Reflections on the Protestation.  
THis Protestation referring to the Queries above-mentioned for the Reasons of it, it follows naturally that the Reader should be referred to the Reflections upon those Queries, where he will find their Reasons considered. So that all that remains now to be done is, to consider the Deference which the Querists pretend to the Civil Government, and any other Reason which may perhaps have escaped them in their Queries.  
Whatever regard they may pretend to the Civil Government, it's plain that they do manifestly impugn its Authority in a very saucy and undecent manner, by denying the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction of the General Assemblies since the Revolution, tho the same be established in them by the King and Parliament, as far as Human Law can do it; and yet the Querists have not so much as one honourable Expression of Deference to the Sanction of the Civil Government confirming their Divine and Ecclesiastical Right, which is so much the more remarkable, and the greater Proof of Disrespect to the Civil Government in them, because, as was hinted before, the whole Party in the late Reigns did, by Act of Parliament, lodge such a Power in the King's own Person, that he might by virtue of the Supremacy, and an inherent Right of the Crown, order the Government of the Church, enact and emit such Constitutions, Acts and Orders concerning Church-Administrations, Persons, Meetings and Matters, as he in his Royal Wisdom shall think sit. Now if the Party had believed that the Government of the Church was of Divine Institution, they durst never have allowed the King such an ample Power concerning it, nor have submitted to it: And if they do believe that the King has really such a Power as is here expressed, how comes it that they do not submit to the Church-Government, as it is now established by their present Majesties and the Parliament? And seeing they do in such an obstinate manner protest against the Authority of the General Assemblies, who, besides their Ecclesiastical and Divine Right to the Jurisdiction over the National Church, have all the Civil Right which the King and Parliament can give, it must necessary follow, that either they think King William and Queen Mary have not so good a Right to order the Government of the Church, as the late Kings had; that his Right is diminished by the Concurrence of the Parliament; or that the Assemblies pretending to a Divine Right, together with the Civil Right, makes it unlawful for them to submit. The two former they will not own, tho there's reason to think the main Objection lies there; but they are ashamed, or at least shy to own it openly, because that would render them unworthy of the Government's Protection, and make the People cry out, shane upon them, that they should have by Act of Parliament allowed more Power to Profane and Popish Princes in Church-Matters, than they will allow to Pious and Protestant Princes: and therefore we will suppose that the main Scruple is, because the Assembly do also pled a Divine Right, which they must deny, either because they want Bishops; and if so, they do both deny a Power of Jurisdiction to most if not all of the Reformed Churches in Europe; for none of them have such Bishops as theirs were even as to Matters of Jurisdiction; and also condemn themselves for offering to submit to and concur with that Government as they did in 1690. and if they scruple their Authority because they had not Delegates from all the Prelatical Clergy of Scotland, it has been answered already.  
But to be plain with them, if their former Principle of the King's having such a Power by virtue of the Supremacy, and as an inherent of the Crown, be true, then they ought to obey their present Majesties, who have settled Presbyterian-Government in Scotland as most agreeable to the Word of God; for so they have enacted it: or if that former Principle of theirs was false, then in Conscience they ought to publish to the World that they declare it so; and in that Case they must allow that the Presbyterian Ministers had reason to be shy in admitting them into a Share of the Church-Government, because of their corrupt Principles and Practices concerning it.  
But if they think that the King alone has that Power, and that they cannot submit to the present Acts concerning the Church, because they are enacted by and with the Advice of the Parliament, then it shows plainly how little Deference they have to the Government who would set the two constituent Parts in opposition to one another: for that the Government of Scotland is by King and Parliament, and no other, there's no Man able to deny; though the Prelatical Party did their utmost Endeavour to overturn it in the two late Reigns, and throw us into the bottonles gulf of an Absolute Monarchy, by giving the King such Power both in Civil and Ecclesiastical Affairs, that Parliaments would have been thereby quiter destroyed. The Power they gave the Kings in Church-Affairs, we have just now heard; and for that in Civil-Affairs, we refer to the 18th Act of the Parliament held by the D. of York; wherein it was enacted, that all Jurisdiction doth so reside in his Majesty, that he may by himself, or any commissionated by him, take Cognizance, and give Decision of any Cases or Causes he pleases.  
Now by their Appealing to their Majesties without any mention of the Parliament, by whose Advice and Consent the Laws against the Matter of their Protestation were enacted; it's plain that they design, by a seeming Excess of Zeal for the Prerogative, to break the very Fundamental Constitution of our Government: as if their Majesties, according to the former Doctrine and politics of their Party, could of themselves revoke those Laws, or totally dispense with the Execution of them, without the Authority of the Parliament. And yet at the same time they are so impudent, as to accuse their Majesties of having called an irregular and ill-constituted Assembly, and to protest against all the Acts and Proceedings of the late Assembly, and their Committee, which acted as Ecclesiastical Judicatories by their Majesties Authority; who in the Act of Parliament settling Presbyterian Government, have expressly authorized the Presbyterian Ministers to appoint Visitors, and purge out scandalous and insufficient Ministers, and to suspend and deprive such as are contumacious and proven guilty: By which the Committee might legally deprive all the Querists, and they in Conscience should be obliged to submit, as having referred the Case to their Majesties as supreme Judges under God, seeing they have g●●en their judgement thus in that very Act, as also, That Presbyterian Government is most agreeable to the Word of God, most conducive to the Advancement of true Piety and Godliness, and establishing the Peace of the Realm. And by another Act of that same Parliament, have abolished the Supremacy, and left the Church in power to hold her own Assemblies as Ecclesiastical Judicatories. So that here's the judgement of their Majesties, to whom our Querists have appealed, fully against them. And if they decline the Authority of the Assembly because they do not only act by their Majesties Authority, but claim a Privilege of acting of themselves by Divine Right, then they plainly declare themselves Erastians, and not only condemn us, but the Church of England; whose Prolocutor, in her last Convocation, did argue against making any Alteration in her Constitution, &c. alleging that it was Apostolical: and if our Querists be Erastians in their Principles, they do still contradict their Principles by their practise, in not submitting to that Church-Constitution which is settled by the Magistrates Authority. So that in plain terms, our Antagonists seem wholly to be influenced by Humour and Interest, and have nothing of steadfastness either in Principle or practise.  
One of the Reasons given by the Querists for their Protestation is, because the Presbyterian Ministers have manifestly stated themselves as Parties against those of their Character and persuasion, which is a manifest Untruth; for the Assembly in 1690, declared, as hath been already said, that they would depose no Incumbents simply for their judgement concerning Church-Government, nor yet urge Re-ordination upon them: and it is very well known, that not one hath been hitherto turned out by any Judicatory Civil or ecclesiastic, but either upon the account of their Disaffection to the Civil Government, or scandalous Life. So that this Pretence is a mere Subterfuge, and maliciously insisted upon to render the Church of Scotland odious to the Church of England, that so those of that Party might have more plausible Pretexts to solicit his Majesty against the Scots Presbyterians. But supposing that it were true, this Objection of theirs will militate as much against themselves as against us, and more; for we could on much better Ground except against their sitting as Judges upon us, because they did plainly state themselves as Parties, and would oblige us to an express Renunciation of our Principles; whereas there is no such thing required of them. But however, if such Objections be allowed, then the greatest of heretics shall escape; for they can truly say, that the Orthodox do manifestly state themselves as Parties against those of their Character and persuasion, and yet this does not incapacitate them from being Judges, no more than those who declare themselves for K. William, are uncapable of judging those who are accused of treasonable Designs to bring in the late K. James.  
But of all things this is the most surprising, that the Querists should have the Boldness to appeal to their Majesties against themselves; for it's plain that the Assembly, whom they decline as Judges, are constituted such by their Majesties Authority, and by and with the Advice and Consent of that Parliament which settled the Crown on their Majesties Head: whence it's apparent, that they strike at the very Foundation of the Civil Government, and not only charge their Majesties with a gross Piece of maladministration in calling a disorderly and ill-constituted Assembly to tyramnize over the Clergy, but disown the Authority of King and Parliament in the most audacious and insolent Manner that can be, by their immodest and seditious Protestation, which in the late Reigns would have cost them their Liberties if not their Lives; for Mr. James Guthry was beheaded because he disowned that unlimited Supremacy in Church-Affairs, which the Prelatists did afterwards grant to their Kings: and the Querists do here in plain Terms disown the Authority of both King and Parliament to restore those Presbyterian Ministers to their Right, from which they were in a tyrannical and illegal Manner ejected by the Council, and the Bishops and their Clergy obtruded upon the Church, contrary to the Inclinations of the generality of the People, as has been asserted by Authority of the present Parliament; and without the Peoples Consent, Ministers can never be duly possessed of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction. Christ makes his People a willing People in the Day of his Power, and does not empower his Ambassadors to exercise a Tyranny over them against their Wills: so that if any be refractory, and refuse to submit to the Censures of the Church, they are to be esteemed as Heathens and Publicans; and if the Querists and their Adherents should continue obstinate, and refuse to come into the Bosom of the Church upon such-easy Terms of Conformity as are now enjoined, all that they do is but to declare themselves no Members of the National Church, seeing they refuse to embrace either her Doctrine or Discipline. But by what Laws, Divine or human, they and their said Adherents, who do not make up the tenth Part of the Nation, should take upon them the Name of the National Church, they would do well to inform the World.  
This leads me to another of the Reasons for their Protestation, viz. That they may maintain the Liberties of that National Church.  
This is truly pleasant, that they should pretend to be the only Patriots for the Privileges of the National Church, whom the Body of the Church in that Nation have voted to be the great and insupportable Grievance of the same. This is just like the late King's Declarations, wherein he pretends a mighty Zeal for the Freedom and Liberties of the Nations which have by their Representatives dethroned him for endeavouring to enslave them. But seeing these Gentlemen will not allow the General Assembly to be the true Representative of the National Church, because they have not delegates from the Prelatical curates and their Adherents, they would do well to show us the Deputations which they have from the Body of Protestants in the Nation to represent them, and protest so strenuously for their Liberties. And seeing the Querists pretend so highly to maintain the Liberties of the National Church, we are willing that the World should judge whether they or the Presbyterians have maintained them best.  
The Presbyterians ever since the Reformation have pleaded, and often suffered for maintaining the Privilege of the Church to hold her own Courts, and be Judges of the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church. Whereas the Episcopalians have always subjected the same to their Princes, how corrupt soever either in practise or Principle: and thus K. Ch. 2d, though a dissolute vicious Prince, was empowered to emit and enact such Constitutions and Orders concerning Church-Administrations, Persons, Meetings and Matters, as he in his Wisdom should think fit, without so much as taking the Advice and Consent of his Parliament; and K. James the 7th, though a professed Papist, had the same Power: So that the National Church had no Privilege neither to will nor to do in any thing concerning Church-Constitutions, Administrations, Persons, Meetings, or Matters; for the Prelates, with their Clergy and Adherents, had made an absolute Surrender of them by that Act: whereas the Presbyterians, as Mr. Guthry above-mentioned, and others, choose rather to suffer Death, and to undergo a savage Persecution, than either consent or submit to such a manifest betraying of the Privileges of the National Church: and that the Episcopalians may be sensible what a horrid Piece of Treachery this Surrender of theirs was, let them peruse the following Declaration of their Head K. James VI. upon the Subjectmatter; which he wrote with his own Hand, and signed and delivered it to the Commissioners of the Church of Scotland at Linlithgow, December 7. 1585.  
I for my part shall never, neither my Posterity ought, ever city, summon or apprehended any Pastor or Preacher for Matters of Doctrine in Religion, Salvation, Heresies, or true Interpretation of the Scripture: But according to my first Act, which confirmeth the Liberty of Preaching the Word, Ministration of the Sacraments, I avouch the same to be a Matter mere Ecclesiastical, and altogether impertinent to my Calling. Therefore never shall I, nor ever ought they, I mean my Posterity, acclaim any Power or Jurisdiction in the foresaids.— And after: Christ saying Dic Ecclesiae, and one only Man stealing that Dint in a quiet Hole, the Act of Parliament reduceth the Sentence for Informality and Nullity of Process; not as Judges whether the Excommunication was grounded on good and just Causes or not, but as Witnesses that it was unformally proceeded against the Warrant of God's Word, Example of all Reformed Kirks, and your own particular Custom in this Country.— And after: I acclaim not to myself to be judge of Doctrine in Religion, Salvation, Heresies, or true Interpretation of Scripture.— And after: My Intention is not to meddle with Excommunication, neither acclaim I to myself, or my Heirs, Power in any thing that is mere Ecclesiastical, and not {αβγδ}, nor with any thing that God's Word hath simply devolved in the Hands of his Kirk. And to conclude, I confess and acknowledge Christ Jesus to be Head and Law-giver to the same. And whatsoever Persons do attribute to themselves as Head of the Kirk, and not as Members, to suspend or alter any thing that the Word of God hath only remitted to them, that Man I say committeth manifest Idolatry, &c.  
Now we see that this Learned Prince disclaims any such Power to belong to himself or his Successors, as our Prelatists conierr'd upon his two Grandsons; and he absolutely declines being a judge in Doctrine: and yet our Querists appeal to their present Majesties as the supreme Judges without any Exception, though they have been graciously pleased to abolish that Act of Supremacy which did constitute them such; and as there's all the Reason of the World to believe, upon the very same Principle that K. James disclaimed it. But our Prelatists will have them to retain it whether they will or not, even against the Touch of their own sceptre; not out of any Good will to them, as is manifest from the Carriage of the Party since the Revolution, but merely to insinuate a malicious Reflection upon the Presbyterians, as if they did not allow their Majesties their full Power. Whatever Noise the Faction may make as if they proposed these Queries merely from Scruples of Conscience; the Presbyterians are not so ignorant of their Intrigues as they imagine, but know very well that the Hand of Joab is in the Affair, and by whom, and what Motives they are influenced and managed: and though the Point be too tender to be here insisted on, yet they may please to take notice of so much in plain Scots, that they have been disappointed in their Design of Rabbling, and now they betake themselves to revile the Committee and their Constituents.  
One thing more I cannot pass over, viz. that the Querists pretend that they don't decline the Committee's Authority with any Design to protect such as are truly guilty amongst them, if there be any such; and yet Mr● Chrevey, the Clerk, or principal Man of their General Meeting, was judicially cited before the Committee, and did accordingly appear, and made several Answers in his Cause before them; which he ought not to have done if he had reckoned them an unlawful Judicatory: And whether it does not look very suspicious, that he and the rest of the Querists were afraid of being found truly guilty, when though he had by his appearing and answering, owned the Authority of the Judicatory; that yet he and they should decline it, and protest against it, before they proceeded to Sentence.  
— And what reason they have to decline the Authority of the Committee as Parties, will appear further from the Instructions given by the Assembly to the Committee in 1690, with which those of the present Committee do without doubt run parallel, viz. That none of them shall be removed, but such as are either Insufficient, Scandalous, Erroneous, or supinely Negligent; and that those of them be admitted to Ministerial Communion, who upon due Trial shall be found Orthodox, Able, Godly, Peaceable and Loyal; and that such who shall be found to have received Wrong in any inferior Judicatory, should be duly redressed.— That they be very cautious of receiving Informations against the late Conformists, and that they proceed in the Matter of Censure very deliberately; so as none may have just Cause to complain of their Rigidity.  
And that this Committee, against whom they cavil, have behaved themselves according to these Instructions, appears from their receiving into Ministerial Communion at Aberdeen, the Persons name in the List, being such as were of the very best of their Party, and of good Esteem for their Learning and Piety: Whose Compliance does fret and enrage the factious Querists and others; who let them pretend what they will, endeavour to conceal Corruption both in Principle and practise, under the Covert of their Protestation.   

Protestation of Mr. William Dunlop Principal of the College of Glasgow, against Mr. James Gordon and others.  
I Mr. William Dunlop Principal of the College of Glasgow, and one of the Members of the Committee of the last General assembly of this Church, Do protest and declare, That the Paper now given in by Mr. James Gordon Incumbent at Banchory, Mr. Thomas Crevey Incumbent at Newhills, and others their Brethren, may not be regarded, nor any way retard this Committee's Procedor in any of the Affairs committed to them, in respect that this Committee are clothed with their Power from the last General assembly: Which assembly was lawfully indicted and held, and was a free and lawful General assembly, comform to all the Laws and Rules of this Church and Nation, whether Civil or ecclesiastic; and against either the indicting or holding of which assembly, or the Power and authority thereof, none of these Appellants, nor any others of their pretended persuasion, did make any public Protest, or give in to the same, any Reasons against their Proceedings, or against the saids Assemblie's clothing this Committee with the Power given thereunto. And in respect the saids Mr. James Gordon, and others here present, do pretend to come as commissionat from a collective Body and Meeting of Ministers; which Body of Ministers have no Power and Authority by any of the laws and Rules of this Church and Kingdom to be such, nor have given these Proofs of their Loyalty to their Majesties of their owning and submitting to the Government of the Church now by Law established, as the Law doth require. And likeways in respect that these Appellants, except Mr. Thomas Crevey, do come into this judicatory without being lawfully called thereunto, and do by their Appeal impugn the lawful authority of the same: And as to Mr. Crevey, in respect that he having been lawfully cited to appear before this judicatory, to answer for several things laid to his Charge, hath sisted himself judicially before this Committee, and made several Answers in causa, and yet ante latam sententiam, hath given in this pretended Appeal. And likeways in respect that all these pretended Appellants give no Reasons for their Appeal, but put in Queries to this Committee, challenging the authority of the same by Law established: In respect whereof, and for other Reasons which I shall humbly offer to this Committee when thereunto required, I do protest that the Committee may proceed to discuss the libel against Mr. Thomas Crevey, and perform all the other Trust reposed in them. And desiring that this my Declaration and Protestation may be recorded in the Registers of this Committee, there to remain.  
Hereupon I take Instruments, Sic Subscribitur, Will. Dunlop.  
AT Dundee Mr. John Chrystison Minister at lieth, was received into Ministerial Commanion, and Mr. David Ogilvy at Aberbrothock was received as Probationer: Mr. Henry Scrimsor his Relation to Dundee was declared null by virtue of his Demission at the Session 5th November 90, from the Pulpit 11th November; and by a Letter to the Provost. Mr. George Graham Incumbent at Inneraritie was deposed for Drunkenness. Nota, He did not appear before the Committee, although he was in Dundee that Day; against which he was pro secundo cited, but on that same Day he was drunk in the Town, which particular Act was proven before the Committee beside many other.  

Affairs at Aberdeen.  
AFter all due legal and usual Steps of Procedor had been observed;  
Yesterday being the 8th of July, the Elders and Deacons of the new Town of Aberdeen were publicly admitted, and this Day constitut themselves into a Session.  
Yesterday also one of the Charges was declared vacant, and Intimation made to all concerned in the Calling of a Minister, to meet together on Wednesday next.  
Yesterday likewise the Church of the old Town( after the reading of Mr. Francis Ross his Sentence) was declared vacant, he discharged to preach any more there; and Intimation made to all Persons concerned, to give in Lists of Persons to be Elders and Deacons.   

A List of Persons received into Ministerial Communion at Aberdeen.  
MR. David Lindsay at Drumaik, Mr. George Anderson at Tarves, Mr. William chamber at Gartley, Mr. William Frazer at Stairs, Mr. William Thomson at Auchindore, Mr. William Johnston at Kern, Mr. William Garioch at Kennethmont: Who being all in the Synod of Aberdeen, are to be erected in a presbytery on Wednesday next. Mr. Patrick inns at Bamff in the Synod of Murray, is also received. Mr. John Auchterlonie at Fordoun hath applied, but is delayed till the Committee return to Dundee, because he is in the Synod of Angus.   

A List of those whose Pastoral Relation to the respective Churches following, was declared null, they discharged to preach any more in them, because they had no Title or Right, but what a Call without the Interposition of the Authority of any Church-Judicatorie gave them; viz.  
MR. Alexander Jamison and Mr. Andrew Dalgarnoe Competitors for Tyrie, Mr. Francis Rosse at old Aberdeen, Mr. Robert Forquhar at Ecclesgreig, Mr. Andrew Honyman Probationer at Kinness, Mr. Alexander Thomson at Terntric, Mr. John Turin at Inch, Mr. James white at Strichen, Mr. James chain at Raithen, Mr. John Houston at Lonmay.  
Mr. William Mackay is transported from Dornoch to Cromdale.  
FINIS.    

The Representation of the Committee of the Assembly for the North of Scotland, to the Privy-Council of that Kingdom.  
With some Queries, by another Hand, proposed to such Church-of-England-Men as are Advocates for the Scots Episcopalians.  
THE publishing of the following Representation, &c. so suddenly after the Reflections upon the Scots Episcopal Queries and Protestation, may perhaps be looked upon by some as an Effect of intemperate Heat: To such I shall only say, That the unwearied Endeavours of our Adversaries to misrepresent the Church of Scotland, and the Interest which they make amongst those of the highest Dignity of the Church of England, to solicit their Majesties against the Scots Presbyterians, and lay such Misrepresentations before them as Matters of Truth, renders it highly necessary to publish the following Paper, that the World may have a farther taste of the disingenuous Practices of the Scots Episcopalians, and that the moderate Church-of-England-Men may themselves be Judges, Whether those of their Communion, who solicit their Majesties against the Church of Scotland, do not therein prefer their own peevish Humour to their Majesties Interest?   

To the Right Honourable the Lord High Chancellor, and remanent Lords of their Majesties Privy-Council of Scotland. The Committee of the General Assembly for the North,  
Humbly sheweth,  
THAT whereas the last General Assembly of this National Church, did grant Commission to a competent Number of Ministers and Elders for visiting the North, empowering them to purge and to plant Churches on the other side the River Tay; and to do and determine in several other Matters, according to the tenor of their Commission, which was drawn up and adjusted to the satisfaction of their Majesties Commissioner present in the Assembly in all Points. comform whereunto we having made a Progress through the North; and in all our Actings, which were sincerely designed for the Advancement of the Gospel, the Quiet of the Church, for the promoting of their Majesties Interest, and the public Peace kept within Bounds prescribed to us. Yet the Refractoriness of several Persons justly censured by us, with some other Occurrents, wherein we conceived the Authority of their Majesties Laws and Government, as well as that of the Church, to be deeply concerned, do oblige us to lay before your Lordships the Particulars following.  
First; That notwithstanding several Ministers have, after gross and uncontroverted Scandals objected and proven against them, been censured with Deposition, yet they presumed to Preach, and exercise their Ministerial Function, in contempt of all Authority, both Civil and ecclesiastic: Such as Mr. Geo. Graham, late Incumbent of Innerarity, deposed for habitual Drunkenness, aggravated with most scandalous Circumstances. Mr. John Lesly at Rothes, deposed for habitual Swearing, and horrid Cursings and Imprecations. Mr. James Smith at Killimore-Wester, for habitual Drunkenness; and Mr. George Seaton at Auchterlesse, for habitual Drunkenness, supine Negligence, and malicious stirring up of Variance and Strife among his Parishioners and Neighbours.  
Secondly; That though upon exact trial, it was found that several Ministers and Preachers had intruded into Churches vacant, not only against good Order, but to the hindrance of the regular planting of the said Churches, and therefore were discharged to preach any more there until orderly admitted, yet they continued to preach still, in contempt of the Sentences past against them; such as Mr. James Gordon Younger, at Foverane; and others: Which Contempt ought so much the more to be noticed by your Lordships, that now through the Care of this Commission, who have taken in thirteen Dissenting Ministers to the Presbyterian Ministers formerly in those Bounds, Presbyteries are duly established within convenient Precincts; so as all the Churches vacant in these Parts may, upon an easy Application, be regularly provided.  
Thirdly; That several Ministers deprived by your Lordships for their Disaffection, do nevertheless, contrary to your Lordships Sentence, and to the Act of Parliament 1690, whereby they are ordained first to qualify themselves in the Terms of the said Act, continue to preach in vacant and other Churches, in contempt of the said Act: Such as Mr. John Matters, late Incumbent at Ceres, intruding himself upon eliot. Dr. John Nicholson, late at Errol; Mr. Will. Ratray, late at Cargill; Mr. David Anderson, late at Perth: All intruding upon Kilspindy, presuming to preach there, and at other Places.  
Fourthly; Notwithstanding of the Abolition of Prelacy, and the settling of Presbyterian Government in this Church, yet nevertheless Persons have received Orders from some of the late Bishops, and thereupon usurped the Ministerial Function, and intruded into Churches: Such as Mr. John Auchterlonie in Aberlenno, and Mr. Gideon Guthry Diaconat, in April last.  
Fifthly; That notwithstanding our Commission was legally given and authorized by the General Assembly of this National Church, established by Law, and countenanced by their Majesties High Commissiorer; yet at Aberdeen twelve Ministers, whereof one only was cited before us, took the boldness to give in a Paper, under the Title of Queries, plainly questioning, not only our Authority, but the Authority of the Law whereby the Government of this Church is settled: And though they got a very moderate and rational Answer, yet they protested against us, and appealed from the Commission, and that in the Name of the whole Ministers benorth Tay, though they shewed no Warrant from them. And further, they appealed to their Majesties Protection, albeit never so much as cited as said is, and that they themselves have not so much as taken the Oath of Allegiance to entitle them to this Protection. So that the Contrivance was evidently Factious, to stir up and animate all such as are disaffected against the Government, both Civil and ecclesiastic. And thus at Innerness, fourteen other Ministers did officiously give in a Paper of Adherence to the Aberdeen Paper, and made their Protest and Appeal in a ruder manner.  
Sixthly; That when the Committee did summon Witnesses, particularly against Mr. Andrew Abercromby at Tarlen, a Person infamous through all that Country, by reason of his scandalous and flagitious Life, yet the Witnesses were kept back; which may be of bad Example, unless your Lordships prescribe some compulsory Method in time coming.  
Seventhly; That notwithstanding that Presbyterian Government is settled by Act of Parliament, and the Exercise thereof lodged in the Hands of the Ministers and Elders therein set down, yet many of the Episcopal Clergy in the North, do usurp Ecclesiastical Authority, and keep their own Meetings, where they licence Preachers, order Admission of Ministers, supply Vacancies, and do other Acts of Order and Discipline, contrary to the Law, and tending to the establishment of a Schism in the Church, and to the visible Prejudice of their Majesties Interest.  
Eighthly; That the Havers of Keys of several Vacant Churches, did refuse to make them forth-coming to the Committee; which was both against Law, and your Lordships frequent Acts and Orders: And thus the Keys of the Kirks of eliot and Kilspindie were refused by.... Havers thereof.  
Ninthly; That in all Churches where the Worship of God is performed, there ought to be no disorderly Interruption, upon any Pretence whatsoever: Yet in the Church of Old Aberdeen, several insolent Persons have presumed to interrupt the Worship of God, by offering at their own Hand another Piece of Worship most unseasonably, to the manifest profanation of the public Worship, and great disturbance of the Congregation, who gave no Compliance to the said Disorder: Which being manifestly Factious, and in all probability fomented by Persons disaffected, doth not only occasion great Scandal, but is very like to grow to higher Degrees of Insolence if not timely restrained.  
And seeing that the happy Success that we have had, thrô the Blessing of God, in these Parts, by taking in and gaining a good Number of Ministers, and disposing others to follow their Example, and by recommending our Moderation to all the Well-affected in those Parts, and settling several Churches and Presbyteries, to the great Benefit of the Gospel, and the Advancement of their Majesties Interest: Which doth in a manner wholly depend upon your Lordships interposing in the premises, and giving unto the Church and its Authority, that Countenance and Assistance which the Law ordains, and your Lordships know to be so necessary.  
May it therefore please your Lordships to take the premises into your serious Consideration, to apply such due Remedies to the above-mentioned Evils as the Law allows, and your Lordships shall find most proper, especially since we can confidently aver, that any Opposition or Discountenance we met with in those Parts, was only from Persons notoriously disaffected to their Majesties Government, and principally upon that Account; and that wherever Ministers, partakers of the present Church-Government, are settled in the North, or have access to preach in those Bounds, there's a sensible growing of Affection among the People, to the Civil as well as to the Ecclesiastical Government.  
And your Lordships Petitioners shall ever pray.   

Some Queries propounded to such Church-of-England-Men as are Advocates for the Scots Episcopal Clergy.  
1. WHether the King and Parliament of Scotland have not as much Power to settle such a Government in the Church of Scotland, as is most suitable to the Inclinations of the People, as the King and Parliament of England have to settle such an one in the Church of England?  
2. And if so, How it comes to pass that they offer to meddle in Affairs belonging to the Church of Scotland, and solicit to have a Party still continued, not only in benefice, but in the Exercise of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction, who refuse to qualify themselves according to Law?  
3. Whether they would not highly resent it, if the Church of Scotland should solicit for such things in favour of the Dissenters from the Church of England?  
4. Seeing the Church of Scotland does no such thing, whether Scots Men have not just Cause to suspect that those English Men who are so bold as to interpose in Affairs that are already determined by the King and Parliament of Scotland, have a mind to revive the old Pretensions of our Crown's being held in Fee of theirs, and that our Church ought to be subject to theirs?  
5. Whether or not, seeing that Matter hath been determined long ago by the Point of the Sword, Prescription of Time, and the Union of the Crowns, the Kingdom of Scotland may not expect as much Justice from the King and Parliament of England, against such Incendiaries, if they should make Application for it now, as they obtained against others of the like sort, both in Church and State, within the Memory of Man?  
6. Whether the moderate Church-of-England-Men have not reason to suspect that Part of the Plot reaches them, seeing they were also persecuted under the Notion of Whigs and Trimmers in the late Reigns, when the Scots Presbyterians were under the Hatches, especially seeing the Scots Episcopalians are generally in the late King's Interest 〈…〉 some of their greatest Patro● 〈…〉 have lately writ to the King, 〈…〉, to their false Representation of Affa●●●●, 〈◇〉 those who endeavoured to have such Men only in Places of Power and Trust, as concurred in the Murder of my Lord Russel, and such other worthy Church-of-England-Men in the late Reigns?  
7. Whether it's possible that they can be so far imposed upon, as to think that the Scots Episcopalians decline Conformity to Presbyterian Government in Point of Conscience; when it appears by Parl. 2. Act 1. Car. II. that it was the Opinion of the Party then, that the ordering of the Government of the Church did properly belong to his Majesty and Successors; and that the Representatives of the Party did offer to submit to, and concur with Presbyterian Government, by their Formula in 1690, if their signing of the Confession of Faith could have been dispensed with?  
8. Whether the Scots Episcopalians be not guilty of very gross Dissimulation, in pretending a Deference to the Civil Government, when they act so contemptuously against the Acts of Parliament and Council in so many things, as appears by the Committee's Representation?  
This being judged sufficient at present, those who desire a farther Account of the Party, are referred to the Answer to the Scots Presbyterian Eloquence, the Continuation of it, the Scots Episcopal Innocence, and the Reflections on their Queries and Protestation, all sold by the Booksellers of London and Westminster.  
FINIS.