^C-S^f iU~? ;*$* */%****<• £' ' * ^^^ ** t \ *•• - * « * A FULL VINDICATION OF THE People's Right T O Eled their own Pastors. WHEREIN A Discovery is made of the falfa Reafon- ingSy Miffeprefe?2tations % Inconjifv . : &c. of the Author of two late Tamj let The one intituled 3 A modeft andhtfmble 1 iquirjjt concerning the Right and (Power of Eie£ling and Calling Minijfers to vacant Churches ; The other, The fublick Teftimony made i/iore fublick. By Mr. John Currie Minifter of the Gofpel at KING LASSIE. ifenim impiaEccleJia fpoliatio quoties alicui pop: ^e* ritur, Eptfcopus quern non pe tier it lei fait em libera vote approbarit. Calv. Inftit. Lib. 4. Cap. 5. Sect. 5. We granr, as to the Matter of the Calling of MinifterS and Officers of the Church, that to all the People be- longeth to nominate and elect the Perfons to be their Church-officers : And that to put upon a People v> I Chriftians, and in a Capacity to elect, any U officer without their Confent and Election, is ur. > rantable Intrufion. Wood againft Lochev, EDINBURGH, Prinred by tbomas Lumifden and John Roterff ^ fold by David Oliphant and other Book-felU; ( J) READER, THE Modefi; ancUhumble Enquiry hath been mightily applauded by Jome, as a> learned and complete Tiece of its Kind> a *Piece which hath beat the Bottom out of this prefent Controverfy of the People's Right to eleA their own Pallors ; and hath been ear- nejlly recommended byfome, who have boajiedof the ^Performance as unanpxerable. Upon read- ing thereof, my Sentiments differed vafily from- thefe Gentlemen ; and, bei?2g apprehenjive the- Slighting of it *witIoout^ an Anfwer might have the bad Effects of leading Jome afide, and con- firming others in their erroneous Opinion as to this Subjeff-, therefore I judged it tDnty at this Seafo?i to contribute my' Mite for vi?idi eating "Truth in the prefent Affair. I know, 'tis i neon fider able with fome, who ba the Electors of Gofpel-minifiers ; but, as in Mr* Calderwood'i Efieem, fo to me, this is a Bufinefs of great Moment : And tho' it was of leffer Im- portance, yety if the Truth of God is to be cm- tended for, there may be Truth in what (Pro* fejfor Jamefon fays (a), " They who conteitl and fuffer for thefc that are commonly reckon ned fmall Truths and of little Moment, pro* viding always they be Truths, are more gene* rous and heroick, in fome Senfe, than thofe which fuffer and contend for Truths that are acknowledged to be great, and nearer the A 2 "JFoim* (a) Preface to ^/iSuro, /. 15. cc €€ CC €C 1 **// wifo they were ; yea M for my Tilting Ibe knows, they all complied with Prelacy. Or> if % by a 'reciting Author, he means I come over the fame 'Things I have written at different Times, I own the Charge: For Jus Populi Divinum is hut afecond Edition wiih large Additmis of Jus Populi Vindicatum. And a great fart of what the Enquirer fays in his Publick Teftimony made more publick is crambe reco&a, or nothing but a Repetition of what hefaid lafi Tear in his Modeft and humble Enquiry, as the 7720ft of his Exceptions ttgainft our Arguments are to be found in Romifh or Prelatick Writers. y Tis plain, the Enquirer^ Scope is to rob the People of all Right whatfoever in the Elettion of Miniflers ; and alfo, One would be tempted to think, to excite Judicatories and greater Ones to trample upon them, as being nothitig but Dregs or Off-fcourings ; But what further SDefign he hath is not fo eafy to divine. y Tis true, in the "Be- ginning of his Book', before he lays down his Method (a), he is very pofitive that it is the Right of 'Presbyteries to elect c JPaJlors, affirm-, ing, That, after a ferious and conlcientious En- quiry, he found it to be fo ; ajferting alfo, That both Scripture and Antiquity affure us, that the Paftors of the Church are the chief Eleftors. But tho\ at entring upon his Search, he had the fullefijj/nrance of this ; yet, when he hath fini- fled his clabour ate, ferious and confeienvous En- quiry > and has come to the lafi Leaf of hi 's Book, s full Aflurance is come down to a bare Proba- bility, to a bare Opinion, and to Lis being much A 4 iri- ) l ■ -«■»■ ( 8 ) inclined to think the Scriptures feem chiefly to give Countenance to Ele&ions by the Church Reprefentative. So it feems the Scriptures of Vfruth) which I thought had been fufficient to teach the Man of God how to behave himfelf in His Houfe, are a moft obfcure Rule, whereby Toe can only guefs at (Duty. And if, after all Jois carejul, attentive, ferious ani contentious Enquiry, his former full AfTurance is co?ne to a tare teeming Probability, and a bare Inclination to think the Scriptures feem chiefly to give Coun- tenance to Eleftion by the Church 'Reprefenta- tive, it feems our Enquirer has loft his (Pains ; and his modeft and humble Expreffions there, they feem to imply, that, after all his narrow * Enquiry, he can determine nothing pofitively in the Affair. Some havefaid, T'he Modeft and humble En- quiry was written by one, andjome have affir- med it was done by another, while others thought mo than one might have a Concern in it ; But common Fame is no (Proof \ And, feeing the Au- thor lies dormant, and has not affixed his Name ; when I tell plain (truth, tho y it ftoould refleEi upon him, it needs not be thought I have an Eye ftpcf? this or the other (Perfon in particular. If the Enquirer think meet to reply, I affure him he Jhall have the laft Word for me, if he follow the fame Method of Mifreprefentations, confident Ajfertions without (Proof Sec at lead, iffo, J rcfolve never, to follow him a capite ad calcem,, as here. A ( 9 ) kSv?35 ^wwHjd&tfS Ajr>/ %y I>^ V W|>3^P^^H5 * r^^\t .v^K-jX^^A.'. ii||§ ia^ffs!^ 1 I'V^At^*^' J€&jftg$ tJJK^^^ J^/'l'B^* -^ NpS§i A Fz/// Vindication O F T H E People's T)ivine Right to elect their Paftors. CHAP. I. HAT it is the Right of the Chriftian People to eled: their Minifters zvu\ other Cburch-Ojficers ,and not the Right of Pope, Prelate^ Presbytery, nor of Magistrates, Heritors or Elders, excluding o- ther People, was proven at fome Length in Jus Topuli jDivinum ; as al- fo by fundry others before and fince the Writing thereof ; But, feeing the Author of the Modell i Humble Enquiry, in that, and in another Pamphlet r lo ) Pamphlet intituled,7#e c PublickTefti?nony made more publick> has attempted to enervate the Force of thofe Arguments ; here I deiign to ex- amine, ift y What be hath f aid in thofe Pieces againji our Scripture- Arguments for the (People's Right, i&bfy The General 'Things advanced in his Title *Page, and Introduction to his Modefi Enquiry. ^dly 3 HisAJ/ertions anent the Conjiitu- tions of this Church relating to the CallofGofpeh Miniflers. 4t hly 3 What he advances in his fecond Seftion, where he pretends to flat e the £>ueftion. 5thly 3 What he fays as to the Sentime72ts of the Fathers and ancient Councils, tfthiy, What he affirms as to the Foreign Churches. And> Laft- ly , Confider what he fays in his Appendix. And, by this Method, the feveral Sections of his Enquiry will be anfwered, tho' not in the Or- der laid down by him. The Arguments adduced from Scripture by Proteftant Divines for the People's Right to elefl: their Paftors, being the main Thing in this Con- troverfy, I begin with the Vindication of thofe which have been attacked by the Enquirer ; on- ly, ere I enter upon that Subjeft, it may be pro- per, for preventing Miftakes. to premife a few Things ; as, i. When we plead it is the People's Right to chufe their Paftors, by the Teople we underftand a People already called and profeffing Chriftianity : We do not fay,that fuch as are not Chriftians have any fuch Right ; no, a Presby- tery or others, as Junius fays, may chule for j them. 2. We fay not, this is the Right of all that are Chriftians by Name and Profeffioii, but of fuch only as are Men fearing the Lord, and walking in his Statutes, A pkbs obfcqmns free- ceptts ( II ) ceptis Tiominicis 1$ Z)etM tnetuem, as Cypri- an fays : The Privilege of iuch as have been, or (in the Judgment of Charity) for Knowledge and a becoming Coverfation might be, admitted to the Table of the Lord, 3. When we fay it is the Right of a Chriftian People, by the People we underftand not the common People only, as fome would alledge ; but under the People we include Nobility, Gentry, Heritors, Elders and Zteacons, yea, and Minifters alfo in a collegiate Charge. 4. When we fay it is the People's Right to eleft their Paftors, we mean, it is the Privilege of fuch People as are to be the Paftor's Charge, joining in full Communion with him, fubje&ing themfelves to his Miniftry in the Lord. 5. When we fay it is the Peopled Right, with Cartwright, Calderzvood, Rtitherfurd, and o- thers, we mean, it is a *Divine Right which Chrift hath purchafed for and left in Legacy to tfcem. *. We do not fay this is fo the Right ofthe People, as to exclude the Presbytery from all Con- cern in the Matter : For it is the Presbytery's Right, not only to give Advice in the Affair, but alfo to moderate the Election ; And it is their Right to examine the Candidate's Qualifications for th$ Miniftry, and to take Trial of his Fit- nefs for the Charge to which he is called. 7. The Queftion is not, Whether the Suffrages or Votes of all, or the Votes of any at all, is eflential to a Minister's Call ; for, where a Con- gregation or People agree for fuch or fuch a Can- didate, there is nothing like an abfolute Neccfli- ty for a Vote, tho', where there is Diilerence among a People, I know not how this can he determined without their Suffrages ; till then, each ( 13 ) each Side is apt to plead they have the Majority. But, pafling thefe, I now proceed to confider the Force of the Enquirer's Exceptions againft fuch Scriptures as have been adduced by Prote- ftants for Confirmation of the People's Right in this Affair. SECT. I. In which Lev. 8. 3. and Deut, 1. 13. are confi- dered. THE firft Argument for the People's Right, which the Enquirer takes under his Confi- deration, is taken from Lev. 8. 3. where the Lord commands Mofes to gather all the Co72- gregation together to the Door of the Taber- nacle of the Co?2gregntion y at the Inftalment of Aaron and his Sons in the Priefts Office ; which fuppofes this was to be done with the People's Confent, feeing they were to be gathered tqgg* ther upon that Occafion. Who they are that argue from this Text, I know not, nor did the Enquirer think meet to tell ; yet, I fuppofe the Argument here is, what we call a jfortiori. Thus, if under the Old Teftament, when God himfelf appointed the Perfons that were to mi- nifter in holy Things, would yet have them in- ftalled in the Prefence of the People with their Approbation and Confent, much more is their Approbation and Confent neceflary inthofe Ca- fes in which there is no fuch immediate Divine Interpoiition. And, tho* God himlelf made Choice of Aaron' to be the High Prieft, and his Offspring to fucceed to the Priefthood, that will not fay the People's Choice and Confent was in vain : vain : For/tho God made Choice of Saul to be the King, yet he was made King by the PeopJe at Gilgal, I Sam. n. 15. where it is faid, And all the People went to Gilgal, and there they made Saul King before the Lord in Gilgal. And at the Instalment of the Priefts, I find it is affirmed (a)> iC There was a Covenant be- " tween them and the People, at which Time cc the Priefts promifed all Duty to the -.People, ec and they reciprocally to the Priefts ; tho* the €C exprefs V^rds of fuch a Covenant are not re- €C corded in iBfe Scriptures." And to fay, with the Enquirer, €€ The People were only gathe- (C red together at the Inftalment into their Of- €c fice, that they might be afTured that God had tc called them, and that they were no Intru- cc ders," is not fo probable ; for Mofes the Man of God his Teftimony was enough to afTure them of this : Or, if this was one Reafon, it was not the only. nor main Reafon. Willet in his Hexapla upon Leviticus (b}, having put the Queftion, Why the Co?2grega« tion was called together at the Ccmfecrdtion of Aaron and his Sons ? In anfwer to it, gives this as one of thofe which he calls the true Reafons ; cc Becaufe, fays he, according to the Apoftle's cc Rule, he that is to be ordained a Minifter, gc fhould have Teftimony of them which are tc without; and that hereby the People might < c fhew their Confent and Approbation, and pip* < c fefs their Purpofe to obey their fpiritual l9 « c thers, left any Scruple or After-thought might < c remain in any one, or Caufe of Exception." And (a) Cougar on Mai. 2. 8, ?. (b) p. 145. . ( *4 ) And there he cites Origen and Tellicanm, a* being of Opinion with him. To the fame Pur- pofe (peaks Calvin (a)* And further, tho 5 under the Mofaick OEcono- my, the Priefthopd by the divine Appointment was appropriated to the Houfe of Aaron, and made hereditary to his Family ; yet the Covenant of Priefthood was only conditional as to him who was next in the Line, the Condition being, if he was meet for the PrieftY Office ; that is, if under noLegal or Moral Incapacity ^ And I hum- bly think the People were to be withered toge- ther at his Inftalment, to give their Confent un- to, and teftify their Approbation of, that Perfon who was to be confecrated, teftifying he was one to whom they cordially confented : For the next in Line did not always fucceed to the Priefthood ; hence, for the Sins of the Houfe of Eli, his Off- fpring were deprived thereof. As to what he fays (in his Teftimony made more pz^lick) of the Prophets under the Old Teftament, their being called of God RenitenU Tlebe, is true of the Wicked, but not of the Godly and Believing a- mong the People. \ And further, the Prophets being extraordinary MefTengers, they were not fent to particular Congregations ; fo it is nothing to the Purpofe. A 2d Argument, brought by fome from the Old Teftament (b), is from the Tower and Li- berty given to the Jews,even tinder the Theocra- cy, to chufe their own Rulers, Deut. 1. 13. where Mofes fpake to Ifrael, faying, Take ye wife Men, and zmderftanding, and known among your »!«• (a) Inftit. Lib. 4. Cap. 3. Se&. 1 5. (b) p. 45. ( is ) your Tribes, and I wiit make them Rulers } where we fee the Election is left unto the Peo- ple, as the Inftalling of thofe Rulers is referved by Mofes to himfelf. The People were allowed, yea commanded, to take (or give to themfelves, as the Words are according to the Original) wife Men, and understanding, and known among their Tribes ; there the Nomination and Electi- on of thefe Rulers of the People is given to them- felves. To this the Enquirer anfwers, i. Thofe were Civil Rulers, and therefore the Confequence is not valid. Anf They who argue from this Text, I fuppofe, will contend, That, in regard God allows them fo much Right in the Election of their Civil Rulers, it cannoc be denied, that, by the divine Will, iheir Conient was neceflary in the Choice of the Rulers and Overfeers of their precious Souls. 2. The Enquirer tells, cc When he confuted cc the parallel Text, Exod. 18. i j. (it (hould be €c 18. 2 5 J he learned Mofes was the fole Ele&or ; €C for there it is faid, That Mofes chofe able Men €C out of all Ifrael, and made them Heads over the €C ^People ; aflerting, That what the People did, €C T>eut. 1. 1 3. was prior to the Election ,• deny- €C ing any more is meant, but that the People €c were to confider who in their feveral Tribes cc were befl approven, giving their Certificate, €C and bringing them to Mofes, that fo, upon € f their Teftimony, he might chufe out of them " fuch as he thought fir. Anfw. Tho' Mofes be faid, Exod. 18. 25. to havechofen thofe Ru- lers, that will not prove he took the fole Ele&i-» on to himfelf; for it is not unufual in Scripture* when a Thing is done by many, to afcribe it to chc ( i6 ) the chief Director, as Nvtnb. 11.21. where it is faid, And Ifracl fent Mejfengers to Sihon King cf the Amorites ; and yet, 'Dent. 2. 26. Afcjes is faid to fend thofe Meflergers : The Meaning leems to be. The People chc-ie thofe Rulers by the Dire&ion of Mcfes, he prtliding in the Ele- ftion ,• for, even according to our Author, rhe People were to confider who were molt fit for that Office, and their Teftimony as to the Quali- fications of the Candidates was needful. I think then it is plain, the Nomination and Election were given to them. He cites Henry on Jzxod. 18. 15. faying, Mofes did not leave the Ele&ion of the Magiftrates to the People, but chofe and appointed them. By his not leaving the Electi- on to the People, the Meaning muft either be, He did not leave the Election fo to them, as not to prefide and direct in it, or not to have a Sh^re therein ; elfe we muft fay, Mr. Henry contradi&s himfelf : For,, when commenting on jDeut. f . 13. he fays, €C Mofes was not defirous cc to prefer his own Creatures, or fuch as fhculd cc under-hand have a Dependence upon him ; 5 C for he leaves it to the People to chufe their cc Judges,to whom he would grant Commiflions : For- refler. Rule, <5cc. Our Author hath the Ho- nour of being the firft among 'Presbyterian 2Ji- vineSy for what I know, that ever wrote againft the People's Right in this Affair. And, by the fecond Branch of his Alternative, he teems to doubt, whether or not Apoftolick Preface in the firft Century is to be a Rule to the Church of ChriCi in After-ages ; but, if in the firft Century the Right of Election belonged to the Church- Reprefentatives,and was only exercifed by them, I think it ought to be fo ftill : And, were I oi his Mind, for as great a Slave as he fancies I am to Popularity % 1 w : ould defire to contend for it, tho' all the People on Earth 3 whether of higher or lower Rank, fhould be difpleafed ; for appro- ved Apoftolick Practice in fuch Matters is to me of equal Authority with a Divine Precept. But I proceed to the Vindication of thofe Ar- guments which are adduced by Protectant 2)i- vineSy efpecially 'Presbyterians, from the New Teftament; and to begin with Affs i. from the 15. v. and downwards, where we have an Ac- count o{ the Election of Matthias to the Apoftle- fhip. Here, 1. 1 will give you the Argument as ftated by the Enquirer. 2. Show wherein he doth Injury to it. And, 3. Anfwer his Cavils or Ex- ceptions againft it: And then proceed to confider other Scripture- proofs much in the fame Method. The Argument as ftated by him is in the follow- ing Words, c The firft Argumertt is taken from the Call c of Matthias to be an Apoftle, which we have c related, Aits 1. from v. i< 9 co the Clofe. I 1} 2 ihall ( 30 ) fhall propofe it, fays he (a)> in its full Strength , and with all its Advantages. The Difciples to the Number of One hundred and twenty did nominate and chufe two of thofe who had ac- companied Chrilt in his Miniftry, that one of them might be a- Witnefs of his Refurre&ion ; and accordingly the One hundred and twenty appointed two, hrmctv JV© ; Here is the Choice of the Church ; And v. i6. it is faid, Matthi- as was numbred with the eleven Apoftles'; vvyK&Tz*\,wt£rH, which Seza renders fimul Juf- fragiis e/e£lus; and Erafmtts thus, commnni- bus fuffragiis eleEius, i. e. he was chofen by common Suffrage: Here is the Confent exprel- fed by a Word of ftrong Import and Significa- tion, for the Word *\x$& ngnifies a Stone or Counter. And with thefe it was the Cuftom of old to give their Suffrage in palling of Judg- ment and granting Commiflions : And the in- fpired Hiftorian alludes to this Cuftom. Thus he had the Choice and Confent of the Church, that this might be a Precedent for future Ages ; and if there was the Content and Concurrence of the People to the Election of an extraordi- nary Church- Officer, much more fhould this be had in the Calling of the ordinary Paftors thereof. Thus I have done Juftice to the Ar- gument ; and, becaufe all Writers on this Sub- ject ufe it, and it is now in the Mouth of every Body, I fhall pay a due Rgard to it, and con- fider it with great Attention. But has he performed hisPromife by propofing the Argument in its full Strength ? No furely; for m~m*m i ■ i i ■ ■■» ■■■■ « » (*) P- 47. ( « ) for, i/?, He tells not that we fay,. The 120 no c only nominated and made Choice of the two Per- fons that were to be upon the Leet, that one of them might be an Apoitle, but alfo they were cal- led fo to do by the infpiredApoftle 'Perer, ha- ving a Divine Warrant for it. 2.ily 3 He tells not, that as we own Matthias to be an extraordinary Officer ; fo there was lomething extraordinary in the Choice, viz. That it was referred to God's imraediateDecifion by Lot. And we plead, That, as he was to be an Officer in the Church, fo the Choice and Confent of the Church was required who named him and Joseph as a Leet, judging ei» ther of them meet tor that great Work. $dly 3 He tells not, as we argue from this, as the firft In- flance of the Choice of an Office-bearer in the New Teftament Church, wherein Men were con- cerned, and had the Nomination ; as we judge it was defigned for a Precedent : So, had that not been, we may rationally think Chrift would have called Matthias immediately, as he did the reft oi the Apoltles. But *Peter, being directed to re-» quire the Hundred and twenty to name orprefent Two, that one of them might be chofen by Lot, appears to have been defigned as a Precedent to the Church of Chrift in all future Ages. qthly $ We fay, That, if in any Cafe Church-members might have been overlooked _, this v as a proper Occafionj when the Eleven Apoitles w«re prefent,and going about the Choice of an Apoftie, who was not to be fixed in any particular Charge; and yet they are required to make the Nomination, jtbly, He neglects to tell, that we argue the People did all that could be done by Men in the Affair; they elc* &ed Two, and^ did not nominate the individual JB 3 Per- ( M ) Perfbn; not becaufe they had not a Right to do ib, but becaufe the Perfon was to be put into the Apoftolick Office,, and fo behoved to be elected in an extraordinary Way, and, in fome Sort, im- mediately by Jeftis Chrift. The People's being called to nominate in this Cafe, was more than to eledt many ordinary Paftors ; as to have a Power to nominate Two,One of which is to be an Admi- ral or General, is more than to have a Power to eleft many Siibaltem Officers. . But now, let* us confider the Enquirer's Anfwer to this ; And, fince he promifes to pay the Argument all due Regard, and praifesGod in the Clofe of his Argument for helping him to reafon after fuch a Manner, no doubt his Manner of Reafonirig mult be very Angular, and fo it really is: For, from the 47th Page, to the 5 2d Page, he fcarcely has a Word againft our Argument, but fpends his Four Pages to little or no other Purpofe, than to make the World believe he has faid a great deal. Indeed he fays, ff God 1 had already made * c the Choice, before the One hundred and twen- cf ty did any Thing about it : And this, fays he, c < the Apoftle Teter had Knowledge of by Re- " velation." A7ipw. 1 ft, True; God had chofen Matthias before the Hundred and Twenty did any Thing about it, in refpedl of Purpofe and Decree ; but the Decree was not the Rule by which the Hun- dred and twenty walked in their Choice; nor was God's fecret Purpofe of chufing Matthias notified to IPeter, or any among the Hundred and twenty Difciples : Or, if fo, to what Pur- pofe were two nominated, that one of them might be chofen by Lot ? And why did they pray,, That the t n ) h the Lord, who knows the Hearts of all Met: s would Jhew which of thefe Two he had chofen^ feeing, according to the Enquirer, he had fhown this already ? He fays (a), Cf Had that Reafon been goo d, We Tiould not curioufly enquire why the Lord or- iered it fo, he is infinitely wife. And, 2dly, Whereas he asks. Why was not the Five hundred" Brethren aflembled, who lately were Witnefles of our Saviour's being alive again? I mlvver, As profcftbly the Hundred and twenty lere mentioned w£re of that Five hundred, our lord having told his Difciples by an Angel, Mat. :fc. 7. to go into Galilee, for they Jhould fee him e: So, as fome think, it is not improbable iofe Hundred and twenty were the Men in Jeru- ilem who at that Time did openly own Chriff, •eing received into full Communion with the )ifciples, partaking of fealing Ordinances : And : is very probable mod of that Five hundred who iw our Lord at Galilee, had their Refidence near nto that Country, which was at a great Dittance # "om Jerufalem, being, fay fome, about Eighty r a Hundred Miles diltant from this City ; fo that without the greateft Fatigue they could not come hat Length. Mr. Henri , commenting on Mat. 28. 7. gives wo Reafons for that general Meeting which Chrift ppointed with his Difciples at Galilee, iff, * It was out of Kindnefs to thofe Difciples, fays he, 1 who remained in Galilee y who did not, and perhaps could not, come up to Jervfalem* idly, in Confideration of the Weaknefs of his Difciples chat were now at Jerufale?n, who, c as yet, Wf re afraid of the Jew* aad durft not " a P - cc CC CC ( ** ) €C appear publickly ; and therefore this Meeting ec was adjourned to Galilee. Chrift knows our €C Fears, and made his Appointment where there was leaft Danger of Difturbance." And on John 4. 45. he fays,The Galileans lay very re- mote from Jenifalem; their Way thither Jay cc through the Country of the Samaritans, €C which was troublefom for a Jew to pafs, €C worfe than Baca's Valley of old/' (a) He asks, cc If the Difciples of our Lord ce could not meet with Safety in. fo great a Com- fC pany near Jerufalem, why went they not cc back to that Mountain in Galilee}" To which I might anfwer, That, tho* the Lord is not obliged to give an Account of his Matters to us, yet we fee he had more Pky upon his Difci- ples, than without Neceffity to carry them back to Galilee, where they had lately been. And, whereas he asks, €C Were there no mo in the €C City of Jertifalem but 39 private Difciples?" I fay, There were 109 who joined in full Com- munion with the Apoftles. ♦ In order to prove there was a great Num- ber of private Chriftians in Jerafalem, ift 3 He cites John i. 25. where it is faid, When Jefus was at Jerufalem on the Feaft-2)ay, many belie- ved in his Name, when they faw the Miracles which he did. To this I anfwer, That the Context fhews they were Hypocritical Believers, fuch as Chrift put no Trull in ; as is the Opini- on of 2)iodati, Grotius, 'Pifcator, and other Commentators. idly, For Proof of |this he alfo cites John 7. 31. where (a) Td& 54. i.i lW* ■ *■ ( 5* ) Si. where it is faid, Many of theTeople believed mi him> and faid > When Christ cometh, will he do more Miracles than thefe which this Man hath done ? Anfw. The Words themfelves give Ground to queftion, whether they were true Believers or not. Grotius on the Text fays, € They believed in him, not as in the Chrift, c for of that they doubted ; but as in an eminent c Man fent from.God,, and almoft to be compa- c red with the Mejfias. * And what if many of them who believed were Night-'DifcipleSy who as yet kept themfelves clofe or hid for Fear of the Jews, not being as yet received into full Communion, partaking of fealing Ordinances ? As for the Three thoufand mentioned, Acts 2. 41. and the otherThoufands mentioned^*??* 4. 4. it is owned their Converfions were after the Ele- ction of Matthias. As to what the Enquirer fays (a) againft the Force of the Word l.vyKATi^^ 1 ^ in the laft Verfe, which our Tranflators render Numbred, I fhall not infift upon it, feeing he owns all we plead for from it ; namely, that it intimates their joint Acknowledgment and cordial Acceptance of him. I had almoft forgot another Query he puts, JKz. {b) " Why is the Right of Election daim- * ed now-a-day* as the Property of the People, u in Exclufion of Minifters, who, according to cf the prefent Doftrine, are the Court that pre- a fides in the Election ? Did the Apoftles and Se- cc venty invade the People's Right, l$c? y Now, for Anfwer, he takes it for granted, that the Se- venty - •*-> (a) p. 53. (£) p. 5 * ( 30 ) venty were all among the Hundred and twenty here, and that they were Chut 'ch-Officers, which we deny. But for a more diredt Anfwer, i. As I faid, we allow and plead it is the Right of Presbyteries to moderate in the Eleftion ; and I am humbly of Opinion, that the Moderation fhould rather be by the whole Presbytery, than one or two of their Number; for the whole Col- lege of the Apoflles prefided in the Ele#ion of Matthias, and of the Deacons, Atts 6. 3. 2. We allow a Negative in the Affair to the Presbytery, in cafe a Parifh fhould ele6fc a Perfon of unfound Principles, a vitious Pra&ice, and wanting fuita- ble minifterial Gifts. We allow the Presbytery to try his Parts and Qualifications for the Work: of the Gofpel in that Charge to which he is called. In the Conclufion of his Argument, our An- gularly modeft and humble Enquirer fays (a), c Thus I have delivered my Thoughts and Sen- c timents on this Argument ; and, before I pro- c ceed further in my Enquiry, I thank the only ? wife God, who affifted tm and enabled me to c reafon after this Manner ; Not unto me, not c .unto me, but unto him be the Glory : And I c humbly implore his Direction in what remains r of my Enquiry/ O Father of Lights, graiA that i7t thy Light I may fee Light, and lean?- the Truth as it. is in Jefus Chrift* . Who can queftion his Modefty and Humility, who faid, God, I thank thee, I am not like other Men (b)? But pray, for what is our Enquirer fo thank- ful, why he hath lent Cardinal Bellarmine and other «W— — — — > I yl ■ «t« (a) Tage jtf. (b) Luke 18. n» ( 31 > other Romanics the beft Lift fie can ? and done all that is in his Power to fbp the Mouths of fuch as vindicate our Reformers, who difturbed the Peace of Mother-Church, pleading Grill ic was the Right of the People toeled their Pallors, and that their Calling was good and valid, tho' they wanted Ordination by a Diocefian Biihop, in regard they had the Call of the People, where :hey ferved in the Work of the Gofpel ? Has he not GrAund to be thankful, that he has de- nolifhed fuch weak and well-meaning Presbyte- ians, as Calvin, Seza, Junius, Chamier, 'Pif- >ator s Tareus, Rivet, Walletis, turret ine, Wende- ine> EJfeneus, ifnrkitis, Pictet, Calderwood, Rtitberfurd, Gillefpie, Fcrrefler, Jamefon, Ruk ; and I know not how many other Pro- ors of Divinity, who have all argued from his Text ? Hath he not Ground to be thankful ? dt now he hath fet them right, to ufe his own ; hrafe. The Enquirer, in his 'Ptiblick 'Tefiimony inade rcpublick (a), adduceth a Citation from Ru- rfurd, to prove the People did not nominate itthias, affirming, That, according to him, hey were only Confenters. But, for Anfwer, ic >ou!d be confidered in that Place cited by him* lutherfurd is only arguing againft People's ha- ing a Right to ordain Minifters ; which is the >odxine of Independents, who adduce this E!e- Hon of Matthias as a Proof of their Right for )rdination. But, as in other Places of his Wri- ng, Rutberfurd argues for the People's Right ) chufe their Paftofs, from this Elc&ion o(Mat~ thias ; (a) Page 40. ***«■ thiasi So, in the very Place cited by the Enqui- rer, he fays, * All the Hundred and twenty did 4 nominate and prefent him. 2. They did chufe c him. 3. Says he, Here is no Probation, that c only a Company of Believers, wanting Paltors, c are Ordainers of Matthias to the Apoftlefhip ; c and this is the Queftion/' Now, Words can- not make it plainer, than thofe do, that Ru- therfard gives the Choice of Matthias to the Hundred and twenty, or to the People, and to none elfe. There alfo the Enquirer cites Profef- for Wood to the fame Purpofe ; but it would be alfo confidered, that, in the Place cited, Profet for Wood is far from arguing againft the People's Right ; for no Man was ever clearer and more pointed upon this Head than he is : For, in the very Place cited, arguing againft Lockier the In- dependent, he fays, c For his firft Inftance of E- € leftions of Officers, we grant, that the Ele- € ftion of Officers is to be done by all ; but, fays € he, Election is no Ordination. ' And in the hoi Page of that Book, he fays, ' To put upon c a People who are Chriftians* and in a Capaci- € ty to eleft, any Church-Officer without their * Confent and Election, is unwarrantable Intru- fion;'* and there he affirms, It belongs to all the People to nominate and eledt their own Church-Officers. And, in the Place cited, his Scope is plainly to fhow, that Right for People to ordain a Minifter, is what can never be proven from any Thing done in the Affair of Matthias ; which we readily grant. An4 whereas he cites Cawdrey to the fame Purpofe, tho* I have not feen the Book ; yet, I doubt not, the Cafe is the fame wath him ; yea, it is evident from his Words, ( 33 ) V/ords, as given by the Enquirer, t that the People propounded the Two, tho* it was not in their Power to nominate a particular Man. SECT. IN. In which the Argument for the 'People* s Right to eleSl their Rafters, drawn from their ele* Bing the 2)eacons> A&s 6. is vindicated and confirmed. C\ U R Proteftant Divines, Jn pleading for the V* People: Right againft Roma?zifts, and fome high-flying 'Pretatijls, have ftiU argued from the Right given them by the Apoftles to chufe their Deacons, Atts 6. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. This our Au~ Chor comes next to coniider. Our Argument according to him, is in thefe Terms (a) ; < Nowj if the People had a Right to chufe their Dea- cons, then a fortiori, or much more, they have a Right to chufe their own Paftors : If they had a Right to chufe thofe to whom they were to entruft their charitable Benevolence, for the Relief of the Necelfities and Wants of the Poor, .much more have they a Right to chufe thofe to whom they are to commit tho Ore of their Souls/ And then he adds, ' I. am exceedingly miftaken, if I have omitted any Thing that * In the New Te- (lament we read, that in the very Choice of Deacons, which was but an inferior Office, and ferving only for the Diftribution of the temporal Eftates of the People, the Apoftle requires, that they fhould, not only be elected by the People, but alfo ordained to this Of- fice : Much more, fay they, ought this to be done in the Choice of Perions who are Called to the Work of Preaching, and difpenfing fa- cramental Myfleries, a Service of all others of greateft Weight and Worth/ And in the bregoing Leaf they lay, c The mediate ordinary C 2 Way (a) Epb. 5. 8. (b) J#s ( 3* ) * Way by which God would have all Men to € enter into the Miniftry, is by Ele&ion and Or- * dination ; and then they add, They are both.of * them diltin&ly fet down in the Choice of the € Deacons, AEis tf. 3, 5,6.' Surely by this they intend, as in the Call of the Deacons to their Office, firit there w r as Election by the Multitude cr People, and then Ordination by the Apoftlesj fo it mult be in the Call of Golpel-Minifters : And thefe learned Divines declare, they reckon it a Presbyterian Principle, That the People have Right to eJed their Paftors (a) y affirming, It is an Excellency of the Presbyterian Government that it is fo. And again and again, they argue from this Text ©f Scripture for the People*! Right, as in their Jus 2)iv. Reg. where the} lay, c Ecclefiaftical Officers are both.ele&ed and c ordained by the Church, without Coinmiffion c from the Civil MagHtratey by vertue of Chriftt c Ordinance, and ki his Name/ They fay * People may chufe Presbyters or other Church- € Officers, but the Presbytery is to ordain, AEti € 6. 3, 5, 6. Look ye out Men whom we may * appoint ; (b that the People's bare Ele&ion is nc c Scripture-Ordinanation.' Again, in their Ju. SDiv. Mn. (b) they aflert, c That the People': * Call may determine a Perfon's Miniftry in at c efpecial Manner to themfelves ,• the regulai € Call confifts not barely in the Suffrages of th( € People, which makes a Perfon their Minifter c not a Minifter.—— A Probationer preacheth € that fa the People that are to chufe him ma] € hav< ■•<* (a) In the Preface to Jut Z)iv, Reg. (b) p, ( 57 ) € have Experience of his Gifts.** And there they declare, they are much and very much fox popu- lar Elections, as well as their Brethren in Ne\y England, and many in Old Englaid. Again, when fhewing that the People's Ele&ion gives Dot the Effence of the Minifterial Call, they fay, That, in Scripture, Ordination is held forth as the greater, and therefore not given to one and the lame Perfons, as appears from AEls 6. 3, 5. But, %dly, As to this of arguing from the lefs to the greater, if the Enquirer had pleafed to notice it, he had a direft Anfwer to it in jfus fopuli> where he was told, 1. That Deacons, as well as Paftors, arc Church-officers ; and in this they arealike. 2. It is a lefler Matter that People fhould be impofed upon in the* Choice of their Deacons, than in the Choice of their Pa- llors,- and, if they are to be latisfied about the one, much more about the other, which is of far greater Confequence unto them. But the Enquirer gives no Anfwer to that. If a leflet Intereft give me a Right, a greater Intereft doth it much more. Men of Learning and Judgment, who knew the Rules of juft Reafoning, have argued from this Topick; as Cyprian, and a Sy- nod withjhim : So the judicious T>urba?n (ays, This Scripture is a clear Evidence of the People's Intereft in their calling of a Minilter : So Calder- , Rntherfurd. And Grotius, tho* no great Friend to the People's Right, yet, upon Atts 14. 23. lays, Se.i o EkjBioni de qua agitur acceffijfje con(enftt7n plebis ere dt bile ob ii quod in re minor i intra habuimus, Acts 6. *> 3. ■ If the Confent of the People was requiftte in a lefler Aftair, to wit. the Choice of the Deacons, ■ ' c 3 ' i* . ■ ( 38 ) Afls 6. a, g. it is credible their Confent was re- quifite in the Choice of Paltors. And many o- thers might be cited to this Purpofe. He lays, € The Freeholders of a County have f a Right to chufe their Reprefentatives in Par- f Iiamept, but not to chufe their Sovereign, nor f any Officer £>f State/ Anf. I/?, The Confe- quence, according to himfelf, p. 45. is not good, being drawn from Civil Aftairs to Ecclefiaftick.' Men may give away of their Civil Right, which they cannot do without Sin in Spiritual Con- cerns. AsChrift's Kingdom is not of this World, fb his Houfe is not to be ordered accor- ding to the Pattern of Civil Government. And fo fays TiBet on this very Subjeft of electing Pallors, ■ affirming, < In Civil Society, where c their temporal good Things are under Confi- c deration, nothing hinders but People may re- € Ggri their Right abfolutely, to evite Confuli- * # on ; but, in that which concerns their Salva- c tion, the Faithful cannot abidutely part with ? their Right, without being criminal/ And tho' he thinks the People may allow the Right of Election to Minifters ,• yet, if they abufe the Power given them, he fays, I'he people may re* fime their Right of EleBion. As to what he fays of the People's being qua- lified for electing fuch as are to manage the Poor's Money, and yet not fit to judge of a Minifter's Aptnefs to teach them. Aiifiv. The People in- deed are not t6 try and judge of Qne's Learning and other Qualifications for the Miniftrv, this tore grant is the Presbytery's Right ; yet they can judge whether a Pallor's Gifts are futted to edi- fy them. And* as this was Selhrrnine's and : SHfon't :( 39 ) fiilfon's Qbjt&iw of old, fo the Enquirer had an Anfvvef to ic in jfm Topuli llivinam, confi- ning of fix or feven Pages ,• yet, feeing he could not overthrov .at .is there 4 he hath wifely paft it by. He lays , "But thh^ I j>afs 3 and come to that w,. be jv. Aged to be fatisfying (it feems he t nought v. hut he had (aid is not fo) And c our L ord, fays ke> had no fuch Officer, tho' c he had a i realurer ; that- theie was no fuch 1 Officer undtrth^Qld TeiiyHiciit, and that the e Apt gave up the Car Poor, becaufe ' they could no: get that Work attended/ hat he means by ail this, I know not ; and he hath not told us. Tho'our Lord had no fuch Offi- cer,noVVonJer; for then there was noconfrituted N ew-Tef tangent Church. What he fays of their having none fuch under the Old Teftament, is not to the Purpofe either ; for what was under that Difpeofation is no Rule to the Church in New-Teftament Days, elfe we behoved to have a 'Pontiff or high 'Priejl. 5. He fpeaks of the Apoities giving up the Care of the Poor. This is refufed ; the Deacons were to a6: in Conjun- Lion with them, their Office was defigned for their A (fi fiance. te. f He wants much to know whom c we are to underftand by the Multitude of the c Dilciples who were afTembled at this Time, to f whom the Apoities gave the Election, and c, He cannot think thefe could be their own c Converts, t r by that Time they were about f Eight thoufand, &c. A .41. Is it likely ' fo many Thoufands of People ihould be con- ! veen'd to chuie Seven PerionS to adminiflcr the C 4. Church's ( 40 ) f Church's finall Revenue ? Was it to be expe- f fted fo many different Perfons, of differen: * Tongues and Nations, would agree in fuch an f Ele&ion, when fc they wefre divided by their * Murmurings? May it not b£ thought, adds € he, that the Multitude pf Difciples now aC- f fembled were Chrift's Difciples, the Hundred * and twenty mentioned, Am i. 1%.' Vitringa tells him for certain; That the Multitude, there fpoken of, were the whole Chriftian People. Certe 2)iaconorum eleftio tota plebi Chrijtia- p# ab 4poftolis commiffa fuif, ipfis ekftos appro- iantibus i3 confirmantibus* Cyprian, who li- ved nearer the Apoftles Days, fays, Et convo- carunt Hit totafn plebem difcipukrum. And the Wefttninfter ' Affembly calls it the' Church which eleited ; for, in Anfwer to the 2)ijffen- ting Brethren, they fay, As for that Ordination, Atis 6. itie doubt not to fay, that in it they atted, fsfrtly as Apoftles, partly as Elders. In confli- cting an Office in the Church which "was not be- fore, they did att their Apojlolical Authority : But, in ordaining into that Office Men whom the Church had chofen, they did att as Presby- ters (a). ' Put the Enquirer will not fland to this, for he obje&s, € T^hat the Multitude of the People * at this Time was upwards of Eight thoufand, * aiid cannot think all thefe could be aflembled * to eleft feven Perfons to adminifter their Cha- * rity.' For Reply, I fay, Tho* we read of Three thoufand, Afts 1. 41. that were added t(3r $he Church, and of Five thoufand, Affs*. 4- yet (a) Pig. 5 f. • ( 41 ) ' yet fundry Divines of Note have thought the Five thoufand mentioned AEis 4. 4. were not di- fUnft from the Three thoufand mentioned Acts %. 41. but that they are included there ; as Ca- rnero, Tifcator, 2)ow72hame, and others. And Dr. Hammond takes the Five thoufand there to be, not the Number of Converts, but of the Hearejrs at that Time. The 'Dutch Annotati- ons (ay, either the Three thoufand Atts %. 41. being reckoned therein, or befides them Five thoufand more. But grant they were full Eight thou&nd converted at thofe Times, which was at the folemn Feaft of 'Pentecoft, when all the Males in Ifrael were to appear before the Lord at 'Jerufalem ; yet this will not fay they were all In- habitants in and about Jerufalem. Such as com- £ut<* the Number of them that came up from the and of Ifrael to the folemn Feafts, they reckon fhofe were mo by upwards of nineteen Parts than the Inhabitants of the- City Jerufakt Ht- car ens reckons the Inhabitants of Jerufalem to have been 120000; whereas the Whole of thofe who were prefent at the folemn Fe- flivals, have been computed ro be Three Mil- lions. Now, grant the Namber of Converts was far greater than Eight thoufand, yet, before fhe Election of the Deacons, moft of thofe Con- verts might be departed,, and gone to their re- fpedive Places of Abode, and fo the Meeting might not befo numerous by far as the Enquirer thinks. Indeed it is faid, Afis 2,. 5. That there ivere duelling at Jerufalem Jews, devout Men out of every h 'at ion under Heaven. But, as Dr. Wiw- ( 4* ) moni, Mr. Mead, and others have obferved, that the Greek Word kcltqikqvvtk, there rendr A to dwell, it fignifies not only 10 abide in ia PLice as Inhabitants, but alfo to fojourn. And to fake the Word for fuch as were Inhabitants,, would make the Scripture fpeak inconfiflentlyj'for/in the ninth Verfe of that Chapter/ it is feid of thofe devout Jews, that they were Dwellers in Mefopotamia, Judea, Capfadoclct^'Pontus^Afia^ *Phrygia, Paraphilia, &c. Now, they could not be Inhabitants in thofe Countries, and- at jferufa- km alfo : And, if Enfebins arid Epiphanius are to be credited,thep Forty Years after this th#C,iH- ftians in Jcrufalem were no more than what the fmall City Pella could contain, together with its own Inhabitants ; for thither they both teftify all the Chriitians fled, being warned by an Ang^l a little before the Deftru<5hon of jferufalem by the Romans. But farther, for Anf*er, TW we fhoul J grant all thofe Eight thoufand were preferit, and rrtade up the Multitude, I fee no Difficulty at all, or nothing that could occafion fuch Confufion or Diforderas the Enquirer fpeaksof ; for,upon the Apoftles enjoining them to look out and chufe Seven Men full of the Holy Ghoft, might not fome ftand up in the Ailembly and propofe a Leet immediately, or propofe that fome Jess and fome Grecians fhould withdraw a little, in order 'to name a Leet of Tuch as they judged meeteft for that Office i which Leet the Multitude might alter at their Pleafure, putting out, and putting in,«s they thought meet: And, if all agreed to their Leet, then, without any formal Vote, thofe might be prefented to the Apoftles. The ( 43 • ) The Enquirer fays, c It may be thought the r Multitude here fpoken of, were the Hundred c and twenty mentioned, A£ls t. 15. and that f which makes it probable, according to him > • is the Advice he gives them to look out Seven c Men among them/ull of the Holy Ghoft ; and € it doth not appear that the Holy Ghoit fell u- € pon others/ Anfwer, What may be m2y not be, and thus to expound the Scripture might make ftrange Work. And that the Hundred and twenty were the only Perfons on whom the Holy Ghoft fell In the Days of fentecoft, is as uncertain. We mult not think thefe only <^n be faid to be full of the Holy Ghoft, who had the Spirit gi- ven in an extraordinary Manner at the Feaft of Pentecofl. I wonder what the Enquirer w T iH make of the Apoftle's Exhortation, Epb. j. 18. where itl Chriftians are*commanded to be filled with tm Spirit. Rntkerfurd fays, This was to be a Rule to all Deacons to the World's End ; and I think the Continuator of Pool's Animati- ons upon A Els 6. 3. fays much the fame. And whereas he fays, c If this be the Cafe, viz. that c the Hundred and twenty were the Multitude > c then the Argument will not conclude/ But he fhould have demanded anotherToJlulatwx, name- ly, That all the Seventy were among the Hun- dred and twenty: And further, That they were all Churoh-officers ; and then pofito que- libet, feqnitur qupdlibet. € It may with great Appearance of Reafon bq thought, fays he (z)> that the Multitude the f Apofth •«•■■■■*■««■ ( a ) i 1 , ( 44 ) * Apoftle fpeaks to, were only fuch as contri- c buted to the JErarium, and common Treafu- c ry of the Church ; and furely the Poor who c were relieved and fupported out of \t had no € Claim to chufe/ Here he is fore pinched : Sometimes he makes the Hundred and twenty the Ele&ors, and fome- times, with Tiettarmine, he makes the Contribu- tors to the JErayium to be the Multitude who chufed the Deacons. But, may we not think that Rich and Poor contributed to the JErarium fomt more, fome lefs, as thp poor Widow her two Mites ? Befides, the giving to this Mrarinm cpuld not be the Oround of their having a Vote ; for, after their giving their Collection, it \ya$ np longer their own, as the Apoftle intimates to Antnias, Afts 5.4. While it remained, was it not your own ? and after it was fold, was it not in you* own Tower ? The Apoftle fpjaks to the Multitude, without diftinguifhing Between Rich and Poor. Tl}£ PjQqx were allowed a Share in the Choice of fuch as w^re to diftribute that Charity, to which they had a Right by their mean worldly Circumftances. In the Clofp of His Argument, he fays, € It is certain all the Difciples did not jeled: the Dea- c cons/ Anf. He fhould be afraid thus to contradi&thc Spirit of God, who fays, The Twelve called the Multitude of the 2)ifciples to t$em, and tht Saying pleafed the whole Multitude : Ahd they, V* the whole Multitude, chtifed, Sec. No piftinftion made between the Man with the Gold Ring and gay Clothing, and others in ineaner Apparel, <»r lower Circumftances. K his • his Argument were good, it would fay, thatf he who gave a Pound, fhould have more Votes than he who gave but a Peny to the Colle&ion on the Lord's Day. Again he fays (a), " It may be asked, if the € Apoftles left them to their full Liberty, and to * ufe their own Difcretion in the Choice / And ( f*yh ^ would feem not 5 for they limited 4 them to fuch as were full of the Holy Ghoft, € that is, thofe on whom the Holy Ghoft de- * fcended in the Days of Tentecofi ; and they c ^ere reftri&ed to the precife Number of Se- c ven. JJ But, is that a Limitation, that the Ele- ftors are required to chufc fuch as they judge meet for the Office ? Are not Presbyteries left: to their Freedom in chufing Members for the Allembly, tho* they mult chufe fuch as have iigned the Formula, and only a certain Num- ber ? Saong Reafoning ! We read of fuch Li- mitations, Exod. 18. 21. where they that havo the Election of M a gift ra ^es are reftri&ed to chufe fuch as fear the Lord, and hate Covet on fnefs. And Titus was to ordain fuch only as were blame- lefs (b). As to (c) their being reftrid:ed to fuch as the Holy Ghoft aefcended upon in the Days of SPe«- tecoft, this is anfwered already. Hath not every true Believer the Spirit of Chrift dwelling in him ? are not all Believers the Temple of thjs . Holy Ghoft which is in them (d) ? As the A- poftle fays, T'he Holy Ghoft is given to them that obey him, Ads 5. 52. Our (a) p. 59. (b) 'In. r. 5, <*■ (0) f. 59 (') Repi, 8. 9, 11. 1 Cor. ?. t*. Si? 6. 19. . ( 4^ ) Our Author is fuch an Enemy to the People's Right, that, rather than allow it, .he will dis- card an Office-Bearer which Chrift hath inftitu- ted ; for he denies that Deacons are Church-Of- ficers of 'Divine Inftitution, tho' nothing can be plainer from the Word of God, than that they are fuch* But this is a ConrroVerfy I fhall not meddle with at the Time ; only, concerning the Subject, Ijiotice two or three Tnings ; as, i. Our Author would have the Reader think, that Rntherfurd was of his Judgment here,ad- ducing the following Words from his Due Right- cf Presbyteries , faying,- So »ar as I can gather from his Reafoning in his Due Right of Presby- ter i es he does not maintain that the Deacon is a Church-officer. For, fays the Enquirer, his Words are, c It is not faid that Deacons € were ordained with Failing and Prayer, Acls € 6, as the Elders are chofen in every Churchy c A£ti 14. 13- and as Hands are laid on Waul and * Barnabas, A<5ts 13. 3, 4; but fimply, that the € Apoftles, Atts 6. 6. prayed a7id laid Hands on * them, which feemeth tome to be nothing but * a Sign of praying over the Deacons, and no c Ceremony or Sacrament conferring on them * the Holy Ghoft" But I cannot fee how it con- •fifted with a confeientious Enquiry or a fair Re- prefentation to fay, Rmherfiird*does not main- tain the Deacon is a Churfh-Officer. Tho' I tiave neither Pick nor Prejudice at the Enquirer's Perfon, be who be will; yet, might I ufe his own modeit Phrafe,7>/s isfiich a b&fe-facd Server- fmi, as I know not 'where the like rf it is to b$ fnet 'with. I fhall give you Rmherfitrtfs Words in that very ( 47 ) very Place or Context which the Enquirer cites; here,. after proving at fome Length the Divine Right of Ruling Elders, he comes {a) to treat of Deacons^ and he begins the Seftion with thefe Words, c We conceive, according to God's ; Word, Acts 6. that Deacons be of Divine In- : ftitution, becaufe, &c. ' And there he fays, Chriit by a positive Law upon good Grounds hath made the Pallor's Office and the Deacon's f Office diftind, A8s 6. 4 But npw, for Rut herf urns Words cited by :he Enquirer, which are narrated above, know, hat eminent Servant of Chr 2 His there anfwering m Objeftion, namely, ( 'Paul, 1 Tint. 3. *e- quireth that the Deacon, v. iu. fhould firft be tried, and thereafter ufe the Office, fo he be found blamelefs: JErgo, the Deacon muft be or- dained with Impofition of Hands ; and fo muft be by Office ibme more eminent Perlon than one who ferVeth Tables only ; for Grace was given to timothy by the laying on of Hands, 1 ffim. 3. 14, &c Mr. Jamefon and undry others have thought (a) it is an Omifli- j>n that Deacons and all Church -Officers are not prdained with the Impofition of Hands : Yet, f Rut her fur A was ot a different Mind in this, t will no mare fay he was againft the Divine "nltitution of the Deacon's Offico, than it will Drove the I fur's eight raojl wife and reflate lers of Fife were a^ainft the Presbyter's Jffice being of Divine Jnititu ion, becaufe they ay, Impofition of Hands in their Ordination is ot ejfential nor neccjfary, but ceremonial and indiffe- («) A t j*. (b) Sim of ppif p. $ j. indifferent {a). And whereas he cites Rut her* furd's Words in the Foot of that 159 Page, fay- ing, c Further, the laying on of Hands was ta- r ken from the Cuitom of Bleffing among the € Jews: Chrift laid his Hands upon young € Children and bleffed them ; yet he did not: c thereby defigri them to any Office." It would! be cenfidered, in thefelaft cited Words, Ruther- fitrd is not arguing againft, but for, the Divine Inftitution of the Deacon's Office; only he thinki Imposition of Hands is not eflential ; and, for Proof of his Opinion, fliows ; that fometimes this might be when none Was fet apart to any Of- fice. Now, any impartial Perfdn upon reading Rn« therfurd in that Place, viz. from Page 159 to Page 171, mud be convinced the Enquirer hath riot dealt fo very fairly with that Reverend Au- thor, as was to be wifh'd. For Profeflor Ru~\ terfurd, in the laft Claule of his Anfwer to this] very Objeftion where the Enquirer would make him declare againft the Deacon's Office, fays, € As concerning the Deacon's Office, I Conceive, € that Deacons rrtuft be as permanent in the € Church, as Diftribution and (hewing Mercy c oti the Poor/' And to that vety Place I re- fer the Reader for a Solution and Anfwer to all the Enquirer objefts againft the Divine Infti- tution of the Deacon's Office :*Arid I am apt to think, he hath taken his Exceptions from that very Place where Rutherfurd is anfwering to them. Next "(a) CaM.B&. p. && and other Churches/ For Reply, i. Whereas he fays, We read not of Deacons in the Church of Rome* Antioch, Galatia, Co~ tofs, and other Churches, and therefore would infer, there were no Deacons in thofe Churches J this (hikes equally againlt the Ruling Elders Of- fice 3 becaufe they are not mentioned in fuch and fuch Epiftles ; yea,, againft the Office both of thd breaching and Ruling Elders, for I think wd find no Mention of either in the fecond Epiftle to the T'hejfalonians. 2. As to what he fays of the Church of Scotland, namely, That (hcfee?/?s nop to have a pofitive Opinion that ^Deacons are Church-Officers ; it may tempt one to think the Enquirer cannot be a Minifter of this Church, elfe he is very unacquainted with her Conftituti- on ; or he fpeaks at Random without confide- ring what he fays, or fpeaks contrary to his Light. If we look into the Book cf common Order, Chap. 5. there we have an Account of their Office, and their Qualifications particulari- zed ; and there Scriptures are adduced to prove what is aflerted anent their Office, viz. Afts 6. i,—5. i 'Tim. 3.8, 13. Rem. 12. 7,8- Again^ if we look into the firft "Book of Difcipline^ Head 8. there we have an Account of their Qua!- D Iifica- (a) $. 6\. *0* ( S<= ) lifications for, and Ele&ion to that Office Again, the 2d Book of Z)ifcipli?ze; Chap. 8, fays, c The Office of the Deacon is an ordinary c and perpetual Eccleflaftical Function in the € Kirk of Chriji; of what Properties and Du- * ties he ought to be, we remit to the manifelt € Scripture. This, as our Author tells us, is the Book to which we are folemnly fworn by the "Rational Covenant. Again, the Order of the Eleffion of Elders find ^Deacons in the Church of Edinburgh, men- tioned by the Enquirer here, which was appro- ven by the General Aflembly 1582, clearly inti- mates,the Church of Scotland looked upon 2)ea* com to be an Order and Office of ChrifFs Infti- tution ,• for there the whole Congregation are allowed their Vote in the Ele&ion of Elders and Deacons, and no Mzn,rich nor poor, was to lefpoiled of his Liberty in Eleffion : And, at their Admiffion by that Order, they were admo* nifhed to confider of the ^Dignity of that Voca* tion whereunto God had called them, and of the ^Danger that lay upon them if found negligent \ in that their Vocation. Sy that Order (fays the Enquirer) the Election is given to the Communi- cants, and not to the Multitude. J\nd this is the very fame I plead for in Jtts IPopuli 2)i- vinum. Are not Communicants the Multitude of Believers? As none of us that plead the People's Right are for a promifcuous Admiffion to the Lord's Table, fo neither are we for a promifcu* ous Admiffion to this Privilege. Again, the General Aflembly 158*, in their fixth Seffion, affirm> There are four ordinary Office- r ( 51 ) , Office-bearers fet down to us in the Scriptures; to wit, Pallors, Do&ors, Elders and Deacons. Again, the General Aflembly 1645, in appro- ving the Form of 'Presbyterian Cburcb-Govetn- mm, agreed upon by the Aflembly of Divines it Weftminfter, aflerts in the plained Terms, Deacons are Officers in the Church of Chrift^ yhofe Office is perpetual : Their Words are, The Scripture doth hold out Deacons as di- ftinft Officers in the Church, Tbil. 1. r. 1 Tim. 3. 8. whofe Office is perpetual, 1 71m 3. 8, to v. 1 5. Jffs 6. 1, 2, 3^ 4. to whofe Of- fice it belongs, not to preach the Word of ad- minifter the Sacraments, but to take fpecial Care in diftributing to the Neceflities of the Poor, Atts 6. 1, 2, 3, 4, and the Verfes fol- lowing/ Further, does not the Enquirer know there is late Ad: of AfTembly enjoining alJ Parifhes to lave Deacons ? and hath enj3ined, that Mini- ters be asked fundry Times a Year,whethfcr they iave Deacons in their Parifhes ? The Author of be modefi and free Conference having affirmed^ yith our modeft Enquirer, Deacons in the Church >f Scotland are not of Divine Inftitution, but .ay-perfons, becaufe they want Impofition of lands ,• The Author of the True Non-confor- m(i y which is owned, I think, by all, to have een that eminent Perfon Sir James Stewart^ ate Lord Advocate, in Anfwer to the Author •f that Modeft Conference (a), fays, € Reallyj Sir, I fhouid be forry tkat you were as well known to be a Calumniator, as the DeacbnS D z [ ufed (a) P. ( ** ) * ufed in our Church are clearly founded in out ' Bibles y their Inftitution, Afts 6. is plain/ When in any particular Church of this Na- tion Deacons are ordained, the Apoftolick Practice of laying Hands on them, is not regarded lays the Enquirer (a), but laid aiide ; for which there can be no Reafbn, if they are Church-Officers. For Reply, The Argument ftrikes equally a- gainft Ruling Elders. The Church of Scotland in the ift Chap, of her Form of 'Procefs affirms, € It is agreeable to, and founded upon, the Word * of Gqd, that there be Ruling Elders to join € with the Minifters of the Word in the Govern- r ment of the Church and Exercife of Difci- c pline :" But fhe never declared Impofkioii of Hands to be neceflary in that .Cafe ; how- ever, for my Part, I think it is lawful, and -would be denrable, that both Elders and Dea- cons were fet apart by Impofition of Hands, tho* I cannot fay this is abfolutely neceflary to their being Office-bearers in Chrift's Houfe. Our Author,having mentioned the AA of Af- fembly 1^42/ which gives the Eledion of Dea- cons not to the Multitude but to the Seffion,, lays (£), € The Ufe he makes of that ASt isj c That, fince our Church does not look on the c Manner of the Election of Deacons mentioned * A6fs 6. as a Conftitution efiablifhed by the' € Apoftles to be obferved in all the fucceeding! c Ages of the Church (for if, they did, would * they make a Canon dire&ly oppofite to that c of the Apoftles ?) and, fince by their Practice c they think it not neceflary that Deacons fhould < be r- fc^— ^— <»— — ^— m n -m n ij fc i i n — w^m <— — — —— — ( u ) be elefted by the Multitude of the Difciplas, let me %sk, how an Inference can be drawn from this,, That therefore the People have a Right to chufe their own Paftors t For Reply, I fuppofe all the AfTembly meant >y that A&, was only this, That the Seffion hould have the firft Nomination of fuch Elders )r Deacons as fhould be taken into the Seflion, eaving ftiil a Liberty to the Congregation to add )r alter as they law meet; and,iffo, tho* that \d may differ from what the Apoftles did, it m\\ not be in direft Contradiftion to it ; But, as o the Ufe he makes of that Aft, it fays, We muft look upon the Church of Scotland asinfal- ible, and that her Practice is to be our Rule,tho* (he make Canons and Afts direBly contrary to Apoftolical Traftice. But, for my Part, I chufe rather to fay, The Church of Scotland, or any o- ther particular Church in the World, hath erred, or may err, rather than fay, any Church upon Earoh is to be regarded in her Decifions, if di- rectly contrary' to the Practice of the Apoftles of Cbrtft. In his Tnblick < Tejlimony made more publick y p. 44. he calls Seza a Miracle of Learning, fay- ing, All the Reformed Churches have paid the greatejl ^Deference to his Sentiments ; and then he cites him, faying in his 83 Epiftle, ' That c which is alledged from the Accounts of the E- € leftion of Matthias and the Deacons, is not to c the Purpofe, as is abundantly proven by the c French Churches, in their publick Synods, a- c gainft Morellus and his Party/ But hath our Enquirer fuch a Veneration for him, as that he will itand to Seza's Sentiments as to ths Elefti- D 5 on ( 54 ) pu of Pallors ? I fancy not ; or, if he will, then he piay lee hi$ Annotations on this Placi of Scrip- ture, where he fays, The Apoftles would not fo inuch as chufe the Deacons without the Confent of the Church: And in his Confejjton of Faith, Chap. 5. he is dire&ly oppofite to him ; for there he &y$ y Tslunquam receptum eft, &c. c It was! € never the Cuftom in Chriftian Churches alrea- * dy conftitute, that any Man fhould be admit- 1 * ted to any Ecclefiaftical Function, unlefs he were freely and lawfully chofen by the Church * particularly concerned ; and therefore all that ? Trade and Trafficking of Prefentations, the iPlenqm Jus of Patronages., Collations, Dirnif- c lions, and other wicked Corruptions of that Nature, owe their Original entirely to the De- * yiU And, even in that Epiftle, Seza is not fpeaking againft the People's Right to eled ; only he is againft leaving all to the Suffrages of a pro- inifcuous Multitude,, which we are alfo againft. And any Thing Seza fays in that Letter, may be of lefs Weight, if we confider his ^oftfcrip to it, where he fays, T'freodorm Seza fententiam roga- tus breviter> nee adeo meditate hdec defcriffi tit argument i pondus, £f? rei magnitudo reqairebat. In Conclufion to this Argument, he fays (a), * And now, when their chief and principal Ar- c gument for Popular Election is examined, I ff am confident, that every intelligent Reader will f pbferve the Weaknefs of it ; nay, that it is no ? Proof at all.' Anpw. Who told him this is our chief and principal Argument ? That it is a clear and ftrong Argument, we grant, but have not deter- t*-mm9m (zJTaxees. determined whether it be our principal Argument or not. He is confident, every intelligent Reader will obferve the Weakneis of this Argument, nay, that it is no Proof at all ; but I am confident, unbiafled Readers will fee, he hath not taken oft' the Force of this Argument, nor meddled with what is of Force in it ; as particularly, that, had not this been defigned as a Precedent to the Church olChnd in the Election of Office-Bear- ers in After-times, the Apoftles, who were infal- lible in their difcerning of Gifts and Qualifications for an Office, had nominated and eledted the feven Deacons, without putting themlelves to the Trouble of calling the Multitude of the Dif- ciples together, or oi putting the Multitude to :he Trouble of meeting and chufing feven Men, #hom upon their Choice they i were to ordain. Whether this Writer hath not been fo well pleafed with his Reafoning upon this and the fub- fequent Arguments as on the former, or whe- ther from fome other Spring,I fhall not fay ,• but le hath not been fo thankful to the only wife God> or enabling him to reafon here nor hereafter, as formerly. In his Reafoning here, he is oppofite, if I mi- take not, to all Tresbyterians that ever wrote jpon the Subject ; yea, and to the Throng of ^roteftant Divines, who have reckoned the Con- jquence, from the Multitude's chufing the Dea- :ons, valid to prove the People have the Right )f ele&ing their own Paflors • as Cyprian, Cal- )in, Chem?iitim> Calder-ixooi, Rutbcrfur.i, Gil* 'efpie, Durham, Tark, Ruk, Forrejler ; lb Alarkitts, Turretine, 'Piflet, Manton and, I uppofe, all, or moft of thefe Divines mentioned D 4 in ( j* ) in the former Argument, and many mo that might be particularized. I add one more, name Jy, Dr. Wall a learned Church of England Di- vine, in his critical Notes upon lome feled: Place: of Scripture, a Book publifhed in 1730, who. vpon Afts 6. 3. (ays, c The Apoftles would no 1 f chufe the Men themfelves, — — but left tty c Choice of the Men to the Body of the People f According to this Pattern, fays he, the Primi- * tiye Church in the Age next to the Apoftles * always made Ufe of the Suffrage of the People c ip the Election of their Church- Officers, no* * only of Deacons, but of their Presbyters, anc * efpecially of their Bifhops. The Bifhop o € any Diocefs appointed or ordained fucb Pref * byters as the People by their general Suffrage c approved of/ And, having given an hiftorical , Account of the Original of (Patronages, fhew- Ing, that at firft the (Patrons were Lawiers. which the Church had chofen to defend theii Right againft Enemies ; c Thefe Lawiers, fay. * he, in Procefs of Time, claimed and got the * Right and Power of Nomination of the Curate. * or Encumbent to the Parifh which they ferved * or defended ; and,which is the worft of all, this € Right to him, his Heirs or Affignies for ever : c So that, tho' he were a good Man (as *tis not * likely the Church would chufe a known f Knave) yet his Heir in Procefs of Time, or his * or their Aflignies ffor this Rights which from ? advocatus they call an Advocation or Advoiv- ' fon, is as faleableas a Horfeina Market) would ? be many Times fome of the vileft of Men, 5 fometimes a profane Atheift, fometimesa Here- of tick,, fometimes a Hater of God and all Reli J gion ( J7 ) . , gion, fometimes a Petty-Fogger, fometimes a le^vd Ale-houfe Keeper ; this is the Man that fhall, in Spite of the Bifhop, in Spite of the People, nominate the Curate that fhall have the Care of their Souls. A Bifhop himfelf, who is by God charged with this Office of lending Labourers to his fpiritual Harveft, had need to tremble for Fear, left he whom he lends fhould do more Hurt than Good to the Souls of the People. Where then will thefe Intruders ap- pear, who, without any Commiffion from the Scripture, determine of the Capacity of a Per- fon for an Office, of which they have no Skill or Knowledge, and yet muft know, that the Welfare or Benefit of many Souls depends up- on it ?* And then this Author fays with Regret, How far are w 7 e gone from the Pattern of this Text (viz. Afts 6. 3.) the Example of Apoftles and thole full Chriftians in chufin& Officers for holy Duty I SECT. IV. In which the Arguments adduced by fome> from Afts 13. 1, 2, ^.and Adts 16. 9, 10. are confin dered. A Third Argument, fays the Enquirer (a), * *• brought by fome Writers, is taken from a particular M'flion of Paul and "Barnabas to go and preach the Gofpel to the Gentiles, Acts 13. 1, 2> 3. He fays,* The Argument formed from % this Paflage is this, If thefe Prophets and ' Teachers (») v. 63. -• . ( -J* ) r Teachers did minifter before the Lord in the f Church of Antioch, furely the People attending c on the Ordinances difpenfed by them, c joined with them in Fading and Prayer ; and e in this Miflion the People concurred and gave c their Confent ; and,if the People's Confent was c needful in the appointing of Minifters to a cer- € tain and particular Work in the Church, they c have a Right to call and eled: them to the Mi* ? niftry itfelf/ Here I obferve, I/?, Our Author in citing this Scripture, he hath left out thofe Words, There were in the Church that was at Antioch ; and thofe Words, As they fafied. The People's 4 Confent to the fending of 'Paul and Barnabas ^ is drawn from the Church's being aflembled with Barnabas, Simeon, Sec. while they miniftred ta the Lord, and while the Church was imployed with them in the folemn Work of Fajling, the Holy Ghofi faying to them, viz. to Minifters and People together, Separate me Paul and Barnabas. The Enquirer after (minijlring unto the Lord) adds (viz. in 'Prayer, Reading, and 'Preaching of the Word, and difpenfing the Sacrament \ but keeps out Fajling, tho* exprefly mentioned in the Text : Did he this on Defign to hide the Force of the Argument ? 2. He tells us, c 'Paul ( and Barnabas were Church-Officers before this c Appointment ; fo that the Separation of them f by Prayer, Fatting, and Impoiition of Hands, c fpoken of in the Text, cannot be meant of c their Ordination.* Anfw. I readily grant it, and this ftrengthenstheArgument for the People's Confent in what was done at that Time. 3. This Argument is dropt by fome, particularly by the Author ( 19 ) Author of^us Topuh, lays he., c Who has done c wifely, this being an Argument uftd by the In- c dependents for eltablifhing their main Principle ; c namely, That the People have a Right in the € Government of the Church/ If that Author paffed this Argument upon fuch a Coniideration, then the Enquirer might forborn to accufe him, as favouring the Independent Scheme (a). He affirms, c The Holy Ghoft acquainted the Pro- c phets in the Church of Antioch with the Per- c fons by Name, and required them, and not the t People, to feparate v ?^w/ and Barnabas' Now, in Anfwer, That the Holy Ghofi laid it only to the Prophets, or that thefe Prophets only iepa- rated them to that Work, is not proven ; it is as probable the Holy Ghojl fpake to the whole Church ; and their joining in Prayer and Falling on that Occafion, after the Command of fepa- rating them, may be conftru<£ted a giving of their Confent. I know not if Independents make Ufe of this Argument, buc neither Amefws nor Dr. Owen argue from it, fo far as I can ob- ierve. Next,he comes to confider^<5?j 16 9,10. where it is laid, And a Vifion appeared to Paul in the Night : T'here ftood a Man of Macedonia, and frayed him, faying, Come over into Macedonia, and help us. And after he had feen the Vifion, immediately ive endeavoured to go into Macedo- nia, afifuredly gatherings that the £ord had called as for to preach the Gofpel unto the/. c This is a Text, our Author fays (b), many, f with a great deal of Ignorance, mention now- c a-day$, « - « - - 1 , . (a) Jfytcndix?. (b) p. 65. ( 60 ) t a-days, as a Proof of a popular Call. The * Glofs, fays be, which many weak People c put upon this Text is, That this was an In- c vitation by a real Macedonian to the Apoftle € to come and be their Minilter, &c' Now here I remark, i. Our Author hath ex-* aftly learned the Dialed: of high Church and RomaniftSy who charge all who difter from them with great Ignorance. c Obferve, fays Dr. Fulk € (a), the intolerable Pride of thofe Popifh In- * terpreterSj that challenge to themfelves all c Learning and Knowledge in Divinity , andcon- c demn all other Men of Ignorance,and mere Ig- c norance.' 2. He lays, c Many weak People c think this Invitation was given by a real Man € of Macedonia? But I queftion if he can name the Man that either faid, or thought ftv 3. Whereas he fays, c This of a Call by one Mace- € donian, would cut the Throat of our Favpu- c rite-Opinion, and give the Call to one Man, c and fo give Countenance fo a Prefentation/ Anpuo. This Inference will not hold : 1. May not one Man in Vifion reprefent many, as in the Angel of the Churches } :Rev. 2. 2. Or, might not one Man bear a Commiffion from the Body of the People to invite, in their Name? The Words are, Come over into Macedonia and help m. He reckons thcfe weak and ignorant who argue for the People's Right from that Text ; but I can point him to two Divines, not much inferior to himfelf in Learning, &c. who have argued to this Purpofe. He may look to Henry on the Text, who fays, c Chrift would have . , , "Paul ■* m (a) On Heb, 5. 6. againft the Rbemfts^ 734, ( tl ) Paul AireGied thither, not as the Apoftles were ar other Times, by a MefTenger from Heaven to fend him thither, but by a MefTenger from thence to call him thither ; becaufe in that Way he would afterwards ordinarily ditcA the Men tions of his Minifters, by inclining the Heart* of thofe who need them to invite them. Paul fhall be called to Macedonia by a Man of Ma- cedonia, and by him fpeaking in Name of the reft/ There was prefented to Paul's Eyes, or to his Mind, a Man of Macedonia. The Angel muft not preach the Gofpel himfelf to the Macedonians, but muft bring Paul to them ; nor muft he by the Authority of an Angel order him to go, but in the Perfon of a Macedoiiian court him to come. A Man of Macedonia, not a Magiftrate of the Country, much lefs a Prieft ; Paul did not ufe to re^ ceive Invitations from fuch : But an ordinary Inhabitant of the Country; a plain Man, that carried in his Countenance Marks of Probity and Serioufnefs. J And his Note upon the oth Verfe is, * We may fometime infer a Call of God from a Call of Man. If a Man of Macedonia fay, Come and help us, from thence Paul gathers afluredly, that God faith, Go and help them. Minifters may go on with a great deal of Cheerfulnefs and Courage in their Work, when they perceive Chrift cal- ling them, not only to preach the.Gofpel, bm to preach it at this .Time, in this Place, to this People/ The other is Dr. Alanton ; fee his Sermon on Heb. n. 8. (a) c Befides authorita- tive (a) Page 347, v wj mm ( 6i ) five Miffion, there is an Election or Call front the People. • ~ It is notable in haul's Vifion, fays ke> the Call is not managed of God, but by a Man of Macedonia y A&s 16. 9. And a Vifion af feared I to Paul in the Nighty &c. Only j if a People be not in a Capacity to chufe, then an authoritative Miffion is e- nough, and we muft preach whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear, as ZPaiil and Barnabas were fent from the Elders of Antioch to go to the Gentiles, A£is iy Dr. Bates, in a Sermon at his Death, gives him. a high Character for extraordinary Knowledge of the Scriptures, and Jays, c The Doftor faw the 1 Difference between true Holinefs and the moft refined unregenerate Morality, and fpake with great Jealoufy of thefe who feemed in theif Difcourfes to make it their higheft Aim to im- prove and cultivate fome moral Virtues, as Ju- ftice, Temperance, Benignity, &c. by philo* fophical Helps ; reprefenting them as becoming the Dignity of our Nature^agreeable to Reafon, and beneficial to Society ; and but tranfiently fpeakingof the Operations o the Holy Gholt, which are as requifite to free the Soul from the Chains of Sin, as to releafe the Body at laft from theBands of Death ;whofeldom preach of Evan- gelical Graces, Faith in the Redeemer^ the Love f God, or his admirable Wifdom in our Sal- ation, Zeal for his Glory, Humility, in afcri- birig all we can return., in grateful Obedience to the frioft free and powerful Grace of God in Chrifl:, which are the vital Principles of good Works, and derive the nobleft Forms to all ? Virtues/ But of this in the £y. SECT. •? ( c preffing the profane Ufe of the Greek Word € more than it will bear, tranfiate thus^ Ordained € by Election? Hence we may remark by the Way j That the People's' Right to eleft their own Pa-» ftors is a c Proie(tant Principle, and a Principle of the Reformation. But the plain Meaning of the Words under Confederation is, T'hat when the People by giving their Suffrages had choj}?t to rhemfelves Elders, Paul and Barnabas ordained them with Prayer and Fafting, and commended them to the Lord in whom they believed. Patil and ( *i ) and Barnabas ordained Elders or Paftors in eve- ry Church by Suffrages, viz. the Suffrages of the Church, the Suffrages of the Difciples or of tfi6 People. And to this Purpofe Calvin, Sez4 and Stillingef render the Words ; fo the Tigurlnt Verlion, Tagnin's Verfion, Flaccus IllyriaiSi Vatablus, ErafmuSj *Pifcator, and the IJiitch Tranflation, which is reckoned very juft ; It is to this Purpofe ; And when they in every Church Vcitb lifting up of Hands had chofen thetU El- ders, having prayed with Faffing, they coin- mended them to the Lord in whom they believed, Our old Tranflation is, And when they had or* iained them Elders by Election in every Co /;- iregatien, and had prayed andfafted, they Com* ed them to the Lord in whom they believed, Fulk, in Anfwer to the Rhemijis, fays of bur )ld Tranflation, 7/ is true, Ordained by Eleflioi^ vid anfwereth to the Greek Word. And, as I [flowed in JnS TopuliDivinum (a), It was not :he Fault of our Tranjlators that the Verfion of his Verle was altered, but it was done by forns Prelates afterward; as Dr. "thorn as Hill (Matter of Trinity College in Cambridge, and a Member of :he Wcfltninfter Affembly) tells us, c I have ; : fays he, from certain Hands, fuch as lived in f thefe Times, That, when the Bible was trank r lated by the Tranflators appointed, the New : Te'ftament was lookt over by fome of the £ : Prelates (Men I could name of their Perlons} : to bring it to fpeak Prelatick Language ; and c they did alter fourteen Places of the New T c (lament, to make them fpeak the Language of E ' t\ ( 66 ) c the Church of England. 3 And then he in* ftanceth four in this Book of the Atts, and this is one of them, which (fays he) in the Geneve Tranflation was rendered, chofen by Suffrage*.. hy lifting tip of Hands \ the Word primarily importing it. That fometimes the Word yj*\*rmn fignifies to ordain or eled: by Suffrages, the Enquirer owns, but fays, Sometimes it fignifies to ordain, create or elect, where there were no Suffrages at all ; and (b) gives a certain Rule to know when the Word does fignify to ordain or chufe by Suffrages, viz, c That, whenever it is affirmed c of many Perfons, it muft have this Significati- € on, becaufe the giving of Suffrages can only be c where there is a Number or many ; but then, c whenever I find the Word affirmed of only c one or two Perfons^ then it cannot fignify to c ordain by Suffrage, but limply to ordain or r elect/ No doubt, this Axiom^s he fays,is of his own laying down. But, as the Author of IP0- ftili fnffragia fays (c), c No Inftance can be c given fince the Foundation of the World, € where this was received as an Axiom.' And, becaufe the Enquirer thinks his bare Affertion is enough, he lays down another Protofition^ which he affirms can no more be difapproved than the former Rule, which is, That no Word ca?i fig- nijy any more 'Perfons than thofe of whom it is etfprejly affirmed. € Now, %eipoTovY}<7&m$ is ex- * prefly affirmed of Paul and Bar7zabas, and € of no other : How then can it fignify here, c that they ordained Elders with Suffrages of the € People? •■*'"- ■ ,— ■ i — , t ■ ■ m i'f i i i l l r 1— ( *7 ) People ? Is not this to affix a Signification to the Word; which it cannot bear in the Text c J ^o doubt, the Church of Rome owei him :anks for this Propofition : For, if it hold iniverfally, it will demonftrate, that, when out >ord faid unto (Peter, Thou art Peter, and unto. e will I give the Keys of the Kingdom of 'haven; and vchatfoever thou fbalt bind o?z Earthy Jhall be bound in Heaven ; and "johatfo- ver thou floalt hofe on Earthy pall be loofed iri leaven (a) ; that Grant belonged to (Peter only^ xclufive of the other Apoftles : And we kno\y le Gentleman at Rome pretends to be (Peter S nly rightful Heir and SuccefTor in this. He fays, € If he can prove both from facred and profane Authors, that the Word yji&Tovn- G&\m<; is ufed limply to ordain or ele<5t without Suffrages, then the confident Aflertior, laid down in the Argument, That one Inftance out of a facred or profane Author cannot hi given, where it is given in any other Senfe than to ordain or chufe by Suffrages, muft fall to the Ground, and thefe who made this Afler- tion muit be alhamed or convinced of their Rafhnefs/ Anfxe I know none who lay down the Dnfident AflTertion he mentions ; but not a few e faid what this Author has not been able td jnfute, namely, That no one I nftance can be iven out of facred or profane Authors of the Vord's being taken in another Senfe at that Timtf /hen the Evangelift Luke wrote the A£ts ofiht 7/c/v This hath been avowed by iundi'y E 2 emi- •+ m m ;. t6 18, i? t ( *% ) eminent Divines; as Calderwood, who, in his Altare Damafcenum, fays (b), c It is not cre- * dible the Evangelilt Luke would have affixed c a new Signification to the Word, qua ante e eum Graeci autores nunquam zifi funt, which c had never been ufed by the Greek Authors be- e fore him/ So Mr. Gillefpie (c) and Mr. Oli- ver Bowles (d) both Members of the Weftmin* fter Aflembly. So Cart-wright on the Rhemill* Tranflation of the New Teltament, upon this Text he fays (e)> c It is abfurd to imagine that r the Holy Ghoft by Luke, fpeaking with the* c Tongues of Men, that is to fay, to their Un- € derftanding, fhould ufe a Word in that Signi-J € fication in which it was never ufed before his * Time by any Writer, holy or profane : For, € how could he then be underflood, if ufing the c Note and Name they ufed, he fhould have fled c from the Signification whereunto they ufed it ? r Unlefs therefore his Purpofe was to write that c which none fhould read, it mufl needs be, c That, as he wrote, fo he meant, the Eledion € by Voices/ And a good deal more he hath to this purpofe, affirming, c The GreekScholiafl c alfo and\Ignatius do plainly refer this Word &o c the Choice of the Church by Voices/ And Seza, whom our Enquirer calls a Miracle for Learning, he gave Cartwright this Teftimony, That he did not think there was a more learned Man under the Sun. But, were Cart-wright, Cal- derwood, Gillefpie and Bowles alive at this Day, our Modeft Enquirer would fill them with Shame for •^•■mwwmO ^— — ^— c^-».. — >■ i ■ i n «ifca» (b) p. 329. (c) Eke. of Rafters, p. 11, (d) . ( 6 9 V for their Rajhnefs, putting them extremely to the Blufh : But his Endeavours to expofe the Sentiments of our ableft Proteftant Divines to Contempt and Ridicule, muft recoil upon him- felf. Now, that x^y™*** * n * ts ^ r ^ anc * P ro per Signification, is to eleft by Suffrages and ftretch- ing forth the Hand, is owned by the mod lear- ned Philologifls and Criticks ; as Suicerus in his ^thef auras Ecelefiajiictis epatribm Gratis, prin- ted 1689, wlio tells us, Antiquiffimis tempori- busy &c. c That in the moft antient Times the Bifhops were chofen # by the whole Church, confining of Paftors and People/ And fays (#)> T * x&&rw£u prima & propria figni fie at io- tie, &c. in its firft and proper Signification, de- notes to elecft by Suffrages with itretching forth of the Hand ; laying, This U(e of the Word continued long in the Church. So the learned Salfamon, Zonaras and others ; yea, %e/larmine himfelf owned it. The Enquirer eflays to prove, the Word is otherwife ufed both in facred and profane Au- thors j and for Scripture he brings AEis 10. 40, 41. where, fays he, c The infpired Hiftorian f Lake ufes the Word concerning God. The r Words are, Him God raifed tip the third c T)ay 3 and fiewed him openly, not to all the € 'People, but unto Wttnejfes chofen before of € God, T&Y.-r/jci&joviv-zvQti : He is fpeaking of the c ApofHes, v/ho were chofen immediately by € 7 e f us Chrijij without the Suffrages of any Per- E 3 ' fon (a/ Col. 1 512. ( 70 ) t Ton whatsoever. Jefus Chrift, who is God as f well as Man, was here the fole Eie&or.* But he ftarts Objections of new, as if they had never been anfwered. Does he not know JMr. Gillefpie and others had anfwered this ? yet he takes no Notice of it : Is this like a candid Enquirer $ He tells ns, Mr. Gilleffie ftriiggles like a Man in Tangs, of Death \ but dares not attempt to anfwer his Reafoning, who fpeaks| thus (a): i As for the Objection from ABs iqJ * 4i- ?r&x ei & Tma ' l$ not ^ e ^ ame w ^^ X e ^ TWiA M\ * but as it were the preventing of x^™ 1 * by * a prior Deflgnation. - 2. It is there attributed ? to God jjLiTcti)cr* imports t 3 as more fully appears by thac Pamphlet. 2. The Enquirer cites Philo ufing this Word :oncerning Mbfes, when he was ordained or cho- en Ruler of Ifrael, which ((ays he) was nop ?y the Suffrages of the liraelites, but by God Hone. * And in the fame Book, fiys he, Philo ipeaking ot the Prielts the Sons of Aaron, kpev z/i&&T3y&i, he (t. e. Afofes) ordained Priefts; this was when he confecrated them by the Di- rection of God, without the Suffrages of the People. * Anfi The forefaid Author fhows, thefe Cita- ions are not in the firft, but third, Book of Philo. . He hySyA/nbabt/s his exceptiombus contextum 'hilonis oppono> &c. ' To both thefe 1 ptions 1 oppone the Context in Philo > who fiys, Mo- ( 70 * fes was chofen to the Royal Dignity Obr he * ufes this Word fometimes of Mofes) not only f by Godo but alfo by the People/ And there he proves his Aflertion at fome Length, citing ZPhilo, laying, E re tQm yvufjwf, &c He ordained them with the common Sentence of the whole Nation. ' And as to his Citation from Maocimus Tyrim, that Author anfwers to this, That, if the Words be rightly rendered, they are io far from helping the Enquirer, that they are a new Argument, confirming, that the Word %#£?roj/ea> Cgnifies to ek£i by the Suffrages of the 'People, fhowing, That the Words of Mnximus Tyrius ought to be rendered, c fhe Perfians did not eleB\ Darius by their Sttffrages > till once the wantonl Morfe eletted him by his Suffrage. And a great deal more he hath in Anlwer to this and the other Exceptions ftarted by the Enquirer againft our Argument from this Text, to which I refer the Reader. And for this Exception from MaA ecimus Tyrius, I need not infift upon it, feeing) the Enquirer owns this Author lived after thej Apoftles Days, in the Days of Antoninus 'Pius \ he fhould have rather faid, in the Days of his SuccefJor Mark Antonine, to whom he was Tu- tor. And, tho* never fo many fnftances could bd given in later Authors that the Word x * Word jc#p0TOW*rr5f. Anfiv. I grant Ordi- nation is included j but then it was an Ordination after the giving of Suffrages by the People. yey/Tw*.u is compounded of 'ye.p the Hand, and vetva to ftretch out ; but it denotes, not ImpoGti- on of Hands by Ordination, but ftretching out the Hand in Election. Here I think the Enquirer may confider what his own Marejius fays, namely, c That yer c foroviet properly iignifies an Election which is e by Suffrages ; Which, fays he, if any fhail de- c ny, he difcovers his own plentiful Ignorance; c And,iffometimes;/e;po70!'iTs* is retained : Yea^ltho* c we (hould underftand by this Word, an Ad: of c *Paul and Barnabas alone, diftincSl from the c Church's Surh a^e andConfent,even in thacSenfe * we lofe not the Argument : For, iff, It can- 4 not be fuppoied that the Bufinels was put to ( 79 ) r the lifting or ftretching out Hands, in fignum : fuffr&gii between 'Paul and Barnabas ; as if it had been put to the Queftion between them : two alone, Whether fuch a Man fhculd be El- der in fuch a Church : But how then can it be an Aft of Paul and Barnabas ? Thus, if you will, thir two did y&wwuv, creare fuffragiis, or ferfuffragia, i. e. they ordained fuch Men to be Elders as were chofen by the Churches : They two made or created the Elders, but the People declared by lifted-up Hands whom they would have to be Elders : So Calvin, Infrit. Lib. 4. Cap. 53. § 15. Even as, faith be 3 the Roman Hiitorhns often tell us, that the Conful, who field the Court, did create new Magiftrates, i. e. did receive the Votes, and prehde in the Elections/ So much for removing his Exxeptions againft his Argument from A£ts 14- -3- which proves he People's Right to chufe their own Paftors, md is (o underitood by our Proteftant Divines, is the Centur tutors of Magdeburgh, Calvin, Zancb?, Beza, Junius, Bucan, Profeffbrs of Ley den, Voetius, Wendeline, Bffenius, Markius, Zl aimer us, Pittet, Bowles, Manton ,Cartwright 3 Calderwocd, Kutherfurd, Gillefpie, Forrejier, Rule, &c. yea even Papiits, as Salmeron on the ^lace, who fays, f Here the Apoftles gave the Election of the Elders to the Churches, as ASts 6. they gave them the Election of their Deacons/ And FSiius, another Popifh Wri- er, when fpeaking of the Word X' t P OTOl '* 1 ays, f If we look either to the Etymology of the Word, or to the Ufe of it among Greek Authors,, it fignifies to elett by Suffrages/ So Levi- s ( 80 ) LorintiSy Gaffer San£lws 3 and others. And the Argument is in Force, for all that Cardinal Sellarmine of old, and the Enquirer of late, have laid againft it. And it is very obfervable, that the Holy Ghod in Scripture ftill makes Ufe of other Words for Ordination, as Ac:$ 6. 3, 6. 1 Tim. 4. 14. fo, 7 it. 1. 5. Ecclejiaftick Writers ufed %£/po(W/c& for Ordination, and yit^Qvi for Proof of this he cites the 6th Verfe of the Chapter, where it is faid, The Apftles and El- ders came together to r confider of this Matter* Now* tho* 1 do not plead for the People's ha- ving a Vote in Church- judicatories, yet the En- quirer would know fome great Men have laid much for the People in this Point. The jfefu- ites of RheimSy in their Annotations upon this Scripture, charge it upon the Proteftants as an Error, c That they plead others than the Cler- c gy are to have Voice in Councils : And, as the c Prieft's Lips fhould keep Knowledge, and the € People under the Law were to ask Words at his € Mouth, fo much more, fay they, muft we re- c fer all to our Bifhops and Pallors now ; And c to have it otherwife here, is to bring all to € Hell and Horror/ But Cart-wright anfwers them thus * c Seeing Councils are as this was, for; € the moft Part, aflembled to fatisfy the Doubts! * of the People, it feems againft Reafon thafc € they fhould not be fuffered to be Partakers o; € the Council/ And Dr. Fulk, in Anfwer to thefe JefuiteSy fays, 'It appeareth frota the c Text, that the whole Church gave their Con- c fent to the Decree, and joined in the Epiftle/ And Mr. Alfop fays (a), ' The People might c rcafonably conform to that Decree which had * their own antecedent Confent, and the more € patiently bear the Burden, which was not im- € pofed upon them without themfelves ; For this € Canon was, not only fent to the Churches by c the Order of the Apoftles and Elders, and the € whole Church, v. iz. but, whatever obliga- c tory >—m (a) Melius Ivq. p. mihi, 17J- J 8 i > r tory Power there was m it from Man, it ran c in the Name of the Apoftles, Elders, and Bre- f thren. But, alas, the Cafe is otherwife with c the poor Church in Reference to Impofitions f of late Ages, who know no more what Im- f pofkions fhall be laid upon their Confciences, c than the poor Horfe is acquainted whither his * Mafter intends to ride him/ Whitaker, ha- ving cited Acts 15. 6, 22. fays, c It is evident c from thofe Places, that, not only the Apoftles, c but alfo the Eiders, yea and even the People, 1 were prefent in this Council, and had therein^a r decifive Voice/ And Profeflor Jamefon, who cites him (a)> fays, He egregioiifly clears the *Place of all the Z)?tjl the Jefuites had caft on it. And cites Willet> as being of. the fame Mind, And even Bifhop Jewel, in his Defence of tloe Apology (b), approves of the Saying of the Cardinal of Aries in the Council of Confiance, when he affirmed, c The Apoltles themfelves, when they had Matters of Moment to deter- mine, did not decide in thefe by themfelves alone, but called the Multitude to fit with them/ And, as for Acis 16. 4. where it is faid, They delivered to them the Decrees that were ordai- ned to be kept of the Apojiles and Elders ; This only fays, the Apoftles and El.iers had a chief Hand in thofe Decrees. And it is very ordinary o afcribe an A&ion to fuch as have the chief r-fand in it, tho' they be not the fole A&ors. But that which we contend for is, That the »vhole Church, or Brethren prefent in thatCoun- 1 3 cil, (i) Cyprian Ifot. p. 5+3 ( b ) P-4*. < & ) cil, had a Hand in the jpioice of thofe Men that jvent from Jerusalem to Antioch with y this he owns the People were dmitted to be prefent at the Debates in this Council ; and, according to him, the Expreffi- >ns would fay they had been fpeaking before in hat Council, feeing now they held their Peace, fet, I think, his Argument here will cut oft all be Apoitles, except "Barnabas, 'Paul, Simeon nd James (the only Speakers mentioned) from aving any Thing to do in that Council ; for I uppofe they were of the Multitude that kept iience, liftning to what (Paul and Barnabas de- [ared. Tho' our Author tells, He will fet rs right, and fometimes charges them with Abundance of Ignorance, be they never fo lear- ed, that ditter from him ; yet, I dare fay, never lortal argued more weakly than he doth in tfois lace. He tells, The ftatutory Word is lAg*, Verfe 2. it pleafed ; and this is evidently afcribed to the Church-officers. And again, fays he, f We have this Word in the 28 Verfe, where it is (aid, It feemed good to theHoly Ghoft and us : And, as 11 Interpreters agree, the Meaning is, It feemed good to us, affifted, or infpired by the Holy Ghoft. This lurely, fays- be, is not to be af- f 4 c firmed ( 88 ) f firmed of the People/ And, will he reftrift the Holy Ghoft to Church-officers only i Has not God promifed his Spirit to all his People as well as to them ? have not fome private Chriftians had a larger Meafare thereof than Church-offi-* cers ? He adds, f Were not the People bound to * approve what the Council did ? was this opti- * o'rial ? Let thofe that ufe this Argument take ' Heed that they give not up this important € Point to the People, to wit, a Right of Deci- *■ lion in Controverfies of Faith/ And let him take Care, on the other Hand, that he go not in to the Doftrine of implicite Faith, obliging People to receive all for Truth that Synods and Councils term Co ; and that he cut not off Elders from fitting or judging in Church- judicatories. But further, fuch as have been moft zealous Defenders of Church- judicatories, have yet ar- gued from this Topick, leeing no Danger in the : Argument ; as Gillefpie, Rule y < Tnrretine i and others, who, I dare lay, were as true Friends to Presbytery as he is. Rntherftird&ys (a) y c No ' thing fhould be concluded in a Synod, until c the People hear and know ; Yea, fays he, they •J have ail Place to fpeak, objeft, reafon, and f difpute in an orderly Way, as may be collected c from Affs 15. 12, 15. Letters are fent in the f Church's Name, Charity fent to the diftrefled ? Saints in their Name, Officers chofen by their * Confent ; but all this maketh no popular Go J c vernment, if we fpeak properly, feeing the * Multitude doth not judge or define judicially," * nor fentepce, nor command and give out Ca-j ' nons (a) Plea for Fres. /, 6s£. 17. ( 90 ) pdftleS) Elders and Brethren fend greeting to the Brethren, which are of the Gentiles in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia; yet he hath fomething to fay that will overturn all that ; as, i. c Our Origin € nal here is vitiated, and x} it cffzhtpot hath been € foifted into the Original, for they are not to be € found. Cod. Monjortii and *) 0/ are not in the c vulgar Verfion and fonrie other Copies : And 4 the Words are thus cited ,without *} hi, by Ire- € neusfPacianus and Athanafius Magnus ; and it c cannot be thought fo manyTranfcribers and Fa- € thers were in a Plot to corrupt the Text/ Anf If the Enquirer fhould alter the New Teftament in all Places where Mr. Mill adduceth various Readings, parhaps he will leave us few Chapters unaltered ; but neither Tool nor Strefo mention any fuch various Reading of this Place : And, tho* the Fathers were not in a Plot to corrupt that Text, yet it is poflible Popifh Tranfcribers might have left out *) hi, for their own Defi^ns of aggrandizing the Clergy, and depreffing the Laity, being againfl: the Admiflion of Elders or any of the People to Synods or Councils. Well, but fays our Author, c Allowing the € Translation is right, yet the People could not * have equal Hand in the Eleftion and Miffion € of Judas and Silas : For the contrary is evi- € dent from the Letter itfelf ; for in the 2*5 Verfe € it is faid, 7/ feemed good unto us, being ajfem- c bled with one Accord, to fend chofen Men tm- * toyou.—rrAnd are we not told, Verfe 6. who c thefe were ? c I*he Apofiles and Elders came to- f gether to confider this Matter.' Anftv. What the Enquirer faid in his great j Mo- ( 9i ) Modefty of Mr. GiUefpie, namely, That he ftruggled as a Man in the Pangs of Death, may more juftly be faid of himfelf here ; for this 25 Verfe is fo far from being the leafl Proof of what he alledges, that it proves the contrary. Is it not manifeft, that, with the Apofiles and Elders, other Brethren were aflembied in that Council ? Why, fhall we go back to the 6 Verfe, when the Connection is fo plain from the immediately pre- ceeding Verfe 2 He ftill contends, the People had not a Hand in this ; but Rutherfurd's Authority may counterbalance his. Rutherford fays, c I grant the Epiftle is fent in Name of all, tho* c he refufeth it was an Aft of Jurifdiction.' Our Enquirer fays, By Brethren, the Apuftles and El- ders may be meant. Who can think fo, when it is faid, es with the 'Pref- bytery or Elderfoip. 2. He doth not deny that the Letters were fent in the Name of others than Church-Officers, tho* he denies that the fending of them was any Att of Authority. Aud, 3- He ( 9* ) fays, c We do not deny but the Brethren joined c their Affent, and that they concurred in fend- c ing Meffengers :' As he owns, private Chrifti- ans may {peak, propofe and reafon in an orderly Way in Synods. And Mr. Rutherfurd, in the Place cited by Mr. Woody grants, The Epifile was fent in the Name of all\ tho* he denies, as we alfo do, that the fending an Epifile was an A<5t of Jurifdi&ion ; and fays, The fending of the fynodical Epifile was done by comon Co7ifent of all; and he fays, It added fome more Authority, that the Epifile was fent by the Confent of alL And Rutherfurd, as well as Mr. Gillefpie, cites this Text,1to prove, That the People have God's Right to chufe their Paftors, 2)ue Right of ^Presbyteries, p. 201. The Enquirer fays, c Such c as plead from this Scripture for the People's c Right, do it at the Expence of lofing the main c Proof for fynodical AfTemblies/ But we lee no fuch Danger : For we do not plead the People were jointly authoritative with the Apoftles and Eiders, in all they did in that Council at Jerufa- lem ; but only, that they were confulted and con- curred, and had a Hand with others of the Coun- cil, as to the fending the fynodical Epiftle. And that Weflminfier Direftory for Church-Govern- ment, which the Enquirer cites, affirms, That, befides Paftors, Teachers, and other Church- Governors, other fit Perfons, where it (hall be deemed expedient, are Members of fynodical Af- femblies. As to 1 Cor. 16. 3. which he calls our fixth Argument ; It was noticed before, we make it not a diftind Argument, but a Branch of the for- mer : There the Apoftle's Words are., And when 4 , ( 91 > 1 come, wbomfoever ye ft) all approve by Letters^ them will I [end to bring your Liberality to Je- rufalem : From this Text, lays he, f The Argu- € ment comes to this. Here the Corinthians are € afTured by the Apoltle, that they (hall have the f Ekftion of the Perfons that fhalJ be fent to Je- 1 rufalem with their Liberality ; and, flnce they € had the Right to chufe Perfons to their parti- € cular and inferior Service in the Churchy much € more have they a Right to chufe and eleft Mi- c nifters who are to have the Care of their Souls/ To this he anfwers, An Argument a minori ai raajus is not valid, and refers to his Anfwers on the fecond Argument ; and for Reply, I refer him to what I anfwered there. But, beflde what he refers to, he fays he will add fome fpecial An- fwers direcftly to this Proof. Andy \. I do not think, fays he, here is any JElefiion at all ; and takes the Meaning to be, when their Charity came, he would be careful to (end it by appro- ven Peribns, or Perfons of approven Honefty. But the contrary is evident from the very Letter of the Text: For the Apoftle lays, He would fend it by whomfoever they Jbould approve ; fo here is no confounding of Things together. But, 2. Says he, c The Words, by your Letters, do c not help the Matter ,• for in the Greek they are € cf* €T/roAa>y, there being no Word in the Origi- € nal for your. Anpw. i. He fhould have faid and I know not how many other e- minent Proteftant Divines, who argue frorti thoie Texts, they are all guiky of writing aftet the Cppy of the Father of Lies ; yet,however hard his Words be, he hath nothing of Argument but what was faid in his Enquiry. In the Conclufion (a) he cites Grotius, lay- ing, ' It was the Cuftom for 'Paul, not to af- c fume to himfelf the Election of thofe who * were to be Admmiftrators of the Poor, but to c leave it to a Synod." Anfw. I fuppofe GrotU tis means no more by a Synod, but a Convention or Congregation of Men : For, will any fay, Synods of Paftors were called together to eled: a Man or fome Men to bear the Liberality of the Churches, or manage the Poor's Money ? Grotins cites i Cor. 1 6. 3. which is an Evidence, that, by a Synod, he means no more but a Con- gregation of the People; for, in 1 Cor. i5. 3. there is no Hint of any other Synod. I may conclude this Argument with a Citation front 7»r- — ■-— «*— — — — >' ■ ' —** (n) $. 82. i ( 97 ) Turretine (a), who, arguing for the Peopled Right from AEts i. 6. and citing Afls 14. 23. affirms, The Words there cannot be unaerflood of Paul and Barnabas, but of the Suffrages of the tody of the 'People : And then fays, Ex* em$la> firm It a id evincnnt, &c. And the like Examples evince this : And, having cited Acts 15. 22, 25. and 1 Or. 16. 3. and 2 Cor. 8. 19. he fays, c Luke is faid to be y&fQTwden; v-sro tov Ik'?.m/vv, that he might be Vaul's Companion in his Travels ; that is, he was cholen by the Suffrages of the Churches. Chryfofwme on that Place, Tkeopkylaff, OEcimcnius, and EJliiiSy underltanri Election : And, if the Suf- € frages of the Church were ufed in the Choice c of thofe that were to carry extraordinary Com- f millions to the Churches, how much more are they to be ufed in the Choice of thofe who are to execute the ordinary Office of Teaching? And, if this was requifite in the Office of a r Deacon, mufch more to the Office of the Mi- ni/try.' Here Chemnitim and others might have been cited to the fame Purpofe- S E C T. VI. /;; which the Arguments from 2 Cor. 4. 5. and from 1 Tim. 3. 7. are confidered ana vindi- cated. QUR Author affirms (b), c He hath alrea- c dy mentioned all the Arguments in w hich thofe that contend for popular Election do lay G < the (a) Zoc. 18. £>i4eft. 24. p. inihi 25J, 25* h) p. 82. ' ( 9* ) e the greateft Strefs, and all of them are but at c beft remote Confequences from what is laid c down in Scripture/ For Anfwer, The Pro- teftant Doftrine is; That native Scripture-Conie- quences are Scripture; and the Confequences drawn from thefe Texts above-mentioned are not io remote as the Enquirer alledges ; they are Examples ot the Primitive Churchy recorded for Imitation. The London Minifters cite 'Per- kins, Martyr, and Calvin, all affirming, c jThat the ordinary Examples of the Godly, approved in Scripture, have the Force oj a general Rule, and • are to be followed. 2. Whereas he fays, All the Arguments on which they, who plead for popular Election, do lay the great Strefs, have been confidered by him. In this he is miftaken ; for he hath not touched fevpral Arguments which are thought to be of no fmall Weight, as has been ihown elfewhere, and may further appear af- terwards. Of other Arguments, Firji, He cites that Scripture, 2 Cor. 4. 5. but thinks it contains no Argument for the People's Right to chufe their own Paftors. The Words are, We preach not ourfehes, but Chrifi Jefus the Lord, and onrfelves your Servants for Je- fits Sake : And he forms his Adverfary's Argu- ment thus (a), c Paftors, are called the Servants € of the People ; We preach, /. e. we declare, * ourfelves to be your Servants : But if they c are the People's Servants^ they fhould be € elected and called by them/ But he tells not who argues this ; and I fuppofe he cannot cite one (a) p. Si. ( 99 ) one Cngle Author that ever laid, The Meaning of, We preachy in that Text, is. We declare curfelves to be your Servants : And it is unbe- coming any, who aflumes the Character of a Minifter, to mifreprefent his Adverfary at this Rate. Indeed this Text is adduced to prove the People's Right by Markius, in his Medulla (a), where, after citing Jffs i. 23. jffls 6. 3, 5. j4£ls 14. 23. he adds, Et minifterii quod Ecclefw toti pr &c. p. 4 j. (b) p. 83. ( ioi ) He fays, € He can fee nothing like an Argu- ment in this Text. Anjw. Others have feen an Argument here : And may not he fee, that, f a Minifter is to have a good Report of them ,vho are without ; or, as Diodati fays, A Re- port from thefe who are not Members of the Church, having Caufe to fpeak well and honou* ably of him, being Witnefs of his holy and lau- lable Converfation ; then furely he fhould much nore have it from thefe that are within, elpe- :iaily from thofe of whom they are to have the Charge? Is it not plain, that this good Report, rom thefe without, fairly fuppofes that he mult iave a good Report from thefe alfo within the Jhurch ? requiring that the People's Confent nd Approbation fhould be waited for, and that hey fhould be allowed to teftify about him? And, f they do not give him a good Report, /. e. do lot approve of him, he fhould not be ordained heir Minifter ? This does not oblige to confent o the Man chofen by Heritors and Elders, or Jfe to give in their Reafons to the Presbytery, vhy they cannot confent,,/. e. in other Words, o procefs him for Error or a fcandalous Practice. )r. Wall on the Ptacc fays, ' We may fee what a neceffary Privilege thefe Chriftian Churches have loft, who have now no longer the Choice of their Bifhops $$c.' Tho' the Enquirer alledges, This Scripture rill not infer a Right in the People to eleft their 'aitors ; yet,can he deny, that it will at leaft in- ?r, that non# are to be intruded upon, or fct wr them, without their good Report ? that is, heir poluive'Teftimony and Approbation. H G 3 &yi ( left > fays (a), Many may give Teftimony who have not a Right to ele6t ; and if the giving a Tefti* mony in favour of one infers a Right to eleft, then Infidels and Heathens,who are without the Church, have a Right to chufe the Paftors of it. Anpvo. i. It is plain from this and the reft ol his Book, that all the Right he gives to Chrifti-! an Congregations in the Matter, is no morel than what he allows to Men living at the grea-i teft Diftance, and even to Heathens \ namely, a! Liberty of giving their Teftimony : And, accor-j ding to him, if they do not prove the Candi- date erroneous or fcandalous,he may be intruded upon them as their Minifter againft their Will ; and tho* they neither give, nor can give, a good Report concerning him : Sure, this is not agree- able to the fore-cited Scripture, which exprefly lays, He mud have a good Report of them that are without ; Which, as I laid, doubtlefs implies he muft much more have a good Report from thefe that are within the Church. 2. He fhould have argued thus, If Minifters muft have a good Report from thefe without the Church, and if their Teftimony about him muft be enquired in- to -, furely fomething more muft be allowed to the Chriftian People in order to conftitute the Relation of Paftor and People betwixt them, even that aftual Choice, which the Lord hath made their Privilege, as is evident from many other Scriptures. SECT. (a) g4 84. < ( i° 5 ^ SECT. VII. In 'which our Argument from i John 4. 1. is vindicated and confirmed. € A Third Argument I give, (fays the Enqui- c " rer (a), in the Words of Jus "Populi, p. f 43, 44. The People's Right tochufe their own c i^aitors is evident from our Lord's Command unto them, 1 John 4. 1. To try the Spirits, the Spirits, 'whether they are of God , bee ait fe many faife 'Prophets aw gone out into the World ; € and, Mat. 7. 1 5. there he commands his People, € to beware of falfe ^Prophets ; and he allows it c in his People, not to bear the Voice of Hire c lings or unworthy 'Paflors, but, inflend of this, to flee from them \ as John 10. 5. Rev, 2. 2. f There it is fpoken to the Commendation of the c Church of Ephefus, that fhe had tried them 4 which faid, They were Apoflles, and were not, c but did lie. She tried them, and tried them lb, € as to reject them for their Unworthinels : And * a Right to withdraw from unfound Minifters, <~ will infer an inherent Right to make Choice of * fuch as are worthy/ Now, tho' he hath given the Words of J *Populi, yet he hath altered them a little, tran- fcribing the firic Part of them fo as to make his Reader think him confufed in exprciling him- felf ; whereas the Argument according to him is worded thus, ' The People's Right to chu f their own Paftors is evident from our Lord's c Command unto them, to try the Spirits, G 4 ' c 1 John (a) p. 84. m-m ; ( 10^ ) f i John 4.. 1. Believe not every Spirit, but try * the Spirits y &.' 2. He quarrels my citing fo many Authors upon every Turn, as being of my Opinion, fay- ing, This is no Way ot Reafoning at all, I frankly own that one Scripture is better than ten Reafons, and one Reafon is more to be regarded than ten bare Authorities. But, tho* bare Au- thority is of fmall Weight, yet, when in Dan ger of being charged with Novelty and atfe d:ing Singularity, I judge Citations from cele- brated Writers expedient : And when the Rea-i fons of fuch and fuch renowned Authors are ad- duced, thofe are furely of Weight. And,in the Place quarrelled, the Reverend Mr. Lawder, fo; alfo ttsrretine, Sow/es, Rutherjnrd, and For*, refter, are, not only cited as being of the fame Opinion with the Author of Jus ^PopiiH, but alfo the Reafons for their Judgment or Sentiments are there given, tho' the Enquirer hath never offered Anfwers to them. 5. He quarrels my citing Ozven, Amefius and Ladder who were Independents , without diftin- guifhing them from 'Presbyterians. Anfov. I re-' gard their Reafonings and Arguments, not their Party : And, if there be any Strength in this Ex- '1 ception, then he is chargeable with the like^ Fault, in that he cites and 1 tys fo much Strefs \ upon the original ^Draught, whofe Author is an Epifcopal Divine. He clafles Mr. Law- yer with the Independents, tho' he was a Tref-l tyterian Minifterin this Church, and defended' Presbyterian Government eftablifhed in it to ex- ccllent ( io* ) cellent Purpofe. Further/The People's Right t* elect their own Paitors is no peculiar Tenet of the Independents, but is maintained by all genu- ine Presbyterians : And a good Argument lofes nothing of its Strength, tho' coming from an In- dependent or Papitt. And, for Amefius, he is cited by Jtutberfurd, Bow/es, &c. on this very Subject ; but it is worfe, that the Throng of the Enquirer's Arguments are the lame with thefe of Romanijls and High-Church Writers : And, whether his Weapons have been taken from their Armoury, he knows himfelf. But now, as to i John 4. 1. he owns, c The c Exhortation of tryi?ig the Spirits, fhows, that e People are to be upon their Guard, left they c be led away into Error. And alfo he owns> * The People have a Judgment of Difcretion in c difcerning the Doftrine which is taught, and c that they are not to believe with impliciteFaith/ But then he deviates, going afide to handle the Doftrine of Separation, alledging, People may not feparate from corrupt Miniiters till freed from them by the Church-Reprefentative, ha- ving the publick Judgment of the Church. Anfw. The Cafe of Separation is a difficult Point, not to be handled in little Bounds ,* nor will I in this Place di^refs Co far as to enter on it ; only, by his Poiitions here, he condemns our Sufferers before the Revolution, who feparated from the Curates ; as alfo, our dilfenting Bre- thren in England and Irelani, who feparate from the eftablifted Church ; for neither of them were freed by the Gfrurcb- Representative : And, now, that 1 h:ive mentioned the iDifllnters, I think it not amils to cite lome Part ot their Rea- fons ( i°6 ) fons of diflenting or feparating from the Church of England, to be feen in Mr. Baxter's Rea- fons of Nonconformity, inferred in his Life, a- bridged by Dr. Calamy, where it is faid (a), They, viz. the 2)ijffenters 3 could not fee how the Prefentation of a Patron and the Inftituti- on of a Bifhop couJd make it the abfolute Dur of all in a Parifh prefently to acquiefce in a Mi- nifter's Conduct in holy Things : This may in- deed legally inftitute him to the Tithes and Maintenance, but cannot make him a Paftor to any one without his own Confent. Parilh- order they thought had its own Advantages, and was to be preferred when more weight; Reafons did not offer : But they could no fee any Thing in it of an ablolute Neceflity^ neither could they reconcile the Suppofition of fuch a Neceflity (thoMertled by the Law of the Land) with the inviolable Rights of human Nature, which leave a Man at as much Liberty to chufe a Paftor for his Soul, as a Phyfician for his Body, or a Lawier for his fi- liate : And therefore, as they thought it would be hard for the Magiftrate to fay, You fhall have this Phyfician, or none, when perhaps another may better hit their particular Confti- tution; or,You fhall have this Lawier, cr none^ when it may be they know another who was much fitter to have the Management of their Concerns : So did they alfo reckon it a drain- ing the Point too high, for the Civil Magiftrate (and much more the Bifhop) to fay, You fhall have this Man, or none, for your Paftor, c when ■ i ■ ■ »M ' ■n (a) $. 271. ( 107 ) c - when it was fo very puflibie to them to know c a Minifter who might be unexceptionable, and c much more fuitable unto them in the feveral € Refpe& in which a Miniiter's Help was need- f ful to them. This appeared to them to be a c contending with them for a Right which God c and Nature had given them ; and therefore they c were for feeing good Reafon for it., before they € would part with.it/ From thefe Words we may fee what a great Difference there is between him and that Author, whom he defigns the great Mr. Baxter. But further, fays our Author (a), c We al- € low the Pe pie a Judgment of Difcretion in e Oppofition to the Doctrine of implicite Faith; c but this private Judgment, which the People c have, muft be guided by the publick Judgment c of the Church-Reprefentative/ AnpoL Does not this fmell rank of Popery ? to allow Men a Judgment of Difcretion, and yet not to grant that it is their Duty to act according to that Judgment, is to treat them as Fools, obliging them to act indifcreetly, or not according to their own Judgment ; and, if Men are not to be a&ed by their own Judgment, pray, of what Avail is that Judgment of Difcretion, wherewith he gra- tifies the People * Romani (Is ,who afcribe all Judg- ment to the Clergy, dealing with the reft of Mankind as irrational Brutes, will ask no more but that Men own they are not competent Judges of their own Good. I fuppofe it will not be eafy for our Enquirer to put a Difference between his Dodrine, and that (a) p. 3d. «* ( i»8 ) that of Papifb. He alledges, what he fays is agreeable to Presbyterian Principles, and the Judgment of all fober Presbyterians. If fo, then the Wefiminfxer Affembly, and the Church of Scotland, have determined againft the Mind of all fober Presbyterians, in that our Confeffion of Faith fays, All Synods and Councils, fince the Apoftles "Times, whether general or particular , may err, and many have r erted, and therefore they are not to be made the Rule of Faith or (PraEfice, but to be tffed as a Help in both ; and that God alone is Lord of the Conference, and hath left it jree from the ^Doctrines and Commandments of Men, "Which are in any Thing contrary to his Word, or befide it, in Matters of Faith or Worfhip : So that to believe fuch 2)c£irines 3 or obey fuch Commands out of Confcimce, is to betray true Liberty of Confci- ence ; and the requiring of an implicit e Faith 9 and an abfolute and blind Obedience x is to de- ftroy Liberty of Confciencc, and Reafon alfo. Our Argument from i John 4. i. is to this Purpofe, That, feeing the People are cautioned againft believing every Spirit, and required to try the Spirits, furely they have a Call from God, not to hearken to feducing Spirits, or Men of corrupt Principles, and vitious Pradices ; and, if they have a Right to feparate from fuch as fet Poifon inftead of Food before their Souls, it clearly folio \*s tbey have a Right to eled: fuch as they have Ground to think will be faithful, and fuch as they judge to fee fent of God. The En- quirer owns, € When a Church is corrupt, as in € France, and other Popifh Countries, the People f are to feparate, and repair to a purer Church, ' and ( * c 9 ) c and join themfelves unto it/ Now, if fo, then thofe vacant Congregations have a Rignt to chufe fuch as they judge will be faithful to their Souls, declaring the whole Counfel of God to them. The Commandment of trying the Spf- rits, gives them a Right to judge of the Fitnefo of a Perfon to be their Pallor ; and confequently a Right to chufe or refufe, as they judge meet, upon ferious and fair Trial. Cyprian, and an African Synod with him, laid (a), Let not the People flatter themfelves, as if they could be free of the Contagion of Guilt when they communicate with a flagitious or guilty Prieft, and give their Confent to the un- lawful and tmjufi Epifcopacy of their Overfeer. —And adds, Wherefore the 'People, if they obey the Lord's Command, and fear God, ought to fe- farate themfelves from a flagitious Prieft, and not frequent the Sacrifices of a facri legions Prieft, feeing the People have chiefly a Power either of chufwg worthy Priefls, or refufing the iinrucor- thy. Seeing the Father of Spirits has given his People fpiritual Life and Senfes to know his Voice in his Servants, and commanded them to try the Spirits, undoubtedly he hath alfo allowed them a Voice in the Choice of their own Paftors. Hence that eminent Divine Mr. "Bowls, in his Pallor Evangelicus, fays, JEquum id reHum- jue, &c. € It is juft and right that they to whom it belongs to try the Spirits, whether they be of God, to guard againlt falfe Prophets, and not hearken to them, to judge of heretical Dodrine, and to be allured of the Life and c Man- (a) £fijl.68. ( no ) Manners of Candidates, that they be free from € Scandal ; that their Confcnt in calling Pa- € ftors fhould not be negle&ed/ And then he cites Cardinal Cufanm aflerting, c That, if the f Confent of the People were not to interveen, € they would be punifhed for the Ignorance or c W ickednefs of the Minifter unjuftly/ And., top that fame Purpofe, Ttirretine, Rtitkerfurd, and others argue from this Text ; Their Words were quoted in Jui ^optili. But it feems our Enqui- rer thinks it below himfelf to notice what is laid by our Divines. He fays, c The Election is to be by the pu c lick Judgment of the Church-reprefentative * and that the fecond Book of Difcipline deter € mines fo, when Chap. 2- ScEl- 4- it defines E € le&ion to be the Chufing out of a Perfon, oj • Perfons moft able to the Office that vaiks, by c the judgment of the Elderfhip, and Confent c of the People : It is not faid by the Judgment € of* the People, but by the Judgment of the, € Elderfhip.' Anfw. He cites the fecond Book of Difcipline, as if he owned it for a Rule of) equal Authority with the Scripture ; and yet, at other Times, be will not have the leaft Regard to it, nor, I dare fay, will he Oand to it here* By the Judgment of the Elderfhip there, I fup-i po(e, no more is meant, but the Elderfhip's judg- ing upon Trial of the Meetnefs of the Perfon fcr the Work of the Gofpel ; upon which the. People proceeded to the Election, cr giving their! Confent. But, whatever be the Meaning of thefer Words Judgment and Elderfhip in th ; s Place, k is manifeitj That, by that Book, the People's; Con* ( III ) Confent is judged to be as eilential to a Minifter^s Election, as the Judgment of the Elderfhip. And further, it feems he will have che People to :onient without all xManner of Judgment, giving mplicite Faith to what is done by the Elderfiiip : For, fays he, it is not faid, the Election is jto be ; by the Judgment of the People, but of the Elderfhip ; and to this Judgment the Miniflers of Fife gave it as their Opinion, The People ought to give their Confent/ Anfjo. No ~)oubt the Compolers of that Book, by the r>ec pie, underitood Nobility, Gentry and Town* :ouncil, as jh|11 as the meaner Sort, and Elders, •xcept thefe in Presbytery. Now, can we think hat Book laid all thele aflde from chufing or ;alling their own Miniiiers ? If it had been to >ear the Senfe thjs Author would put upon it, *m apt to think they, viz. Nobility, Gentry and Commons, would not gone in thereto, much lefs worn to it. His Harrangue about Phyflcians md Quacks, and the unthinking giddy Multit- ude, is lo mean and filly, that it needs not an Infwer ; the fillieft among us, they will chufe he ableft graduate Phylician, if the Enquirer, or ny for him, will bear the Charges. He difmiiTes this Argument, by charging me pth a bare-faced Perverfion of that Scripture, flev. z. 2. becaufe I take the People of the Church of Ephefits to be included in the Num- er of thofe who tried them who faid they were 4poftles y and were not* but did lie. Have I been uilty of that hainous Crime? Others have been :h bare-faced Perverters before me, fuch as, e judicious 2ktrbam 3 who fays, i The Dire- ( If we look into the Body of I c the Epiltles themfelves, and confider the Way J c how they are ufhered in, and the folemn Claufc j € wherewith each of them concludes, it is plain, € for that Angel muft betaken in a colleftivall c Senfe, as including, not only all the Ministers j € of the Church, but even the whole Church i c itfelf/ Again that Author fays, c In none of j c thefe Seven Epiftles is there an A& of Epifco- t c pal Jurifdiftion fb much as hinted at, nor any»ji e Act which is not competent to all the Mini-sS [ * fters of the Gofpel, yea, indeed to the People! c c themfelves : As, for Inftance, when it is faidju e of the Church of Ephefus, Chap. 2. 2. Thomk c hafi jtt -•»«» {a) "Due Right of Tresfr. p. 496. (b) p. 1 1 2. ( *n ) r haft tried them which fay they ate Apoftksi c and are not, and has found them Liars ; ic r is no more than what is the Duty, and will be [ the Praftice of every good Chriftian, all being .enjoined, i John 4. 1. Beloved, believe nop every Spirit, but try the Spirits whether they are of God : Secaufe many falfe Pro- phets are gone out into the World* So Pro- «ffor Jamefon in his Sum of the Epif copal Zonsroverfy, p. 66 and 69. So Principal Rule in his Good old Way defended, p. 15. 2>i- \dati affirms, That, by the Angel of the Church )f Ephefus, we are to underftand the whole church. Epifcopal Writers might be named to his Purpofe ; as Dr. Henry More, who fays, Cbrift, his writing to the Angel of the Church of Ephefus in this myftical Senfe, is writing to all Bifhops, Paftors and Chriftians^ in the firft Apoftolick Interval of the Church ;' And now, et the World judge, if the modeft humble En- juirer had not Ground to charge me as being 2 )are-fac , d Perverter, and a heedlels Writer, argu- ng as never did a 'Presbyterian. If I have been 1 bare-fac'd Perverter, I have trode in the Steps >f ^Durham, Rutherfurd, Anderfon, Jamefon> Rule, Diodati, &c. But, fays he, It was the Minifters that tried hem that faid they were Apo files, and were tet. Anfiv. I own Minifters and Elders in a Ju* licatory did it ; yet fo, as the People, who are commanded to try the Spirits, did try them alio tfith a Judgment of Dilcretion ; yet no impor- ant Point is given up to the Independents, as he Enquirer alledges, nor is there any Article of )ur Confeffion given up. Again, he lays, f Had H ' the < "4 ) 1 tin? Author .of Jus ^Populi corrfidered thisy, it c had kept him from a great many heedlefs E- \ fcapes/ Anpx. The Author of Jus "Popttli* may have fallen into Efcapes, yet neither htxcj nor any where elfe has the critical Enquirer pointL ted out one of them. But., palling this, I frank^J ly own it belongs to Churcn- Judicatories to trf the Spirits, and judge in Controversies authorP tatively ; yet fo, as the People, who are com- manded to prove" all 'Things, are alfo to try the Spirits by a private Judgment of Difcretion : And there is a Trial of Minifters Gifts which i^ allowed to the People by the Wefiminfter Aflem-. bly and Church of : Scotland, in their Propofiti-- ons anent the Ordination of Minifters. He hath attempted to anfwer our Argument* from i John 4. 1. and Rev. 2. and 2. Tho', in hi> Mnquiry, he had not attempted to take off the* Force of our Argument from Mat. 7. 15. where* our Lord commands his People to beware of falfe ^Prophets ; Yet, now, in his Tublick Teflirnong made more fublick, he hath touched this Text, tho* he fays- nothing for taking off the Force of our Argu- : m&it ; he only tells,Thefalfe Minifters, of whom, our Lord fpeaks in that Text, were the Scribes and 'Pharifees, who taught for Ztoffrines the Commandments of Men ; and were unfound a«s tout divorces and Oaths, whom yet the People ,• *were to hear : But, to reftrid the Text to thefe,> 3s to go contrary to theXurrent of Interpreters. , Grotius underftands it of all that teach falfe and pernicious Do&rine ; and Henry underftands the j Text alfo of fuch as preach falfe Do&rine in I thefe Things that are eflential to Rdigien, who ^ teach- ( II* ) :each that which is contrary to the Truths as it is njefus. Well, fays he, ( Beware of them, fuf- pecft them, try them ; and, when you have dil- covered their Falfhood, avoid them, have no- thing to do with them, fond upon your Guard againft this Temptacion/ Our Enquirer asks, [t the Cafe of the Church of Scotland be like the ^a(e of the jfews in our Saviour's Days ? which s nothing to the Argument ; for, it .is not of fe- :arating from the Church of Scotland that the \rgument fpeaks, but of the People's having i Right to feparate from falfe Teachers in gene- al, and confequently, of having a Right to eleft uch as are found. Our Author^ in his modeft Enquiry, had alfb mft by John 10. 5. and, in his Ttflimony made nore ftiblick, he pretends to anfwer it, but fay's lothing to the Purpofe, telling, He thinks the •hepherd fpoken of in the Contexts only meant )f Chrift, but hath not one Word of what we ire to underftand by the Stranger whom the iheep will not follow, but flee from. And, hould he reftrict: that to falfe Cbrifls, he will be ;ontnlry to the Current of Interpreters ; for by he Stranger the fame with \X\tHir cling is meant 3 (uch as love the Wages better than the Work* nd fuch as preach ttrange Dottrine. ; fuch as re Strangers to, and alienated from , the Life of God by wicked Works. Becaufe the People, upon s Text, in their Reprefcntation, fpeak of thrift's Sheep their having a fpiritual Inftinft \nd Sagacity to know the Voice of the true ihepherd from the Voice of the Hireling and tranger ; our Enquirer calls lh^ Cj.ut and fan- fied Language, which may tempt One to qrie- ( 116 ) ition, if our Author be really in the Station of Minifter. Mr. Henry , upon this Text, fays,The; who have experienced the Power and Efficacy divine Truths upon their own Souls, and havd the Savour and Relifh of them, have a ftrange Sagacity to difcern both Good and Evil ; and fuch Language is not unintelligible Cant, as the Enquirer reprefents it. The Soul of the Believctj hath its Senfat ions as well as the Body ; There is a fpiritual Senfe which enables Believers to dH ftinguifli Things. Hence, Heb. 5. 14- the Apoftld fays, Sutftrong Meat belongttb to them that arm of full Age, even thefe, tube, by reafon of Ufel have their Senfes exercifed to difcern both Gooi end Evil. Further, Why faid he nothing to that Part ol .the Argument, That, if People were not to have Vote, and if their Confent was riot needful how could they be punifhed for the Ignorance] or Wickednefs of their Paftors ? And to me 'tis! equally clear, as that Two and Two make Four J It the People have a Right to flee from the Voice] of Thieves and Hirelings, they have a Right td chule whom they ihall hear ; for it cannot but be Sin to forbear Hearing, when Paftors can be had to feed them with Knowledge and Underftand^ ing. I i SECT. ( 117 ) SECT. VIII. Wherein are anfwered the Enquirer's Objeftions againjl the People's Right, drawn from feve- ral Ordinations of Minifters under the New T'eftament, in which there is no exprefs Men* tion of the People's Ele£tion 3 &c. A FTER pretending to anfwer our Argu- i ^ ments, the Enquirer comes to confider fome Ordinations of Minifters mentioned in the New Teftament, fubje&ing his Thoughts upon thefe Co fuch as arc able to fet him right ; but who they are, whom he (hall think thus ab)e,is hard to tell. Here he cites three Places of Scripture, in which we have an Account of Ordinations, where there is no exprefs Mention made of the People's Ele- ction ,• And therefore, fays he,|it may be thought, in the Apoftles Times, the People had not the Eleftion of their Paftors. For Reply to thefe, in general, I fay, The Silence of an Hiftorian in Things commonly pra&ifed, is no Proof that they were not done: Such negative Arguments ire not concludenr. Eleftion,in the Apoftles Days being the common Practice, may well be fuppofed in fuch Cafes : Or may we not as well fay, That in the Apoftles Days none were ordained by lay- ng on of the Hands of the Presbytery, but only Timothy, feeing we read of none other fo or- dained ; or, that Timothy alone was to ordain, becaufe the Ap( lie, writing to him,cautionshim 3nly, faying, Lay Ha?ids fu.iienly on no Man ? i Tim. <. 22. He tells us, He reads of an Ordination of O- /erfeers, Acts 20. 28. another r 'Tim. 4. 14. .ano- H 3 thcr ( US ) fcher Tit. f. 5. yet no mention of the People's d\ufing them ; hence he would infer, they were not chofen by the People. I think the Author of the original tDraughs argues from this To- pick, whether the Enquirer hath the Hint fronv him, I know not: But, for Anfwer, what was {*uft now foid of negative Arguments, anfwers all us long Reafonings from thefe Inftances. He cites Clemens Romanus, faying, c The A- c poftles, preaching through the Provinces and * fcities, appointed their firft Converts, having 1 * Trial of them by the Spirit, to be the Bifhops € and Deacons of thefe that fhould afterwards be- j * lieve/ Anpw. 1. I fee nothing here againfl our Argument. 2. The fame Clemens Roma- mis in that fame Letter affirms, That the Apo- files themfelves appointed approved Perfbns for ' the Work of the Miniftry, wvivfoMetm. t>j; zk- tktietcLs taw, by, or with, the Confent, Choice and Complience of the whole Church : But of this Citation from Clemens, and what he fays further anent it in his publick 'Tejlimony made more piblick> I may take Occafion to fpeak more fully afterwards. He fancies Perfons were or- dained Minifters in the Apoftles Days, by the ex- traordinary Direction of the Holy Ghofi pointing out the Man ; but all this is only his own Con- jecture, without any fufficient Document. He cites 1 T'im. 4. 14. concerning TimPthy\ Ordination, where no Mention is made of the I*eople*s Choice. Anfw. 1. Neither do we read of publick Fading and Praying on that Occafion, yet there is no Reafbn to thipk they were neglected. And ^Timothy was an Fsuange- Jijt 9 an extraordinary Office-bearer, and was not . fixed ( *IP ; ) fixed to any particular Charge ; fo thfs fays nothing flgainft the People's Choice in ordinary Cafes ; and yet, as fbme have obferved, the A- poftle would not take Timothy to the Work pf the Gofpel with him, till he had a good Report anent him from the Brethren at Lyflra and lco- niutn, of which we read Affs 16. z, 2, 3. Our Enquirer would have all the Eledions of Paftors in the firft Age of the Church, to have fceen made by fuch as had the Gift of difcerrring Spirits " v/ithout the People's Choice. And hence* in his ^PiibJiakTeftimony made more fublick, p. 56. 57. he fays, * I read, that, upon the Martyr- * dom of James at Jervfalem^Stmeon the Son of r Cleophas was chofen to his be Succeflor by Per- * fons that had this Gift of difcerning 5' and then he falls on at a Broadfide upon the Author of c iqniry into the Method of fettling Tarijbes, coi: to the Afls and 'Pratlice of the Church of Scotland, faying, c I'm confounded, that the Author of the Enquiry into the Method, Sec. f a Gentleman of undoubted Honour, fhould * pervert this Paflage as he has done ; I muft fay ervert, if he has not taken it upon Truft. He in p. 58, cites Evjebius after this Manner, viz. at "iter the *Lcath of the slpofile James, Church oj Jerufalerri conveened and etefted - imeony is Sncceffor. Now,there being no Words in 1 :u$> importing that the Church r of Jtrvfalem did conveen an :; I f fhall give hi/n a faithfu 1 Tr :ion of this Pa' f fi^e to let him ri;^ht, /y.«T■ ^^mti^mmmm^ ( I2 4 ) « Church which I fhali take Notice of is, That, • in the Epiftle to Titus, Chap. i. 5. where the ' Apoftle writes to him, For this Caztfe left I € thee in Crete, that thou Jhottldft fet in Or- * der the Things that are wanting, and ordain € Elders in every Church, as I had appointed thee. c Now,becaufe there is no Mention ofthe People's Eleftion here, and becaufe, thinks our Author, 'tis probable Titus did not tarry fo long in that Place as, by a human Sagacity, he could know who in Crete where fit for the Office of the Mi- niftry ; therefore Titus 9 having the Gift of dif- cerning of Spirits, without any human Ele&i- on, he elected thofe Officers, and ordained them : But, that Titus ordained without the People's Election, there is juft as much Ground to think, with fundry Prelatick Writers, that he ordained alone ; for there is no Mention of any Laying on of the Hands of the Presbytery in this Epiftle ; Eut, as Dr. Rule calls that Argument Meer pu- erile Sophiflry, we may upon as good Ground affirm it is fo in this Cafe. And the Apoftle di- rected Titus how to ordain, namely, thefe only that were of good Report : And that, as was hinted before, fhows what Intereft the People had in the Calling of their Paftors. That emi- nent Divine Chemnitius, in his Examination of the Council of Trent, fays (a), c Titus in Crete € had the Overfight in ruling and moderating the c Eleftion of Presbyters, that they might be mar 4 naged in a right Manner ; and that, by Ordi- € nation, he might approve and confirm the E- c leftion which was rightly gone about. * And c the (a) p. 4"> ■ 111 11 1 1 l«ll ,»»■»— qw^i*— — m^m* ( i a* ) c the Apoftle commands him, That he lay Hands • fuddenJyon no Man, nor partake of other Mens c Sins; Approba?ido fci licet ele&ionem ant voca- € tionem, non rite faftam, viz. by approving e an Ele&ion which was not given in a right ' Manner/ c The Apoftle tells 7ltus, he was to ordain El- c ders as he had appointed him ; That is, fays our € Author, by Impofition of Hands, Prayer and € Fading, and fhows him the Qualifications of € the Perfons he was to ordain, but fays not the c Perfons he was to ordain was to be ele&ed by c the People/ For Anpwer, There is fully as much Ground to fay,The Apoftle appointed him to ordain Elders upon the Call of the People, as to fay he appointed him to ordain with Impo- iition of Hands, Falling and Prayer ; for there is not the leaft Intimation of thefe in the Text, tho' no doubt they are fuppofed as well as the other. Bur, allow our Enquirer to add and ex- plain, and he will make the Scripture prove as he pleafes. The forementioned Dr. Wall hath been of a different Mind from our Enquirer in this Plaee ; for, in the (Preface to his Notes upon 7i/W, he fays, Such Rules (to wit, as the A- poftle here gives to Titus) where continued, would keep up in the Sijbops and (Paftors, a, cordial Love, Care and Concern for the Soul's Good of the People ; and in the People a Love, and Reverence, and Obedience to their *Pa(lon fo chofen. But alas I — And, if our Author pleafe to confulc Calvin, in his Infiitutions, Lib. 4. Chap. 3. Seft. 1 5. then he fays, ( They are deceived who f think there is any Weight from this Argument f anent Timvtbj and Km.' And further he affirms, ( I* ) affirms, c liis not credible *Patil gave more to * them than he took to himfelf, who ufed to € create Bifhops by the Suffrages of the People/ citing AEls i^ 23. And wh£re;ishe dtzsTheofhiJaB, faying (a), The Trial andOrdipation, or .%etj#rm& of fo many Bifhops,was committed by the Apoftleto Titm; and then adds : /Tt>i$ is another Proof that the Word %&fir$n& fometimes limply fignifies Ordi- nation. ~ Ic is a lirtle ftrarige to fee a Man pre- tending to fnch Accuracy, adducing a Citation to' this Purpole in this Place; for no other De- fign can be given of citing c Iheophila£l here, but to fhow that the Word %eifrrcvta. is fometimes fo taken : And none denies, bur in later Times the Word hath been To ufed by fome;, tho 3 ftill in an Improper Senfe, when taken for Ordination ; and then it is meant of an Ordination after Ele^ fiion. In Concluiion of this Seftion, he fays (£), * Thus I have finifhed the third Thing I inten- € ded, and it willtto^V appear that there is no- * thing in the New Teftament that dotji either € exprefly, or by neceflary tbnfequence, efta r « blifh to' the People a Right of Ele&ioh, or ' fhov/, that th t any Time did exercife it at *.' the Direction of the Apoftles.' Jhf. Many, if their own judges, frail never lofe a Caufe : However, it is no rare Thing to find fuch as have faid little or nothing to the Purpofe thus confident : As in the Cafe of Mr. Rhind, who fpeaks of every Thing on the Presbyterians Side, as if it was Weaknefs, Prejudice and an Argu- ment V m mrm~% hi— .mi ii ■ p^wp^^^WBWP— — rnmiij i » '*f<0 P- ?*• (V P- 55- ( 7 27 > inent of a defperate Caufe ; and fays Mr. An^ t derfon, c His Fancy wrought fo as if he had for r ever decided the EpiJcopal y Arrninian and * Liturgical Controverfies ; hence he condu- ' ded his Book with a £>. E. 2> ;' as if all he faid had been clear Detnonftration : And fuch is the Caie here with our modeft and humble Enquirer. And fo much in Anfwer to his Ex- ceptions againft thofc clear Scripture-Arguments from which our Proteftant Divines have argued for the People's Right to eleft their own Pallors : And, for all he hath faid to weaken thefe, ftill I think they abide in Strength • and tho* they were lefs clear, I might fay, with the Weftminjler Aflembly in Anfwer to the dijfenting Brethren [a) y namely, c That fuch Proofs and Evidences 1 mud be admitted in this Point, as are acknow- r ledged and allowed in other Parts of Church- r Government, which are not always immedi- [ ately out of Scripture, fufficiently clear to con- ' vince pertinacious Adverfaries ; and yet the : Scripture-grounds compared with the Light of ' Nature, are fufficient to fatisfy pious and mo- derate Men. Thofe, as One fays, who chufe/ :o be ScepitckSy may, if they pleafe, hold the Balance fo, as that the moft cogent Arguments may not weigh down the moft trifling ObjeSi- ons, but the Scales may ftill hing even. SECT. ') P- 5 ( is8 ) > SECT. IX. In which fitne Scriptures are adduced, confir* ming the People's Right to elett their 2>a- Jlors, bejides thofe that have been mentioned by the Enquirer. r\UR Author fays (a), r He hath not out ^- of Deiign omitted any known Proof in- / lifted on by Writers on thisSubjeft :' Inti- mating to his Reader* be hath anfwered alJ the Arguments for the People's Right. But, in my humble Opinion, he hath anlwered none of them to Purpofe : And here, in this Chapter, I fhall inftance fun dry Arguments pleaded by our Divines, which he hath not (b much as at- tempted to anfwer : i. It is argued, As this is a Privilege, which is naturally inherent in all free Societies, to chule . their pwn Rulers ; lo this Power is naturally inherent in the Church of Chrift as a Chriftian Society : And therefore this Freedom cannot be denied unto her, the moft truly free-born Society upon Earth. Mr. Tark argues to excellent Pur- pofe from his Topick (b) ; fo doth the learned Tiflet, who fays, ' It is the fame Way in the * Church as in all other Societies ; none of them € want a Right to conftitute their chief Head c to govern them, &c. y And, to deprive the ] Church of Chrift of this Liberty, is fpiritual Rob- bery. Hence Calwerwood, having aflerted, c That, in Ecclejia prima primitiva. Sec. in c the ..!■ ■ » »^=» (a) p. 125. (t>) againfi Tauonages, p. 115, 1*4, 173- ( 129 ) r the Primo-primitive, that is, the Apoftolicai c Church, the Election, both of Paftors and . c other Officers of the Church, was in the f Power of the Church f he adds in the fame Paragraph, Sed quod libertas, &c. t But that the r Liberty, which the Bridegroom hath given to € the Church his Bride, fhould altogether be ta- c ken from her, facrilegiurn eft, rapina eft ; It r is Sacrilege and Robbery/ And the judicious Calvin calls this, An impious Plundering of the Church. Sir David 2)alrymple, in that Speech of his before the Parliament 1712, fays, c Will f not the Body of the People complain that a c Paflor is impofed upon them ? Has a Superior * a Title to impofe in Matters of that Kind upon c his Vaflal ? or a Landlord on his Tenant 1 Has not the exorbitant Ufurpation of Superi- ors and Landlords over Mens Bodies and € Goods been loudly complained of ? And, € will they now pretend to extend their Superio- € rity over Mens Souls too, in Matters of a fpi- c ritual Concern t Yea, that Church of Eng- land Divine Dr. Field fays, c That each People c and Church ftand free by God's Law to ad- € mit, maintain and obey no Man as their Pa- c ftor, without their Liking ; and that the € People's Eleftion by themlelves, or their Ru- € lers, dependcth on the firft Principles of hu- c man Fellowfhip and Aflemblies ; by which c Caufe, tho' Bifhops, by God's Law, have € Power to examine and ordain before any Man € be placed to take Charge of Souls ; yet have I < th«y : ( J 3°, ) € they no Power to impofe a Paftor upon anf E Church againft their Will (a).' 2. Minifters of the Gofpel are the Peopled Mouth in Prayer to God ; and Reafon fays, A believing praying People ought to have the Choice of that Perfon who is to fpeak to God as their Mouth and in their Name. To this Purpofe argues Mr. Bowleg faying, c It is their € Right to chufe a Minifter, in whofe Vice or i Room the Paitor doth minifter; and it is juft, £ the Paftor being, not only God's Mouth to c the People, but the Mouth of the Church to c God in pouring out Prayers, that he (hould c not be obtruded upon a People whom they c have refufed upon juil Caufe : For, fays he, it * is a Rule in Law, Ab omnibus approbari d&* € bet qui omnium vicemjiipplet > He ought to € be approven by all who lupplies the Room of € all/ And/ if a People think the Perfon cho- fon, or offered by others, hath not the Gift or hath hot the Grace of Prayer, if they cannot think he prays in the Holy Ghoft, and is not fit to exprefs their Cafe, that may be a jufl Caufe for their refuting of him, even tho* he had other Gifts* 3. Chrifi: the King of Zion hath given his Church and People a Right to ufe all thefe Means, which are for their Safety and Preferva- tion ; and, faithful Minifters being of the greateft Ufe this Way, furely he hath given them a Right to make Choice of fuch. ^Furretiiie, when arguing againft this of Election's being the{ Right of Paftors only, he fpeaks to this Purpofe;] (a), Seeing! e— (a) Of the Church, Lib. j. Cap. 54. (( w ) (a), c Seeing the Church is a Society which God c gathered by the Miniftry of the ApoftleSj and c daily gachereth and .preferves by the Preach - c ing of the Word and Ufe of Sacraments, it is * needful that God, who is never wanting to his e Church in Neceflarks, fhould given her from *' that Moment he formed her a fufficient and : full Right of ufing all Means that are necdla- ry fer her Prefervation ; among which Means, : w ithout Doubt, the Miniftry is a principal one, : ■ The Church being a holy Society of Men c which God hath gathered by his Word,- that c they may live among themfelves in good Ot- € der, and whom he will preferve in the World I* to the End ; therefore it is needful that he be* How upon her a Right of calling and having Paftors, by whom fhe may be inftrufted and r governed/ And this Reverend and Learned (Author hath more to this Purpof?: So ^iElet fays 3 F It cannot be denied, that God, in conftituting * his Church, has given her a fufficient Right to ufe all Means that contribute to her Preierva- tion and Edification, of which Means the Mi- niflry is onp of the moft confiderable. God,wha hath given to all the Faithful, of which tho Church is compofed, Faith and Holineft, hath obliged them to continue in the Exercife of theie Chriftian Virtues, to defend them againifc c all the Attacks and Frauds of the Enemies of 1 our Salvation,to increafe and fortify them more 1 and more ; and every one knows, that the c Miniftry is a lawful Means for all thefe End J, \ God hath given the Church the Right of cal- I z ' ling im m ■ ■ ■»■ l» , . * m a— — «t— wmmmmmmm lm. » i *■ ■* (a) Lcc. 18. «SYff. <}. ( I}2 ) c ling Paftors, becaufe he is never wanting to c his Children, to communicate to them what is c neceflary for them. Again, the Reverend Mr. Bowles he argues to this Purpofe (a). So Wen* delineund others. 4. The mutual Compaft and Obligation which is between a Paftor and People, requires, That, as the Paftor hath Liberty or not to accept the Charge of fuch or fuch a Flock, fo this alfo requires a Liberty in the People to accept of him or not for their Paftor, as they think meet. So the Reverend Mr. Bowles, who fays, c That CcMj c venant which is between the Paltor and Flock,, c or Multitude of the Faithful, for their Well-be- € ing, importunately requires this, Hoc ipftim c fiagitat ; That Covenant, I fay,by which the € Paftor binds himfelf to God and the People, to r watch in thofe Things which are neceflary for * their Salvation, arid by which the Flock or c . Multitude of the Faithful bind themfelves to € hearken to the Word, difcharging all the Du~ € ties they owe unto a Paftor ; it bears this in it, * The relative Duties between Paftors and Peo- € pie imply a Covenant ,• and, in every Con- € tra& or obligatory Covenant, there ought to € be a mutual Confent, at leaft tacite/ The Re- verend Mr. Coupar, in an Admiflion-Sermtfn on Mai. 2. 8, 9. fays, c There is a Covenant be- € tween Miniftersand People; both folemnly en- c gage to one another before the Lord,- Minifters € promifeto take the Charge of People's Souls, c and to be faithful in all Things to them ; and € the People, that call them, engage to be dutiful * to **' ■ m *. mmk w ■■ > 1 1 i ^ wmmmmmmm mfrn*- (*) tPaft.-£vavfrp.iu € L>n-J to them, and to fubmit to their Miniilry in the c Lord/ 5. This appears highly reafonable, in re- gard, when a raftor is the Choice of a People, it draws out their Attentions to him, making cheerful in difcharging relative Duties ; whereas, 'tis known from fad Experience to be quite other- wife, when Paftors are thruft in upon a People. Where there is a mutual Confent, Nature's Light dictates the Minds of Paftor and People are join- ed more cloiely, and each difcharges what is Du- ty the more cheerfully. And the Reverend Mr. Socles affirms, € That this conducetli very c much to gain the Afteftions of the Multitude of c the Faithful to a Paftor, when he is one whom r they judged meet for the paftoral Charge/ IVendelme fpeaks to the fame Purpofe, faying, c Unlefs the Church hath the Power of calling € her Paftors, it cannqtbe that of Free-will lhe i fhall always fubmit to her Minifters, which yet: c is no lefs needful in the Miniiby, than in Mar- * riage* So Mr. GMefpie, who fays (a)> ( As the free Confent of People in the Election, is a great Obligation and Engagement, both to them to fubjeCt themfelves in Chriftian and uiliinj Obedience to him, whom they have willingly chofen to be over them in the 1 j and to the Perfon clefted to love them, and to oflrr up himielf gladly upon the Service and Sacrifice of their Faith : So, where this Oblation or mutual Union of the Hearts ( tor and People is wanting, mutual Duties are not dune 1$ c - (a J Mifccll. gtteft. f>. 22^ -• •- c ( 134 ) • yvwasi but as it Were by Conftraint and Ne- c ceffity i they in the mean Time drawing back* c from the Yoke, and he, at the belt, watching e over them, not with Joy, but with Grief and * Sorrow of Heart. 3 So Tiirretihe, who fays (a), Neither is it to be omitted here, what we read in the old Pontifical > where the Bifhop ordained fays, It was not inftitute in vain by the Fathers, concerning the Election of them that are to be admitted to the Government of the Altar, that the People be confulted ; becaufe it is neceffary in order to One's yielding more eafy Obedience to the Pallor ordained, that he is One to whom he gave his Affent before his Ordination. Which is fo manifeft in this Cafe, fays T^urretine, that iPaffizis 3 Valentitis, Canonicus> at the Council cf T'rent, perfwaded the Council to fufter that to be corrected, and thefe Places to be expunged that mentioned fuch a Thing. 6. Some, as the Reverend Mr. Gillefpie, argue * from thit, c That it is a common Maxim among c the Fathers, Quid ad omnis pertinet omnium € confenfu fieri debet ; That which concerneth c all, ought to be done by the Confent of all ; 4 c Common Senfe dictates this/ And fo the Au- thors or Author of the Full Vindication of the. Commiffion's Overtures cites this Maxim once,; and .again (b), calling it one of the fundamental, Maxims oj Presbytery : And, when treating of the Calling of Minifters, that Vindication cites the London Minifters approving of this Maxim, That which toucheth all, ought to b« done by all j (a) Zoc. 18. Seft. 17. A *58. (*Jjp. 34j* / fa t all ; feying, This Maxim takes f lace tn the Cafc ling of Minifter s. It is true, that Vindication applies it to the general Sejftons ,• but it holds in all Ele&ions, all being equally concerned in the Perfon chofen : And, to allow People no more but a Liberty to content, and not to regard it, is, as that Vindication fays, a mere Shadow a tDream y leaving the Sound of a Word behind it, and no more ; Por , if a Presbytery be not obliged to pay any manner of Regard to their Conlent or Diflent, what an airy 'Privilege is this ? 7. Our Divines argue fr6m the great Hurt it doth to the Souls of the People, and the Succefs of the glorious Gofpel, to have Paftors thruit in upon Congregations without their Choice and Content. Profeftbr Zanchy fays {k) x Eligere Iptftores, die. c To elect Paftors without the People's Confent, I. It is not Apoftolical, nei- ther lawful, and hereby fach a Minifter is not •a lawful Minifter. 2. It is repugnant to the Liberty of the Church, and hereby that which 'hrift hath given her is taken away ; and, how c great a Crime is tjiis! 3. This is not to the lntereft of the Paftor, for lie can never execute : his Office with a good Confcience ; neither is this for the lntereft of the Church, which will not willingly love nor hear him who is thruft : in upon her without her Confent/ So the Re- verend Mr JGil/ej j b), who fays of hun who obtruded upon a People without their own Ele- n, c It is well (aid by , , That he ' can neither with a good Confcience exercife hie 1 4 ' Mi! (a) In J^iiar. 'Prtcep. Col. 785. (b) Mfcel. ( I?* ) 1 ' Miniftry, nor yetlbe profitable to the People/ * becaufe they will not willingly hear him, nor j ' fubmit themfelves unto him/ And there is a great deal of fad Truth in what Hickeringill fpeaks, tho 3 it may be delivered with too much ot a merry Difpofition, when he fays, But, how can Men relifh what is crammed down their Throats as Capons are ferved, or given them with a Horn like a Drench ? This makes an immortal Feud and Difguft generally betwixt the Phyfick's Patients, and their Eccle- fiaftical (not Fathers, but) Farriers, that force open their Mouths, and pour down what they pleafe : Thus are the People treated like Brutes rather than Men ; and Chriftians they are like to be good Ones. But, what cares the reading Don of the Pulpit? He cries, I am instituted and indufted ; Come to your Parifh-Church : The Horfe and the poor Afs muft graze where he is tied ; Til feed you in fpite of your Teeth; Ay, and flarve us too in fpite of our Teeth. There is neither Reafon nor Religion for this : If he were never fo good a Phyfician of Souls, all he fays is accepted with Prejudice, and as difguftful ; for, let his Potion be never fo whole-*' fom, it goes againft any wife Man's Stomach to be drencht. This is a!fo the Fault of our Con- ftitution, and wonderful are the Inconvenien- cies that follow this, as Animofities eternal be- tween Minifters and People, Suits at Law about his Maintenance, for they pay as they hear, only fo much as they are forced to ; And, as 4 for the Care of their Souls, they truft him no c mors ( i?7 ) more than they will their Bodies with a Phy- c fician of another Man's Chufing. 9 The Au- hor of the Overture anent planting vacant "Ta- 'ijbes, tranfinitted by the General AJfembly to Presbyteries, confidered, publifhed laft AUembljr, \y$ (a) 9 * To me it is next to felf-evident, that the Method propofed in this Overture, or any other, that deprives the People of their Free- dom of Choice in this Bufinefs, has a dired: Tendency to blall the Miniftry, and ftarve the People, both as to Gifts and Grace, and has had that Effeft already to a fenfible Degree, iq confequence of our Church-Proceedings and Decifions in relation to Trefentations and Ac- ceptations? Thefe and fundry other Arguments our En- quirer could not but know of; for they are hin- ted to bim by Gillefpie or Imrretine, whom he hath cited once and again ; or in the learned Mr, Bowles, to whom he was referred by Jus c Popult. So it is ftrange how he could fay in the Begin- ning of his Appendix, I have not out oj ^Defign omitted any known Troof infifted upon by Wri- ters on this Subjeff, when he had not touched one of thefe Arguments more than John 10. 5. I know not if our Enquirer thought his Promi- fes of a fair candid Rcprefentation, and telling the World how devout he had been at entring on the Subject, and how grateful he had been for Affiftance, was enough to make the World be- lieve he was a Man upon whofe Affirmation they might depend, without the Icaft Jealoufy of bein g im« — ' — 1 — ~ j 1 ■ (a) p. 10, 11. ( i}8 ) impbfed upon. And fo much for Arguments confirming the People's Right. Having vindicated the Scripture-argument! petitioned by the Enquirer for the People's Right,- and adduced fome other Topicks confir- ming this, I proceed now to confider what elfe is laid in the Modeft and humble Enquiry. iv CHAP. IL Containing Remarks npon the T!itk~ page of that So ok. Jf* ■ ^*IS commonly laid, In ^Titles of Ho- fj nour there's no Falfhood ; whether" H it be jfe in Titles of this Nature, I fhall not difpute : Bijt, for all our Author's Pretenfions to Modefty and Humility^ fome think a Title the very Reverfe of thefe Epithets had been fully as proper for the Perfor- mance. In the Front of his Book, i. He cites the 5th Canon of Laodicea, in which 'tis laid, € The c Election of a Minifter muft not be made in the f Prelence of thefe who are in the Rank of Hear- c ers.' According to what muft be hisSenle of this Canon, the Heritor, be he never fo high, tho' a Prince, yea, even the King himfelf, is cut off from having the leaft Intereft in the Choice of a Miniiter, unlefs he enter into Orders, and become a Preacher ; and all Heritors are in the , Rank oi Hearers. But there is not a Word in all that Canon which ( n* ) Ivhich makes in the lcait againft the Peoples* Right in calling their Minifters: And, for un- flerftanding' the Meaning thereof, it would bfc nfidered, Amtfng the Antiems the People wete i lifftnguifhed into kverdlRanks-oi-C/.iJJes (a);' a*, t. Catechumens, i. Tenitents. Of which there ivere fundry Sorts; as, ift, O/ T&fiktAorrts, who food weeping in the Porch of the Churchy in- reating fuch as went in to pray for them. The id were their ia&vuzvot, which is the very Word : or Hearers in this Canon : They were admitted :o hear the Scriptures read and expounded to the People, and were to depart at the fame Time with the Catechumens. The $d Rank were fhofe that were defigned i/WIt becaufe., Sermon being ended, they fell proftrate before the Bifliop or Minifter, mak'i Confeffion of Sin ; and they were to depart with the chu- mens. The 4th Rank were calk ^ who flayed with the reft of the Congregation, joining in Prayer and finging Pfaltns after the Ca- techumens and other Ten/rents were gone forth, tho' they were not allowed to tarry and partake in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper. And, I-aftly, There were their -r/ro/ or Faithful, who, having been baptized, were alio admitted to par- take of the other Seal of God's Covenant. Now, the ' ' or Hearers, being an in- ferior Rank of Chriflians, who were not allowed to partake in the Sacrament of the Zord't Sup- >', nor fo much as to tarry to join in Prayer and Praife with the 17/rc/, Fait or Setiwin, but were obliged to depart before th publick Worfhip was over } no great Wonder that ■ w (a) Cave'; Trim. Cbr- ?• M<* ( H° ) that the Antients made fuch a Canon as, 7%at the EIe£tion of a Minijler Jhould not be in the fPrefence qf tbofe that were in the Rank of Hearers. And, thofe being exprefly excluded, I humbly think the Canon plainly implies, that the Ttim or Faithful were allowed to be prefen^ and have their Choice in the Election of Paftors ; and hence the learned Rutherfurd cites this very Canon to prove, that, according to the Antients, the People had the Right of Ele&ion {a). a. In the Title-page he cites the 1 3th Canon of the feme Council of Laodicea, in which 'ti$ fkid, * It is not to be left to the Multitudes to c make the Ele&ions of thofe who are to be or- € dained to the Priefthood/ That Canon is fo far from being againft fuch as plead for the Peo- ple's Right to eled their Paftors, that it is the very Thing they plead for: They are all againft leaving the Election to the rude promi/cuous Multitude, affirming, This is only the Right of fuch as are Men of Judgment and Probity ; the Privilege of fuch as have been, or in the Judge- ment of Charity might be, admitted to the Lord's stable; the Privilege of the t/s-o/ or -Believ* ing. Such as ftand for the People's Right, they are not for leaving the Election fo to them, as to exclude the 'Presbytery's Moderation ; nor are they for leaving the Election fo to the People , as upon their Eleftion the Candidate chofen is forthwith to be ordained, without the Presby T tery's Examination, "Trial and Judgment. Voe- tins underllands that Cdnon thus (b) ; fo Ruther- furd (a) 2)ue Right ofPresb. p. xpi. (b) ToL Eccl. Part 2. /. 5 jtf. ( Hi ) furd (b) ; 16 alfo Gillefpie (c) ; fo [Cartwrigbt , Junius and others. 3. In his Title-page he adduceth Fitting* faying c It is abundantly evident from the Hillary c of the New Teftament and *Paufs EpiftleSj c that the Apoftles and Apoftolical Men did de- € fign and eleft Paftors to the feveral Churches, c and did ordain and inftall them in their Office : € But it is not fo plain that the Names of thole c who were elefted were to be propofed to the c Church , either to be appro ven or difapproven ; € neither can ye gather it from any certain or f plaufible Argument/ Our Enquirer ieems to lay a great deal of Strefi upon Vitringa, who, he fays, is one of the fir [I, Rank for Learnings citing thir Words of his once, again, and a third Time. Now,concerning this Author, and the Citation from him ; 1. According to this Citation, if ta- ken in the Senfe in which the Enquirer 00 doubt intends it, Miniflers may be fettled, not only without confuting the vulgar common People, but alfb without ccnfulting Elders or Heritors^ the Honor at i> *Primores Tlebis, or Higheit in the Congregation ; for, by the Church here, the People in general are furely meant. 2. Vitringa his Sentiment and the Enquirer's are dire&ly Antipodes in many Things, as may be fhown afterward*. 3. Our attentive and ingenuous Enquirer hath jnot given Evidence of being both, in his Trans- lation of the laft Claufe of that Citation : For, 1. Where- -*-»-. (*) Due Right of 'Pruk, P. so 4 . (c) Eng. 'Pot. Cer. /. afa. g ( 142 ) I. Whereas he makes Vnringa fay, fit is nq c plain that the Maijies of thofe who were ele r .irli anient* s Ait anent fettling vacant Churches 1690, ant: that Act its being peaceably fulmitted to by all the *Pref» K w'S (4) P- 5- ( 14* ) byteries and Judicatories of this Church till 17123 and of the aged and experienced ^ajlors^ who were alive ajter the Revolution, their be- ing advifed about that A6i, and their giving good Ajji(la?zce in framing thereof. There needed not a Word be added for Attfucer to all this,beyond what was publifhed lafl Year in that little Piece, intituled, "The Overture confidered ; or, gHieries upon the Overture : Of which our Enquirer hath not taken the lead Notice, tho' he pretends to anfwer fbrne Part of thofe £%u£ Ties. But this inquifitive Author hath a lingular! Talent in anfwering his Oppofite, which is, to! put his 'Thumb upon every Thing which is moil confiderable. He fpeaks of wife Brethren, and I'm fure he wants not Wit ; for he never meddles with any Thing in Jus Topuli Divinum, or the Qjieries, which is too hot for him ; Wh^ fhould he burn his own dear Fingers ? But, left any that have not feen thefe Queries might think what's here advanced is puzzling, and this being a Topick which many ftill infift upon ; I anfwer to it more particularly, and that much in the Words already publifhed in the above- mentioned Qiieries, where it was told him ; 1. The ^Parliament's Aft left more to the People than the Ajfembtys Overture did ; for that* AEl gave only the Nomination and Propofing of the Candidate to Heritors and Elders; where- asthe Overture, now turned into an AB, gives the formal Ele&ionand Catling to them. 2, Tho' the Church of Scotland fubmitted « peaceably to that A&, yet fhe never declared her Approbation thereof; fhe never enacted this* ought to be the Mcthpd of calling Gofpel-mini- fters, ( 147 ) fters. And it is one Thing to fubmit to a Civil Law, t^o* incroaching in fbme Meafure upon the Church's Liberties., and another Thing for her to make an Aft of the fame, if not of a worfe, Nature. 3. If Minifters and People did not complain, it flowed from this, That, in the Time fpecified, tho' Heritors and Elders had the Nomination and Propofing of the Candidate, and for the molt Part ufed only to vote at the Election ; yet the People's Content was asked and obtained. And it is evident from the Form of Calls in the Lar- ger Overtures, printed 1705, befide that Form which is in the Commiffion's Overtures, publi- fhed 1 719, thatjtho* then they gave the Nomina- tion to Heritors and Elders, yet ftill it was their Sentiment ,Sett 'lenient s were not to be made with- out the Congregations Confent. And as the Form of Calls in thofe Overtures, lo the Form of all Calls given in thofe Times,ftill mentions the Congregation's Confent: And then Minifters were not thruft in upon Congregations invito grege* rhen there were no Settlements made by Corre- J>ondents or conjttnEl Meetings, or againft their Vill,nor by Members of the CommiiTion's Choice. 4. Tho* Minifters did not formally remonftrate gainft that Aft, as contrary to our Principles ; 'et they could not but look upon it as oppofite o them 3 and to the Pra&ice of the Church of totlani in all former Times. And fundry of ur valiant Champions for Presbytery fince that ^ime have 3 if not formally, yet materially de- lared and teftified againft it in their Writings, Forrefter, Jarnefbn, Lawier, and others ; /hile in the plaineft Terms they affirm, It is the 'copied Right and Privilege, granted them l.y K 2 Z\m\ Z/WsKing, to elect their own Paftors, without the'leaft Innuendo of Heritors having more Righ in the Aftair than People of inferior Rank. And, even fince that AEt"i6^o y it is known fun- dry worthy Minifters in this Church, tho* they had what was termed the Legal Call, yet could not content themfelves therewith, unlefs they al- fo had the Call or Confent of the People, de- clared, not only verbo, but alfo fcripo, or by Writing under their Hands. 5. Whereas he affirms, c The old and experien- * ced Minifters who had fuffered,were advifed with c bout that Aft, and gave their Affiitance in * framing of it/ This is loudly talked from Time to Time, yet Proof is never offered. But furely there is fully as much Ground to fay,Thofe worthy Minifters were confulted, and affifted as to the Wording the A& of Tarliamtnt aboli-f Jhing Prelacy at that Time, where too much ; Strefs feems to be laid upon the Inclination of tJbe c Peoj>le,zr\& too little upon the Word of God. And had thofe Minifters affifted in framing, and approved of fuch an Aft, they had afted dire-j <5tly contrary to all the ftanding Afts of the Church of Scotland ', and to the known Senti- ments of c Prcsbyterians 5 upon that Point in all former Times ; and to their own declared Senti- ments at granting the lecond Indulgence in', 1672; at which Time a T'eftimony.sKzz agreed. upon by many worthy Minifters of this Church who had taken the Spoiling of their Good joyfully, rather than renounce Tresbyteria Principles, complying with Prelacy : In whicl tTeftiffionythe .Neceffity of the (People's Call I stferted, both in regard of Minifters and People, and ( H9 ) , and the Indulgence is complained of as a Grie- i vance, becaufe thereby 'People were deprived of I their Liberty of a free Election : And in this Tefitmo-ay they defire, f The Liberty of Accefs c to Settlements, as the Lord fhall grant the Op- ' portunity of a free Call from the People/ And further, had they approved and had a Hand in framing any fuch Ait, they had gone •contrary to their declared Sentiments^and the Sen- timents of thofe Thoufands of Presbyterians,who, in a 'Petition to the Prince of Orange in 1688, drawn up by Miniftersand Gentlemen who had fuffered in the former Reigns ; in which, as they earneftly defiled that Laick Patronages might be difcharged ; fo alfo they requefted the 'People might be redored to their Right and 'Privilege of EleEiion, according to the Warrant of Goa's Word (a). Can it be imagined, thofe worthy Minifters were fo changeable in their Principles, as to be for one Thing in itf88, and for another in 1690, affirming the People's Right to eleft their Payors, was warranted to them by the Word of God this Year, and that they had no Right unto it next Year, but what might be ta- ken from them? And^inftead of approving of that ACi, or having any Hand in framing of ir 5 I'm credibly informed, the A CI was no fmall Grief to iome of thofe eminent Servants of ( , who pailed their Fears of its proving hurtful to the I urch 0$ Sot fond. Now, the n of this, and confiderably m )re, was fiid in the -5 ; for taking off the Force of which, the Enquii hath not offered the leall Word. K 3 J ^ And (a) tfodrow's Hilt. Vol. 2. p. 6; 1. ( i$o ) And further, I add, It is a moft improbable Story, fuch Presbyterian Minifters as were alive at the Revolution approved of that A3 3 or haff any Hand in framing thereof ; if we confider what was faid in the Reprefentation ofPresbyte- r i an Government y licenfed April 18. 1690, which Reprefentation was publifhed, 1. To give a plain Account of what Principles Presbyterians hold. 2. To take off the moji material and com~ raon Objections and Reproaches which were ufef cgainfi them at that Time. In which Reprefen- tation it is faid (a), c Chrift hath appointed c what Officers fnall be in his Houfe, and how c they fhall be chofen and authorized, viz. h\ € Election and Ordination.- And the Way c how Men come into any Office or Power in * the Church, is by the Eleftion of the People/ And, when anfwering an Objection (b) 3 which fome were ready to make againft the taking a. way of Patronages, and giving People the Choice of their Paftors, namely, c If that ftiould c be done, then Men of Note and Intereft in c Pariflies may be over-ruled by the Multitude € (which often is ignorant and heady) and fo. * have Minifters impofed on them/ In anfwerjj to that Objeftion, it is faid, 1. Patronages he fhould have o pofed that to the utmoft of his Power. 3. He fays (b), c Having laid afide all Biafs c and Prepofleflion, after fearching the Scriptures c of Truth, and beft Commentaries and Writers c on the Subject, he cannot find this is a Presby € terian Principle ; nor can he find any Text, on € which he can build his Belief, that the People have (»)/• 5. (b; p. 6. have a Right to elect their Paftors by a decilivc Voice/ Anfw. i. All his Pretenfions to Ingenuity lere, will not be an infallible Criterion of Inte- ;rity : For fome Writers, in feeking to demolifh heir Adverlaries, are wont to make the higheft Pretences to uncommon Degrees of Candour. tt HChrifi has given his People a Right to eleft heir own Paftors, be hath furely given them a ilight to do it by Suffrages, in cafe of different >entiments among them. 3. Tho' he could not Snd this, others as free from Biafs, and no lets rapable to make the Difcovery, have founJ it ; is Calderwood, Rutberfurd, Rule, Jamefon. \nd Principal Forrejler, who joined the Presby- erians in the Heat of PeHecution in the late rimes^he fayS(V),T he Right of the People to call heir Paftors,Presbyterians have made good irom everal Scripture-Grounds. Wood againft Lockier ays much the fame (b). And, 4.. For all the inquirer hath faid, the Scripture-Arguments for } roof of the People's Right, remain in their full strength. 'it is true indeed, fome Pnsbyterians who 5rove from Scripture, that this is the People's iight ; yet give the Voice in Election, fome o the Presbytery, and fome to the Cctngrega- ional I- Iderfhip, yet fo as to referve a Negative the People : As c Pi£tet, who, having put the leftion (c), To whom belongs the Right of ting Paitors, whether to the Paltors or to ;he Body of the Church ? anfvvers, c It belongs 1 to (a; Appendix, p. 262. (b) p. 201. (c) Theol. rejl. Edit. 2. Tonu 2. Lib. 14. Caf* 23./. 465. ( **4 ) 4 Co the Body of the Church, and to the Socic- € ty of the Faithful wherever they are, whether * they have a Miniftry among them or not; and* € wherever there is a Multitude aflembled in the c Name of Chrift, in them refides the Right of € calling Pallors/ And he adduceth fundry Ar4 guments for Proof of this from Scripture, ReaV fon, Fathers and Councils, And he gives, thet; Body of the People a Negative over the Ele-* dors, be who they will, affirming, l^hey have a Right to give their Confent or not } to receive. or rejeff the Terfon eleffed. But, if this be the People's Right, it is clear they are allowed of Chrift to ufe it by gi-. ving their Votes and Suffrages in the Affair. 5. He fays, c Many famous and celebrated Di- € vines of the Presbyterian Stamp have been € much in the fame Cafe with him/ I wifh hel had pointed us to the Writings of thefe Prebyte- rians who deny that People have any Right to chule their own Minifters. I own, as formerly, fome of them have been for allowing the 'Pref-i hytery or Congregational Elder/nip to chufe fori them, yet fo as flill to give the People a Nega-J five over thofe Electors, owning it is the* Peopled Right originally. He cites Marefius and Vitri?2ga. As for Vitrin^i ga, I have faid enough to vindicate him from that Afperfion : Marefius alfo was far from beinga of his Mind ; for he Ihews it is the Doctrine oflj Proteftants, That the People have a Divine Right to chufe their o\yn Paftors. In the 51ft, Article of the Selgick Conjeflion (a)> it is faid, Credi- I mtm (a) p. 450. Credimus tniniftros Qwini verbi y Sec We be- lieve, that Minifters of God's Word, Elders and Deacons, ought to be chofen by lawful EleAion of the Church, with Invocation of the Name of God ; and in that Order which is taught in the Word of God/ And Mare* jte,in hxsExegefis or Explication of that Article, ays, 'Preflius debet attendi, Sec. Here it ought o be more clofly confidered what we are put in vlind of by our Confeffien, viz. That lawful Election of 'Paftors behngeth to the Church : So bat Affertion is oppofed to the common Sen- ence of Romanifts, whefe Thefts it is; That he Election of Minifters of the Church doth not elong by ^Divine Right to all the People, nor } titb it depe'tid upon their Covfent and Suffrage. Vnd, after citing Popifh Authors, who alledge, n hat all Right of Election belongs to the Ro- nan 'Pontiff, and having fhown why Romanifts nove that Controverfy with Protefiants, and low Cyprian and a Synod of Bifhops with him vere for the People's Right, he fays, Et tequum n ab omnibus el'igi qui omnibus praeffe debet : ft is jutt that he (hould be chofen by all, who »ught to have the Charge of all. Indeed in his \yftem he fays, t Therc is nothing fo expreily re- orded in Scripture, concerning the Right and banner of Fledion, as, That, a certain conftanc J univerfal Rule can be propofed or eftabli- hed : But the Enquirer (hould not have torn oft' hat Sentence from the Context, where Marefi- 45 his Judgment il more fully e\*pre(Ted, for in bat very Phce he owns the People have a Right n the Atfair; for, in the Words immediately ollowing, he adds, It maybe fai4 The Author of Jus 'Populi feems to have read a great many Books without any Marnier of Judgme7it. If it fhould not be thought immodeft to lufpeft our Enquirer's In-. telleftuals or Integrity, fome might think he had evidenced no extraordinary Judgment in citing Marefius and Vitringa, as being much in the fame Cafe with him. 7. Whereas he thinks, c He will be tolerated c (b) and born with for declaring, That, after c a ferious and confeientious Enquiry, the Right c of Election belongs ftill to the Church-Repre- c fentative, mm (a) /. no. (b)/. 7. * ji < J ' 7 K Tentative, or the Presbytery; it being reafonable to fuppofe, that fuch an Airembly has more Learnings $$c. 9 Upon this I obferve, i. That, according to him, the Nobility and Sentry, Magiftrates and Town-Council, have io more to lay in the ElecTrion of Pallors, than lis Dregs of the People ; for, according to him> ;ll belongs to the Presbytery. 2. This is new Do&rine in the Church of Scotland, and we need to be jealous of Innovat- ions. Our Enquirer complains, That the People re more jealous of their Rights, and that fome viinifters ftand up more for them now, than at he Revolution. But, is there not lome Ground or it ? Rittherfurd fays (a) 3 € Both our Bre- thren the Independents , and we, deny that the Ele&ion is in the Hand of Church-guides/ Dr. Calamy fays (b), * I am for each Congre- gationVchufing their own Paftors : And,fhould a whole Synod hereimpofe upon them, I can- not fee that it can be juftified any more, than when Lay-patrons do it by the Right of Patro- nage/ And the Author of the Letter concer- ning the Commijfions Overtures fays (c)> € He never heard Minitters claim this Right, being no A£t of Government and Jurildicfcion in a ; Congregation, but a Matter which belongs to the ChriltianPeople and their Reprefentatives/ The Enquirer's ftrong Argument for giving the Presbytery the Eledion is, c That it is reafo- nablc to fuppofe, that fuch an Allembly has more Learning, Wiidom ancj Prudence, than • a (a) ) Church of Scotland ; yet, in tranfcribing, he hath not dealt fo very fair : For, in the firft Pa- ragraph of that Section which treats of the jB- le&ion of *Paftors 3 he puts the Word Their in- ftead of That ; The Minifters and Elders, at fuch a Time as there wanteth a Minifter, affemble the whole Congregation, exhorting them to advife and confider who may beft ferve in their Room and Office ; which marreth the Senfe, and keeps from obferving, the whole vacant Congregation was to be aflembled to chufe and nominate a fit Perfon or Perfons to labour in the Work cf the Gofpel among them ; but in the Original Copy it is, that Room and Office, z. Our Enquirer puts in or out Words at Pleafure ; as in the 4th (Parag. of that Seff. where the Words are, One of the Minifters at the Morn- ing-Sermon frefenteth him again unto the Chnrch. But the Enquirer makes it run thus, c Then the Minifter who is to preach prefents c him to the Church (7. e. acquaints them, that c he is moft meet of the ThreeJ He leaves out the Word j4gain> and adds his own GlofIes,as if they were the Words of the "Book of common Or- der ; and by this Means he makes that Book to contradift itfelf : For ^according to his Glofs, there behoved to be Three nominated by the Congre- gation ; whereas, according to the Book itfelf, Only Two, and, if they had not Choice, I think there might only be One. And, as to his Obferves on this Book. 1. He affirms, That here is no Principle laid down ; but it feems the Compofers judged the Orders laid down in this Book, as to the Subftance of them., to be founded on God's Word. For, in the (Pre- face ( rfl ) face they fay> c We therefore do prefent unto yod * - a Form and Order of a reformed c Church, limited within the Compafc of God's f Word, which our Saviour left unto us, as on- c ly fufEcient to govern all our Aftions by/ Tho* here the Enquirer denies not that this Book gives the Election to the People, yet he fays, There is no Scripture-proof adduced. But this is falfe; for, in the Beginning of the firft Paragraph of that Section, which treats of the Ele&ion of Paftors, at thefe Words, The Mini- Jlers and Elders, at fuch Time as there ivantstb a Afi?iijler 3 ajfemble the whole Congregation % exhorting them to advife and confider who may left ferve in that Room ; and on the Margin they cite Affs 14. 13. Tit. i. 5. AEIs 1. which I'm apt to think fhould be AEIs 6. 2. for I can obferve nothing in A£fs 2. which luits that Sub- ject And again in the fourth Paragraph, where tis faid, At which Time alfo the JMiniJier ex- horteth them to humble themselves by Fafting and Trayer, that their Eleffion may be agree* able to God's Will, and alfo profitable to the Church; they cite, in the Margin, Aftst*.. 3* Attsitr. 23. 3. He fays, f The Book of Common Order € did not allow the People their free Choice, but € reftridted them to One whom they thought c beft qualified/ This is alfo denied. As he cannot refufe that the People had the Election, f<> they were not reftrifted in the leaft in their Choice ; for the whole Congregation had the Nomination of the Perfo'n or Pcrfons, whom ihe Presbytery was to examine. And cho', if they had Choice, they were to cbufe two or JL three ( *& ) three as they law meet ; yet, if there was nc Choice, I humbly think^ 'tis clearly: intimatec they might name but One, whom they incli- ned to have,, that he might be examined by Mi- nifters and Elders. 4. He fays, The Congregation was rejirifiedtc One whom they thought bejt qualified. If he mean whom the People thought beft qualified; it is no Reftri&ion ; or, if he means the Peffon the Presbytery thought beft qualified, it was no great Reftri<5tion, feeing he was One of the People's Nomination. He fays, They exhorted the People to the Election of him whom they thought moft meet. This is alfo denied ; for it is only faid, They exhorted them to the Ele- £lion after the Afternoons Sermon. And, had they been abfolutely reftri&ed to the Eleftion oi thatPeffon whom thePresbytery recommended as beft qualifiedjit Would not been a properEleCtion. What Sort of an Election is it, when People are told they muft chufe this Man, or none ? I think the Words of the fourth Paragraph are a clear Proof that the People had Itill their Choice, after the Presbytery's Examination. And after they are told whom the Presbytery judged moft meet, eight Days at leaft before the Election, the! People were exhorted to humble themfelves to 1 God by Fafting and Prayer, that fo their Elefti- on might be agreeable to his Will, and alfo pro- fitable to the Church. Which fuppofes they were allowed their free Choice after the Presby- tery's Recommendation. 5. He fays, c Should a 1 e Presbytery aft fuch a Part in the prefent State * of the Church, they would be greatly exclai- € roed againft, and be roundly told, Ze take tool ? ratick\ * ranch upon you, ye Sops of Levi 9 But,Iet the : People in vacant Congregations have the No- mination of Two, Three, or of One, if they have not Choice of others, and, I dare fay, they will be loth to refufe the Presbytery the Power of 'examining his Meetnefs ; and if the IPresbytery, upon impartial Trial, judge them or him unmeet, they will be content to name lbme others. And fo much for his fair and can- did Reprefentation of the Book of Common Or* der ; and, if I be not miftaken, it will not be lo eafy to reconcile it with the confcientious En- quiry he boafts of. SECT. ir. Concerning the Firft Book of Difcipline. /^\UR Author comes next to the Firft Sook of ^ LQifcipline. And, i. To make his Reader believe, that, according to this Book of DiP cipline, the Presbytery might compel a People to receive a Minifter ; if they coutt not ob)cti a- gainft bis Life or Z)o£Iri?2e; He tranfcribes only a Part of the fourth Se&ion of the fourth Head, breaking oft before he come to a Point ; the Words tranfcribed are (a), f And if his Do&rine be found wholcfom, and able to inllruft the 1 Simple, and if the Church juftly can repre- 1 hend nothing in his Life, Doctrine, or Utte- f ranee ; then we judge the Church, which be- c fore was deftitute, unrealizable if they refufe him whom the Church did offer ; and lhat r they fhould be compelled by the Ccniure ofthe L 2 f Council ■•■ (a), p. «?. ( 1*4 ) * Council and Church to receive the Perfon ap- € pointed and approved by the Judgment of the c Godly and Learned, &c. y Now, here our in- genuous Enquirer breaks oft in the Midft of a Sentence ; the Words immediately following are, Unlefs that the fame Church hath appointed a Man better , or as well qualified to the domi- nation, before that this forefaid atrial was taken of the Perfon prefent ed by the Council of the whole Church. As for Example ; c I*he Council of the Church prefents to any Church a Man to be their Minifier, not knowing that they are otherwife provided ; in the mean \time the Church is provided of another, fuf- ficient in their Judgment for that Charge y whom they prefent to the learned Minijiers and next reformed Church, to be examined : In this Cafe, the Prefent at ion of the 'People to whom he fhould be appointed Paftor, mu[i be preferred to the Prefentation of the Council, or greater Church, imlefs the Perfon prefent ei by the inferior Church be judged unable of the Regiment by the Learned? Now, let the World judge of the Enquirer's Candor ; had I done fo, perhaps there had been fome Ground to accufe me of a Defign, and a great Defign, to deceive, to ufe his own modeft Phrafe. But now, as to his Remarks upon that Sook of Difcipline, he tells, He was not a little furprized at the laft Words of the fourth Head, which are, c But violent Intrufion wc € 4|11 not, when the Council of the Church in € the Fear of God, and for the Salvation of the € People, offereth to them a fufficient Man to / ! in- ( rf* ) inftruft them, whom they fhall not be forced to admit before Examination/ But, for Relief from his Surprize, he may read in a late Piece, ntituled, An Enquiry into the Method of fet- tling 'Parifies, Sec. p. 10, n. where it is (aid, Here it muft be noticed, That fome run away with this laft Sentence of the Paragraph, viz,. Stit violent Intrnfion we call not, when the Council of the Churchy in the Fear of God, offereth unto them a fufficient Man, Sec. as if it were a general Aflertion there intended, That the Council of the Church might in any Cafe give the Parifh a Man at their Pleafure. To which it is anfwered, That, as it was im- poffible for our worthy Reformers thus to mean Contradictions ; fo this laft Sentence muft be confident with what goes before in the very fame Paragraph, wherein they lay down the particular Cafe in which the Council of the Church may give them a Man, namely, When the Parifh is in mora, by being either negli- gent or unwilling to eledt ; and fo this laft Sentence muft of Neceffity relate to that par- ticular Cafe, viz. That, when the Parifh is in mora to elect, the Council of the Church may give them a Man ; and in that Cafe fuch their giving is no violent Intrufion, $$c. Efpecially that there is no other Cafe mentioned in the Books of D:fcipline,in which the Council of the Church can give them a Man, except when the Parifh is thus in mora. And fo the plain Senfe of the Paragraph put together in Coruiftcncv with itfelf runs thus,|That, as the People have Power to chufe their own Paftors, yet, if at any Time they are in mora to eledt, either by their Ne- L j J gligence ( itf* ) gligence or Unwillingtiefs, the Council of th< Church may give them a Man ; In which Cafe fuch their giving is no violent Intrufion, bui giving them a Man in the Fear of God, and for the Salvation of their Souls. And fo verj much do theyfeemto have the People's Elefti on at Hearty that they put the Cafe, That th Council of the Church gives them a Man \ Bui that, in the mean Time, the People have a- greed about another Man : In which Cafe, the People's Man mult be preferred to the Coun- cil's Man ; And the Reafon is A fubjoined in thefe Words, For altogether this is to be a* voided, That any Man be violently intruded or thruft in tipon a Congregation ; But that this Liberty with all Care raufi be reserved to every feveral Church, to have their Votes an a Suffrages in the Ele&ion of their Minifters. And that this is the neceflary and obvious Senfe of this Paragraph, is further evident from the Affertion that follows in the 8, Parag. viz. The Admiffion of Minifters to their Offices, muft co?zfiji in the Confent of the 'People a-ad Church whereto they pall be appointed, anA Approbation of the learned Minifters appoin- ted for their Examination? The firft Book of Dilcipline was mainly com- peted by that great Man of God, John Knox % whom fome have called the Apoftle of the Scots. Spotipvoood fays (a), ' It was framed by him, ' partly in Imitation of the Reformed Churches c in Germany, and partly of that he had fecn * at Geneva ; yet our modeft Enquirer charges c it (a) Lib, 3. Fol. lik ( 1*7 ) f it with Inconfiftency/ But, from what is faid in the above-cited Enquiry, he may be fatisfied k was only a feeming Inconfiftency, which oc- cafioned his great Surprize. I imagine he him- felf could foon have reconciled that feeming Contradiction, had he not been glad of any Handle for bringing a Tafh upon that Book, which pleads fo firongly for the People's Right to eleft their own Paftors by Suffrages and Votes. I hope he will not deny, that it was then thought a Presbyterian 'Principle, and a Principle of the Church of Scotland, That it is altogether to l avoided, that any Than be violently intruded < uft in upon any Congregation ; but this Li- nuft be referved to every fever al Chun to have their Votes and Suffrages in Elefth ef ' Miteifters. ^ 3. He fays, c To me it appears, that they e- r Iteem that only to be a violent Intrufion, wheq c the Patron fixed a Perfon in a Parifh without c undergoing the Trial and Examination of the c Council of the Church/ Aupm. What is more plain, than that they reckoned it a violent Intrusion, when People, willing to chufe, and dcfirous of, a Gofpel-Minilter, had Onethrufl in upon them, whom they had not the Freedom to elect ? I doubt if he can give an Initance from Hiitory, of any at that Time thus thruft in by Patrons : Our Nobility, Gentry and oihcxzjhat od for the Reformation in thofe %)ays, defired 1 Election of Miniferspouli be made by the 4. He affirms, This Book of Difcipline wjs never authorized by any Aft of Allemb I , It was of Authority in the Church of L 4 fandi ( i«8 ) land ; hence the Collectors of our Confeffions fay, c It was of publick Authority appointed and • € ufed in this Church from the Reformation (a). 3 $« The General Affembly frequently took it for their Rule, as appears from Calderwood's Hiftory (b), where we have an Account, In the General Affembly i%6z, it was ordained, That, at every Affembly Superintendents , Minifters and Elders 1?e tried in their Life, 2)o5irine and Execution of their Office ; and that Minifters be not remo- ved from their Kirks, but according to the Or- der fet down in the Book of Difcipline. And again, the General Affembly 1570 limits the Power of Superintendents in the Decifion of Queftions by that Book of Difcipline ; and the Affembly 1 5 7 1 enafts to the fame Purpofe ; and the Affembly 1573 appoints Extracts of an Aft a- nent Superintendents, regiflrate in the Book of Difcipline, to be given to the Minifters of every Province. 3. In 1562, we find the Affembly enjoining Mr. Alexander Gordon, who was cal- led Bi (hop of Galloway, tofubferibe that Book ; and that fame Affembly enjoined all Minifters to befubjecl to their Superintendents in all law- ful Admonitions, as is enjoined in the Book of Difcipline ; And, which fhould have been noti- ced above, the General Affembly 1562, accor- ding to that 4th Head of the Book of "Difci- pline, concerning the lawful Eleftion of Mini- iters, ordained, That Inhibition (loould be made to all and fundry 'Perfons ferving in the Mini- Jlry, who had not e7itred into their Charges by the Order appointed in the Book of Difcipline. 5. He r (a) Title *Page, id Vol. and Introd. to the Contents thereof, (&) p. 32. ( 1*9 ) 5. He affirms (a), Offome who had fubfcri- bed this Book, That they tlmight them/elves o- bliged, upon better Information^ to withdraw their Siibfcripions. But, this fays nothing a- gainft the Book itfelf. And who were they that withdrew their Subfcriptibns ? None but Time- fervers, who withdrew from the Brethren, and alfo from the Lords of the Congregation ; yea, from the Aflembly itfelf for a Time, tho' they came back afterwards to avoid Sufpicion, as K720X and Calderwood tell us. Our ingenuous Enqui- rer would infinuate. That honeft Men withdrew their Subfcriptions from the Book of Difcipliney and were approven in it. But others tell the Story more fairly, faying, c Some of the Noble- c men, who had, in former Times, (hewed them- c felves mofl zealous againft the Toleration of 1% f dolatry 3 were grown a little more cold by the f Flatteries of the Court, and all of them emulous f for each others Greatnefs, were driving who c (hould be mod in Favour with the Queen/ She was againfl the ratifying of that Book, which was earneftly deiired by the Church at that Time; and, if this wasearneitly dcfired by the Church at that Time, it fays, That Book was approven bv the Church. ' 6. He aflerts (b) y The Aflembly i«f) had weighty Reaibns to appoint a Committee of learned Perfons to revile the laid Book ; and the llealon probably might be, Becaufe they thought upon a new Book of Difcipline which might be more taking. Anfoo. r. As to the new Book of Tolicy, it was not computed till about Nine or (<0 P- i0 - W P-io ( r 7 o ) or Ten Years after this. 2. That Book was or- dered to be revifed, in order to its further Con- firmation; if we may believe the ColleEior of thefe Affs of Aflembly and Parliament, which were printed with the Sooks of Difcipline 1621, who is thought to be Calderwood : For, having mentioned the Particulars of the A& of Aflem- bly 15^3, and the Perfons Names appointed to revife the faid Book ; He fays, c By thefe it is * evident, that our Kirk acknowledged the firft c Book to be the Book of "Difcipline, and no- * wife to be abolifhed, but for the Ule of the € Kirk to be further confirmed/ And, in the End of the 'Preface to thefe Books, he fays, c Ei* f ther of the laid Books confirm the other, and * neither of them aboJifli nor innovate the other/ And,if the Enquirer be not fatisfied with this Au- thority, then Til give him a Second, which is the Teftimony of the General Aflembly, nrli in 1638, in their A6t declaring the five Articles of VPerth had been abjured by the National Cove- nant, in which once, again, and a third Time, they refer to the firft Book of Difcipline, for Proof of what the Aflembly affirmed in that Cafe. Again, the General Aflembly 1644, in eftabli- ihing and ratifying the Weftminjter's 2)ireciory for Wbrlhify they approve thereof, c Provi- f ded always, that the faid Aft fhall be no Pre- ' judiqeto the Order and Practice of this Kirk, c infuch Particulars as are appointed in the Books * of fDifciptine, and Afts of General Allemblies/ There you fee, that, in 1638 and 1644, the firft Sock of 2)ifciplipe was of Authority in the Church of Scotland, as well as the fecondSook ; and that it was never refunded, 7* The ( 171 ) JT. The Enquirer fays, There were feveral Things in that Book very exceptionable, which made the revifing of it neceffary ; aod parricula- rizeth this, That it is for dropping tfte Ceremoizy of Impofition of Hands in Ordination. But, if our Enquirer finds nothing of greater Moment to quarrel, then, according to himfelf, there was little Ground for reviling it, at lealt none for ' compiling a new One : For he calls Impofition of ■ Hands a Rite and Ceremony, which is not necef- fary nor eflential to Ordination ; Where then was the great Evil of dropping an indifferent Rite ? And, if that was very exceptionable in the firfi Book of' £ Difcipline, what can be faid for vin- dicating bis Minifiers of Fife, (who, he fays, were mojl wife, valuable, eminent, and very e- minent Minifiers of this Churqh, nc. - fear- ing the Wrath of the King, nor Slaves to Po- pularity) who, even after the feccid Book of Difcipline was compofed and fworn to, yet fay as much as in the firfi Book of 2)i fcipline, name- ly , That Impofition of Hands is not neceffary, but ceremonial,in the Admiffion of Paftors ? Yet, let none miftake me, as if I was a^ainii this. And fo much for his candid Reprefentacion of that firfi Book of Difcipline. SECT. HI. Where ) of the fecond Book of ] )Kne. HP H I S fccond Book is introduced by the En- quirer in the Middle of a 1 ph thus ; c Further it feems, that the firfi Book cf Dip c cipiine '»■ ■ ^p^^> i {a) p. io. ( *7* ) cipline needed to be amended as to this Head of the Ele&ion of Minifters : For, in the fecond Book of Dif cipline > Chap. 3. SeEi. 4. the Ele- ction of a Minifter is thus defined ; The chu- fing out of a Perfon or Perfons to the Office, that vaiks by the Judgment of the Elderfhip (r. e. of the Presbytery, as appears after wards J and Confent of the Congregation to whom the Perlon or Perfons fhall be appointed. The firfi Sook ef iiifcipline determined, Th2t the Eleftion muft be by the Votes and Suffrages of the People ; but the fecond Sook determines, That the Election muft be by the Judgment of the Elderfhip. The People indeed are to give their Content to the Election, but they allow them not a proper decifive Voice, as is evident from Chap. 7. SeEi. 1 3. The Powder of the E- ledtion'ofthem who bear Ecclefiaftical Charges, pertains to this Kind of Aflembly (i. e. the El- derfhip or Presbytery, as the following Words fhow) within their own Bounds, being well erefted and conftituted of many Pallors and .Elders of fufficient Ability/ Here again the Enquirer copies not fo fairly as were to be wifhed; for he fhould have inferted the Words following after a few Lines, which are, c In the Order of Election it is to be ef- c chewed, that any Perfon be intruded into any c Office of the Kirk contrary to the Will of the c Congregation, to which they are appointed, € or without the Voice of the Elderfhip/ And, in citing the 9th SeEi. of the 12 Chap. I humbly think it was needful to tranfcribe the former Part thereof, where it is faid, c The Liberty of f Eleftion of Perfons called to the Ecclefiaftical 5 Fun&ion, ( 173 ) ■ Fua&ion and obferved, without Interruption € fo long as the Kirk was not corrupted by Anti- € chrift, we defire to be reftored and retained c within this Realm,, £S?c/ Again., as he gives his own Comments feveral Times in the Midft of the Citation, fo he does not diftinguifh them by a different Chara&er, nor any other Way s Hence his Reader is apt to take his Glofs for a Part of the Citation. But I proceed to his Re- marks upon that Book. And, i. He fays, It feems the firffc Book of Difcipline needed to be amended : And attempts to prove this from the Difference, which, accor- ding to him, is between it and the feoond Book of ^Difcipline ; affirming, c Tho* the firft Book € determined the Election mud be by the Votes € and .Suffrages of the People, yet the lecond c Book determines, that the Elefiion mull be c by the Judgment of the Elderfhip : Citing, for Proof of this, Chap. 7. § 1 7. of that fecond Book, where it is (aid, c The Power of Eleftion € of them who bear the Ecclefiaflical Charges, c pertains to this Kind of AfTembly (7. e. the Ek € derfhip or Presbytery, as the following Words € (hew) within their own Bounds, being well € ere&ed and conftituted of many Pallors and * Elders of fufficient Ability/ But, for Anfwer, I humbly think, by Eleilion, in that fcventh Chapter, not the Eledion of a Paftor to a par- ticular Congregation, but the Eleftion of a Pa- ftor to the Mmiflry, is meant ; for, in that Place cited to prove his Pofition, there is no Mention of any Eleftion to a particular Charge. And none of us doubt the Presbytery's Right to eleft and make Chgicc of fuch as fiuU preach the Go- r P* J i ( h J 74 ) Jpel ; but that the Presbytery ingrofTed to them- felves all the Power of Election to particular Congregations, leaving nothing to Nobility, the lords of the Congregation, Gentry, Magiftrates, and Town-Council, is very improbable ; For all thar flood for the Reformation in Scotland^ de- lired the Election of Paltors fhould be made by the People, according to the Cuftom of the Church, as "Buchanan tells us. 2. He affirms (a)> c The Election by the El- c derfhip v as good and valid, tho' the Congre- € gation did not give their Content/ But this is denied ; for that Book of Qifcifline makes the Congregation's Confent as efTential to the Eleftion of a Minifier, as the Judgment of the Elder- Jhip ; as in the 6th and 8th Paragraphs of the 3d Chapters, and again in the nth and nth Paragraphs of the 12th Chapter. If, for all that is faid in thefe, a Perfon might be thruft in upon a Congregation without their Confent, then Words are no Signification of Mens Minds. And here it is as clear as a Sun-beam, that tho* we fhould yield it, that by this Book, the EI- derfhip had the Eleftion ; yet ftill the People had a Negative upon both Preaching and Ru- ling Elders ; and, unlefs they gave their free Confent, the Perfon eleded by the Elderfhip or Presbytery could never be fettled without a manifeft violent Intrufion. Our Church-Hiftory gives an Account, In thefe Times, when a Paftor was to be fettled, the Confent of the Flock was ftill to be had (b). And, ^>^m. 1 {a) p. 36. (b) Cald. Hift. p. do, 7 1 . ( 17? ) And, 5. Whereas it is laid in the 6th PagrtU graph of the 3d Chap. "that the Election to the Office that vaikes is to be by the Judgment of the Elderjhip And Co7ifent of the Congregation. By the Judgment of the Elderfhip, I think the Presbytery's Judgment of his Meetneft for the Work of the Gofpel, is meant: For the Word Judgment fignifies a \trial, Opinion, Advice % Approbation or Suit. And, as Confent is given to the People in that Paragraph, fo Confent is the fame with Election ; the People's Confent was their Ele&ion of the Perfon whom the Pref- bytery judged meet : And it appears, from our Books of Difcipline, Presbytery and People had each a Negative upon other. And nothing can be more clear than, accor- ding to that Book of Difcipline^there was no E- le&ion., or the Eleftion was not complete, whatever was the Judgment of the Elderfhip, without the People's Confent or declared Wil- lingnefs ; for there the Election is (aid to conJift, € In the chufing out of a Perfon or Perfons to the Office which vaikes, by the Judgment of the Elderfflip and Confent of the Congregati- c on to which fhall be the Perfon or Perfons c appointed/ And, as the Elderfhip's Judg* went was elfential to the Call, fo was the Con- gregation's Confent ; as is further evident from the Words following, where it is faid, c In the * Order of Eleftion it is to be efchewed,that any ( Perfon be intruded into any Office of the c Kirk, contrary to the Will of the Congregati- c on to which they are appointed, or without € the Voice of the Elderfhip.' As the Elder- (hip's Judgment, declared by their Voice, was tflftte I ( '7* ) rffential to the Call ; fo alfo was the declared WiH and Confent of the People. Chemnitius, in his Examination of the Coun- cil of Trent, fays, c It is profitable to obferve^ c That, in the Hiftory of the Atts y tbmetime* € the Minifters and reft of the Church togethei c did conjunctly propofe and eled thofe tha! € were meet for Pallors, A&s i. fometimes the c Church did both propofe and ele6t, fubje&infi c the Election to be approven by the Judgment € of the Apoftles, J£is 6. and often the A^ € poftles, who could better judge of thofe Things c propofed fuch to the Church as they judged c meet for the Miniftry ; and, when the Suffra- € ges and Confent of the Church was given, th* c Call or Election was ratified/ And To I doubl riot it was with the Church of Scotland in thofi Times of Reformation. In the ancient Canons of the Church, as wzu obferved Simon Vigor, of which Obfervatior Marefim approves, the Confent of the Peopl< was the fame with Ele<9rion ; as the Nomination and Defignation of the Clergy, was more efpe< cially called Election : And fo I think it wask the prefent Cafe. He frequently cites the Anfwer of f ome Fifi Minifters to the following Queftion propofed bj King James VI. in i^^viz. Is not theConfem of the mofi ^Part of the Flock, and efthe Matron necejfary in eleBing 'Paftors} They anfwei thus ; c The Election of Minifters fhould b( * made by thofe who are Paftors and Do&or € lawfully called, and who can try the Gifts ne« € ceflarily belonging to the Paftors by tb< * Word of God : And to fuch as are fo chofer i ( 177 ) \ (N. S.) the Flock and Patron ought to give their Confent and Protection/ Now, for a Reply concerning thofe molt wife and refolute Fife Brethren, as he defigns them 3 and his Remarks anent them, I obferve, 1. Nei- ther he, nor, for what I know, can any elfe tell who they were. 2. Whereas he fays, Mafters Andrew and James Melvilswtxe preknt in thac Synod, which appointed fuch wife and refolute Brethren fhould be chofen to anfwer the Que- ftions propoied by the King : Calderwood >Spotif- 'Wood and c Petrie have been looked into, and no- thing like this is found ; fo it feems to be a Fifliori to make his Reader believe they were of thac plumber who anfwered thole Queftions. Calitr- how accu- rate he ufsr to be . in fating the ^iiefion^ and tell the World how he nfes always to begin his Study on any controverted Siib]e£l> by imploring the divine ConiuEt and Afjifiance ; and when he ihall publifh to the World, how finely or ftrong-* iy he hath reafoned on his Subject j and tell how thank- ( *79 9 thankful he was to the only wife God , who ajjiftei and enabled him td reafon after fuch a Manner j and p&bli/h his Liturgy which he makes l3ie of in his Clofet; Then> tho' he ihould be proclaimed to the Worlds a Perfon atte&ing to be efteemed one of the mofl wife in his Symd y and fomething elfe, he would not have much Ground to complain. We grant, Eie&ion to the Miniftry is the PreC- bytcry's Right ,• but the Enquirer would alfb have the fecond Book of 2)ifcipline to give the Election for particular Congregations to them ; but this can never be proven^nor did c Vt r ourPret byteries claim this as their peculiar Privilege. Our Parliament 1640, in their 8th A&, affirms, c It c had been the Practice of the Church of Scot- c land to fettle Parifhes on the Suit and Calling c of the Congregation, ever fince the Reform a- c tion/ And Mr. Alexander Henderfon, when giving an Account of the Government and Or- der of the Church of Scotland, fays, c The f Paftor is nominated to the vacant Place by the € Elderfhip and by the Minifies if any there be, c with the Content and good Liking of the € People.*— —The Perfbn, thus known and nomi c nated, is by the particular Elderfhip named to € the greater Presbytery, where he is examined, € &c* This was firft printed in 1641. And whereas Intrufion of Pallors on 1 rifhes againft their Will, is in the fecond Book of 2)ifcif>li declared Antichriftian ; How fad is it, that any in this Church (hould plead for it f M % SECT ( i8© ) 'SECT. IV. in 'which the Enquirer's Account of the CanduEt of the Church of Scotland, in flaming vacant Congregations, from 1578^0 1645 is confi de- red. A S here, in this Paragraph (a), our Enquirer infifts mainly, in fhewing what Regard was ihown to ^Patronages from 1578 to 1645; fo here he feems to be no Enemy, but rather a 'Pa- tron, for theie. 1. He fays, SHbe Jlffembly 1 586 concluded it lawful to admit a Taftor prefented iy the King's Majefty ; but he is not fo ingenuous as to tell, that at this Time Corruptions were creeping fall in. The Court being let for a new Scheme of Ghorch-Gdvernment, T'ulchan Si- Jljofs and conftant Moderators behoved to take Place. And,is he not moft confident with himfelf in this, feeing in the next Leaf he tells, Patrona- ges were a Grievance, under which, to 1649, the Church of Scotland had always groned fince the Reformation. I fuppole, all the Ground our Enquirer hath to lay of that Aflembly, T'hat it concluded it lawful to admit a *Pafior prefeated by the King's jMaje/iy, is what Calderwood tells us (b), when he fays, c It is condefcended to After-reafoning, c that the Name of a Bifhop has a fpecial Charge c and Function annexed to it by the Word of € God j that his Eleftion lhall be by a Prelentati- € on dired: by his Majefty to the General Aflem- * bljr, of whom he lhall receive his Admiflion/ There «Jh (*) h J4. (b) J>. 197- \ ( i8i ) There indeed the Aflembly fays, It is ccndefcen* ded, that the Sifiofs Election Jball be by a ^Prefentation ; but not a Word have they of the Lawfulnefs of this : No, But,becaufe our Enqui- rer thinks Prestations which have been decla- red both by Church and State to be contrary to God's Word ; I fay, becaufe he it feems thinks them lawful, therefore he palms it on the Aflem- bly, that they thought fo ; Whereas the Expref- fion intimates, it was fomething of a Force upon them. And tho 5 he fays, That AfTembly declared it lawful to admit or fettle a Pallor upon a Pre- fentation ; yet he fpeaks not a Word of what immediately follows, namely, c That he, viz. the Bifhop, fhould be appointed to a fpecial Kirk, where he fhall make Refidence, and there ferve the Cure as a Minifter ; providing always, that the particular Flock, being fore- warned, have Place to oppone, as in the Ele* flion of other Minifters/ 2. f The Aflembly 164.2, fays he (a J, directs a Lift of fix Perfons willing to accept (N. S) of the Prefentation upon every Qccafion of 3 Vacation of a Kirk, to be fent up with a blank Prefentation, to be filled up with one of the Lift who fhall have moft Intereft. Here, fays they offer, upon every Occafion of a Va- cancy, to fend a Draught of a Prefemition to the Royal Patron, and a Lift of Candidates all willing to take the Right to the Stipend from him ; and they countenance the ufing of Endea- vours by Intereft and FrienJlhip for the Per- M 5 ' ions ( 182 ) e fons obtaining the Prefentation. And then he adds,, * If any Thing of the like Nature were en- c couraged ' by this prefent Church, what Out- f'vcries would be raifed everywhere againft her ? c and yet theje are agreed to in an Aflembly in € the pureft Times of this Church.' Here, again, i. I obferve, Our Enquirer, for all his Promiles of a fair Representation, yet follows his old Method of unfair reprefenting : For, tho? heteljs of the Affembly's fending a Lift of Six to his Majefty, that he might give a Prefentation to one of the Lift ; yet, tho' the A£i once* again, and a third Time, makes mention of the Confent of the mod or beft Part of the Congregation as needful for the making up of fuch a Lift, our Enquirer never gives the leaft Hint of this. I own it was a Grievance, that the Congregation had not their Choice of the very Perfon whom they inclined to chufe for their Paftor ; yet, fee- ing this Lift was made up with their own Con- fent, it was nothing lb hard as is the Cafe of fun- dry Parifhes, where the Patron will have the v Nomination of the Perfon or Perfons out of which the Parifh muft chufe. 2. Whereas he fays, f They fent a Lift of Can- f didates, all willing to take the Right to the Sti- € pend from the Patron/ I fay, Thefe Candidates having the Parifhes declared Confent, by going into the Lift, for them to declare their Willing- nefs was far from being fo culpable as is the Fractice of many at this Day, in accepting Pre- fentatipns, where the Parifh have given no Confent to their being their Paltor. 5. Here, fays he, c They fent a blank Prefen- l tatbn to be filled up with one of the Lift who i ihould ( i8j ) c fhould have molt Intercft; and he affirms, c The Aflembly gave Countenance to the ufing c Endeavours by fntereft and Friendfhip, for the c Perfon's obtaining the Prefentation/ This is a very unfair Representation of that Aft of Affembly, fuch as the Reader may think that Aflembly encouraged the Seeking of Pre- fentations to any Preacher or Miniiler they plea- fed ; whereas,, in ufing Endeavours for this, they were limited and reftrifted to fuch as the Presby- tery and Parifh had fixed upon as fit for the va- cant Charge : And this being neceflary,as Matters then flood, was, as he could not but own, what the Church of Scotland . then groned under, I mean, their being obliged to give fuch a Lift, and to have his Majefty's Concurrence with Calls to . thofe vacant Congregations of which he had the Patronage ; and yet the ufing Endeavours for procuring fuch a Prcfentation, was no more but the ufing Endeavours to have his Majefty's Con- lent to One whom Presbytery and Parilh had a- greed upon. 4. He fays of our AfTemblies, c That, tho* c they groned under the Yoke, yet they did not € attempt by their Authority to (hake it oft, but c calmly and wifely fubmitted to it. 5 I grant, they did not attempt to fhakc it oft by their Au- thority j and no YVonder, for they had not Au- thority to refcind an AEl of Parliament : But, if a Grievance > it was their Sin and Fault if they did not petition or addrefs againft it. They might and ought to have authorized fome of their Number to petition for the Refcindinsj of fuch a grievous A<5t, as at this Day we fhould do. And, confidering by whom, and at whac Juncture, M 4 the ( i8 4 ) jthe fPatmzage-aff was made ; confidering alfq our referved Rights, and what a gracious Sove- reign his Majefty King George^ ; we want not Cround to aflure ourfelves of E)eliverance from that Bondage : Tho', for my Part, I fee not much Difference between the *Patronage-a& and any other A&, which leaves the Body of the Peo- S»le no more Right but barely to libel the Candid- ate, and prove him guilty of Error or Immora- lity. 5. He asks, c Was any Thing of the like Na- c ture done by the prefent Church, like what c was done by the Affembly 1642 ; What Out- e cries would there be againft her ? ' I dare fay, Was the Church of Scotland at her next Affem- bly to ena<9:, That no Judicatory fhould go in to any Presentation, fo as to fettle a Minifter upon it, without the Confent of the beft or moft Part of the Congregation ; none but the Favourers of Patronages fhould complain. And, 6. If the Affembly gave the leaft Coun- tenance to any Prefentations, and ufing Inter eft for them, fhe had afted contrary to her Princi- ples and Afts of Affembly in former Times ; as» in her fecpnd Book of Difcipline (a), where his faid, ''The Names of Patronages, together r with the Effects thereof, have flowed from the c Pope and the Corruptions of the Canon Law' And they aflert^ c The Introducing of Perfons, and placing them over Kirks by Prefentations, is contrary to God's Word, and to the Liberty of Ele&ion, and ought not to have Place in this Light of Preformation/ And this was the Senfe c : *-* (a) C&af. 12. Tmz- Hi *+ ( »«$ ) Senfe of our Church at the Reformation, fays Si r David 2)alryrnple, in his Speech before the Par" liament, printed 17 12. And, had that or any Aflembly fmce 158a given the leaft Countenance to the ulin^ of In- tereft for obtaining a ^refentatiaiiy they had acted in direft Oppofition to an Act of that AfTem- bly (a), where it is faid, c The Affembly hatb concluded with one Content, conform to the Word of God, and moft godly A<5ts of antient Councils, That no Man feek an Ecclefiaflical Funftion, Office, Promotion or Benefice, by •any abfolute Gift, Collation or Admiffion of the Civil Magiftrate or Patron, by Letters of Horning, tit whatfomever other Means than is eftablifhed by the Word of God, and Afts of General Aflembly, and hitherto ordinarily ufed within the Reformed Kirk of Scotland -— under the Pain of Excommunication fummarily, and without any Proceis or Admonitions,, to be pronounced, with the Judgment of the ] derlhip, by the Minifterpr Minifters that fhall be appointed by them, how foon it is known that any one of the laid Heads is tranfgrdlcd .- And the Aft is nowile to be prejuc to the Laick Patrons and their Prefentations^ until the Time the Laws be reformed according to the Wprd of God. ! SECTION (a) Cald.i///?. J>. 124. ( M ) SECTION V. in which the Enquirer's Account of the Wefi- i minfter Affemblfs Form of Ordination,, ana. the Conduct of the Church of Scotland in rela< I tion to it, is confidered. ^T OW, concerning that Form of ( Presbyteria\ ■*^ Church-government y and Form of Ordi-\ nation of Minijlers, which was agreed upon by] the Aflembly at Weftminjler with Commiflionfcrsl from the Church of Scotland in 1^45, and the Enquirer's Obferves anent it, I notice a fewi Things. j And, 1. Whereas, in the 2d Paragraph of the ZDireffory for Ordination of Minijters, itisfaid,i c He that is to be ordained, being either norni- * nated by the People, or othervtfife commended c to the Presbytery for any Place, muft addrefs * himfelf to the Presbytery, ££?<:. ? Our Author feems lb fond of c Prefentatio?2S y that by thofe Word, otherwife commended (a), hefuflflofes they mean a Prefentation, tho' there be not a Word of 'Prefentations in all the Directory for Ordination. Why might he not have fuppofed this to be the Elders, or Rders and Deacons, or the bed Part of the Congregation, or fome Part of the Presbytery, or even the Heritors and Elders ? 2. Whereas he fays, c TW the Congregation c was advertifed to fend a competent Number, to c the Presbytery to give their Confent, yet they € neither call them the major nor the better Part, f becaufe they wifely forefaw the Difficulties ' which Ml** (a) p. 16. C 187 ) •' which would caft up againfl: the one and tf : other/ What he intends by the Obferve, 1 t foppofe, is this,, namely, That PresbytefieS or jother Church-judicatories need not trouble theffH felves whether they have the Confent of the greater or better Part of a Parifli to the Settle- ment, if they get what they fhail reckon a conv- petent Number, which may be Fifty of Five aundred, or a Hundred of a Thoufand, or the third Part of a Parifli, the/ of that competent Number there fhouid be few or none almoft that are defirous of a faithful Gofpel-miniiUr. But, for Anfwer, If the Candidate was of the People's n naming, as according to that 2)ireftory it might be ,• then a very fmall Number, only two or three Perfbns chofen by themfelves, might be enough to teftify their Adherence to their former Choice or Nomination : Or, on Suppciition the Candidate had been otherwife recommended to the Presbytery, yet, feeing the whole Congrega- tion had the Nomination of the competent Num- ber, and a Liberty to judge what they thought competent, a very fmall Number might do the Turn. 3. He fays, ' He knows not what Part c € Commifljoners, Matters Henierfon, 2) 5, 1 Rutherford, Saillie and G , au in c this Affair at the U For Anfkver, Tho* 1 cannot certainly ti to me, and I humbly think alfo to every unl Per- fon, it is probable, and fomcthing more th :n probable, that thofe great Men were all judgment, That, according to the Word of CI, People fhould have the Choice of their own Pa- yors j or that none are to be thruft in 1 * thaif ( i88 ) their Will- . And,, was my Reafon asked, the I think it is evident from what we find recorc ed in their own Writings, or in the Writings others anent them. And, i. As to Mr. Henderfotzs Sentiment 01 this Head, I think we may gather it from tha little Ira&ate which is intituled, T*he Govern Tnent and Order of the Church of Scotland, prin ted 1641, and reprinted 1690. Asthis Book ha; commonly been attributed to him, fo the Tublicl Refolutioners, in Anfwer to 'Protetlers no Sub' verters, affirm (a), That it was written by him In that little Tra&ate he declares for the Li- berty of Eleftion, making the People's Confent necefTary. And there he declares, That Patrona- ges are prejudicial, and a Hinderance to the Li- berty of Eleftion ,• and that in his Day, if a Per- lbn had gone about to procure a Prefentation, he was accounted reus ambitus, and declared by the Church of Scotland incapable of that Place. Let our Author compare this of 3641, with what he tells the AfTembly did in 1642, and then let the World judge if our AfTembly could in the leaft approve of Patronages, or feeking of Prefentati- ons, or of Settlements againfl: the Will of the Con- gregation. Yea, Mr. Henderfon tells, c That if * a Minifter through old Age or Sickneft, or any € other Infirmity, was difabled fo as to need a- c nother to be joined with him, yet that other c was not to be joined with him without the c Confent of the People/ 2. For Mr. Robert Douglas his Judgment and Conduct at that AfTembly, it may be gathe- red (a) p. 85. ( i*9 ) ted from his Remarks upon the ConnciVs A& at Glafgow, of the Date OEiober i. 166 2, which turned out about the third Part of the Minifters of this Churchy by which A<5t every Minifier ^joas obliged to receive a 'Prefentation from t ^Patron , and Collation from theSiJhop ; When, fpeaking thereof, he fays (a), The receiving a r Prefentation and Collation may be accounted € a (mall Matter ; but who confiders it well, 9 will find it very weighty. Taking of Prefen- c tations condemns the Removal of Laick Pa- r trons ; and, which is more, condemns the Call r from the People/ By which Words 'tis evi- dent he thought the People have a Right to call their own Minifters ; and it was not a Matter of Moon-fhine, but a weighty Matter with him, whether Patron or People fhould have the Choice. 3. As to Mr. Rntherfurd, no Man was ever Tiore exprefs for the People's Ri^lv than he ; for he affirms, T'he People have Goa's Right to tbttfe their Minifters ; jor Jo the Word prefer 7- heth (b). Again he affirms. It is the Ordinance vf Chrifty that the \Peofle have the Elettion of ir Taflors. And, with Calderwood and Cart- igbt, he fa\s, 'the Teofle's Right to call :ir Tajlors is a 'Part of that Liberty which \s pur chafed with CI ; Shod. And he af- firms (c) y this Privilege |s common to all the Faithful, to all Believers, mho are not to take Taftors as the Market goes. 4. As for the Reverend Mr. Saillie his Senti- ments, ■ T . .. , — o 1 . ■ 1 ■ ■_ (ay Wodr. Hijl. Vol. 1. >;-. .:)!Dt Higbt of 'fresh p. 201. (c) ]jU, p. 446. ( (T90 } ibtfift, r cannot tell,, not having feen any of hi Writings from which I can gather his Judgmen touching that Point. But then, 5. As for the Reverend Mr. George Gillefpie'. Conduft at that Aflembly, this may be gatherec from what he fays in his Englijb Topifh Ceremo- nies (z), where he affirms, € The Right of Ele c <5tion pertains to the whole Church ; which f as it. is maintained by foreign Divines, whc c write of the Controverfies with the Papifts, fc € it is commended to us by the Example of the c Apcitles, and the Churches planted by them. J Avid, after infilling at fome Length upon the Proof of thiSj he adds, c From that which hath \ been faid, it plainly appeareth, that the Ele&i f oh of Minifters, according to the Apoftolical € Inftitution, pertaineth to the whole Body ol * that Church where they are to ferve/ And that this was the apoftolical and primitive Pra- ftice, is acknowledged, fays he, even by fome of the Papifts, as Lorimis, Salmeron, and Gafi> per SanEtim. And, from what hath been faid ol thexfe worthy Members from our Church to the, Weftmwfter Ajfembly, it looks very like a Pres-i byterian Principle, and a Principle of this Church,- That People have a Right to chufe their own Pa* ftors. 4; The Enquirer fays, c The Wefiminfter df- c * femhly gave no proper decifive Voice to the e People, but only a Power to nominate a com- * petent Number, to give their Confent and Ap- ' probation, or to give in their Objeftions, if e they . <*mX* (aj p. z%o. (b) p. 1 7. ( *9* ) c they have any. 3 This is no fair candid Repn< fentation : For, i. According to that Form or Qirettory fit Ordination, the People have a Power to nomi- nate a Perfon for their Minifter, recommending him to the Presbytery ; as is evident from the fecond Paragraph of that 2)ire£iory y where it is laid, He that is to be ordained being either no- minated by the People, or other ivife recommen- ito the 'Presbytery, &c. Tho' that Aflembly doth not particularize any other by whom th& Nomination may be made, yet there they cJearly intimate, That the People may nominate the Candidate; and, if they may nominate himj they may do it by Suffrages, in cafe there be any Difference among them ; and the Nomination is their Eleffion. I fuppofe he will not deny but, by the A£t of Parliament 1690, Heritors and Elders, tho' they had only the Nomination and Propofing of a Perfon to the Congregation, yet what they did was their Election of the Candi- date. 2. I fuppofe that competent Number was only to be fent from the People, in cafe the Candi- date was commended otherwife than by them* felves ; for, in cafe he was of their own Nomi- nation, there was little Need of asking their Confent, tho' they might ask if they adhered to their former Choice. And feeing, as I faid, they had the Nomination of the Perfon^that were to reprefent their Mind, Two or Three honefl Perfons were as good for this as a Thoufmd. 3. From that DireBory for Ordination, it is very evident the People were not reitrifted to ob- ject againft the Candidate'* JLife and Do&iine; wad ,( r 9* )' shi to me it is clear, that thereby the People's Confent was judged effential to all Calls: For 5 if, not being pleafed with his Gifts, they did not give their Confent to his being ordained their Xlinifter, he was not be fet over them as a Pa- ftor; as appears from the 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 Pa- ragraphs, which follow the Rules laid down for Examination of Candidates. And Forrefler fays 3 c The AfTembly of Divines, in their 2)ire£lory € for Ordination of Minifiers, 4 Branch, re* € quires the People's Confent and Approbation c as neceflary antecedaneous to the Ordination/ And from that Weflmi?zfter 2)ire£lory there is as much Ground to fay a Perfon might be ordained a Minifter to a Congregation againft his Will, as to fay a Presbytery has a Power to ordain a Mi- nifter to a People whether they will or not. 6. Whereas he fays O), c This Advice was c fent down to Scotland for the Approbation of c the General AfTembly, who approved the c fame, provided that this Aft approving, fhall c be nowife prejudicial to the diuinft Rights of c Presbyteries and People in the Calling of Mi- * nifters, but that it fhall be free to debate and c difcufs thefe Points, as God fhall be pleafed to c give* further Light/ They were fo far, fays € he> from clearing their Principle about Right, c that they judged them to be debatable Points, c and owned they needed more Light to deter- € mine therein/ In this Remark I obferve, The AfTembly KJ45 owns the People have Right in the Affair, as well as the Presbytery. Now, if they have Right ( m ) Right, it is either a Right to eled by Suf- fages, or a Right to nominate, which alfo is their Ele&ion, or a Right to confent or fiot, upon their being fatisfied or not fatisfied, as to the Fitnels of the Perfon nominated or elefted by others. And I find our Enquirer is for none lof thofe, but for that which is no Right under Heaven, but what a fober 'Pagan living at a Di- stance hath, namely, a Liberty of consenting if he pleafe,or of diflenting and flopping the Settle- ment, if, under the Pain of Punimment, he un- dertake to libel the Candidate, and prove him guilty of Error or Immorality. And, for my Part, I know not what Debate could be, ex- cept as to this, whether the Body of the People, including Heritors, Elders, Magiftrates, Town- Counfellors and other People, fhould be proper Eleftors in the firft Place ? Or whether the Pref- bytery or Seffion fhould be the Eleftors, and the People have only a Ri^ht to confent or nor, as they judged the Canditate meet for them? And, as the People's Right to confent or not, as they judged the Perfon qualified for them* had never been controverted, this could not be the Debate. And, be the Prefenters, Nomina-* tors or Electors who will, the People, in my O- pinion, are as much robbed of their Right as by Prestations, if the Body of the People have no more to fay in the Affair, than they that live at a Diftance, unlefs they prove againft the Can- ditate Error in Do&rine, or grofs Enormity in Converfation : And, of all the Debates which might be then, I fuppofe he fhall not give an Inftance of Church-judicatories claiming this as their peculi-ir Privilege to chufe Ministers, fet- N tlinj ( 194 ) cling them in Congregations, whether the People was for their Man or not ; or that this was the Right of Heritors, to have a Suffrage be- yond others. As to what our Enquirer fays of the Aflembly i6\6 being as much in the dark as the Aflembly 1645 {: What hath been laid on the for-! mer Head may ftand for Anfwer to this; only I add, If they were in the dark as to this, then they were not pofitive for the Presby- tery, nor for the Elders, nor for Heritors, efpe- cially Heritors not of our Communion : And indeed they never dreamed of any Thing like thefe, while they exprefly own particular Con- gregations have Intereft in the Aftair. SECT. VI. In which the Dire&ory of the AJfemhly 1649* for the EleElion of Mnifters, and the Enqui- rer's Remarks upon it y *re confidered* /^Oncerning the T)ire&ory of the Aflembly ^ 1^49, 1- The Enquirer hath neither tran- fcribed fairly nor fully ; not fairly, for in tranfcri-* bing he hath caft the 3d, 4th, and 5 th Rules and Paragraphs together, without the leaft Di- ilinftion : Whereas the AJfembly's tDireBory is fo diftind, that thefe Directions are diftingui-j ihed, both with Figures, idly, $dly, %thly K and alfo with fo many new Lines. And furely, this was not without Defign in our Enquirer; and the Defign is obvious: For,as the Author oijm *Po- puli had told, c It is as clear, as two and three € make five, that the Aflembly, by the fourth € Se&ion of the Directory, intended fome other * Sort of ExceptiQn$ Should be made by the lef- * fee ( *9$ ) € fer Party in a Congregation, if they objected € againft the Choice of the Elderfhip, than what c they required from the major Part thereof:' So he could not but fee it would more readily be obferved againft him upon the diftinct marking of the Paragraphs. 2. He hath not tranfcribed that 2)ire£iory (b fully as was requifite ; for, i. It might been fie to have tranfcribed a Part of the firft Section or Paragraph thereof, from which we fee the People had the Choice of Perfons whom they inclined to hear, befides fuch as were fent from the Presbytery ; and, if they were to have a Hearing of fuch, I hope it was in Order to their Trial of the Utterance and Gifts for their Edifi-* cation, more than for the Trial of their Ortho- doxy : For a Preacher may be a Socinian> an Arian, yea, a 2)e//?, and yet have that much Policy as to hide his erroneous Sentiments in two or three Sermons. Again, when he tranfcribed the whole third, fourth and fifth Paragraphs^ containing twenty feven or twenty eight Lines, if it was not four or five Words in the Begin- ning; I wonder why he left out thefe few Words in the Middle of thofe Paragraphs, The Aftion being moderated by I im that preached, if it watf not, left it fhould be too obvious, that at this Time the Presbytery fought no more in the Af- fair but Liberty of moderating in the Election, or becaufe that Claufe condemned the Overture 1 731, in which there was no Mention of a Mo- deration. But then, as to his Obferves upon that Di- rectory ; 1. Whereas the Author of Jus Topufi fDivi/wm had affirmed, The People, according N t ( ijtf ) to it, have a Negative upon the Elderfhip; Upon this the Enquirer makes a great Clamour, affirming (a), ' This would be to eftablifh a £ molt ridiculous Negative, the moft abfolute € Negative that ever was heard of, and to allow * the People a Negative, .unlefs they lhall prove c the Candidate guilty of Error or Immorality ; c the Affembly's Directory would be no Rule at c all, but Humour and Obftinacy, Ignorance and c Nonfenfc, Paffion and Pride ; and I know not * what mult have the Afcendant— — And, if fo, c then Nonfenfe and Ignorance, Force and Vio- c lence muft rule the World and the Church — c and the Power given the Seffion would be no c Power at all, gfc/ i. I ask, Whether he would think it any Power at all to allow from henceforth the Bo- dy of the People the Nomination and Eleftion of the Paftor, with this Referve,That,unlefs the major Part of the Seffion go in to their Choice, there fhould be no Settlement. I ask, Whether he thinks the Houfe of Commons have* any Pow- er at all, in fuch Cafes, as the Houfe of Lords have a Negative upon them 1 2. c By this Negative, fays he, the People € will have a Negative, not only over the Seffi- c on, but alio over the Presbytery, yea, over all * fuperior Judicatories, fo that they need not ap- c peal either from Seffion or Presbytery, their € Negative is enough; and thus Presbyterian Go-' € vernment, for a Redrefs and a Subordination of € Courts, is overthrown at once, and the Majo- c rity (a) p.2Q>2Z. ( T 97 ) c rity. of the People are the fupreme Court ui£ c der Heaven. Muft all be carried, fays he, be- c Tore the Bar of the popular Tribunal ? muft c that be the dernier Refort ?' Anjhu. i. I ask, Is Presbyterian Government ruined, unlefs Presbyteries have a Licence to do what thev pleafe? Muft they-be as abfolute over the Peop* as the Tope or Romifo Courts ? lllu.i tanw.pt foJJimuSy quod jure pqffimus, hath been, and will be a received Maxim. Is Ariftocra- cy ruined in Holland, becaufe any one of the leven Provinces hath a Negative over the other fix 1 or, Is all turned into Confufion there, be- caufe, when one of the Provinces cannot givs fufficient Reafons for not being of the fame Mind with the other Provinces, nothing can be con- cluded ? 2. Was not Presbytery as much rui- ned, if they had been obliged to iettle a Minjfter whom four of feven, or five of nine, or Ji x of eleven Elders have chofen, tho' all'the Body of the People, Great and Small, Nobility and Gen- Gentry, Good and Bad, had been againft him 1 5. leather than this is a ruining of Presbytery, ic may be thought, our Enquirer hath no veiy good Will to it, not only as the Scope of his Book is to run down a 'Presbyterian Principle, but alfo, in that here he (peaks as if he h id a Defign to expofe Presbyterians. 1 or, *PagQ Twenty eighth, he fays, c Some learned Godly c Presbyterian Divines have m tintained,That i € Right of Election, by a deciCve Suffrage, c belongs to the Churcb-Reprejeutativc (hut € are not agreed, whether this is the Pres ry ' or the kirk-bcllion) but then they feem to N 5 hoi ( i 9 S ) ' hold,That,if the major Part of a Congregation * enter their Diflent from the Election, the Pref- f bytery may not proceed to the Ordination, but € the Majority has the Negative/ And what is, this according to him, but to fay, Some learned end godly Presbyterian Divines have been mere Fools, ridiculous and void of common Under- flanding, and the moft inconfiftent, \^ak, non- fenfical Men in the World ? Indeed I own fome fuch have laid, yea, all or moft of them do fay, This is the leaft that can be given the People, to wit, a Negative in the Affair, (o as no Pref- bytery can thruft in a Pallor upon them with- out their own Will and Confent ; yea, Cart- wright, Calderwood, Rutherfurd, Gilleffic, and fundry others, affirm, The People have a Negative over all Judicatories under Heaven, fo as they cannot thruft in a Pallor upon them, tho' they could neither prove Error nor Immo- rality againft him. And to me it would be a Scan- dal to Presbytery to fay, The Presbyterian Church of Scotland 1^49 made an Ad, in which fhe gave neither Ids nor more to the Bo- dy of the Lord's People, than what was given them under ^Patronages, which had been abo- lished by the (Parliament the March before, as i?iconftftent with God's Word, and prejudi- cial to the Liberty of the (People in calling their 'Paftors ; or what is given them in fuch Churches as are all fettled on the Footing oi (Prefentations ; or then what is given them in the Church of Rome, putting the Nobility, Gentry, and Commonality, not only upon the fame Level, which he exclaims fb much againft, but preferring the Vote of one Elder, which in voting ( w ) voting might caft the Balance, to them all. Or, I may ask, if it was ruining to Presbytery to al- low any fuch Negative to the People in 1649? Whether a Negative granted to Heriters or El- ders would not as effe&ually ruine it at another. Seafon ? But no Doubt Our Enquirer's Reafo- ning upon this Point is Demonftration ; for he comes ovejr with this again and again, as here, and/. 28. and/. 120. where he lays, To allow the People a Negative overthrows the Presbyte- rian Co?iflitution. ^thly, Whereas he fays,Such a Negative would cut oft all Appeals : This is refufed ; for, if a Presbytery injure the People of their Right, there is nothing here againft an Appeal. 1. He fays, c If the Dillent of the Majority € founded on no other Reafon but this, That c they plead they are more edified by another € Perfon, then here the Majority is both Judge c and Party ; n iy, Judge of their Judges, and in- c vade that authoritative Judgment of the Qua- < Jifications of the Candidate for the Minikry, c which, by all Presbyterians, has ever been ac- 1 knowledged to be the Presbytery's Right/ Per- haps I might reply, as Gillefpie, That no Reafon can be given why the People ihould be obliged togivea Reafon of their DifFent, more than the Elders a Reafon for their Election ; yet, if a People declare upon their ingenuous Word, That it is neither Humour, nor any Thing elfe, but becaufe they are not edified by fuch a Man's ( <:fts, or not fo much as by another, who they defire to have for a Paftor to their Souls, I think this is a Reafon'fufficient. He owns the People have a Judgment of Dif- N 4 crotion ( 2CO ) crction of the Performs Gifts and Abilities ; but asks, c When thefe two Judgments, viz. that c of the Presbytery and their Judgment interfere ? * Muft the authoritative Judgment yield to the f People's Judgment of Diicretion i* kl fay, If they have a Judgment of Difcretion,. they muft ufe it, or aft with implicite Faith. What he fays here, was Cardinal Sellarmine's Obje&ion of old againft the Proteftant Do&rine of the People's Right to chufe their own Pa- fiors : And, if our Enquirer had pleafed, he might feen a Reply to it in Jus Topuli 2)ivi- Mtim, in Anfwer to that Objeftion, Teople are not competent Judges oj the ^iialifications cf Minifters ; where (a), f I anfwered to^his, * in the Words of Junius againft 2}ellarmine y € That Congregations judge, not fimply and ab- c folutely whether one be fit for the Miniftry, r but whether he be fit to ferve in the Miniftry € among them ; which Two are fo different, c that of Two Men offered to a Congregation, c he that is fimply and abfolutely the beft qualifi- r ed for the Miniftry, is not to,be for that Caufe c admitted hie £S? nunc, but he who was fitted € for that Congregation. 5 And there he was told, A rude and ignorant People can judge which of the Two fpeaks beft to their Capacity and Edification. And as the Presbytery, and not the People, are to try the Minifter's Learn- ing ; fo, tho' the People have paft by One of brighter natural Parts, and acquired Endow- ments, that will not fay they have erred in their Choice, if of more eminent Piety; for many .Times, the Man being hontfft, weaker Gifts have been ( aoi ) been remarkbly bleft of God, being enabled by the Spirit to bring out Things in another Man- ner, and with another Stamp, than all the Rhe- torick and Eloquence of Men can do, as 2)«r- bam f peaks. And tho' Presbyterians grant the Presbytery have the Right of judging whether a Man be fit for the Miniftry, yet not fo as upon their Judgment to thruft him upon a People, renitente & contradicpite Ecclefia. 6thly, He fays, * He cannot comprehend how c lefs material and momentuous Objections made c by the Majority, viz. of the People, fhould r ftop the Presbytery's proceeding to Ordination : more than when Objections are made by the * Minority/ Hai the Author of Jtti 'Populi bid any Thing like this, That his Judgment could not comprehend fo and fo, probably he had ufed his modeft Phrafe, and told him, he wanted all Manner of Jud^ t. This Ar- gument of his plainly fays, that in his Efteem 3 :ho' a whole Parifh, great and (mall, fhould be linft a Settlement, it is no more to be regarded, :han if it was only one Perfon : At leafl it favs, in his Opinion, this was the Cafe with Refpeft o the Di: :y i6±9> and that this ought to be : Cafe with refpect to the AJfembi) f s Over- ture. He aflerts (a), That the Things he had ad- /anced would anlwer the Reafonin»s advanced >y the Author of Jin ^opuli ; and then he goes >n recite my Words, namely, c That the At- fembly 1649 fiever meant that, unlefs the ma- jor Part of the Congregation could give rele- vant Exceptions againll the Man's Life or Uo- c rtrine., ■ > 1 ■■■ 1 ■ > 1. m (il) p. 22. ( 202 )'" 9 dxine, the Presbytery might go an in the Settle- € merit ; for 'tis as clear as Two and Three € make Five, that the Aflembly intends fome c other Sort of Objections fllould be adduced by r the lefler Part to flop the Settlement, than was c required from the greater ; otherwife they new c ther knew what they faid, nor whereof they € affirmed/ Now, in Anfwer to this, it is to be noticed our fair and candid Reprefenter, tho* he tells what the Author of Jm (Populi afler- ted, yet in that Place he hath concealed hi* Argument adduced for proving his Aflertion ; and this indeed is ordinary for him : I faid, Surely the Aflembly 1649 never meant, unlets 1 the major Part of the Congregation could give relevant Exceptions againft the Mao's Life and Do&rine, the Presbytery might go on in the Settlement : No furely ; for, if only the lefler Part of the Congregation adduced fuch relevant Exceptions, then the Presbytery was not to proceed, as is evident from the Words of the fourth Se&ion of that Dire&ory. And it is as clear as Two and Three make Five, that the Aflembly intends fome other Sort of Objeftions fhould be adduced by the lefler Part to ftop the Settlement, than was required in the greater ; otherwife they neither knew what they faid, nor whereof they affirmed. And the fourth Section of that Directory fhould be cratnbe recoffa, the fame in all Re- fpefts with what the Aflembly had faid in the tnird Sedion. Can any dreanf the Aflembly 164.9 g ave no more to the People than was given under Patronages, which had been abo- iifhed by the Parliament the March before, as ' un- ( 2°? ) unlawful and unwarrantable by God'? Word, and contrary to the Do&rine and Liberties of the Kirk of Scotland? As I faid. Surely our Inquirer had his own End in tranfcribing the lireftory after his Manner ; and here it clearly ppears ; for he dare not mention the third and urth Seftions as diftin&, becaufe they evidence 3 every impartial Reader that fomething diffe- nt was intended, by putting that. Directory in ftinft Paragraphs, or Se&ions, diftinguifliing lem alfo with the Figures, i, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. 5 hitherto printed in all Copies. 8. I had adduced the Words of the learned Ax. Gillefpie for Confirmation of my Opinion, 7hat the Church of Scotland in 1^49 had gi- r en a Negative to the People over the Elderfhip. rhe Enquirer, who pretends he hath over- hrown the Whole of Mr. Gillefpie s Reafoning ipon that Head, he gives not a full Reprefenta- 'on of his Words and Arguments ; as, when ranfcribing his Words, he tells, Mr. Gillefpie lid, As the Vote of the Elderjbip is ajtee Vote, b is the Congregation's Confent a free Lonfent ; md the Objection holdeth no more agai72.fi the a f :er than againfi the forme He puts his thumb upon Mr. Gillefpie 's following Words, vhich are tranfcribed in Jus Topuli i)ivinum, ^or both are jointly required by the Church oj Scotland. And then our Enquirer replies, by >wning the People's Confent ?nuf; be a free lonfent ; and, if they plea fe no: to confent, they nay enter their Dijfent. ; as if all Mr. Gil- efpie intended had only been a Liberty of a ree Confent; whereas the Scope of his^Reafon- ngis, tofliew that the People's Confent, by the <*n. ( 20 4 ) Cotiftitution of the Church of Scotland, was ; effential to the Calling or Ele&ion of a Minifte. as the Voice of the Elder/hip. And whereas t lpeaks of the People's having all Manner of L berty to enter their DifTent for their Exonerat;[ on/ 1 would ask him. If he would allow ther to give in their Reafons of Diflent, recording both in the Regifter ? For, to allow a Perfon o People to diflent, and not alfo to allow them . Liberty with all Meeknefs to give in and recon their Reafons of Diflent, is to allow them a Li berty to have their Names recorded as Fools Fire-brands, contentious, as Men of divifivJ Spirits, and what not ? becaufe few Judicatories that have the managing of Minutes, but wil order them fo, as feemingly to vindicate them felves. Again, the Enquirer having told how the Au { thor of Jus Toj>. adds from Mr. Gilleffie /Tho € nothing be objected againft the Man's Do € ftrine ; yet, if the People defire another better. e orasuvell qualified, by whom they find them c felves more edified than by the other, that is 2 * Reafon fufficient, if a Reafon mutt be given a! c all/ He anfwers to this (a), as to the former, namely, That this is a fufficient Reafon why People fhould not give their Confent ; and, H they p!eafe,for their own Exoneration, they may give their Diflent for the fame Reafon. It feems, our Enquirer hath forgotten himfelf,when former- ly, and here again, in anfwer to Mr. Gilleffie, be fays, "This is a fufficient Reafon why tkeyfiouli- not confent •> and a Reafon, if they pleafe, why: for t fi) P 21. ( 20f ) ir their own Exoneration they (bouldgive their Tiffent : For this is contrary to his former re- bated Aflertions, when, with his wife rejblutt ife Brethren, he ftill ufed to fay, The People Light to give their Confent ; and yet, here he ys, c If the People deflre another as well quali- fied,, by whom they find themlelves more edi- fied, that is a Reafon, and a lufficient Reafon, why they fhould not give their Confent ,• and why, if they pleafe, for their own Exonerati- on they fhould diflent.' Aliquando dormitat >fe Homerus ; but the Enquirer will come right ;ain. And, as in the laft Citation of Mr. illefpie, fo here, of new, he pafleth by s Argument adduced for Confirmation of hat he had faid, which (befides the Authority ' that eminent French Divine iDaneus) is an rgument from an Inftance with refpedt to the irliament of Scotland, where fays Mr. Gillef- e, c It being condefcended upon, that his Ma- jefty, with Advice and Confent of the Eltates, fhould nominate the Officers of State, the fi- liates of Parliament were prefled to give a Rea- fon of their diflenting from his Majefty's No- mination, but they refufed ; and I am fure, fays he, confenting, or not confenting in a Matter. Ecclefiaftical, ought to be as free, if not more free, than in a Matter Civil/ But our Enqui- r takes no Notice of this. Had he been a Mem- ?r of Parliament at that Time, he would fet wn right, toufehis own Expreffion, and told lem, That Humour and Obftinacy, TaJJionani } ride 9 Ignorance an.i Nonfenfe , 'Nonjenfe vd Ignorance , Force and Violence, and 1 know not ( &o6 ) bM nsAat* milt rule the World and the State, theytnould refuie to give his Majefty fatisfyin Reafons, why they went Hot in with his Nom nation or Eleftion. He fays, f. 18. c Probably the Aflembly 1*4 c confidered the Seffion as Reprefentatives of th c Congregation, and this led them to place th c Right and Power of Eleftion in them/ An his Probability is come to a pofitive Judgmen f. 4tf, for there he pofitively affirms, Thatth jijjembly 164.9 w&s for the Kirk-fejfion exet cifing this Right for, and in the Name of tl ^People as, their Reprefentatives ; by which Cor ceffion, I humbly think, our Enquirer hath yiel ded, that the Aflembly 164.9 were of the Mind that it is the People's Right originally to eled their own Pallors. If the Elders chufe for, an< in the Name of, the People, I think no Man c\ common Underftanding, to ufe the Enquirer* Phrafe, can deny but it is the People's Right and, if their Right, I fee not but they muft hav a Right to exercife it, unlefs they have rendret themfelves unworthy of it, or unfit for exercifinj thereof: None have a Power to take" it fron them, nor can they have a Power to make ai abfolute Grant of it to any ; and the leaft can m allowed to the Church, is a Power to regulatej her Delegates in cafe of Aberration, when flu hath impowered them to aft fbmething in he) Name. Learned Rmherftird (a) fpeaks to this fame Purpofe. The Enquirer fays (b), c The ^DireBory in hij € Opinion is exaftly calculated, to fhew, that thl c Pref- m v *m (a) 2)ue Right, p. 4^4. 0>) t % " 4 ■ ( »<>7 y € Presbytery is to proceed to the Ordination, un- f lefs the Majority give fufficient Reafonuo the c contrary ,• for it exprefly fays,That the Presby- € tery is to judge of the Diflent of the Majority, c and of their Prejudices; and,ifthey do not find € them to be catifelefs, they are to appoint a new € Eleftion, &c. y He might feen a Sufficient An- iwer to all this in Jus Top. 2)iv. if he had plea- fed to notice, where it is told him, what the Af- fembly might mean by catifelefs 'Prejudices. The People's being prejudiced at the Candi- date's mean Parentage, or his being educate in Principles not fo found, tho', (eeing their Evil, he had fincerely renounced them; fome littleln- decency in Voice or Gefture; their being preju- diced at his being of a lefler Stature,and the like, as it was with fome in the Church of Corinth s who faid of the great Apoftle of the Gentiles^ His bodily Trefence is weak, and his Speech con* temptible ; Thofe, and the like, are caufelefs Prejudices r But the People's not being edified by a Man's Gift, after his being fent to preach • unto them for the Trial of his Gifts, or their having a greater Love unto,and Deflre after, a- nother, by whom they find themfelvjs more edified, can never be called a catifelefs Preju- dice.' And whereas he asks, If any of common Un- derftanding will fay it was the Intention of that 2)ire£iory to give the Majority a Negative upon the Presbytery ? Here, upon the Matter, in his great Modeily, he reprefents that great Man Mr. Gi lief pie, as well as fome Q there, CO bs void of couioion Underftaadins> AnJjj ( 2o8 ) Atid> to conclude this Head, he fays (a), c If * I fhall allow that 2)ire£fory requires the People * fhould give in Reafons of their Diflent, where- ? as Mr. Gillefpie thinks the major Part needs c give no Objection at all, How will I agred € with him V It is eafy to every confidering Per- lon, that I am not fpeaking of what the major Part of the People are obliged unto by the divine Law and right Reafon, of which Mr. Gillefpie is Ipeaking ; but of what the People were obliged unto by th&tZ) ireEfory : Only,before I finifh this, I have one Queftion more to ask, viz. Whether is not our modeft Enquirer guilty of Immodefiy, in that, by his reafoning on this Subjeft, he hath charged the once famous Church of Frmce with aftin^ moft ridiculoufly, afting fo, as to ruine Presbytery ; feeing he owns (b) the Church of France, by the fixth Canon of the ill Chapter of her Difcipline, did give a Negative unto the People, he makes them as weak Men, over- throwing Presbytery as much as the Reverend Mr. Gillefpie, or yet the Author of Jus Toptili ? But enough, and more than enough of this. SECT. VII. In vojttlcb there are fome curfory Remarks upon t&hat the Enquirer fays in the laft two Leaves of hisfirfi Se&ion. j. UE fays (c), c Since the Aft reftoring ?a- c tron ges in 17 12,, there being no uni- € form fettled Method obferved by Ecclefxaftical € Courts, contrary Sentences have, to the great € Scandal ■■» (a) p. 22. (b) p, u$, ( c) p. 24, ( 2C 9 ) Scandal of Religion, been paft by the fame Courts in Settlements where the Caufes were exactly parallel/ For my Part, I heartily join ivith him, That for a Judicatory to pafs different: Sentences, where the Caufes are exaftly parallel, s a Scandal to Religion : ' Tis fad when it may 3e faid of any Judicatory, Civil ox Ecclefiafiiccil 9 ihow me the Man, and I will fhow you the Law. And, as to the Overture (a) 173 i, now tut-* :cd into an A£t with fome few Amendments 5 As I'm credibly informed, it was contrary to the Mind of thp moft Presbyteries, declared by the Report of their Commiflioners, that ever it Tiould be turned into fuch a Handing Aft : So wc nave little Ground to hope it fhall prevent our Divifions ; when it is fuch a Rule as fbmetimeS Judicatories, yea, even the Commifjion itfelf* (enow not well how to explain it ; as in the Cafe of jDrumfries c Presly:ery y from which the fol- lowing galleries were lent, for Advice, to the CommiffloH in Attgttfi laft ; to which they gave 10 Return^ and to which (fay fame) they knew [lot how to anfwer : Hence they compromifed :he Affair, by dividing the Stipend between the Candidates. The firft Jittery not being to our Purpofe 3 the other Queries are as follow ; z&S$t*? m ' ry> Whom the Commiffion looks upon to be Heritors, and what they make the Definition of r an Heritor \ viz. Whether or not any Perfon, : having a Right to a Piece of Ground,tho' fmall, nd not paying Cefs or Tiend, not having a Tenant on it, may be reckoned an Heritor pi O c perly 1 »i^ «« (*4»WMKaM ( 2IO ) perly ? 5. Whether or not any Perfon having a Piece of Ground holding of the Town in Feu, but not obliged for Watch and Ward, is to be held a Landward Heritor ? 4. Whether or not three Perfons, that have an heritable N Difpofition to one Piece of Ground ex indivi- fo y and all living in one Family, can be lookt upon as diitindt Heritors, and have diftinft Votes ? 5. Whether or not a Minor, with- out Tutors or Curators, can be entitled to a Vote ? 6. Whether or not Papers, fhewing the People's Approbation of Mr. Wright, fhould be received in before judging of the Call, '. notwithftanding of thefe Words in the K6c of the late General Aflembly, to wit, tfhat, af- ter finifhing the Election, the 'Perfon fo eleffed to be Mini fler Jb all be frefofed to the Congre- gatmi, to be either approven or difaf proven by them ? 2. The Enquirer fays(V), c By his hiftorical Re- • lation it will appear, he hath been at due Pains to know it this Church hath declared by any Deed a Principle concerning the Right of Ele- ction of Miniftersj and, having turned over the proper* Vouchers, he cannot find they have any fix'd fettled Principle about it. ' In Reply • to this, I fay, It is not to be doubted but he hath been at all due Pains to fearch if he could find any Thing to invalidate the Proteftant Arguments fpr the People's Right to eleft their own Pallors, and at all due Pains to fee if he could find any Thing in all the Hiftcry of the Church of Scot- land which might be a Pretence for robbing the People ( 211 ) People of their juft Right : But,that he hath been at due Pains to find out the Truths 2s to the real Sentiments of the Church of Scotland about the Right of calling Minifies is queftioned j elfe, as I obferved, in the Beginning of the fourth Chapter, why went he not back with his Hiftory to the Times there mentioned by Heftor Soethius 3 by Salteus, and alfo by the learned Antiquary Sir James Dalrymple ? And, 2. Why did he not notice what Buchanan telk us (a), namely, • That, at the Reformation, all that flood for c it in Scotland, in a Petition to the Queen Re- c gent, requefted, That the Eleftion of Mini- c iters (hould be by the People? ' 5. If at due Pains, why did he not give us an Account of fundry Afts of Aflembly relating to this Point ? as A<5t December 20th 156c, which was the firft General AfTembly of this Church after the Re* formation, where it was enacted, 'That the Ele- ction of Mini fieri ft) onld be in thepv.blick Church by the People} And the Aflembly 1562 ena- cted, That the Trefentation of Miniflers Ihotild be in the People. And that lame Aflembly ena- fted, Tloat Inhibition ftov.ld be made to all and fundry ^Perfons then ferving in the Miniftry % had not tntred into their Charges according to the Order .appointed in 1 Hook of Dis- cipline ; which Book requires the Votes and Suf- frages of the People. And the Aflembly 1638, at which Time Presbyterian Government was re- ltored, enacted, That no ^erfen be intruded it any Office of the Kirk contrary to tie Will of the Congregation to :h they are appointed. And O 2 the •>**— ) Hift, Lib, if. ( 212 ) the Aflembly 1725 difcharged the Settlement of the Parifh of Aberdeen, without the exprefs Con Cent of the 'People. And, feeing our exaft and candid Hiftorian mentions the Ad: of Par- liament 1690 y he might alfo have mentioned Ibme other Afts of our higheft Civil Courts ; as the Aft of the great Council of Scotland, which, January 17JI1 1560, fubfcribed the firft Book x)f Difcipline,; in which the Vote and Suffrage in the Eleftion ^f Minifters is given to every feveral Church ; declaring before their Subfcri- ptions, That they lookt upon that Book in all .Things to be conform to God's Word. And, in King Charles his 2d Parliament, 7th Aft, Pref- lyteries were ordained to plant vacant Kirks with Confent of the Parijhes. And, in the 8th Aft 'of that Parliament, when fpeaking of ad- mitting Minifters to Kirks which belonged to the jBifhopricks, the Parliament fays, Provided al- ways, that this be without 'Prejudice of the L2* terefl of Parijhes, according to the jiffs a?id fPraEiice of the Kirk fince the Reformation. And, in the 9th Aft of the laft Seflion of that Parliament, Presbyteries are appointed to plant vacant Churches upon the Suit and Calling of the Congregation. And when our Enquirer fpeaks of the Parliament 1649, refcinding the Patronage Aft, he might have told how they refcinded it ; c Confidering that Patrons and Pre- € fentations to Kirks are an Evil and Bondage c under which the Lord's People and Minifters of c this Land have long groned, and becaufe they c have no Warrant in God's Word, and becaufe c they are prejudicial to the Liberty of the \ People, and unto the free Calling and Entry of < Mi- C «? ) € Minifters to their Charge." And that they c refciqded all A6ts in favours of Patronages, as c being unlawful and unwarrantable by God's € Word, and contrary to the Do he takes no Notice of the People's Confent, which, beyond Controverfy, by that Book, is eflential to the Election. Again, in ihowing what was required by the Directory 1649, he tells not how it was uppn Suppofition the Body of the People went in to the Elders Choice that the Minifter was to be ordained ; and, according to himfelf, he might told this A(- iembly was for the Kirk-feffion's voting for, and in the Name of, the People. And I humbly think it is not for the Honour of the Church of Scotland to fay, She hath no Principle, no fixed Principle, nor never had, about a Matter of fuch Importance, the Scriptures of Truth being lufficient to teach the Man of God how to car- ry in his Houfe in all Things. He asks, Whether he fhall believe with the Firfi, or with the Second Book of 2)ifcipline> or with the Aflembly 1649, or with the A6tand Overture 1731 ? This puts me in Mind of what ^tnlly tells us of the Athenians, fending to the tDelphick Oracle to enquire what Forms of Re- ligion they fhould chiefly embrace 1 The Oracle anfwered, T'hofe Forms 'which had the Autho- rity of their Anceflors Cuftom : The Meffen- gers told Appollo, T'hofe Forms had been oj ten changed and altered ; and therefore asked, Which of thofe various Rites and Cuftoms thsy Ihould follow ? The Oracle replied, "They ought to follow the befl : Never a Barrel had better Herring among them ; but it is not fo in the prefent Cafe ; and therefore our Enquirer may follow and believe with the Book of common Or- dcr, where both Nomination and EleBion is 9 given ( «* ) given to the People^ or Congregation : Or, let him believe with the Firfl Book of "Difcifline^ which is the fame with the Book of common Or- der, allowing every tfeveral Ccngregatioittheir Votes and Suffrages in the Elcftion of their c Pa- dors; which, as jvlr. Knox, and others who drew up that Book, declared to be agreeable to God's W*ord ; fo the great Council oj Scotland did alio declare the fame : And there is no Ground to doubt, but then this was the Judgment of the Church of Scotland, as well as of the State. Or, f he believe with the Second Book oj^Difcifline, :hen it mud be an Article of his Fakir, 'That Apoftolical Praffice, and the Practice of tl primitive Kirk, a?id good Order, require, th; none be intruded upon a7ty Congregation wh- om lawful Election , and the AJfent of the Teifle TJer whom the Per/on is placed. And, according to that Book, it will be contrary to the Scrip- :ure for any Presbytery, or all the Presbyteries under Heaven, to thruft in a Paftor upon a Con- gregation without their own declared Confent, whether to pieafe themfelves, or the greateft Prince breathing. Or, if he believe with the Affembly's 'Dircftory in 1649, it is evident to every confidering Perfon, that the major Part of the Parifh have a Negative over the Elderfhip. And further, Reafon fays, as was noticed abov it was not poifible for that AfTembly to give all the Elderfhip, leaving nothing to the Nobi- lity, Gentry and whole Body of the People, but a bare Liberty of Hopping the Settlement, in cafe they could prove the Candidate guilty of t, or grofs Immorality. And,for the Aft and Over- ture 173 ij he may believ cording to it, co O + trair ( 2l6 ) Erafr to the Eelief of all the Churches of Chrift, That fpiritual Privileges may be bellowed purely upon worldly Confiderations. Or he may be- lieve the declared Enemies of our Conftitution . have as good a Right to eleft the Rulers and Overfeers of the Church, as her beft Friends, I Qr he may believe the Compofers of that Over-/ ture were ftill of Opinion the People have a Right to eled their Pallors (tho* all Right was taken from them) feeing they declared the El- ders are the People's Reprefentatives in the Af- fair. Whafis laid down, fays he (a), in the Second, Sook of TiifcipUne, bids faireft for the Declarati- on of a Principle. I affirm, What is laid in the Eook of Common Order, and in the Fir ft Sook 9/ ZDifcipline, to me it is much the fame with that. Second Sook; and all the Three declare plainly the Principle of this Church ; and ;what was it, fcut this, T'hat the People have a Right to elett their Paftors ? For the firft and fecond of thefe there can be no Controverfy ; and, for the Se coni Sook of T> ifcipli ne ,the Principle laid down there,is (I?), That none is to be intruded upon any Congregation, either by the Prince, or any tn~ ferior Perfon, without lawful E/effion, and the Jljfent of the People over whom the Perfon is placed, as the PraBice of the Apoftolical, and primitive Kirk, and good Order craves. Now, j according to this, the Election can belong to none but to the People ; none elfe are here men- 1 tioned, w r here, according to the Enquirer, the Principle is laid down. Had they meant, that, J ac-3 (a) p. i6 % (b) Gbgpy 1 a. P.ir. 1 1 , fz> 1 3, 1 4 • § ( *I7 ) acording to the Practice of the Apoftolical and primitive Kirk, the EJderfhip or Presbytery had the Election, furcly they had put in the Word Elderfiip. And who but would think this needful, feeing it was at fuch a Diftance they had faid, To this Kind of AJfembly pertains the E- kttion, no lefs than 19 or 20 Pages back in the Enquires Copy, as was noticed already i And another Reafon for being of this Mind, which, I humbly think, is unanfwerable, is this, name- ly, That the Praftice of the primitive Kirk requires this. Now, it hath been the general Opinion of Presbyterians, and many of Preh- tick Principles, yea alfo of fundry in the Church of Rome, (as may be fhown afterwards,) That, m the primitive Kirk, the People had the Choice ; yea,none almoft but have owned it was either the People's Right alone, or the Privilege of the Clergy and the People of the vacant Congrega- tion jointly. Our boij after all his confcientious Enqui- ry, knows not where to fix, nor what to think of the Church of Scotland, therefore he would have her as unfixed as to her iments of Right in the Affair as himfelr . No e is one of e mod unfixed Men in the World ; and that none can be more volatile in I .iments than he, is pretty evident from v. hat he fays in the Clofe of his 26, and in the L. and Middle of the 27 Pages. In the Clofe of the 26th, he , f Now here the Compofers of the feconi A of Difcjpline> I fay, feem to me to de- c dare a Principle/ And, after fhowing in the ginning of the next Page, what Ground the Compolers of that Book went upon, be fays, 'This C 5i8 ) * This Confideration abundantly fhews, this was f the Principle of the Compofers of this Book/ And then he adds^ € But, I think it was alio the f Principle of the Approvers of it, for this Book ' had the Approbation of the General Aflembly 1 1578^ telling from Calderwood, how it was agreed to, tfttijundfy Conferences and often Dif- futation and Reafoning in many JlJJkmblies. * And, lays the Enquirer, was fworn to in the € -jNational Covenant, which adds a conliderable € Regard to what is contained in that Book/ Now, muft he ever be in Sufpence, as to the Church of Scotland's having a Principle or fixed declared Principle, when he hath affirmed, it was abundantly Ihown what was the Principle of the Compofers and Approvers of that Book fc Surely to alter after this would be, too like what is laid of Reuben JJnftable asWater, &c. And yet the next Words,with which he concludes his firft Se&ion, are, c I faid above, That it does not ap- c pear' that this Church has a fixed Principle, c plainly declared anent the Right of Eledion ; c for, if what I have advanced Irom the fecond c Book of Difcifline^ is that Principle, I am c forry that the Church has fo long departed c from it/ There he is dark, clear, dark again, in little more than Half a P^ge, And, before I conclude this Chapter, I think it worthy of a Remark, That our exaft and con- fcientious Enquirer, in his Search after the Senti- ments of this Church, hath entirely parted over the Deed of the General Aflembly 1566, in which Aflembly the later Co7tfeJJion of Helvetia was approvenin all Things by the Church of Scot- land) except as to the Obfervation of fome holy Days., C 2*9 ) )ays ; in which Confeffion it is faid, c Let the Minifters of the Church be called and chofen by lawful and Ecclefiaftical Ele&ion, that is, let them be chofen religioufly by the Church, or by fuch as are deputed by the Church for that Effect, in the juft Order, and without Tumult, Seditions and Contention.*— --And thofe that are chofen, let them be ordained by the Elders, with publick Prayers and Impofi- tion of Hands/ Now, was there not a Prin- iple laid down there, and the Election of Pa- tors given to that Church, of which the Mini- ter elected is to be Paftor ? And, albeit this Co?i- "ejjion leaves it either to the Church herfelf ; or, f file pleafed, to fome deputed by her to elect Minifters of the Gofpel, yet thereby the Right )f Election is given to the Church originally, rife fhe could not depute others to chufe for her : ftind, as it is left to the Church her Pleafure, to nepute or not ; fo, in cafe of a Deputation, it follows, (he muft have a Ne t ve. And by fhe Church in that ConfejjLf the Presbyter y'$ deputing the People to chufe them. SECTION ( 220 ) SECTION VIIL In which the Author's Account of the Form and Order of the Ele&ion of the Superintendent, is conjidered. HT H O' in this SeBion our Author promifes to* "■■ give a fair and candid Reprefentation of! what he could learn to have been the Mind of I the Church of Scotland, from the moft authen-' tick Vouchers, in which SeBion he hath given 4 fome Account of the Book of Common Order, ofl our Books of jDifcipUne, of the jDireBory 1649, &c. yet, in his hiltorical Narration, here he o- nrittedfundry Things, and particularly the Form\ and Order of the Election of the Superintendent \ But, in the next SeBion, where he pretends to ft ate the Queftion, he gives a hiftorical Accounts thereof, which here I fliall briefly confider, that! fo, together in the fame Chapter, the Reader ' may have a fuller Account of the Mind of this j Church in the Affair. The Words cited by the Enquirer (a), from * that Form, areas follow, * The Sermon finifh-l € ed, it was declared by the fame Minifter, that c the Lords of the Secret Council had given € Charge and Power to the Churches of LotloiA c an to chufe Mr. John Spotipvcood Superinten-J € dent, and that fufficient Warning was made by? c publickEdift to the Churches of. Edinburgh, c Zithgow, Striveling, "Tranent, tladdingtoun c and ibumbar ; as alio, to Earls, Barons, Gen- € tlemen, or others, having, and might claim to' c have, *-..*- (a) p. 37. 38. (221 ) have, Vote in Election, to be prefent that DayJ at that fame Hour/ The Enquirer, in his Obferves upon this Form* iys, i. ' By it he found, that Heritors and great Men, as fuch, were regarded in the Ele- ction of Minifters ; thofe of Rank, by their Birth or any otherwife, being allowed to have a decifive Vote/ Now, if this be all the He- ard he pleads for to Heritors and great Men, I ;ankly yield it to him; for none plead, for he People's Right but allow Heritors and jreat Men a decifive Vote with others. But, if ^e mean a decifive Vote, fo as to exclude People f meaner Circumftances, he muft reprint that 7 orm, and make a new Impreflion of it with Ad- litions, before it prove his Point : For, as that ^orm particularizeth Earls, Lords, Barons, Gen- lemen ; fo, in general, it gives Nomination to all tbers havand, or that might have, a Vote in the, tleftion, who are called to be prefent at the E- ?ction,as well as them. And there is not the ?aft Innuendo in that Form, of Heritors having decifive Vote more than others. 2 . He {vj%;the learned Collectors of our Con- >flions ajfure us, that this Form and Ordtr wi> nt ended to ferve in the Election of all other Mi- xijlers. I or my Part, I ihould be glad it was (6, Jut whereas our Author would have the World elieve by that Form, Heritors, and thofe of lank, by Birth or otherwife, had a Suffrage be- ond others, affirming, That the Collectors cf ur Confeflions ajfure us, this was intended to e for a Form and Order, not only in the E- ectiou of Superintendent s, lut aljo of other Ml- ii/iers, I fay, This is lalfe, and what ip wether ho ( 222 ) he would call a bare-faced Terverjion. For all our Collectors* do, is,, they tranfcribe according to Robert Zeckprevick's Edition, of the Dat< March 9th 1 5 tfo, where it is faid^ in the Title t< this Form, That it may ferve in Eleftioun of all uther Minifters. But our Collectors give no Judg- ment concerning this Form and Order thcm- felves. As to what he fays of Joh?i Knox hii not fcrupling to moderate in that Election, for my Part I fee no Ground for Scruple, wherr there was fuch a free Eledtion of this Superin- tendent. But now, for a few Remarks upon this Form and Order which the Enquirer fays, our learned Collectors allure us was intended to ferve in the Election of other Minifters ; ift 3 1 humbly think, by that Form the Eleftion is given to the whole Multitude of the People., including great and fmall, if they pleafe to ffteak and vote in the Affair : For, in the third Paragraph thereof, it is faid, c The Minifter demands, give any Man c knew anyCrime or Offence to the faid Mr Johti c that myght unable him to be called to that Of-I c fice, and that demanded thryce. Secondarily i c Queftion wes moved to the hole Multitude, c give ther was any uther w horn they wald put € in Eleftioun w 7 ith the faid Mr. John 1 And th 4 c People were asked, if rhey wald have thj c faid Mr. John Superindendent ? if they wald c honour and obey him as Chrift's Minifter, and c comfort and affift him in every Thing pertain* € ing to his Charge ? } They anfwered, We will, c and do promife unto him Obedience, as becul c meth the Scheip to give unto their Pallor, fo c long as he remaineth faithful in his Office/ For ( «3 ) : or any Thing that' appears to me, there the domination and Election is given to the whole Multitude of the People : The People were de- nanded, If they would have fuch a Man for heir Minifter ? So there was no thrufting' in lere. Then a Queftion was put to the Perfon :hcfen by the whole Multitude, viz. Seeing bat ye hear the 'Third and Defyre of the People, do ye not think your f elf bound in Con- science before God to fupport them, that fo ear- teftly call for your Comfort, and for the Fruit f your Labours ? There we fee, it w r as at the earneft Defire of he People that the Superintendent was to be ettled. Now, if lo much was given to the D eople at the Election of a Superintendent, can triy entertain a Doubt, but as much Power was ;iven to them at the Eleftion of other Minifters? 2. Concerning this Form of EleBion, I think n it we have a Principle of the Church of Scot* I, and a declared Principle at that Time, jiamely, That the People fhould have the Ele&i- n ; for the Scripture cited in the Title-page of hat Form is Afts 14. 23. which we adduce for le People's Right to eleft;andthe Tranflation here is according to the Original, and as it was 1 all our old Tranflations, to wit, And when bey had ordained them Elders by Election in very Congregation, Sec. But, 3. From this Form and Order of Elefti- n of a Superintendent, I obferve great Multi- jdes may be called to vote in an Election with- ut Confufion, as many, and mo, as is the dumber of Communicants in any of the largelfc 'arifljes iq Scotland \ \w> let all the Earls, all the ( 32 4 ) the Lords, all the Barons, and all the Gentle- men, Magiftrates and Town-Council in the three Lothians and Stirling-fiire, be gathered, and the Meeting will be pretty throng, though none elfe fhould be called ; and, by that Form, all the Churches of Lothian are charged to chufe the Candidate, according to that Maxim , which fome call, one oj the fundamental Maxims of (Presbytery ; £>uod omnes tangit, ab omnibus traEkari debet. I think the Enquirer gains little by this Form and Order. As a Conclulion to it he fays, c And if th< * Authority that our Collectors have for faying, c That this Order was intended here to ferve in c the Ele&ion of all other Minifters be good, I e am confident the Author of Jus poptili will € review what he has advanced, p. 20—26"* c and in his Queries, p. 4..- 10/ Now, in thofe Pages it is proven, that the Ele&ion is e-, qually the Right of Rich and Poor, of High! 2nd Low : But of what is faid in thofe Places of Jus (Populi and the ^iieries cited by the En- quirer, which are no fewer than 14 Pages, h< takes not the leaft Notice. Tho 5 there Argument* from the facred Scripture be adduced, as alfo thi Arguments of eminent Divines, as j4ppolonius 5 Vcetius, (Park the Contimtator of Pool's ^no- tations, Surkit, Lawder, and the full Vindica- tion of the Commiffions Overtures ; yet all thi* was nothing to our Author, it was enough t( him, if in the Clofe of his Book he fhould fay. He had ftifficiently an fixer ed all. And fo much 'for his fair and candid Reprefentation of thi Mind of the Church of Scotland in the Affair. CHAP, { *** ) CHAP. V. In which the Enquirer s fecoiid SeUi* oih where he comes to ft ate the £tie~ Jiioiiy is conftdered. AND, i. He pretends to great Accu- racy here, and tells us, c He always € ufeth to begin his Study, imploring c the Divine Conduft and Afliftance, that he may fiqd out Truth, and that he might not fall into Blunders, aor oppofe or fight againft that which is not maintained by others/ 2. He let us know how he prayed, f That he might be helped to flop up thofe little lurking Holes his Adverfaries geaerally run to, and in which they are wont to earth themfelves/ Are lot thefe beautiful Phrafes, very becoming a mo- left and humble Enquirer ? Men of his fingu- ar Genius, fuch a Prodogy for Learning, may >e allowed to compare fuch filly Perfons, as Calvin, Beza, Junius, Walleus, Cartwrigbt* Knox, Caldti -wood, Rutherfurd, Gillefpie y For* 'efler, Jamefon, and other weak contemptible Voteliant Divines that might be named, to .Vorms, which have crept into little Holes for ar of Bellar?m?ie, and Men armed with his Veapons, as %i/fon, Sage, and fbme other Champions for the Prelatick Caufe. 3. When he comes to give an Account of vtr. Gi/tefpie's Conceffions in ftating the Quefti- »n upon this Subject ; as to his firft Conceflion ie tranlcribes it thus, i(i y ' The Quetfion is nor, P i Wbe- C 2 2 <> ) c Whether the whole Collective Body of the, * Church ought to be tailed, and their Voices * feverally asked in Elections, but the Repre- 4 Tentative Body of the Church ? ' He leaves out a Claufe between the Word Elections and thp Word Hnty viz. For all may confent 'when. none vote in Ele&iom. I think this is as bad as* my omitting to tranflate aim presbyteris, which, he (a) imputed to Art and Craft, appealing tOj the World if it was fair and honeit Dealingj 2. In tranfcribing thofe Concefiions, he adds the Figures i, 2, j, 4. whereas Mr. Gil/ejpii has none of thofe. Elfewhere (£), in tranfcrij bing the iDirefiory of the Aflembly 1649, he leaves out the Figures 2, 3, 4. perceiving the] putting them in would make it evident, that Afi iembly defigned fbmething diftind: by *he 3d and 4th Paragraphs, whfeh might confute his Aflerij tion anent that Zliretlory ; and here he take$ the Freedom to put as many Figures in for them. 4. c The Refiftance of a People, fays he (c)> * ought to be well qualified, for he hath known c fome^ who at firft have been for a Perfon to * be their Minifter ; but, whenever they heard c he had accepted a Prefentation or the like,thej € have made-the greateft Refiftanceand Oppofi- c tion to the Settlement ; and of fuch,he tninksi c their Refiftance /hould no more be regarded € than the Oppofition made by a Madman to a c Phyfician that is called for his Cure/ Anpuo. I think a Perfon's accepting a Prefentation in a- ny Terms before a People have chofen him to be their Paftor, argues great Untendernefs ; and to »««■■■ n 1 ■ — — w— — — - (" ) p. 113. (b) p« 18. (cj p. 2% ( 227 ) d do it in abfolute Terms is yet worfe. Such Lcceptance, in my Opinion, makes him reus mbitus. 1 beg our Enquirer will anfwer, if he in, a little Print, on this Subject, publifhed at ie Sitting down of the laft Aflembly 1732, enti- jled, The Cafe of accepting Trefentations. Mr. Anderjon, in his Synodical Sermon, fays a), c How a Minifter can be faid to be made an Overfeer by the Holy Ghoft, who enters ta that Charge upon the Prefentation of one w r ho poffibly may be a Dunkard, a Whore- monger, a common Swearer, a Papift in his Heart; and that,not only without the Confent, but againft the Will of the People, is beyond all natural Comprehenfion and common Senfes And aids further, It is without the leaft Ve- ftige of the like Praftice in Antiquity, for many Hundreds of Year from Chriit downward : And now, that this Church is as yet free of that Thraldom, as every good Chriltian will pray ihc may be fo kept, fo I am confident none will feek the Re-introducing it who have any Senfe of Religion, and do not defign the peftring her with a Miniltry, which few wife or good Men will think worth the owning.* The Leverend Synod of G/aJgoiv and Air defired im to print this Sermon. The* Enquirer may e more on this in the 14 and 1 5 Pages of the iemarks upon his Mode ft and Humble Enqne~ y. 5. c There are others, fays he (£), that main- tain the People or Members of a Chriftian Congregation are the only proper Eleftors ; P 2 ' that (<0 P- 8. (I/) p. 3*. ( 248 ) e That this is a Presbyterian Principle., a Refer. N * mation-Principle, a Principle of the Church ol f Scotland, founded on the Word of God ; Thai c the People have undoubtedly a Right to elefl c their own Pallors by a decifive Suffrage anq € Vote,and that.they cannot transfer his Right b) c any Deed of theirs to others, who may repre c fent them or ad: in their Name, but that ! c muft be immediately expreffed by themfelves] c And finally, that this is neceflary to make\j € Pafloral Relation between the Minifters anc € and luch Congregations, it being a Marriage * like Relation : For this, fays he, I vouch tbl * Author of Jus 'Popiili 'Divinum, and of thj € Queries upon the Overtures of the laft Afleni c bly : And thofe he pretends to be of the fanJ c Principle with himielf, whom he mentions of c ten in thofe Performances; and the Authd x of the Right of Patronage confidered. This! c alfo with the higheft Aflurance aflerted vm * voce by many in Church-Judicatories, feu € their flaming Zeal animates them to give \ * faithful Teftimony to the Truth. y AnpA The Books or Pamphlets he produceth for Vo4 chers, fhow that this is fat from being a fair Re prefentation : For, ift, W e never faid that al Presbyterians were for the People's voting vir% tim y or Man by Man ; but on the other Hanc we always owned fundry learned Presbyterian think, tho* the Right of Calling is originally ii the People, yer they may be reprefented by tht Presbytery or Congregational Elderfhip. idly We do not make it eflential or neceflary, to ft the Relation between Pallor and People, thai all the People^ exprefs their Suffrage by them- - • " ftlves ( 22p ) elves, tho' we own they have a Right to vote ; nd that the leaft, which can be allowed them,, is Negative, be the Eleftors who will. And, for ne, I told in the Preface to Jm Tofuli, That, f at the Moderation all agree upon a Perform I ee no Neceffity for a Vote, or the Elderfhip taay be allowed to vote firft ; and,if all agree to he Perfon voted for, I fee no Need of calling nore, or Heritors may be allowed to vote, or Magiftrates and Counfellors in Burghs : And, if he People agree, I (hall not fay there is Necef- Ity for their Suffrages, tho' ftill they have as ^ood a Right to vote as any : And when there Difference among Parifhioners, if they defire a uftrage, I fee not how it can be refufed. Andf that Book I faid, f Such Minifters as have had the People's Confent, have materially had that which makes up the Suhftance of a Gofpel-Call ; nnd,when People have made no Oppofition to a Minifter's Settlement, there it may be faid, Minifters have had their Con- fent according to that received Maxim, £>ui facet, confent ire videtur ; or, He that is filent, feems to confent. And, tho* I never laid nor hought a People were obilged to fubjeft them- elves to a Perfon that had been thrult in upon hem ; yet, if afterwards they be pleafed with hat Perfon, upon acknowledging his Fault, and lpon their teftifyingagainft the Manner of Settle- nent, they may without Sin fubje<5t themfelvcs o his Miniftry : And thereafter, Acceptance and ubjecting themfelvcs to his MinHtry, will make 11m their Paftor. 4- Whereas he fays, c This is aflerted/y/V* vo m ce> with the greatetl Aflu ranee, by -y in N 3 Church* ( $1° ) * Church-judicatories at this Day, whofe Zeal € animates them to give faithful Teftimony to the * Truth/ Anf. I doubt the Truth of this as wori ded by him ; tho* we -all plead, The People, in- cluding Nobility, Gentry, Magiftrates in Towns, Elders and Commonality, have a Right from Chrift to chufe their own Paftors y which, beiM a fpiritual Privilege, muft belong equally to Rici^ and Poor, High and Low. And their Zeal, upoq the jufteft Ground, animated them to oppofe that Overture, which robbed Chriftian Congre- gations of their Right to eleft their Paftors. What moved our Enquirer to make fuch an unfair Reprefentation of his Oppofites Sentiments^ is not eafy to tell, nor fhall 1 take upon me to divine. Our Author, in his Enquiry concerning thq State of the Controverfy, found (a) 3 That, 1>j one Dafh of the Pen of fome Writers, the onl Half of the People are fcored of£j particularizine Mr. Gillefpie, as denying Women the Liberty of confenting ; and Mr. *Park 3 and the Author o| jus populi, as denying them a Vote. ' As fol the Reverend Mr. Gillefpie, nothing can be mor falfe than that he meddles with that Subject the Place alledged. Indeed Mr. take up the Reader's Time with theft. A Shread cut <>rt i } 4 fcow ( $12 ) from the whole Piece of a Difcourfe may eafil; through Ignorance be mifconftrued, or througi Malice mifreprefented, to an Author's Prejudkjp. 2. c Under this Head, fays our Enquirer (a), c the Author of Jus fopuli divimim exclude? c from this Right all fuch as are not of our Com- f munion ; and for this he hath the Authority oi € the Affembly 1549 upon his Side/ Now, il fo, the Author of jftis popdi is not lingular in his Sentiments. The Enquirer fays, c The Ad upqn the O-l € verturei73i, and the A£t of Parliament 1690, € grant fuch a Vote,, becaufe they have fo much € Charity as to think them fincere in th.eir Pro-1 ' mifes of all dutiful Refpeft, &c. y Anf. Was'? then our Aflembly 1649 qncharitable ? Why may i we not allow Tapjls the fame Liberty ? May we I not truft them as fincere alfo, if they fubfcribe 2 the Call ? He fays, c We gain by fuch a Me- € thod/ But, I humbly think, it is not unlike 1 the Method the Church of Englaiid took to gain the Papifts at the Reformation, which fome com- pare to One's faftning his Rope and Anchor to a Rock j the Vnore he pulls, the Rock brings I him the nearer to it. But I have faid fo much , upon' this Head in Jm populi (&), and Queries (V), which the Enquirer hath taken no Notice of, probably becaufe he faw it is not eafy to an- fwer it, that I fhall not here infift upon it, but refer the Reader to thefe Papers. Only, I am credibly informed, fome of the Epifcopal Clergy have refufed to admit fuch Gentlemen to the Sa- crament >-•■ (a) $. 31. (b) /. $ j io. (c) /. 17; 18, 19, so. < ^ > , L. rament of 'the Lord's Supper, till they have made rofeffion of their Repentance for a&ing fo difin- enuoufly as to promife Subjection to the Mini* try of Presbyterians, by fubfenbing Calls, when hey never intended it ; And, in fo doing, they lave afted honeftly. 3. The Enquirer judges it will be agreed to, hat ignorant Perfons are a Part of the People, *ho cannot have a Right to elecft. Anf. Might le not have own'd here, that we exclude igno- ant and irreligious People from this Privilege, Jlowing the Liberty of Chufing only to fuch as lave been, or in the Judgment of Charity may }e, admitted to the Lor is L'able ? The Author )f Jus foptili fhows this at fome Length. I join with the Enquirer in lamenting People's ."gnorance ; Yet, if he mean that the (Generality )f the common People are more ignorant of the irft Principles of Religion than lome of higher Elank, then it may be a Queftion : For, with us, he Commonalty being examined once or twice l Year, they are put on to learn ; whereas fun- Jry of higher Rank are at Ids Tains, of which [nftances might be given. The Enquirer fays (a), ( A Cant, a whining 7one s a loud Voice > (trong Lu;;gs, diftorted Facet, Entbitfiaflick Motions and Agitations are generally the Grounds of popular Elefti- ons. Anf Here the modeft and humble Enquirer's Expfclfions favour of a profane Spirit, he (beaks n the Dialed of Rakes and profane Moclcers: [$ this fuitable to the Chsra&er of a Gof] ni- niiier ? *■- (a) f. 53. ( *34 ) tiifter ? If thefe be the Grounds of popular EI< iftions, the London Minifters evidenced litt Judgment, in faying, They were very much fc popular Ele&ions ; as well as their Brethren i Hew England, and many in Old England. Ml Sijfet, in (his Plain Englifb , tells us how % Oracle of the Etiglifo Law termed their Noi thern Neighbours on the other Side of Twees. Sneevling Saints. Alfop tells us (a), how h Oppofite charged the Presbyterians with Apij Gefitires, and Tragical Vociferations, inftead c Eloquence in delivering their Sermons. Mr. Co? let fays (b), c Earnejjtnefs of Speech, and Ei< € vation of the Voice, are not of little Fora c And truly, fays he, the Weight of the Bufinel c requires due Fervour : Should the Matters c c Lite and Death be delivered without Feeling c as by Men half-afleep ^ And he adds, A mc € ving Tone and taking Geflure are helpful fo c moving the Afteftions/ Are not Minifter called to lift up their Voice like a Trumpet, an< cry alond ? And our Lord himfelf, on the la\ tDay of the Feaft he food and cried. To th lame Purpofe fpeaks Henry upon John 10. 20.^ 4. Our Author owns, it hath been though proper to exclude the Immoral from the Rigfci of Election ; and owns, the T)ire£iory 1^49 j for this,, if the Perfon be under Church- cenfurj r But, fays he (c), it has been doubted by forr^ c if the Immoral are to be denied the Right r Eleftion, providing they have Knowledge to c make a right Choice/ M -dm-\ (a) £. raihi) 74. (£) Kingdom of God, p. z % TO/- 35« - ( *3* ) dnf. I think the Profane are no more to have a Voice than the Ignorant. Such hate nothing more than a faithful Miniftry ; and if One more lax can be had, One that's for living and let live in Sin, as they (peak, he fhall be their Mini- fies Was Knowledge enough, Satan wants not Abundance of it. The Enquirer cites the Order laid down for the EleElion of Elder's and Deacons to the Church of Edinburgh, approven of by the Ge- neral AfTembly 1582, namely, ¥bat the Electors oj fuch Elders and 'Deacons were to be Commu- nicants (a). This is a Confirmation of the Au- thor of Jits poptili his Opinion ; and, concer- ning that Order it is to be noticed, : the Election there was to be by the / of the whole Communicants , with* iction of Rich or Poor: And there it is declared, c That * the Votes of all being rec e Votes are c counted, where the manyeii: \ 1 without c Refpect of Pertons hath the rir :ce in the * Elderfhip, and io proceeding till the Number € of Twelve be complete,- Lb rhat, if a poor € Man exceed the rich Man in Votes, he pre- € ceedeth him in Place, and is called the nrft, c fecond and third Elder, even as the Votes an- € fwereth. And this fame Method is obferved ' in the Ele&ion of the Deacons/ * He fays, If this Method fhouli take TlacCy ( viz. of giving the Vote to tne Communicants^ the State of the J^/tcJliori mud no more proceed vpon the ma)or 'Part of a Tarijb, but vpon the better *Part of it. slnpw. Set afidc the Jsno- rantj (a) /. 34 ( *tf ) rant, Immoral, and Irreligious, who fhould not have a Vote, the major Part of the People come to Years are Communicants with us, and I doubt not in other Congregations through the Land. He fays here, He defpairs of ever feeing the ^Difficulties refolved that will cafi up y or meet- ing with fach wife Regulations as pall remove] nil Debates and Rejifiance in planting Churches \ Jlnpw. Why then is he fuch an Enemy to po- pular Eledions ? I dare fay, they are attended with fewer Debates and Difficulties than when Heritors and Elders are made the only Eleftors. How eafy were it to have a Regifter kept of all in a Parilh who communicate, which would be fooner read over at the Moderation, and lefs Jangling about it^thantwoor three Heritors their difputed Rights, of which Minifters are not com- petent Judges, can be examined. And of all the Schemes that ever were laid down, that of the Overture 1731 may be attended with the moft inextricable Difficulties, Squabels, Jarrs, Feuds and Animofities in Parifhes and Countryfides. In fome Places the Obfervation of that Rule has introduced fuch Heart-alienation and Rancour among Gentlemen, as may convince every think- ing Perfon, that Canon is not good that produ- ceth fuch bad Eftefts. Moreover, what odd Debates has it introduced into our Church-judi- catories; fo that Presbyteries, Synods, and other Ecclefiaftieal Courts, whofe Bufineii fhould be wholly fpiritual and facred, are put to the Ne- ceflity of hearing and marking in their Records long litigious Wranglings about Heritors Civil | Rights, Protefts and Counter-protefls, Quirks of Lawicrs, and a Thoufand Things gf that Na- ture ; ( ni ) Cure ; fo that our Minutes are fluffed with Civil Matters, looking more like the Records of fecu- lar than Ecclefiaftical Judicatories. , j. The Enquirer comes (a), to confider the Cafe of non-rcfiding Heritors : And concerning his Conduct, I here obferve, i. That, tho' he was aflured both from Scripture and, Antiquity, that it is only the Presbytery's Right to elett the Paftors of the vacant Congregations, as was no- ticed above; yet, here in this SeEiion, he pleads the Reafonablenefs of giving Heritors, and Heri- tors not of our Communion ; and he feems alfo to be for allowing the Immoral, if knowing, a Suffrage. And here he pleads it would be bard, and extremely hard to refufe non-refiding Heri- tors a Vote in the Affair : Muft not this be in great Confiftency with himfelf? Is not this to make Reafon and Revelation clafh and contra- dift one aqother ; feeing, according to him, the Scripture gives this Right only to the 'Presbyte- ry 1 And yet he fays,it is reafonable Heritors, and Heritors not of our Communion, and non-refi- ding Heritors fhould have a Vote. 2. Tho* he pretends to anfwer Jus 'Populi Divinum y yet, ic is obfervable, he feldom touches his Arguments ; and particularly it is fo here, unlefs the received Maxim be inverted, and contra arguraentari ba the fame with refpondere. The Author of Jus ^Poptili adduced lundry Arguments againft this ; beudes the Authority and Arguments of Mr. Heitry, Mr. 'Parky and the Commiffioners of the General Aflembly 1711, yea, the General Af- fembly itfelf 1712, but he never meddles with any (a) p. 54. ( 2j8 ) any of thefe ; and yet this confcientious Authot can fay in the Clofe, That he hath fufficiently fca^tered the Cloud of WitneJJes, pretended to be for the People's Right. But, for Anfwer to what he fays, in a few Words, i. If Heritors will be cioncerned for the Good and Intereft of their Tenants, to have them well provided with able Gofpel-Miniftcrs, fo will every good Man in the Neighbourhood. 2. As they may come and take up their Habitation in that vacant Parifh, fomay Hundreds. 3. If fome Heritors have come ancf builded where they had a Land-Eftate, fo have others bought Lands and builded there. ^Where- as he (ays, fome/or the Value they had for a Mi- nifies have come and hired Houfes in fuch and fuch a Parifh : That Reafoning fays, They that have Houfes in a Congregation fhould have a Vote. 5. If fome have Manfion-houfes in diffe- rent Parifhes, refiding in one Parifh in Summer, and in the other in Winter, I fuppofe, few will oppofe fuch their having Votes in both. For what he fays of an Heritor's having his Manfion- houfe in one Parifh, and a Dwelling in another, where he defigns his Heir or Widow (hall refide ; let the Right of non-reflding Heritors be refla- ted to thefe Cafes, where there is a Probability of their coming to refide; if I miftake not, it would not be much oppofed. Tho' what is on- ly a May-be^ may never he y nor can fuch May* bees be of any Weight in this Cafe. Our Enquirer concludes this Head with a hea- vy Charge againft the Author of Ju% Toptli, namely (a), That, as the Beauty and Charms c of 0) P . 55. m nm*mn » m t ^ m^mm — %*jfmM WM ( 5*39 ) L ' of the jair Sex, could not move him to allow them a Vote ; fo the Honour, Greatnefs and Riches of Heritors will not prevail on him to fhew them the leaft Notice or Regard in this Matter, fo polite and courteous is this Writer/ 4npx. His 2) i a left here, is liker the Stile of >ne that writes a Comedy, or Romance, than the tile of a Minifter of the Church of Scotland, vriting a modefi Enquiry into the Right of cas- ing Gofpel-Miniflers. The Author of Jus Top. rankly owns, he never was, and hopes never to e, io polite, or rather profane, as to complement .ny with fpiritual Privileges from carnal or world- / Confident ions. And, I fuppofe, our Enqui- er may have the Honour of being IPrmipilus the irft in the Miniftry of the Church of Scotland, hat ever fet up for Compliments of this Kind : \nd yet, for all this, he cannot deny but the Au- hor of Jits Topitli is for giving more to the fair iex, tho* not for the Sake of their Charms, beauty or Favour, than he or any that oppofes he People's Right, will allow unto them : Yea, Es was hinted already, he allows them more, han he with a good Confcience, and in a Con- iflency with his Principle, if here he have any, :an allow unto Men, be they never fo great, un- efs they be Members of Presbytery. Again, whereas he reflefts for not heing fo po- lite, as in this Affair to Jhew the leafl Regard to Heritors, for all their Greatnefs, Ho?iOur and Riches. In Anfwer to this, i. I allow more to the meaneft Heritor in a Congregation, than lie according to his Principles can give unto the greateft ; for I allow them a Vote in the |6hoice of their Paftor, whiclj our modeft ( 2 4 ) Enquirer cannot grant ; feeing he Believes Chrij hath given this Right to the Presbytery • and, ac cording to him, the Presbytery need not fo mucfc as propole their Candidate to any in the Congre- gation,be they never fohigh ; or, if they do, rhec it is only for their Confent, which,' whether thej obtain or not, they can go on to thruft him in upon all the Congregation unlefe they libel tht Candidate, prove. him vitious or erroneous. 2. 'Tisfelfe to fay, I allow not of the leaft No- tice or Regard to Heritors : For, in Jus Topn- liy i. I grant they may be allowed to vote firft, and, if the Congregation go in to the Choice,there is no more need of Votes {a). And, 2. I faid. Civil Refpeft is due unto Gentlemen according to their Quality, Birth, Blood, Wealth and Sta- tion in the World ; and that it is a great Mercy to the Church of Chri(l y when the Rich among the People, and Perfons of greater Influence ii a Congregation, are ready to join in the calling of faithful Gofpel-Miniiters. And, 3. low) double Honour is due unto them, if really religi- ous, and that People ought, not only to confull with fuch, but alfo to have a Veneration fon their Judgment. And, 3. iW the Author of Jn$ ^oftili (T fieems Goodnefs above Greatnefs, and cannot make a Compliment to the Greateft of fpiritual Privileges ; yet in this he is far from being fingu- lar. Bifhop Hall lays (b), c There is nothing! € but Man that refpefts Greatnefs, not GW, not] c Death, nor Judgment ; not God> he is no Kc\ c cepterl ^ m (a) p. 6. of Preface to Jm Top. (b) Medi- tation and Vdws,, /. 1, ( »4* ) „ cepter of Perfons, not Nature. We lee the Sonj of Princes born as naked as the pooreft, and the poor Child,, as fair, well-favoured, ftrong and witty,as the Heir of Nobles : Not Difeafes, Death, Judgment, they ficken alike, die a- like, fare alike after Death. There is nothing (befides natural Men,) of whom Goodnefiisnot refpe&ed. I will honour Greatnefs in othersj but,for myfelf,I will efteem aDrachmofGood- nefs above a World of Greatnefs/ The above- ited Representation of 'Presbyterian Govern- ment, fays (a) y We are content to allow great Men all due Refpcct, but not to compliment hem with that which is Chrift's Legacy to his 'eople. Whatever Civil Refped: is due to great tfen, they muft never be complemented with biritual Privileges upon worldly Confiderations. w we may fay it, without being guilty ofScanda- uni magnatwn, he may be a great Man, and ave little Grace. He was a great Man, yea the ;reateft in three Kingdoms, that, fpeaking o£ ludibras at a Council-table, faid, It was the eft Book that ever was printed, tho' the Bible ad pafled the Prefs a good Time before that* ilihu was not fo polite as ourEnquirer; for he (b) lys, Let me not, I pray thee, accept any Man's \rfon, neither let me give flattering Titles unto 4an. For 1 know not to give flattering Titles, in ) doing my Maker would foon take me away* ^re not all Believers great in the Sight of the -ord ? The Prophet Elifoa was no doubt an tipolite Perfon,feeing he faid to Jehoram King of Q. Ifrael m~- (a)> p. 13, (b) Job. 32. 21,22. ( 2 4 2 ) cf Ifrael, As the Lord of Hop liveth hefore xehora I ft and, furely, was it not that Iregar ' the Trefence of Jehofhaphat the King of Judah x I would not look toward thee y nor fee thee* Whatever civil Refpeft he might fhow unto him as his Sovereign, and he a Subjett ; yet, as a Prophet, he would not (hew him the leaft Re- gard. To have Refpeff of Terfons is not good j for for a ^iece of Bread, that Man will tranf- grefSy Prov. 28. 21. Next, Our Author fays, (a) c He .found the € ftrongeft AfTerters of the People's Right hav * thought it highly expedient that the Exercife € it fhould be brought under fome Regulations, c for preventing fuch Diforders as they did forefee c might fall out, to the Offence of all good Men c if the Call of a Minifter to a Parifh were to b c by a Poll Election/ I own that fundry, wha have flood up for the People's Right, have been for bringing this Affair under fome Regulation ; but fuch a candid Enquirer fhould have told thefe ftrong AfTerters of the People's JRight, were ftill for the People's having a Negative over all that ihould reprefent them in theEle&ion. 2. Where- as he fays, They were for thofe Regulations, that fo fuch Diforders might be prevented, as are an Offence to all good Men. As to this, I ask, if they were for lodging the Exercife of this Right; in Heritors and Elders, as judging this would be the Way to prevent them ? Have we not known as great Diforders at Eleftions in Scotland, where the Ele&ion was not by a Poll, as any he can (*) P« %h m m w i >ii m iw ( 24? ) ^ can inftance at fuch ? But, as for the Difbrders that have happened, or may happen, at popu- lar Ele&ions, he had a full and large Anfwer to this in Jm *Populi (aj, which he pretends to anfwer, where no fewer than eight Pages are fpent in fhowing how little Ground there is for the Clamour, whether in this or former Ages of the Church ; and there the Cafe of Aberdeen* which he mentions here, is alfo touched ; but of thefe he takes not the leaft Notice. As for his Inftance of Edinburgh or Glajgaiv, in cafe of a Poll Election, let every Parifh have the Choice of their own Paftors, and this Ob- jection doth evanifh. And for other numerous Parilhes, their Votes may be called and given in far fhorter Space than they take to communi- cate ; and where there is Unanimity, there is no Need of calling the Votes of all ; and where it is not, I know not in all the VVorld how it fhall be known who Jpve the Major^. unlefs their Suffrages be askecP If any pleafe^BI^ may fee more to this Purpofe in the Preface to Jus IPopuli 2)ivinunt. And further, as to his Inftance of the Confu- lion popular Elections would occafion in Edin- burgh or Glafgow ; if Spotifxoodis to be credi- ted, then popular Elections in the City of Edin- burgh have only been in Defuetude fince 1624; for he fays (b) 3 T*his Tear the popular Eleftion of MinifterSy when as Places by an Occafion fell void, were difcharged, and the ^refutati- on appointed to be by the \Provojl 3 Baillies and Council. Catterwood gives an Account Q^ 1 That ( 244 ) t That this fame Year, viz. Nov. 18. 1624, tPhen there was to be a Meeting for making a Leet of three Minifters to be heard, that out of them one might be chofen to the vacant 'Place, f viz. in Edinburgh,) the whole honeft Inhabi- ta?its were warned from the 'Pulpits the Sab- bath immediately preceeding, to come to the f aid. Meeting. But now,, for what he fays (a), of the Alie* nablenefs of the People's Right, affirming, c Some, who are more zealous than wife, re- f claim againfl: this as an Inv'afion of the People's c Right, which is unalienable, and cannot be c given away by the People, nay, not to their € Reprefentatives, tho* they were chofen by € themfelves/ And, having particularized the Author of Jus Populi as being of this Sentiment, the Enquirer declares himfelf to be of a different Mind, and thinks no Man can oppofe his Opi- nion unlefs he be out of his right Wits, and be- fi.ie huvfclf, by an Aff Ration of Popularity , thatmmnot ?nifs to maJwhim do Things, which ?nuft be condemned by 'all good aitd wife Men. JBut,doth he bring any ftrong Argument to con- firm his ftrong Aflertion ? No ; only he fays, € Husbands are the conjugal Reprefentatives of € their Wives, Parents of their Children not yet c forisfamiliate, and Matters are the Civil Re- c preventatives of their Servants, and yet fuch € Kind of Reprefentations are not condemned in c Scripture.' Anf.\. The Unalienablenefs of this Right was proven at Length in Jus Populi, where no left than Ten Pages are fpent inConfirmation of this, That (a) p, 36. r ( *M ) . f That the People s Right is unalienable : And there the Arguments of Cartwright, Calderwood, Rti- therfurd, Park and Rule are adduced, befides the Author's own Arguments, to none of which Jie makes the leaft Reply ; and it feems he few he was not able to aniwer them to the Satisfacti- on of any impartial Perfon. Some of thofe Ar- guments were trankribed and publifhed in the Remarks upon the Mo dell Enquiry, and there- fore I fhall not further infift upon them : It was enough for our Enquirer to fay, in the Clofe, 'Thus I have Sufficiently fcattered the Cloud of Witncffes loudly pretended to be for the 'People's Right. As to his alledged Inconfiftency between denying the People can alienate their Right ; and faying, Perhaps Women may be faid to give their Voice in the Men. I cannot difcover this In- confiftency ; for I did not aflert Women gave a- v.ay their Right to the Men : And further, there was no pofitive Affirmation upon the Head. Whereas, 1. He fays, He cannot think any Man in his right Wits, will oppofe, &c. I re- ply, i. It feems the Enquirer, if he hath not been be fide himfelf ivith an Affectation of Po- pularity, yet here he is molt inconfiftenr : Fcr, in arguing againft the People's having a natural Right (a), he pleads thus, c The People's € Right of electing Minifters is not a natural c Right, Cnce God kept Men back from the € Exercife of it (or near to the Space of Four € Thoufand Years : A Right that for (o long a K Time could not be exercifed, muft h n • in vain; and a Power that for all that Time Q^3 c w 00 P- 4 *> V * was never reduced into Attion, muft be no c Power/ He is there fpeaking of the Time of the Old-1'eftament Difpcnfation : Now, I would ask, if that Right could not be alienate for Four Thoufand Years, whether could it been alienate for Three, ' Two or One thoufand ? I fee not* how he can deny, but, if it might be alienate for a Thoufand, it might alfo be alienate for Two thoufand, and fo forth. And, if People's Right may be alienated for One hundred, why not for moe Years ? And therefore, according to himfelf, I cannot fee how People can make an abfolute Grant of their Right for Fifty Years, or fo much as for once in all their Lifetime : No doubt they may alienate their Right fo far, asro allow the Elders, the Heritors, the Deacons, or the Presbytery, al a Time, to elecft for them, upon Suppofltion they chufe the Perfon they no- minate, or are defigned for ; but they have-not a Power to give their Right of chufing to ano- ther, fo as to leave them to chufe whom they pleafe. If he argue againft the People's having a natural Right to eleft their Minifters, then the long Want of the Exercife of this Right is a clear Demonftration they never had it : But, when he argues for the Alienableneft of that Rjght 3 which Chrift has given his People, then 'tis itark Madnefs and Diftraftion to deny that this Right may be alienate from Generation to Ge- neration, was it till tDgomfday, without ever claiming the Exercife thereof, for here, he refirids th^ Alienation to no Time. 2. In Reply to this, I ask, Whether our Au* thor hath the jufteft Title to that of a modeji> iuiphle Enquirer z feeing he charges fome of the molt ( *47 ) oft eminent of all that ever flood up for Pres* Jytery, viz. Cartwright, Calderwood, Rtither* ^urd, Park, Rule, etc. as well as the Author f Jus Populi, as being mad, and bejide them- selves, with Affectation of Popularity , in denyi- ng the People can alienate their Right of Elefti- >n to any ? for they are all pofitive, they can- ot. Rutherfurd, in his Due Right of Pres- byteries (a), cites Calderwood with Appro- bation faying, A -particular Church cannot alie- nate or transfer her Power of . Election to a I uron, nay not to a General AJfembly, efj i ally a perpetual and heriditary Right, becanfe, as Cartwright/iyj, it is a Part cf that Liber- ty which is pnrchafed hy Chrifi's Blood, which the Church can no more alienate and difpofe, than fhe can tra?2sfer or'difpofe to another 1 Inheritance of the Kingdom of God, to which this Liberty is annexed. But, fay .you, per- haps the Enquirer hath not known this to be the Sentiment of thefe eminent Divines, elfe he had not fpoken fo harfhly of that Pofition. But, b« affured, that is far from being the Cafe ; for all thofe folid, wife and learned Divines, with their very Words, are recorded at fome Length by the Author of Jus Populi in the very Place cited by the Enquirer. Bur,as the Author of the Reworks fays,the£;;#///>£r,here,and thro' moft of hisBook, feems to have had a Defign to befpatter his Ad- verfary the Author of Jus Populi, perverting his Words, or afcribing Pofitions to him as lin- gular, tho' he hath advanced nothing anent che Q^4 Cal- — . ■ , ■■>■ — ■ {a) p, 464. ( *4* ) Calling of Gofpel-Minifters, for which he hatha not cited good Authority. 3. As to his Charge of Madnefs with AfFefta4| tion of Popularity ; this hath ordinarily been the; Cant of the Enemies of Presbyterians ; nothings more ordinary than for High-Church to charge diflenting Minifters in England and Ireland, as nothing but a Company of vile Hypocrites, and ( Affe&ers of Popularity for refufing Conformity, and pretending Scruples againft the Ceremonies.] Principle Rule, in his c Irue Non-conformift, tells! tis (a) how his Adverfary accufed the No?z-conA formifls as courting the Favour of the Vulgar,' pleading the People's Right to eleft their Pa- llors. And Calderwood relates a Speech of the Archbilhop of St. Andrews, in which he faid to Mr. Robert Salcanquell, Many that have y Tittle in them will pretend to be zealous for the Kirk, to get them Refpeft among the 'People. 4. For Reply, If, with our Author, we may take the Freedom to judge of Perfons Motives, then, to every confidering Perfon, there is as much Ground to think that fundry who op- pofe the People's Right, are a6ted from low, nfiean, felfifh and worldly Confiderations, fuch as, the Advancement of themfelves to fome Firft-rate Benefice, or a Tranfportation to lome eminent Charge. What a conforming Member of the Church of England, who defigns himfelf Iranens Junior, in the Pre- face to his Tfe'a for Abatement in Matters of Conformity to the Church of England, fays, per- haps it may be applicable in the prefent Cafe, Our (a) p. £8< ur Church, fays he, / rf/# of Opinion, nitty hank her 'Preferments for tl e great Zeal of tany of her Votaries in the Cafe of Conformity. 'he Roman Clergy, adds he, bad never (tickled ) ear ne fly to have advanced their Bifoops a* ove the Council, if the later could have given Dignity as well as the former. Profeflor Ja- nefon (beaks to the fame Purpofe, when fpeaking f the Difference between Prelacy and" Presby- ery. It is a fmall Alleviation of theReproach of being veak Men, Self -faking Men, Men of divifive Spl- its, Affetters of Singularity and Popularity, hypocrites, and what not, to wear, as One fays, \ Feather in their Cap, the Tlume of popular rfpplaufe. The/, I own, every Miniiter of the jofpel, as he regards the Suceels of hisMiniltry, vould guard againlt doing lcfs or more that may nake him contemptible before the People, fink- ng or ruining his Reputation among them, as a tfan of no Confcience ; yet Wo will be to that inifrer, or private Chri(tian that loves the raife of Men more than the Traife of God. nd to fay that Men are madiath a?i/ljfeciation of ^Popularity \ which makes them do Things which mnfl be condemned by all good and wife , is to (ay they are nothing but a Pack of ogling Rafals and vile Hypocrites, who, if :hey get the Praife of the People, care not what they do. Had the Enquirer pleafed, as he ("peaks, ibis Railery might been left at Home. In the fecond Place (a), c Suppofing this is : the People's Right, he wants to know if this ' be ) /. 3*. . , * , .■«p n ,. ( *fo ) < be equally the Right of all that have been., 01 c maybe, admitted to fealing Ordinances/ An< againft this pleads, c That a Son not yet for is- ' jamiliate, and a Servant that is in Subjeftidf c to his Matter, cannot have equal Right i c the Affair. And this, fays he, leems to pleat c againft it, that both are to receive their Jawful c Commands, not only in Matters civil, but ii € religious Things, according to what is record c ded to the great Honour of Abraba?n* Gei c 18.19/ Anf. ift, If our Enquirer thinks thoi cannot have eqtial Right with their Head ; think the Authority of the Learned Calderwcoi is enough, and fomething more than enough, t< counterbalance his Authority. Bifhop Silfon h; ving obje&ed, That Hinds or Country-Fellow, at Service, have not Riches to pay a *Part oj Minifters Stipends, and therefore jloould not h allowed the Privilege of Call'mg ; In Apfwer t< him, Calderwood fays (a), c Plowmen are no lei c Members of the Church of Chrift than the c Lord or Laird of the Land : And in Chrh € there is not Bond and Free, but all are fre&t, c If they are to be excluded from this Libertyj € viz. of Eleftion, they may alfo be excluded * from the Church icfelf on this very Account, ' That they arc Country-fellows, Plowmen and c Servants. * Here we fee, he was far from dreaming Matters or Parents, thefe Civil Repre< fentatives as the Enquirer calls them, had a Right to eled for them. I own, Parents and Matters t may require and enj ifft»»i ■■■■ ^ 1 l* — m tt— 1— » u 1 ** (a) Alt. 2) am. p. 59^ Imp. 1. ■ ;( mi y - in their Children and Servants to keep the d Ways of the Lord ; and it is their Duty to y, not only becaufe God hath commanded , but the Authority of Parents and Matters i fuperadded Obligation, God having enjoined ildren and Servants to obey their Parents and ifters in all Things lawful : But, that they ve any fuch Right in religious Matters, as our quirer afcribes unto them, is refuted ; and I ovv of no Command enjoining them thus to :eive their Commands in Mattets religious. If Father or Matter command them to go hear an )ifcopal Minifter, are they obliged to leave the esbyterians and attend upon their Sermons? or, hey command them to read fuch or fuch Places the Apocrypha rather than the facred Scrip, res? or, if they fhould enjoin them to accuftom cmfelves to pray by Book, the Book of Corn- on Prayer, or the like, rather rh^n othervvife? hofe are religious' Matters. "But, if our En- jirer thinks them notfinful in themfelves, Will \ therefore fay they are to be o I in thofe ? ' fo, many will think him no iianch Presby- erian. ' As Dr. Calatny y in his Baxters Life abridged, lis us (a), The (People's not having the Choice r/jcir *PaJlors> txtas one of the Rcafbns why >i(Tenters in England could not join with that hnrch : And, fpeaking there againft the Prir r Rifhops having a Power to chufe for others, 'tis . c Whofe Intereltand Power in my Family, and with Reference to my Wife and Children,t jefupppofed to be earlier an J gi I than mine 1 Who (a) Chap, jo. p. z-i. ( 2J2 ) Who more concerned .in the Inftru&ion the receive then I? Why then fhould I let anothe c impofe a Paftor upon them which more belong c to me certainly than to any elfe, if they an c not competent Judges for themlelves ? But c fays he j if it becomes not even me, and couli e not be juftified for me to tell my Wife and Chil € dren that are come to Years of Difcretion,The} c fhall have this Man for their Minifter or none € They fhall either worfhip God here or nowheri € how can the Magiftrate have fuch an Authqj c rity I how came the Bifhop by it!?* There wjj fee Mr. Baxter , whom our Enquirer calls thij great Baxter (a), declaring, If Children h come to the Tears of Qifcretim, they fsavq a Right to ele£i their there are no Parifhonei but the Heritor's labouring Servants : It feeiij according to him, no Body in that Parifh mul chufe, for there is no reliding Heritor in th< Place ; and, according to his Reafoning hen Blders muft be icored mft y unlefs they fc Heritors, the Elders of*Tne little Parifh < Sympron are all Cottars. If a Member of th lai ■»»*«*»i«*p«^« (*) P- J 4 r > 14-2, 143, J 44. (&) P- V- ( 257 ) ft AfTembly, the Enquirer fhould have obje- ed againft Elders having any Vote ; for they ay be turned to the Door, and the Minifter of e Parifh of $y?/zpro?z can hardly be faid to have paftoral Relation to that Parifh, which is fo friable : How it may be now, I know not, yet, think, when that eminent Servant of thrift x. Thomas Sofion was Minifter in that Parifh, ere were as few Changes in it as in moft Pari- es through the Shire having a fixed Elderfhip ; |id a Parifh, in which, if I rightly remember, ere was not a prayerlefs Perfon or Family ; yet is, or any fuch Congregation, according to our nquirer, mull take a Pallor as the Market goes, ! what he will, feeing they are the "Dregs of the eof'le ; be they never fo rich in Faith, it mat- rs not, if they have not the Sag. May it not i faid,That, tho' the Inhabitants be changeable, >t they chufe for others that may fucceed them, i much as Magiftrates and Town-Counfellors, ho are to tarry but for a Year or two, or He- tors that die may be faid to have chofen for their peceflbrs ? And, as for the Parifh of Da-wick, fuppofe, it may be much the fame with that of yr/ipron, tho* I know nothing of its Circum- ances. In the third Place> our Author asks (a), If this levelling DoElrine fhall take Place in [Cities and Burghs, muft the meaneft of the I People, Hewers of Wood and Drawers of Wa- ter, have a Ri^ht with their Superiors the Ma giftrates and Town-Counfcllors ? Shall the ve- ry Dregs of the People have as high a Claim as ; the Honor ati and Trimores TleUs 1 . Shall they € chufe (<0 P. 3* ( *& ) c chufe for their Betters ?* As to levelling Do Brine , he had a Reply to this Objection at forfit Length in Jus Top. 1)iv. (a) but he thought! was not fafe to meddle with what is there faid ir anfwer to it. 2. Sundry think our Author^ Stile here favours of Prolanenefs. Is it fuitabk to a Minifter of the Gofpel, as the Enquirer del figns himfelf, to fpeak fo difdainfully of God's pe- culiar People,, whom the Spirit of God calls the Royal 'Priefthood^nd who are Kings and Triejli unto God, as are the meaneft worthy Communi- cants ? Is it not the Chara&er of all that are trdl Citizens of Zion, that they defpife vile Men, bl what they will in the World, while they honour ftich as jear the Lord (b) \ Hath not God cho- fen the^Poor of the World, rich in Faith, and Heirs of the Kingdom t None of God's Chil- dren are thus contemptibly to be fpoken of, they are not the 2)regs of the 'People, but the excel- lent Ones of the Earth, a peculiar People, and more excellent than their 'Neighbours. Hence "Theodojius the Emperour faid, ' He thought it a € greater Honour to be the Servant of Chrifi i c and to wear his Livery, laced with the Silver c Graces of the Spirit, than to be great and re- c nowned in the World. 3 This Language of the Enquirer is too near the Dialed of thofe malicious Enemies of our blefled Lord, who faidj Have any of the Rulers or of the Pharifees be- lieved on him} Sut thisTeople who know not the Law areaccurfed (c). This People, oyK^^r^, this Ralble People, or thefe Dregs oj the People. Henry I IU ■»»■ (a) p. 97. 98, 99. (byPfal I5.4-YO 7o&* 7-4 8 > 4?. ( **7 ) nry, on this Place, fays,, c This pitiful, fcanda- ous, fcoundrel People, whom they diidained to let with the Dogs of their Flock, tho'Gc^had fet them with the Lambs of his/ And then he ds, c The Church's common Interefts are be- trayed, when any one Part of it ftudies to ren- Ider the other mean and contemptible/ Our En- uirer cannot pretend he fpeaks oi fuch as may e wicked among the meaner Sort ; No, he nows, they who plead for the Peopled Rights ley are for excluding the Impious and Irreligi- us, be they high or low. The Enquirer asks (a), If the 'Dregs of the ^eople (ball chufe for their 'Betters ? as formerly e asked, If to allow the People a Vote, was not ) allow the Ignorant to chafe for the Knowing ? ill fpeaking of thofe of lower Rank, as if they fere all ignorant ; and of Men of higher Station, $ if they were all knowing. But, without any lefigned Reflexion, I am much afraid there vants not Ground to fear fundry of higher Rank aveas little Knowledge of the Principles of our o)y Religion, as many of the Commonalty, As ir. Henry fays, on John 9. 30. There arfc many ho pals for learned and knowing Men, that un- erftand Bufmefs, and can talk Senfe in other ^hings, that yet are ignorant, to a Wonder, of \e Dodrine of Chrifl ; that have no Concern, iq, not fo much as a Curiofity to acquaint them- elves with that which the Angels defire to look 'o. And the Sentiments of our polite Enqui- er are vaitly different from that polite Author 3ifhop Hall, who fays (b), The deepefi: Philo- R < fophrr (a) p. -9. (b) Med. and Vows, f. 34- ( 25* ) ' fopher that ever was, laving the Reverence of c the Schools, is but an ignorant Sot to the fira- « pleft Chriftian/ Our Author fays* c The belt of our reform( f Divines have given to the Civil Magiftrate, ' fuch,a Right in the Calling of Minifters \ citing ^turretine for Confirmation. For Reply, That any one eminent reformed Divine hath given to the Magiftrate as fuch a Right, is more than I know of. I know the Erafiians have pleaded for this ; And the Remonftrants in Holland; when they could not prevail with the People to: chufe Men of their Principles, they pleaded thisj is the Magiftrates Right ; And, I own, there) were fome learned Men among them : But, that' any found Proteltant Divines have flood up for this as the Magiftrates Right originally, is more than he can prove. The Magiftrate, as a Magi-< ftrate, is not a Member of the Church of Chrift*; So fays Rutherfurd (a), and others, If a Magi-^ ftrate, as fuch, then a Tagan, a Mahometan, an open and avowed Arian, pr a Dei ft might have the Choice of our Paftors; for* it is the Do-i <3xine of our ConfeJJion of Faith, that Infidelity,, or Difference in Religion, doth not make void the Magiftrates juft and legal Authority. Hath < not the King of Zion provided well for the Safe- ty of the Church, if her avowed Enemies may chufe her Paftors i if fo, fhe may have rank Poi- ! ion inftead of Food. As to the Enquirer's Citation from Sfatretine, it is little to his Purpofe ; it hath not a Shadow of «M (a) Due Right of Pref./. 3$>o. ( 2 )9 ) if Proof, that the Election belongs to the Ma; rate as a Magiftrate. A Chriltian Magiiiratd ndeed hath, not only a Right with others, but ilfo, by his Office as a Magiftrate, he hath a light to lire that the Election be gone about in $ood Order : This Intereit he hath in the Affair , :>ut no peculiar Voice in the Eledion is due to lim beyond others. And, as for this Citation rom tfurretine, I may have Occafion to touch t afterwards. 4. Our Author tells, c On the Head of Rights he proceeded to know, if it is fo necefTary to be exefcifed by the People, that a paftoral Re- lation between a Minifier and them cannot be conftituted otherwife. The Author of Ju$ PopiiU, fays he, contends earneftly for thisj p. 16. and fays, Albeit the People have, not on- ly a Liberty of confenting, but alfo a Negative over fuch Electors (7. e- over the Presbytery,; Elders and* Deacons all joined together, for of thefe he is fpeaking) that is not enough, Chrifi having lodged the Power of Election originally in the People : And he gives his Reafon why this is to necefTary, p. 48. Becaufe the Relatiort between a Paftorand his People is a Marriage- like Relation ; and, is not the Bride to have her Choice as well as the Bridegroom 1 S$c. y For Anfw. 1. As wasobferved before, It is a Slan 3er, unworthy of any, and efpecially of one that Jefigns himlelf a Minifier of the Gofpel, to fay^, Dr infinuate, That fuch as plead for tne People's ht, affirm, There can be no paftoral Re!a tion between a Congregation and a Paftor, unlels R % thfc* (a) d. a ( atfo ) ; the .People have exercifed this Right themfelvesj by a decifive Voice ; for this is to expofe them ! as a Company of the very weakeft inconfiftent Men that ever was.upon the Face of the Earth, and to make them own, they have no paftoral Relation to their own Flocks, in regard their . Settlements for the molt Part have not been by the decifive Voice of the People exercifing their Right. And, 2. Whereas he affirms,The Author of Jtis ^Populi contends earneftly for this ; I anfwered to j that Charge formerly : But, ieeing he comes over it again, I affirm this is downright Falfhood. I contend indeed,That the People have a Right to eleft their Pallors, and that, if they have a Right to this, they muft alfo have a Right to exercife I that Right which Chrift has given them ; but I never contended, aflerted, nor fo much as] once infinuated, there cannot be a paftoral Re- 1 latiori, unlels the People have a detifive Voice \ % in the Affair ; tho* I have faid, and ftill affirm, there cannot be a paftoral Relation between a Chriftian People,that's defirous of, and willing to electa faithful Orthodox Paftor, unlefs they mall confent untp the Pallor's Settlement as their Mi- 1 , nifter. I own I faid, Albeit the People fhould have, not only a Liberty of confenting, but alfo i a Negative over all other Eledtors, it is not e- nough; for, if otherwife, they may never get the Minifter they are for, while others are the E- leftors, having a Negative over them. 3. He affirms, The Reafon why I aflert this of the People's exercifing their Right is fo ne- , cefTary, is, Becaufe the Relation between Paftor \ and People is a Marriage- like Relation, and the Bride ( rfl ) . ride ought to have her Choice as well as the ridegroom ; and tho' Father and Mother, and I concerned confent, there can be no Match, nlefs the Bride confent alfo. But this is another alfhood, for I never gave that as a Reafon,why ic People fhould have a Liberty to exercile their ight. And, why would he have the World be- eve I was fuch a Fool, as not to give my Rea- n till 30 Pages after laying down my Poflcion ? , according to him, the Reafon is 32 Pages ftant from the Aflertion. But the Reader may now, that, in the Place where he fays I gave y Reafon, I am not f peaking upon this Subject f the People's exercifing their Right, but only tiling what Arguments Proceftant Divines, and resbyterians in particular, have infilled upon for roving the People's Right to eleA their Pallors; fhere, after inlilling upon Scripture-Arguments >r this, in a new Paragraph, from which the Inquirer takes his Citation, I lay, c And fun- dry have argued from that Marriage-like Rela- tion which is between a Pallor and People/ jting Principal Forrejler's Words. 4. Whereas he fajs, c If the Pafloral Relation is to be meafured by the Marriage-relation in this Particular as to Confent and Choice, he is afraid there will be Miniiters in this Church without a Marriage-relation to the People, ' 'Skijjg, ' If there be not imny Congregitions in the North planted by Presbyteries upon the devolved Right i y For Reply, I grant, in my Opinion there are vlinilters in this Church without a Pafloral Re- ation; yea, I affirm, All fuch Paftoro as have >een thrult in upon a Chriilhn People, defirous R 3 tf ( 262 ) pf, and willing to chufe, a faithful Gofpel-mir fter, they have no Paftoral Relation to fu< Flocks, whether their Refidence be in the Nor or South. Hath not the Church of Scotlhi declared the People's Choice and Confent to effential to a Minifter's Call ? And in the Pla cited from Jus populi he is told, The Reveret Principal Rule, who was employed by tl Church of Scotland to write in her Vindicate from fuch Afperfions as were caft upon her by flanderous Pamphlet, intituled, The Cafe of t. cffliBed Clergy, when fpeaking of the Epilcof Clergy which were ejefted at the Revolutio fays, There was never a Relation of Taftor ai ^People between them and, thofe Flocks ; they, vi the 'People, having -never confent ed to fuch Relation : By which *he clearly intimates, the can be no Paftoral Relation fixed between a Wi nifter and People, unlefe the People confent un it. And I take this to be the received Opinic of Proteftant Divines, if it be not of fome fuc as are of Trelatick 'Principles. The Lond Minifters fay, The "People's Suffrages make iPerfon their Minifler, not a Minifter $ they i fertthis again and again : So Rtitherfurd, fo j ■pollonius, and others. The Synod of l*ife ma( an Aft, of the Date September 28th 17 16, i which The Synod recommends to' all Tresbyt Ties within their Sounds, that they have a ff cial Care not to pla?2t a Minifler until they ha\ the 'Defire and Choice of at leaft the Generalii of the 'People made hiow7i unto them, as beh the proper G round for founding the c Pa(loral Rt lation. And the Presbytery of Kirkaldy entre into a written Refolve, a little before the lad Ac! ( *6i ) k favours of Patronages : In which Refolve ar\tx\t ie Settlement of Minifters 'tis affirmed, T'hat be Relation of Pa/lor and/People is founded pon the Election, Choice and Confent of the ^eople. And whatever fome may talk now, I be not far miftaken, there was not a Synod or Presbytery in Scot/and at that Time, but was ?ady to declare the Paftoral Relation in Chri- rian Congregations is founded upon the Call and r onfent of the People : And yet there is nothing 1 this againft the Aft of Aflembly 1649 ,• for lere is a vaft Difference between malignant and ifaffefted Congregations^ and thofe here fpoken f, as was fhewed in Jus fopuli divinum. 5. Jrie asks, If the Majority in a Parifh carries the Call, is not the Perfon ordained in a Pafto- . ral Relation to the Minority, tho' he was not their Choice, nor had their Confent ? For Reply, I fee fome of the ExgUJh DifTen- ,ers, at Dr. Calamy> deny this: But Rmher- Mrd fays (tf), c Any abfent from the Election of Matthias, Afts 1. the feven Deacons, y#7/ 6. and the Elders chofen in every City, ABs 14. 23. were tied to ftand to the Eleftion of Matthias, the (even Deacons, and Elders in every- City ; clfe no Aft of the Church were valid, where one or two dififTenteth. 5 As to what he fays in the laft Paragraph of his tcond Seftion, where he endeavours to prove he People's Right to eleft their Paflors is not a idtural Right; I am lefs concerned with it. n):ne among us, who are as oppofite to the ^ppple's having a Right from Chrift as the En- R 4 irer, {a) Tlca for Tmb. p. 84. ( arf 4 > quirer, do maintain they have a natural Right jr the Affair ; yet, becaufe they fay it is only a na< jural Right „ and not founded on Scripture, it ma\ £e managed as Societies (hall think meet. I fhai not infift upon this, but leave him, and fuch a* are on the fame Side of the Queftion with him to debate this between them : Only, in general,] fay, As this is a Divine Inftitution, by vertue ol Apoltolical Example, Pra&ice and Directions fo alfo ^tis very fuitable to the Light of Nature and found Reafon that it fhould be fo. As free Societies have the Chpice of their Governors ; and, as it is rational People have the Choice 01 their Phyficians, Lawiers, Faftors, &b. fo it is in this Cafe ; yet we do not lay the Strefs of this fomuch upon Human Reafon as upon Gofpel-in- ftitution. And fo much for the fair and candid Keprefentation which he gives in his fecond Se-? £Hon, in which he propofed to ftate the Que- ftion : But, for all the Accuracy he pretends to, be hath never yet fixed the State thereof, nor told what he was to prove. CHAP. r, ( 2*5 ) CHAP. VI. n which the Sentiments of the Ancients and primitive Church is conftdered. SECT. I. In 'which fome general Remarks upo?z the En- quirer's AJfertions anem Antiquity, the Sen- timents of fome of the mofi learned among tProteftants, and alfo among Romanhts, as to the Judgment and Traffice of the primitive Church about Elections, is related. I Agree with the Enquirer in the Introdu&i- on to this Subjeft, when he fays (&) 3 c If c the People's having a Right to eleft their c Paftors cannot be proven from Scripture, c it may be thought needlefs to enquire into € what were the Sentiments and Practice of the * primitive Church in the fecond, third, fourth f Centuries ; for, if this Right cannot be provtn c from Scripture, it cannot be proven from the c Writings of fallible Men, whether Fathers or c Councils/ And indeed, as was faid in jfits populi, all human Quotations are as fo many Cyphers itanding for much or nothing, as they are placed in an Account. A Thouiand Quo- tations from the Fathers or Councils, are but as a Cypher placed firft in the Account v\hich ftands for nothing, if there be not a Scripture b fore it. And I look on it as Cgnifying much, if firft -" W— — — I— _■ ■■ M- (aj p. 96. ( *66 ) firft there be a Scripture before it confirming th Pofition in the prefent Cafe. i. As to what he fpeaks of different^ Sentl ments among- the ancient Fathers and Councils namely, c That fome of tbem maintain tht € People fhould elecS: and chufe, others denj c it ; and thbfe who held they had this Rightj € aflerted, that the Clergy were joint Electors e with them ,• fome of them wfcre only for allow- c ing them a Liberty of' Content/ I own, they do not all exprefs themfelves^in equally pofitive Terms that it is the People's Right to eleft their Pallors ; yet fome are plain and pofitive/ and none of thein contradift this, none of them de- ny it is fo : And the Difference is (mail, or no Difference, between them that give the Election equally to them and the Clergy ; for by the Clergy in their Writings, the Elders, or Elders' and Deacons in fuch and fuch Congregations feem often to be meant; and this muft be the Meaning of the Word Clei'gy in fome of their Writings. Or, grant by the Clergy Miniflers are meant, it will make no vaft Alteration ; and they that mention only Cbnfent, at leaft mult give the People a Negative. And I fuppofe he cannot give an Inftanc* of Father or Council in any of the Centuries he writes of, that faid the People's Confent was not to be regarded, unlefs they fhould libel the Candidate, and prove him guilty of Vice or Error. The Author of An Enquiry into the Confii- tution,2)ifcipline 3 Sec. of the primitive Church, which is attributed by all to my Lord King, at prefent Chancellor of Great Britain, fpeaking of the Manner of ele&ing a Bifhop in the firft three ( 2*7 ) ree Centuries (a), fays, II ben a Tariff) o* ijhoprick was vacant thro' the Detift of t ncurabent, all the Members of that Panfi y th Clergy and Laity , met tcgetmr in the Ch? commonly > to chufe a fit- Per Jon for his Sitcceffcr, o whom they might commit the Care and Go- vernment of their Church, From which Words, 'tis evidept, by the Clergy which met with the Laity to elect a Pa- llor, according to this noble and learned Author, the Elders of the Congregation, or Eiders and Deacons, muft be meant, for none e!(e could be deligned the Clergy of the 9 but tuele ; and they,6eing Church- officers, might be thus de- iigned. And, in ancient Times, particularly in the Cyprianick Age, as the Elders were pretty num € tichrifty we defire to be reftored and retaine c within this Realm, fo that none be intrufe ft upon any Congregation, either by the Princ c < or any inferior Perfon, without lawful Ele&io c and the Aflent of the People over whom th € Perfon is placed, as the Practice of the Aft * ftolick and 'Primitive Churchy and good Orde c t craves/ I know not what can be plainer, thai that the Judgment of our Enquirer is difteren from that of the Church of Scotland , fworn t< ifr our National Covenant. Again, Buchanan affirms (b)* That all whe flood for the Reformation in Scotland, in theii Petition to the Queen Regent, they aflerted thij was the Cuftom of the ancient Church. In thij he is oppofite to many learned Writers in this Church (a) Chap* ii % Tar. u , U> 13- (b) Lib. ( ^71 ) Ihurch ; As to Ccildenvood in his Altare Datna- 'Mura (a), to Mr. Gillefpie in his Engli(h To- ifi Ceremonies (b) y to Mr. 'Park in his Trea- fe againft *Patro?zages (c). So to Principal \ule in his True Non-Conformft (d), who fayqg Nothing of Church-Order .is more clearly an cr frequently, and unanimoufly in the Writings of the Ancients, nor did longef continue untaken away, even in the degenerate Ages of the Church i fo that we may reckon Patronages, and obtruding Minifters on the People, among the Novelties of Popery/ So Mr. Jatnefm ys (e), c Nor had the Chriftian People this Power, to wit, of electing their Ta(iors y on- ly de faffo, as the Papiits alledge, whereof the Bifhops could deprive them when they pleafed ; but they had it by divine Right, as Cyprian and a whole Synod with him roundly and fre- quently affirm; and accordingly, we find the People practifing it from the very Beginning of Chriftianity/ Again, $dly, In this he is oppofite to learned 'nglijb Divines.as Mr. Herle Prolocutor or Mo- orator of the Weflminfter Aflembly, when wri- ng againft the Independents, fays, c We ac- knowledge, That the Paftors and other Offi* cers were antiently, and it is to be wifted they ftill were, cholen, at leaft confented to, by the Members of each refpettive Congregation/ 'he Reverend and Learned Authors of Smec- mnuus, viz. Meflieurs Stephen Marjbal, 'Ed- i Calamy, T'ljomn Toting, Matthew New- cornea* » «^ > (a) p. 7, 328. (b) p. 282. (c) p, iw. i) p. 2cr, (e) typ. Jfih p. 537* c'otoen, and William Spur (low, who were al Members of the Weftminfter AfTembly, whei fhewing the Difference between 2)iocefan Bi fhops and the ancient Bilhops, fay (a)> € Tb € Primitive Bifhops, who were only Parochh r Bifhops, they differed from ours in this 3 tha c all their Ele&ions were ordered by the Privi c ty, Confent and* Approbation ofthe Peopl € where the Bifhops.were to ferve/ And, havin cited Conftantines Letter to the Church of Ni comedia, they fay, c That which the facred Em e peror calls the right Order of Ele&ion, wha c is it but the Ele&ion by the People? In who! e Power, fays he, it then was, and long ag< r had been, to chufe a Bifhop. And, [ay they € to this Election in Nicomedia we could, if i € were needful in fo clear a Truth, add many € like Precedents of popular Election, whicl € for Brevity's Sake we pafs over/ And, ir that Letter cited by them, we have the Teftimo ny of the famous firji Christian Emperor foi this of the People's Right to ele& their owr Pallors, Again, in this he is oppofite to Foreigr Writers, as the Learned %alfamo?t y who, wher. commenting on the 15th Canon of the Counci of Laodicea> fays, ' Kcu a** r? Tttpovr^ k&v'ov®> c &c. It is evident from this prefent Canon, that. c of old, not only the Bifhops, but alfo the c Priefts, were chofen by the People/ And he cites fundry Authors, (hewing from the Ancients, that formerly it was the Cuftom of the Church for the People to eled their Paftors. So the great *m ~l-\ 1 l| > 1 I ""''I 1 "I '*■' (a)-p. 23, 24. ( *7* ) eat Chcimier, as the French Divines ufed to U him, having given an Account of the Ro- ijb Cuftoms in calling Bifhops, fays (a), But in Times part it was quite otherwife ; for the People, by giving their Suffrages, elected to themfelves a Bifhop, whom they defired, whom the neighbouring Bifhops, three at leaft, did confecrate. ' And he affirms, The Suffrages of the whole People, as well as of the Clergy, were required ; or, as Cyprian [fays, The Suffrages of the whole Fraternity/ ) the learned Profeflor ( Turretine fays, c Anti- quity judged, as it were with one Voice, that all fuch Elections were void, as wanted the Confcience or Confent of the People/ Vitr'uiga, whom the Enquirer cites again id again, as being of his Opinion, fays (b) 3 *Tis evident from the Ecclefiaftical Records of the primitive Times, the Chriftian People had their Pari in the Election, when a Bifhop was to be fet over them, for neither the Clergy only (Elders and Deacons) but, efpecially the Chriftian People were asked by the Bifhops^ ordaining, who did meet from the neighbour- ing Places for this very End, whom they efpe- cially defired for their Bifhop, and whether they reckoned him worthy of that Office or not ; fo that Eleftion by Ecclefiaftical Writers is, in the Primitive Times, almoft attributed to the Chriftian People,and the Bifhops ordaining did only approve of the Election by their Confent, and, as it were, confirmed it/ And S there- (a) 'Pan. Catboi. fib, 10. caf, 5. (b) Synag. et. p. 88a. J *74 ) * therefore, adds he> I do not deny that tti< c Bifhops ordaining did interpofe their Judg. c ment in the Ele&ion ; yet it was their Dutj € in Elections to follow the common Defire o € the whole Church, if nothing of great Mo- * ment hindred ; and therefore Eledion is attri- c buted to the Church by a better Right thai c to them/ Now, let the World judge, if th< learned Profeifor of Church-Hiftory Vitringa whom the Enquirer placed in the Title-Page o his Book, hath faid much for his Opinion ; an( from this Citation, I think it is evident the kar ned Vitringa, as well as my Lord King, thought that by the Clergy, which in the Primitiv< Times joined with the People in Eleftions, th< Elders and Deacons are meant. But further, not only Presbyterians, but fun- dry Divines of the Church ot England, hav* owned this, as the learned Dr. Fulkjn his Anno tations on 43s 14. 23. affirms, "The Minifterso, the Church were chofen in ancient Times ty Voices of the Chrifiian People, concurring nxitl the Election of the Clergy and Governors o J . the Church. So the learned Bifhop Silfon, wh< was no more a Friend to popular Ele&ions thai our Enquirer, for he hath written as much againf them as any, having advanced almoft all tha hath been faid againft the People's Right, b] fuch as have come after him ; and yet he was fi ingenuous, as to acknowledge, c That, in th c Primitive Times, the fulleft Words that th € Greek Authors ufe for all the Parts of Election c as, to propofe, to name, to chufe, to decree c are in Ecclefiaftical Hiftories applied to tfo * People/ rfnd fa owns, f That in the Primi 5 tiv< ( *7t ) r tive Church the People did chufe, name* e- lecft^ and decree,, as well as the Clergy ; and tho* the Presbyters had more Skill to judge, yet the People had as much Right to chule their Paftor ; and, if the moft Part of them did agree, they did carry it from the Clergy (a)/ Dr. % arrow ^another Church of Engla7id Di- /ine, vvho was of the firft Rank for Learning, .vhen giving an Account of the Manner of ma- ring Bifhops, lays (b)> c The neighbouring Bifhops, being advertifed of a Vacancy, did conveen at the Place ; then, in the Congrega* tion, the Clergy of the Place did propound a a Perfon, yielding their Atteftation of his Fit- nefs, which the People hearing, did give their Suffrages accepting him, if no weighty Caufe was objected ; or refufing him, if fuch Caufe did appear : Then the Bifhops prefent did ad- join their Approbation and Content upon fuch Recommendation and Acceptance, and laid ort Hands/ Here we fee the Clergy which pro* pounded the Perfon, was the Clergy of the Placg Dr Parifh, namely, as I take it, the Elders, or Elders and 2)eaco?is ; and, according to this lear- ned Author, the People in ancient Times had :heir Suffrages in the Affair. Again, the learned Dr. Cave, in his Primitive Chriftiani'y (c) 3 fays, c At all Ordinations, efpe- cially of Superior Officers, the People of the f Place were always prefent, and ratified the A- r 6tion with their Approbation and Confent : r And indeed, fays be, it cannot be denied, buC S 2 tha M^ (a) Perpet. Govern, of the Church, Chflf. 15. (b) Top, fit}, p. ?©}, (c) p.a4cu ( 2 7 6 ) I c that tbePeople^in fome Places, efpecially were c very much confidered in this Aftair, it being c feldom or never done without their Prefence c and Suffrage/ And there he Jbows, c There c was, not only a propounding and publifhing * the Perfon's Name that was to be ordained un- € to the People, but alfo a common Vote and € Suffrage paft, as Cyprian {peaks. Again,the learned Do6tor#^z//another Church of England Divine, in his Critical Remarks $\2b\i» fhed 1 730, upon fome feleft Places of Scripture : In his Remarks on A&s 6. anent the Election ol the Deacons,fays, € The Apoftles would not chufi € the Men themfelves, but left this to the Body € of the People ; And, fays he, according to c this Pattern, the Primitive Church in the Age € next to the Apoftles always made Ufe of the * Suffrage of the People in the Choice of their c Officers, not only of Deacons, but of their Pres- * byters, and efpecially of their Bifhops : The c Bifhop of any Diocefs appointed or ordained c fuch Presbyters as the People by their gene- € ral Suffrage approved of; and, when any Bi« € fhop died, the Clergy of that Diocefs, with c the Confent of the People, chofe another^ c commonly one of their own Body ; and € then Tome of the Neighbouring Bifhops came, c and, laying Hands with publick Prayer^ ordai. € ned him : And both ot thefe Things, the E- € leftion of the Clergy and People, and the c Ordination by fome Bifhop or Bifhops, were c counted eflential to the Being or Right of a c Bifhop: And when any Queftion arofe con- c cernitig a Bifhop's Right to a Place or Office c which he held, thefe were the two Things that c were examined ; Whether he had been fairly *ancl K *77 ; and duly pitched upon, or elefted by the Clergy and People of that Diocefs ? and, Whe- ther he had had Epifcopal Ordination into it 1 If either of thefe were wanting, he was no more accounted a Bifhop, than any one is in England accounted a Mayor of a Corporation, or a Burgefs or Knight of Parliament, that was never elected : And there were, and are, Canons of thofe called Apoftolical (which are really fome of the eldeft Canons of the Church) that, if it were found by any after Enquiry, that any Bifhop had ufed any Simo- ny in his Election, or had been chofen by any Procuration, Interefl, Authority or Power of any Emperor, King or other fecular Potentate, he fhould be depofed, and in fome Cafes ex- communicated/ c This, adds he y was the Ufage and Practice of the whole Greek and Latine Church for a thouland Years and more, and that continued conitantly without Interruption, except two or . three Encroachments ; fuch as in fo long a Space are found in the Hiftory of any Law, Rule or Pradtice whatfoever, whether Human or Divine. The firlt avowed Breach of this Rule was made in that Church, in which mod of the Mifchiefs and Abufes of the Chri- flian Religion have begun, I mean the Church of Rome, &c/ Now, whereas Dofior Wall in this Place foeaks of the Clergy of the Diocefs their chu- fing in Conjunftion with the People ; if, as my Lord King, the Learned Mr. %oyfe y Mr. Ja- mefon, Mr. Law.ier, and many others have made evident, and I think fome Epifcopal Au- thors have owned, in the Primitive Times the b 3 Bilhops ( *78 ) Bifliop's Diocefs was only a Angle Congregati- on, then the Clergy of the Diocefs will only be the Elders, or Elders and Deacons of the Con- i gregation, • But not only learned Independents, Tresbyte* rians and Troteftant Trelatifts, but alio fome 1 Romcinifts, have acknowledged this ; as the fa- j mous Hiftorian Father Taiil, in his Hiftory of the Council of Trent. Again, the learned Era/mm 3 as cited by Tool in his Criticks on AEls 6. 6. fays, Din mos erat in Eccle/ia y utpopulus eligeret& Epifcopmor- dinaret. So the learned French Hiftorian Du 3>in s in his Abridgment of the Hiftory of the Doffrjne, D if tip line and Morals of the Fir ft three Centuries, when fpeaking of <"he Difci- pJine of thofe Ages, he fays (a), c They were * careful to chufe Minifters, whofe Life and c Manners were blamelefs; after the Death of • f thofe appointed by the ApofUes, the People % chofe them/ In the fourth Century he fays, € When a Bifhop died, all the Bifhops of the * Province were called together to ordain a Suc- c ceflor in his Room ; he was commonly chofen f by the Clergy and People of the vacant f Church. 5 And I fuppofe, thofe whom he calls the Clergy of the vacant Church, are the Elders, or Elders and Deacons, who joined with the Body of the People of the vacant Congre- gation. And, when he comes to the nth Cen- tury, he fays, c The Election of Bifhops were f yet in Ufe, but often the Princes named and caufedx (0) Vol z. p. 78. ! ( ^9 ) ^ufed whom they pleafed to be elefted / nd again Rigaltius, another learned Vapid* vns this. Their Ingenuity qaay put fome Prote- mts to the Blufh. Sundry other learned c Protefia?tts and Vapifts ight here been mentioned* Do<5tor Clarkjon rs (a), c He had feen fuch a clear and full Evidence for the People's Privilege herein, that it had convinced many learned Papifts and o- thers, whofe Intereit fwayed them the other Way. And adds* I was ready to think thofe who would contradift it, might be fufpe&ed ei- ther to want Acquaintance with the ancient Records and Ufages of the Church, or Fideli- ty in reporting them/ And in his 'Primitive Ipifcopacy he affirms, f That of old, if a Per- fon was not elected by the People, he could never be, nor be accounted a Bifnop, whatever Ordination he had/ I (hall only cite one more, and that is the Re- •erend Mr. Laivder, in his ancient Si/bop con- Idpred, when fhowing, that the People in the Primitive Times had the Election of their Pa- tors, he fays (b), ' Nay, the impudent Jefuite Bellarmine himfelf could not for Shame ab- folutely deny this palpable and evident Mat- ter of Faft, and was forced to betake himfelf ; to this filly andchildifh Shifr, That, where the : People enjoyed this Privilege in ancient r Times, they enjoyed it by the Condefcendence ( of the Bifhops, and particularly the Bifhop of S 4 < Rente* (a) So Evidence for 2) iccef p. 44. (l>) p. 3 54. ( 286 ) c Rome. 9 And having cited the learned M. Lt Blanc, fhowing that Hellarmine and other Pa- pifts owned the People had the Ele&ion of their Pallors in the Primitive Times, his marginal Note is, c Have we not Reafon then to be afto- c nifhed at J. S. that he could affirm pofitively, c and without any Scruple of Confcience, That: c there are no Evidences that the People elected c their Bifhops, nay, nor Intimations of fuch 2 c Power at all difcoverable ? Wonderful I That c not difcoverable, which Papifts and Proteftants e and all the Chriftians in the World are convin- € ced of/ This of the People's Right to chufe their Pa^ flors is (o plain from Antiquity, that the Topifb Fathers at the Council of Trent, for as corrupt and impudent as they were, yet they had not Brafs enough to deny it ; and, when fome of them would had Elections brought back to the Primi- tive Practice, Diego Lainez the General of the jfefuits flood up and (aid, c It was a Motion € from the Devil to offer to reduce Eleftions.to € the ancient Courfe ; and pleaded, It ought to e be fupprefled, becaufe it was the ancient Cu- c ftom : For, if the Church had not found it * inconvenient, fhe would never have quit it/ Some affirm ,This of the People's Right to eled their Paftors is a new Doftrine invented flncc the Revolution or 171 2, and later Years. * JBu( * the learned Dotftor "Blondel, fays the London € Ministers (a), that great Antiquary, under- * takes it, in a very long Difcourfe to make it out, * that for 1200 Years the People had free Liber- * ty ■*»■ ' — *» — — C»— — m^mm, —i>« (a) jfm 2)iv. Min. p. 147. . ( , 281 I ty in the Choice of their Biihops ; And, fay they, he proves it by undoubted Authors in all the feveral Countries/ Now, after adducing fo many [famous Wit- lefles owning and affirming, That in the primi- ive Times the People had the Eie&ion of their ^ftors, it might be altogether needlefs particu- arly to confider what the Enquirer hath faid jpon this Head ; yet, left he lhould dream of ts being unanfwerable, I fhall briefly reply to what is alledged. SECT. ir. In which the Sentiment* of 7#e Fathers anent the Eleftion of Tajlors is particularly confidered. A S to the Fathers I obferve, i. That,tho' he r attempts to enervate the Force of what is laid •from a few of them, yet he hath not brought fo much as one Father denying the People's Right in the Aftair. In other Points, it is no rare Thing to find Father againft Father, and Council againft Council, but nothing like this anent the Electi- on of Pallors in the purer primitive Times. 2. I obferve, He hath not brought one Father fay- ing, That this is the Right of any others than the People ; none of them laying, This is the Right of Presbyteries, or Heritors, the Right of Ma- giftrates, or the Right of the Rich more than of the Poor. And, 3. Tho' he ha'h affirmed, That fome of the Fathers are only for allowing the People a Liberty of confenting, yet he hath not adduced an Inftance for proving ever any of them faid, This of Confenting was their only Right, which is no more Right than what be- longs ( 282 ) longs, by the Enquirer's own Confeffion, to a (Pagan, who may give Teftimony in the Cafe. But, to come to Particulars, i. He begins with the Teftimony of Clemens Komanus, of whom the Apoftle faid, 'Phil. 4. 4. 'That his Name was in the "Book of Life: The \People,m their Reprefentation, had onJy faid, Clemens teitifies, That the Apoftles them- felves appointed approved Perfons to the Office of the Miniftry, by, or with, the Confent of the whole Church. Upon this our Enquirer, in his ^Publick Teftimony made more fublick, to let the World know what a learned Critick he is, charges the People with a wrong Tranflation, and the Compofers of their Reprefentation with grofs Ignorance of the Greek. 1*11 give you all that the People fay, and the Enquirer's learned Remarks, and let the Reader judge, if there was great Ground for his long and ^learned Cm/- cifm. The People, in their Reprefentation, /. 44. only fay, c Clemens, who lived in the Days of c the Apoftles, and is reckoned the firft Writer c after them, teftifieth, That theApoftles them- € lelves appointed approved Perfons to the Office € of the Miniftry, by, or with, the Confent of € the whole Church/ And in the Margin they add, In his Epftle to the Corinthians. Our Enquirer's Words upon this Citation are^ as follow, This Tajjage, I inform you, is w lis firft Epiftle, p. 44. the Words are, tSV w ka- ( >8? ) fafe who compofed your Reprefentation, and maffed your human tefimonies together, be- ray, by their T'ranflation, their grofs Ig?iora7ice f the Greek ; for the Greek Word which they :nder thus approved Perfons, they make to re~ r to thefe who were appointed, whereas they 'late to thefe who appointed them ; and then ie Tran/lation will run thus, "therefore they 3 . e. the Taflors of the Chttrch, of whom Cle- aens ha i been f peaking) being appointed by :Jem, i. e. 4po(lles> and likewise by other re- pwnei "Terfons, with the Approbation of the Je Church, Ichufe rather the Word Appro- ition than your Word Confent ; becauje, when find the Word Yv^mico, ufed in the New tefta- 'cnt concerning our Saviour, Matth. 5. 17. and 7- J- ** figmfies a high Complacency in, and atilfaHion with, him, This is my beloved Son 1 whom I am well pleafed. And now 3 if the } ajfage of Clemens is rendred with the Appro- won or good Liking of the whole Church, oes this fay any c fhi?2g to Jhew there was any Zleftion of the 'People previous >to the appoint - igor ordaining fuch Ta/iors ? There you fee he charges the People with a >rong Tranflation ; whereas their Words are uher a fhort hiftorical Account of what Cle- itns fays, than a Tranflation. %* Whereas he harges the Compofers of their Reprefentation /ith grofs Ignorance of the Greek ; I am credi- ly informed, that Reprefentation was of the 'eople's own compofing. And our learned En- cr hath not given fufficient Proof of his Charge. ( a8 4 ) Charge. The Words on which they lay thi Strefs of the Citation, are rendred by all to tb< fame Purpofe as they take them. And, 3.Wherea he likes the Word Approbatioii better than th< Word Confmt, tho' this fhould be yielded tc him, the Argument could lofe nothing by it; for if the People's Approbation was needful to the Settlement, then it was unwarrantable Intrufioi to thruft in a Perfon whom they did not approv« of. Further, once for all, it may be noticed That Confetti and Election is frequently the fan* with fundry ancient Writers upon this Subject And the Learned Marefius obferved, That th< ancient Canons fpeak fo, as Confenfus popuL tquipoleat eleffioni. 2. ' Origin, fays he, allowed the People on« € ly a Liberty to give Teftimony, which can ne : c ver amount to an Eleftipn/ I reply, Thai the People's good Teftimony, which, accord- ing to Origin , they behoved to have, was fure. ly a pofitive Teftimony of their judging him fil and worthy for that Charge. But, tho* w< fhould yield, that Origen, who was a Father that lived in the third Century, is not fo plain for the People's Right in that Place cited, name- ly, his Homily on the tfth of Leviticus ; yet, it ijj obferved, Origen in the Clofeof his laft Book a-: gainft Celfus, difcourfing exprefly of the Calling] and Constitution of Churches or Cities of Godjj fpeakingofthe Elders and Rulers of the Churchy es, affirms/That they are iKteyotAsvot, chofeo to their Office by the Churches which they doi rule. 3. The, ( 2 8; ) 3. The Enquirer comes to confider the fa- ious Teftimony of that eminent Martyr, Cjr- rian ; and here he harps upon the fame String >ith fuch Prehtifts and Papijts, as Sage, Bel- trmine, Pamelius, and Boecantts, whofe Ex- ptions have been fully anfwered I know not ow often by 'Presbyterians, and other Prote- ant Divines, tho* the Enquirer takes no No- ce ef what hath been faid in Anfwer to his Ex- sptions. » Cyprian's Teftimony being cited almoft by li that touch this Subject, our Enqui- er tells, f How Lord Chancellor King ad- duces feveral Paflages out of him, to prove he was chofen Bifhop of Carthage by the Inha- bitants and Members^ of the Diocefs, by the Suffrage of the whole People/ And then he ffirms, 'The learned Author of An original 'Draught of the -primitive Church, in Anfwer *to him, hath made it evident, and evident to the Conviction of every Body, that Cyprian doth not ufe the Word Sztffr aginm for a pro- per ele&ive Voice, but to Iignify a folemn Te- ftimony, a publick Approbation and good Liking to the Thing done/ Anfiv. i. Our inquirer might be asked, Why doth he cite an Spilcopal Author being of his Opinion, as well s he quajrels me for citing Independents ? 2. Why wenthfcfo far, as to the English Epifco- )al Author of An original Draught, when Mr. ^age, our own Countryman, in his ^Principles f the Cyprianick Age, hath the fame Inftances rom Cyprian ? Might he not told the World low excellently Mr. Sage argues upon the Head, jiving him the Praife ? 3. Why ( 2?n of Paftors f But further, for Anfwer, in ge- neral, I fay, Tho' fometimes Cyprian may ufe ,he Word Suffragiam, in a metaphorical Senfe, or Confent and Approbation, yet that will ne- per prove he ufed it not in a proper. Senfe in the places adduced by the Chancellor, and others tfho plead the People's Right in the Aftair : \nd I fuppofe it is granted by all, we are never o go. from the proper Senfe of a Word to a netaphorical, unlefs it be when the Subject plain- y requires this \ and, if Words are not to be :aken in their proper Senfe, when the Scope of :he Place will admit of it, then nothing could be proven from the Writings of the Fathers, or Dthers. If by Suffragium Topuli, populi univerfi Suf- fragioj fuffragium univerft f rater nit at is, and fvffragium ve(lri>m, Cyprian meant no more but the People's Teftimony ; then Words are of little or no U(e for fignifying One's Mind. But, as to this learned Author of the original Draught ( ,288 ) ^Draught, Is our Enquirer of the fame Mind with him ? Will he allow as much to the People as he doth 1 I think fcarcely : For that Author having cited the Chancellor's Book, faying, € When a Parifh or Bifhoprick was vacant, all € the Members .of that Parifh, both Clergy and c Laity, met together, to chufe a fit Perfon for his- c Succeflor ; J In Anfwer to this, that Autho^ fays, c It need not be difputed between us, but c that in many Diocefles (tho* not in all) they] c commonly did fo, provided that by chufing € here we may be allowed to underftand, thad c it was no more than to pitch upon a PerfoiJ € acceptable to themfelves, whom they might * propofe and recommend to the neighbouring^ c Bifhops, for their Confent and Approbation ; c for his own Scheme runs fo, that is, for thofe € Bifhops to accept or refufe him as they fhould c think fit ; for, where we fue for Approbation] c or Confent, we muft allow a Right and Power € to difapprove and diflent too/ By which Ex- preflion, it is very evident, that Author allows of the People's having the Nomination and Ele- ction, tho' he gives the Bifhops a Negative over] them, becaufe they Jjad a Right to approve on difapprove. And further, there that Author is 1 oppofite to him, in that he fays, When we fue for Approbation or Confent, we mufi allow d Right to difapprove and dijfent, which isfome- 1 thing more than a powerlefs Teftimony : But the Reader may fee further Anfwers to thefe Excep- tions, in Forrefter, Jamefon> and Lauder > their Writings. But, fays our Author (a), € I find a PeHbn € has mmmm-mmmm> And, tho* Art an Bifhops thruit in Men upod T People i (0 AQfttt, guejl. p. ( ^9° 7 People againil their Wills, will that militate jl gainft the People's Right ? Or, will it prove,tfr; ever the Orthodox did fo ? And our Enquin might have adduced other Inftances to this Pun pole ; as the Settlement of Arfam us , when Chrjy[ foftome was banilhed ; the People, as 'Theodore teliifies, would rather go into Banifhment, tha; hear his Succeflor. What the Ariam did hope is no Precedent t worth the mentioning The Effects of fuch Settlements have always beei undefirable. His Story of NarciJJiis, being neither for no againft popular Elections, I infill: not on it ; no can I lee for what End he hath adduced it, if i was not to fill up his Pages. Our Enquirer relates the Diflention that hap' pened at Rome at the Election in which 2)a- mafus and Urcicimts were Candidates, where fundry were killed. But, as to the Obje&ion a- gainft popular Ele&ions, which is taken from the Diforders they are ready to occafion, our En- quirer had a large and full Anftver to it in Jm iPojmli c Divimm y of which he hath not taken the leaft Notice : And there he had a Reply toi this very Inftance of the Bloodfhed which hap-i pened at the Election of 2)amafm at Rome$ where he was told, That,for the firft three Cen- turies after Chrift, there cannot be a fingle In- ftance given of any Diforder which happened at the Eleftion of a Paftor, tho ? all that Time the People had the Choice. And there he was told, That the learned Amianm MarceUinus y who gives an Account of that Diforder, fays, c That € and fuch Diforders were owing to the Ambiti- c on of Bifhops: The Riches, State and Pleafure, € wherewith the Chair nf Rtpn* accomodated the *n* ( 2 9 1 ) ifthc Bifhops, incited them to make their Wzy ;i unto it through Blood and Slaughter/ There 3 Ifo he was told, The fame Diforders might have i) appened, tho' the Eieflion had been lodged in n Aagiitrates and Town-councilor in Heritors and i ilderSjfuppoflng them to be divided,as it happens lot rarely : And I fuppofe he may have Inltances mong ourfelves, where Swords were drawn a- e long Gentlemen at Elections, when the People ad no Vote. The Learned Du Pin, giving an iccount of thisEIedion oi 'Dainafus, fays, ' Af- ter the Death of Liberius, the See of Rome being vacant for fome Time, Ttamcifns was chofen about the Month of October %65, by - molt of the Clergy and People, and ordained by the Bifhops : But, on the other Side, Urci~ cinus jxho was intriguing for it, got himfelf or- dained by fome other Biihops in the Church of : Sicinnm\ And there he fcems to lay the Blame ipon the Clei'gy, the Partifans of Urcicinu$ % who would not communicate with Z)amaf The Emperor ordering their Churches to be ta- cen from them, they aflembled within the City, o, that it was neceffary to baniih them from Rome. Now, If there he any Weight in the Argument, rom Diforders which happened at popular Ele- ns, tho' our Enquirer hath only mentioned me that he found In Antiquity ; then ths Clergy houldbe deprived of all hand in that Affair, for key have (till found to have a deep Hand Diforders. And, eve^ according to his j\\ n I ieems the Clergy were tmc lor .this Dilorder ;' for, he fiys, iks as R t cks, W Vf T ( 292 ) f unified by Maximinus then TrejeB of the Cit I think the Expreffion intimates the Ecclefia flicks have been mainly punifhed, as being chie ly to blame for all the Diforder and Bloodfhe which happened at that Time. The Enquire, in his Tranflation of Socrates , inftead of Peopi he puts Populace > faying, c This Acftion raifed * Diflention among the Populace i But,who a; we to understand by thole ? Is it only the Poor No, the Honorati Cives, theMagiftrates,Cour fellors and wealthy Citizens ; the free Men < Rome as well as others, are meant by the Peopl there. * But, fays the Enquirer, c This, and many othe c Inftances of the lad Eftefts of popular Eleftior c which have happened, made always Govern c mentsfor the Peace and Safety of Society fa € on Ways and Means ofchufing and ele&inj c Minitters after another Manner/ By this, On, may think, our Enquirer will allow it to Civ Governments to give the Ele&ion of Paftors t» whom they pleafe, altering the Way and Mean as they think convenient : But, hath he inftan ced what the Civil Government was, that thu changed the Ways^nd Means of Ele&ion, from fuch a Confideration ? No indeed ; if his Memo ry had ferved him, he might have inltanced th< Sritijh Parliament in 1712, which took the E leftion from Heritors and Elders, lodging thi Power of Prefentation* in Patrons, upon this ve ry Ground and Conficeration with others, Thai Elections by them had occafioned much Diflen tion and Divifion, as appears from the honell Speech of the late Lord Advocate Sir Davh fDalrymple to that Parliament, when about tc refton ( 2 5>3 ) ^eftore Patronages ; who, when anfwering the bjeftion taken from the DifTention and Divifion hich may arife from fuch Calls, fays, c But, if this Objection be good, then the Praftice of the primitive Church was erroneous, and Chri- r ftianity itfelf culpable ; which, tho' in its own i Nature a Doctrine of Peace, has, thro 5 the Cor- ruptions of Men, occafioned Divifions among the neareft and deareft Relations. But further, will the reftoring the Right of Prefentation to Patrons, cure this pretended Evil ? Will not the Body of the Parifh complain, that a Pallor is impofed upon them ? Has a Superior a Title (to impofe in Matte/s of that Kind upon his Vaffal, or a Landlord on his Tenant ? Has not the exorbitant Ufurpation of Superiors and f Landlords over Mens Bodies and Goods, been loudly complained of ? And will they now f pretend to extend their Superiority over the f People's Souls too, in Matters of a fpiritual r Concern/ The Application is eafy. Next, he comes to confider the Election of Ambrofe, which, fays he, Mr. Gillefpie menti- ons, as being with the uniform Voice of the Church, and giving the Words of Socrates as to the Election of Ambrofe ; he denies his Election was by the People, affirming, he was elected by the Suffrage of God rather than of Man. But^ as Mr. Gillefpie cites this as an Infi:2nce of the People's Right to ele£ their Paltors ; fo Brtean, whom in the 119/. of his Enquiry, he cites, as being on his Side of the Queltion ; as he proves the People's Right from Scripture, fo alfo from Antiquity, citing this very Election of Ambrofe 1 3 ** ( 2 5>4 ) a$ an Inftance (a). But, *ho' our Enquirer's vitiated Sight can fee no Proof here, yet, as Prb fefTor Bucan, fo many others have feen this to be a clear Proof: Which appears from Socrates, a; cited by himfelf; where, i. We read of the In- habitants oi'Millan their being difturbed about the Ele&ion of a Bifhop, and there being Con tendon among them : c Some making it their Bu« * fineis to eledt one, and fome making it then € Bufinefs to eledt another/ I think thele Words > make it very plain the Inhabitants, without Di- stinction, had the Eleftion. The People again : by his Account, were^ gathered together to eledt a Bifhop or Pallor ,• and, upon Amhrofe his O- ration, the People were (quieted, and unanimouf ly agreed upon Amkrofe himfelf, as -a fit Perfor to be their Bifhop. ^What can be plainer thar that the People,according to this, had the Choia of a Perfon for their Paftor ? and upon their cry- ing out, He is worthy, and deferved the Bifiop> rick, and defiring he fhould be ordained, it wa accordingly done. And I cannot help thinking that none, except fuch as are wilfully blind ir this Cafe, but may fee the People at that Tim had the Right to elecft. Mr< Bingham, a lat< Learned Church of England Writer, fpeaking c an Oration or Speech of Amhrofe, fays, c Am € brefe addrefled himfelf to the People in this Stile c Ye are my Fathers, \vho chufe me to be a Bi € , fhop ; ye, I fay, are both my Children anc c Fathers ; Children in particular,Fathers altoge c ther/ In which Words, he plainly refers t< $hat providential Confent of the People of Mi Ian (a) XnJiit.T&eol. p. %cc. 1 ( *9$ ) ] Ian, w ho, when they were divided before into Ifeveral Faftions^ as loon as Ambrofe was na- 1 med, all unanimoufly confpired together in his c Election. And he lays, c Some Bifhops paft the : ' Complement upon the People juicing them Fa* tiers, in regard to the Share and Influence they * had in their Designation and Ek^on.' So the 'earned Profeilor dicier adduces this of. Ainbrofs as an Inftance of popular Elections. But, fays the Enquirer, f Ambrofe came with c a Military Force to appeafe thele Tumults ; f this, in our Part of the World, would be r looked upon as an Invafion of the Right of c Electors, and a depriving them of their Liber- c ty/ Our Enquirer hath omitted to give the Occafion of that Dnierence which was amo. the People of Milan at the Time when Am- fe was eledted ; which ^s Socrates tells us, was. this, the one Half of the People was for an Ari- an 'Bijbop, Lch as A iritis was, who had been ordained by the Arians, and the other Half were for an Or: v Bifhop. NowAvasIt an> Won- der the ( x People of Milan did beftir fthemfelves to oppoie an Arian his being placed among them '( >nteft here was not about a Trine. Bur lOLe direct AnlWer to what the Enquirer lays,0/ ofe bis 5 ftce 9 viz. /, / oj oj tl t of E.eciors, 1 fhall not 6y • he may ic, but I am lure there are nc and up tor the P e's it in the A: it is t! ;i* Right and Duty to luppre's at s. Our Enquirer might feeo, a not but fee, the Author o\ Poputi allocs T 4 of ( *9* ) pf this, citing it as the Judgment of ParkyCat derwood, &c. as well as his own, That, in Cafe cl Tumults, the Civil Magiftrate mayfupprefs then! (a) y tho* no Magiftrate upon Earth hath a Pow er to reftrain or overaw People from their Liber ty of a free Choice at an Election. f Mr. Gillefpie, fays the E?tquirer, brings th<| * Eleftion of Chryfoftome as a Proof of a popu?] * Jar Ele&ion, but the very Citation of the Fad € will prove how impertinently it is alledged. No Doubt,with fome, feein&our Enquirer fays it, Mr. Gillefpie was moft impertinent in adducing' it as a Proof : But, with our Author's Leave, Mr. Gillefpie was not fo impertinent as he affirms. And whereas he fays, c Had Mr. Gillefpie given f us the Words of Socrates as he hath done, c every Body at firft View would have perceived * they did rather militate againft, than make for, c him/ Now, after reading his Words, I fee bo Ground to think Mr. Gillefpie was imper- tinent, tho'fome may think our Enquirer moft impertinent in fpeaking with fo little Refpeft of that great Man : For according to Socrates, as he hath tranflated him , Chryfoftome was not fent for till the Laity as well as Clergy had given their Canfent to it : And our ingenuous Enquirer hath pot made a juft Tranflation of Socrates ; for what he hath rendred, With the commoniCon- fent of all *Perfons, Clergy and Laity, fhould been rendred, by or with the common 2)ecree or Suffrage, the Words being, 4-no'T(>vmcu 'E-Trlo-KOTfov. He ne- ver meddles with the Author of the Apoftolical Confti t tit ions > who was cited, affirming, Bifliops are to be chofen by all the People ; nor with Ambrofe 3 who, in his 8 2d Epiftle, fays, Ektiio £ff vocatio quae fit a tota Ecclefia vere & certe eft divina vecatio ad miinus Epifcopi ; and fun- dry mo which are cited by Tiirretine, Rnther- fzird, Piffet and others ; Nor hath he laid one Word in Anfwer to that Citation from Cyprian % in his 6% Epiftle, where he, and an- African Synod with him, affirm, (Plebs ipfa raaxime It abet poteftatemvel eligendi dignos Sacer 'dotes vel indignos recufa?2di ; ' The People themfelves * efpecially have the Power either of electing c worthy Priefts, or rejecting the unworthy/ This, if there was no other Expreffion in Cy- frim to fnew his Mind, makes it clear, beyond all 4 . ( 299 ) 91 Controverfy, he and that Synod with him *ere clear for the People's having the Right, and the Right above all others, to elect their Pallors. Words cannot make it plainer ; and :here Cyprian is defi^nedly handling the Subject )f Election, fhewing whofe Right it is. But, :ho' this be cited by all who plead for the People's Right in the Artair, yet he never meddles with it in theleaft ; he faw there was no anf.vering of t, and therefore did befl to let it flecp. t 4 Thus (fays the Eh er) we lee (a) the Fathers are not of one Mind about this Matter, : they ditter from and contradict one another, and none of .them place this Righ: lolcly in f the People, but allow a S ge to the (Jer- ' gy in the Ele i. For Reply, I. I refufe there is any fuch Contradiction among the Fa- as to this Point, nor hath he been able to give one fingle Inftance of any driving this is the People's Right. 2. This i mother Mif- rc-j nation, That none 1 ' em place the Right of Election in the Pc . 1 or Gregory jfazianzen, when fpeaking of the Election of mtbajutfim 9 he mentions only the Peop: prion The c Peo u it ti me? of Eletiion : The Emperor. Cmfi re, in v. ig to the Church 2sicomedia y mentions only that Church \ having the Right to eleer ; and fo of marry < s. And, 3. Such of the Ancients as join the Clergy with the People in Eledcions. ]]y the C ', in my Opinion, as. I {aid formerly, the .lean the Elders and Deacons ; they (peak of the Clergy of the vacant i 1 1, or ( the Dioccfs; (a) p, 104, ( 3°° ) Diocefs ,• and what was the Diocefs, but onlj that Congregation in which the Minifter laboi* red, as was fhown above ? Or, grant fome meant the neighbouring Bilhops alfo, it may be fuppofed they concurred only as they moderated or gave Advice in the Election,* or, grant they had a decifive Voice, it makes little Altera- tion in this Aftair, confidering how few they were. In Conclufion, here the Enquirer (ays, r The f noble Author of the Conftitution-Z)ifcipline M c Sec. of the 'Primitive Churchy lays, It comes € to one and the fame Thing, whether the E- c le&ion of a Bifhop be afcribed to the adjoin* c ing Minifters, or to the People ; yet few of f our prefent Sticklers for the Right of the c People will agree with him, tho' the Eleftion c was not reckoned valid without the Concur* c rence of both/ This I think is another Slan- der ; for, if I be not far miftaken, there arejnone who plead the People's Right but will grant the Minifters of the Voifinage y as well as the People, are to be fatisfied, that the Perfon called by the People is worthy. Do they not all allow, not only the Right of moderating in the EledUon, but alfo they grant it is the Presbytery's Right to try his Qualifications for the Work of the Gofpel among that People to which he is cal- led / And none of them ever faid, Minifters are obliged forthwith to ordain upon a People's Ele* dion. And I am fure they are ten Times more willing to go into this Method in Elections, than cur Enquirer and fuch as are on kis Side are for going in to what that noble Author tells us was the Practice of the Primitive Church: For they ( 3d ) they are all of Opinion, the Presbytery hath a (Negative, fo as no Paftor is to be ordained (without the Presbytery's Trial of his Qualifica- tions. We are well fa tisfied, grant but as much to the People, as the Archbifhop of Spalato did, whofe Words are related by Calderivood in his Alt are tDamafcenum (a), where he fays, Non J licet populo eleBionem facere eoram qui adfa- cerdotium fromoventur , fed in jndicio epifco- forum fit, ut ipfi eum probent, ft in fermone, fide £5? fprituali vita edoElus fit ; [implex it a- qae eleftio relinquitur jure communiflimo plebi > dummodo eleEli approbatio vel reprobatio non fpeElet ad plebem, fed ad Epifcopos ordinato- res. SECT. III. Where the ^Determinations of fome of the anci- ent Councils a?ie?it the Election of ' Tajlors are touched. AUR Author, having infifted at fome Length ^^ upon 'the Sentiments of the Fathers, comes next to examine the Determinations of Councils, with Relation to the Choice of Paftors (a) : And, becaufe in jfui Topul'i I laid, Ma- ny Councils might be cited aflerting the People's Right to chufe their own Pallors, as the Coun- cils of Nice, Confiantmople, Carthage, Chal- cedony Laodicea, and many others, in force of which the Want of popular Eleftion was held to make a Minifter's Ordination void. .Upon this he lays, It would appear I either rake things OOP- 33i. (b) p.i°4. Things upon Trtifi, or have a 2)ej7gn to imfc upon my Reader. Well, hath he given one In- ftance of either ? Yes, if you will take his Word for it ; but this I absolutely refufe : And they that call a Perfon's Truftinefs in Queftion, need, i. To fee they be innocent themfeives. And, 2. That there be fufficient Ground for the Charge; As for the firit, we have feen too many Inftan- ■ ces of the contrary, and may have more before our Anfwer be finifhed : And, as to the laft, Jet it now be putto the Trial ; and ijl. As to the two Canons of the Council of Laodicea, which he pleads are againft the People's Right, I think already, upon the 1 Chap. 1 have made it evi- dent, there is not a Syllable in either of thofe Ca-. non$ againft the People's Right; but on the contrary they plead for this Right in them, and therefore I fhall not further infilt upon them. idly, He cites the fifteenth Canon of the Council of Antioch, where it is faid, If-aBi- pop that has no Sijhoprick inbades a vacant Church without the Authority of a Synod, he ought to be driven a r jcay from it, even tho y the People of the Church Jlmild chufe bin If our learned Author had not been fcarce of Xnftances or Cozincils favouring his Scheme, he had never cited this Council, for there is not one Sentence nor Word in it that favours his Caufe. Do we not ail own, albeit the People have the Ri^ht of Eleftion, yet their Eledion doth not conftitute him the Minifter of the Congregation, without thePresbytery's Ordination and Admifllon? Prin- cipal RvJe was as much for the People's Right to elecS their own Paftor^ as any, and yet he vs as much, yea the very fame with this Coun- cil, ( y°~? ) :il, laying down fundry ^ Aflertions anent Intm-" iers. i. Says he (a)> c The regular Way of entring into the Miniftry, is by the Election or Call of the People over whom he is to have Charge, and the poteftative Million or Ordiaation of the Pafcors of the Church. 2. It is confequential to this,That whoever do . not enter this Way into the Miniltry, are in fome Degree or other Intruders into that Work. 5. Tho 5 the exprefs Call of the People, and their free Confent, be needful to the more or- derly Entrance of a Minifter among them ; yet, if they implicitely fhew their Confent, and they being prelimited, - that is enough to the Subftance of a Call, and maketh the Unifier that fo entreth no Ufurper. 4. There are three Sorts cf Ufurpers of the Miniflerial Office or Work; 1. Such as fall upon that Work without a Call from a People, or Ordi- nation from Minifters.) 2. Such as do it upon a ople's Call, but have no Ordination or po- teftative Million by thofe in Authority, the Church, for that End: 3. Such as have Ordi- nation, but take the Charge of a particular )ck wholly without Confent, or againft their Will : The two former Sorts ufurp the Office, the third ufurpcth that particular Charge that he hath no Right to. 5. The Prefentation ot a Patron to the Living, the Civil Laws of Men joining or owning a Man's Entrance into a ace, due Ordination, Institution and Indu- on, and wl .e Men pieafe to devife, c ver niak. him the Pallor of fuch a particu- lar (c.) 7 wife , p. ztf$. ( ^4 ) c lar People, without their Confeht fbme Wa € had, but, without it, he is ftill an Ufurpei And fo far he. And by that Canon, as cited b the Enquirer, 'tis evident the People had th Choice ; only, according to that Council, th People's bare Ele&ion, without the Presbytery 1 Ordination and Inftalment of him, was not c Hough* which they that plead the People's Righ do own, except in extraordinary Cajes, wher Minifters are not to be had to ordain. Had th Canon been, A Minifter, or Bifliop ordained by Synod, is to be continued in his Charge, or e fteemed the Minifter of the Parifh, whether th People chufe him or not, it had been to his Pur pofe. This Council of Antioch exprefly for bids that the Multitude be debarred, or that Mi nifters be fettled without the People's Confent Calvin fays, Hoc igitur in concilio Antiochenc vetitum eft, nequts invitis ingeratur, Calv. In- ftit. Lib. 4. Cap. 4. Seft. n. 3. Whereas he cites Arfenim the Monk hi: Epitome of the eighteenth Canon of the Coun- cil of Antiocby and of the thirty arid fixth Ca- tion of the Apoftolick Coriftitmions. This is no- thing like a lufficient Proof of the Mind of an ancient Council. A Man's Epitome of, or hh commenting upon, a Cdnon, or AH oj AJfem- hly is not the y#?itfelf; for many Times People'* Commentaries deftroy the Text, a^ the Orleans Gloft. And, had it been his Epitome of twa Canons of the fame Council, it had been lefs ex- ceptionable ; but to epitomize an ancient Coun- cil, and a Canon of a private Author, and then] to lay Weight upon it, is a little odd. And evenj in that Epitome of Arfenius the Monk, there til ( 3 C 5 ) ot a Word againft its being the People's Right elect their Paftors : Had not a Man of our En* uirer's Reading been put hard to it, he had ne- er adduced this Epitome for Proof of his Point* trange ! that a Man of his prodigious Learning, l yho will direct others with a magHterial Air here to find fuch or fuch Things in Antiquity, hat, frr all his \;.ft Infight into the Fathers and Councils, could not find fo much as one Father Council upon his Side. Had the Epitome een^ That People, who doth not receive him tfho is ordained a Bifhop fhall be excommuni- ate, it had faid fomething for him. Having cited theCcuncilof Laodicea anddn* ioch as being on his Side, he comes next to cite ie Council of Nice, which was the firit of hofe Councils which are called General, held in .25, where there were prefent between Three nd Four hundred Bifhops or Paftors ; and con- cerning this Council, our modeft and humble inquirer, in h^grcat Modefty and deep Humili- ty, fays to im Author of Jus poptili > He'll be ileafed to, know ; «— and, ifie know not where find that Letter of the Councils, I will di- eil him to Theodoret's Ecclefiajlical Hiftory 3 Ice. c There is, as One fays, a Sort of Men, which magnify themfelves, as if they were the only Oracles in the World, and that the whole Oib of Learning moved in theirHeads. The Boafttr is not unfitly compared to a Drum, which makes a great Noile, but look into it, and there is nothing.' I fhall not fay fo of our En- uirer ; yet a Man might direct to Theodoret, ho' he had feen little more than tbc Backfide of is Book. U But ('3<* ) But for what End did be direft thither, fee ing he owns that Council is for the People 3 Right ? Surely it was to let the World kno\ his Superior Parts, and that he is a Man of vai Reading, a very Prodigy for Learning, intimate ly acquainted with all the ancient Fathers am Councils ; and let it pafsforan Apology, Tha Scire tmim nihil eft , nifi te fcire hoc fciat alter But could he directed to a Council declaring thi is the Presbytery's Right, or the Right of Heri tors, and Heritors not of the Communion o the Church, or of non-refiding Heritors ; or tc a Council declaring againft the People's Right, it had been fomething to the Purpofe. Yet, feeing he hath direfted thither, upon looking to it, 1 obferved, our Enquirer is a blind Guide ; foi Theodoret hath not a Word of that Letter in the Chapter pointed to by the Enquirer ; for it i* not the fixth, but the ninth Chapter of that JEccleJiaJfical Hiftory where that Letter is to be found. And I obferve he hath wj^ng'd the Ori- ginal of that Epiflle, putting *p/T?lor aipono. He cites the third Council of Carthage, which decrees, c I*hat no Clergyman be ordained^ r his Affirmation, for both thefe Councils arc n the People's Side. As to the Council of Cffljlantinople, to which e comes in the next Place, he quarrels I men- t oned it, and did not tell what Council of Con- antinofle it was. If this was a Fault in me, he guilty of the fame in the very next Page, vhere he fays, € I (hall cite to him two Coun- cils which Bellarmine had long a&o mentioned, viz. The Council of Conftantinople, and the fecond of Niece : But, fays he, in none of the Councils of Conftantinople can I find the People's Right averted but the third Council.' *Jow, if it be aflerted in the third Council of lonftantinople, then here are three Councils, by lis own Confeffion, for the People's Right ; but, laving cited the Words of this Council, he eats n what he had juft now (aid ; perhaps, knowing nimfelf Mafter of fo much Learning, makes him [bmetimes lefs confiderate as to what he write*, than they who move in a lower Orb are obliged to be ; For, having cited the Words of U 2 chx ( 3°8 ) that Council \ he fays, c Here is no more afcribec] c to the People in the Ordination of a Bifhop.j c than a Liberty of contenting, and this the € Clergy had equally with them/ Now., tho' ] am clear for holding him at his firft Word, and I think there is Ground for it, yet even, accor ding to his Citation, by this Council, the Peopl< had as much Hand in the Ele&ion as the Clergy and, if both had only a Liberty of confenting, tc whom will he give the Election ? Calvin, {peak- ing of this Council, lays, Adeo aittem caverum fanEii patres, ne ullo paffo imminueretur hat fopiili libertaSy vt quum fynodus ziniverjali. t Conftantinopoli congregata Ne£torium or dinar et id nolaerit fine tonus cleri & fopiili approba- tione, at fna ad Synodum Komamim epiftok te (latum eft. As to the Council of Chalcedon, he fays, e Ii c determines nothing in favour of the People*! c Right, jQnly it ordains, That Clergymen b< c ordained to particular Flocks, and the Name; € of fuch as are ordained be publickly read, bui r this is nothing for a Right of Election/ Now as to this OEcumenick Council, held 451, whicl was the greatefi Council ever the ancient Churc! had, there being Six hundred and thirty Bifhop thereat, tho* our Enquirer could fee nothing ii it for the People's Right to eled: their Pallors yet others have feen fomething which is confide rable here : And , if our Enquirer pleafes, he ma] read the eleventh AS. of that Council, and theri he harh an Account, not only of Stephanus Bi fhop of Ephefm his pleading his being chofei by the whole City, but alfo in it he will find thi Council declared for the JSphefians tbeir havinj ( 3°9 ) Bifliop chofen by all the Flock, whom he was feedi T£f£ 7TCLVT0OV 7UV (J.zKKQVTCW t *Ql[JL&lVzt£rcLt miw+tfto And, in the 12th Acl. the Council claries againft either Bajianus or Stephanm be- g Bifhop of Ephefih, appointing another to b fettled by the Election of all the Flock, «$ ris.oyiK vxvTatv rev (j&KHpTvf Toi/Actti>z£rcfi *\.yizijo- ■/a The Council of Cbalcedon declared luch >rdinations void as were againft the Mind and kfill of the People. The learned Ticiet law the eople's Right affirmed by this Council ; and ence he cites it as a Proof, That the Ancients fere of the judgment the People have a Right :> elect their own Paftors. Some would fay, acher our Author hath not read the Hi/lory nd -Acts of that Council, or hath been napping ^hen he read them, . or had a Defjgn to impofe; ;hen he fays, That Council hath nothing in it ivouring the People's Right. He adds, c The Author of jfm fopili fays, He might cite many other Councils, and this he will probably do at another Time/ Whe- her he was convinced other Councils might be ited to this Purpofe, I fhall not fay : But, that was not impofing by that Aflertion, here I all inftance fome of thofe other Councils ; and, elides the Councils of Niece, Laodicea, the rhird of Carthage in 597,. Constantinople and Zhalceion, already mentioned, declaring for the People's Right to ele<5t their Paitors, the others ire ; 1. That African Synod met at Carthage, Anno 257, declared plainly for this Right in the People, as appear* from that Letter which wrote in the Synod's Name to fome Churc! ii Spain, which is his tfS, or, according to fome U 3 Copies, h Copies, his 6^ Epiftle, where it is affirmed, SYeftl; ipfa maxime babet poteftatem, &c. c ThePeopt $ themfelves chiefly have the Power of chuurij c worthy Priefts, or refufing the unworthy. 2 And there it is aflerted, c That this Order defceah ded by Divine Tradition, and ought to be dilife gently maintained ; Which, fays #e,isalfo pre! ierved among us, and almoft in all Provinces,! that, in order to the makinglawful Ordinations! the nearefl: Bifhops of a Province fliould af [ femble with the People, who ought to ordain i\ Prelate : And a Bifhop fhould be chofen in thcl -* Prefence of the People, who may perfe&ljj € know the Life and Converfation of every One ] And this is what was done among you in th< Ordination of Sabinus ourCollegue; for, by the Suffrages of all the Brethren, and by the Judgment of the Bifhops who came themfelves to you after you had wrote, they conferred the Order of Epifcopacy on him, and laid their Hands upon him in the Room of Safilides. 2. The Council of Avergne or Clermont, held nthe Year 535, determined, c That a Bifhop fhoul^ be raifed, viz. to the Dignity of the Mi- niftry, omnium eleEiione £S? non pauconim fa* vore, by the Election of all, and not by the Fa« vour of a few ; declaring alfo, it is finful tc ufe the Intereit of great Perfons, Craft, Promi« fes, Gifts or Threatnings ; and that they wh< take f uch Methods, fhould be deprived of th< Communion of the Church whereof thej fhould be Bifhops/ 3. The third Council of Orleans, Canon 3d. held in 538, appointed, * That the Bifhops o: * the Province mould be chofen by the Clergj 5 anc ( 1*1 ) nd People.' And that Council gives a Rea- , which binds in all Ele&ions, namely, c Be- au(e it is fir, that he who is to prefide over U, fhould have the Suffrage of all/ This is e what the Full Vindication of the CommiJ- ms Overtures , calls one of the fundamental taxims of Presbytery, namely, £>iwd omnes wgit ab omnibus jieri debet. 4. The 5th Council of Orleans, Canon nth 549, Sicut antiqni Canones decreverunt, mil* s invitis detur Epifcopus, fed nee per opprejfi- tern potent ium perfonarum ad confenfu?n faci- zdum cives ant Clerici, quod dm nefas eft, in- 'inentur. That Council decreed, ' According \ to the ancient Canons, no Bifhop fhould be > placed over a People againft their Will, and i that none of the People or Clergy fhould be bowed or fwayed to give their Confent by the Oppreffion of great Men, which is a Sin to be faid of any/ 5. The third Council of Paris, in the Year 59, fays, c Et quia in aliquibus rebus, &c. Becaufe in fome Things the ancient Cuftom is neglected, and the Decrees of the Canons vi- olated ; it is thought good, according to the ancient Cuftom, that the Decrees ot the Canons be obferved, and that no Bifhop be ordained Civibus invitis, if the Citizens be unwilling, nor unlefs he be heartily invited by the Electi- on of the People and Clergy, neither by the Command of the Prince, £S?c/ 6. The fourth Council of Toledo in #53, de- reed, € That none fhould be efteemed a Bifhop, but he that was chofen by the Clergy and People of the City/ U 4 7- The ( 3" ) J. The fecond Council of Cdbihne or Chaa- Ions, in the Year £49, fays, Si quis Epifcopns dt quacunq\ civ it ate defimEius, i$c. c If a Bifhop c in any City be removed by Death, the Ele&ion c of another fhall not be but by the neighbour- c ing Bifhops , the Clergy, and his own Citizens j ' if otherwife, let his Ordination be efteemed * void/ Others might be named, but thefe may fuffict to confirm this Truth, That in the primitive Times the People had the Choice of their own Paftors r Yet, I add the Teftimony of one Au- thor more, and, I think, his Teftimony upon this Head is unexceptionable ; and that is Bifhop Burnet, who, in his Rights of 'Princes in the difpojing of Ecclefiajiical Benefices, having told how Bar das the Emperor called a Synod in 858, Ignatius conf effing he came in without due Ele- Bion, he was degraded. By this Proceeding, it appears, fays the Bifhop (a), c That they ftill * looked on Elections as a Thing neceflary, and * that without it, even after a long Poffeflion (for * this was fixteen Years after Ignatius his Ordi- * nation) it was fufficient Ground for degrading € a Bifhop/ And, when fpeaking of England, tho* he regrates the Slothfulnefs of ancient Wri- ters, he fays (b), c No doubt the Bifhops were € chofen, according to the Cuftoms that were € fpread over the reft of the Roman Empire. f ■■ — > — >Seda hath written carelefly of this MaN c ter, fo that from him it is not certain how c the Elections were managed ; but, fince we f find, that popular Elections did afterwards take c Place (a;/, 8,. (b)j>. 157- Place in England, we have reafon to conclude icwasfo from the Beginning, for Power fel- dom returns to the People after it is once ta- ken out of their Hands/ And, according to lim, e It was not till after the 12th Century ,that the People were deprived of all Part in the E- lections : J For, he lays (a), c That, after the i ith Century, the People had no other Share in the Elections, but that they met and applau- ded the Choice the Clergy had made. The Popes were, no doubt, willing to bring the Ele- ctions whoiiy into the Hands of the Clergy, as w T ell as they had aflumed the Inveftitures to themfelves ; and Princes were not unwilling to take it iikewile out of popular Hands, ib as that they v\^re forfaken on all Sides; A and it c grew alfo to be recieved, that, inftead of the r whole Clergy, only thefe of the Chapter did c chufe ; and, inftead of the Concurrence of the € People's Suffrage, there was only a Publication c made of the Choice in which the Chapter € had agreed, upon which a Shout of Applaufe c was made, and pafled for the Confeiit of the f People. By what Steps it grew to this, from € Hincmarus's Time,in the End of the 9th Cen- c tury, in which, we are fare, it was far other- € wife, is not lo certain/ And this fhows our Author's Scheme is of no ancient Date ' in the Church : Now, from what hath been (aid, it is pretty evident, for all his high Pretences to Ac- quaintance with the Fathers and Councils, his Skill in Antiquity is not extraordinary ; or elfe, might I ufe his own charitable Expreflion, he hath •* , ' (a) f>. 191. $ A 1 * > hath written with a Delign to impofe upon his Readers, in denying this was the Do&rine of the Ancients, or that nothing can be gathered for certain from them. And, in Concluiion to this Head, I think the concurring Teftimony of the Ancients fays much for our Confirmation here, feeing we have fb much in Scripture for Proof of this, That it is the People's Right to eleft their own Paftors. Some of Epifcopal 'Principle* net almoft for fetting up Antiquity , and the Pra&ice of the ancient Church, as an unfallible Chair for determining the Senfe of contravened Places of Scripture ; particularly, when arguing for Pre- latick Government ; therefore, 'tis ftrange any fuch fhould oppofe this Doftrine of the People's Right, to chufe the Overfeers of their precious Souls, when this is fo clear from Antiquity. But enough, if not too much, upon this Subjeft. CHAP. ( ¥S ) CHAP. VII. In which the Enquirer's pretended Enquiry into the Sentiments and Pra&ice of the Proteftant Churches and Divines fince the Reformation, is confidered^ and the Falienefs of his Reprefentation anent thofe is difcovered- SECT. I. Containing Remarks npon fome general AJJer* tions laid down by the Enquirer. A S to Foreign Churches and Divines, the Enquirer lays, i. c That, having fearched with Care and Exaftnefs, he learned from them, that, as to their Judgment, the Offi- cers of the Church are the only chief Electors of Minifters/ But doth he prove, or attempt to prove, his Affertion anent the Sentiments of Foreign Churches by the Determination or De- claration of any one Church under He wen 1 No ; you muft believe his Word with impiicite Faith, 2. He fays, f No Proteftant Churches or Di- 1 vines have maintained, that the People are ori- r ginally the proper and fole Electors of Mini- c fUrs by a Divine Right, except the Indepen- € dents. 9 But he may is we!) deny the Sun ia the Firmament gives Light : They have man* tained it is their Right to eled Paftors, and their Right originally, without deriving it from any. I think both the firft and fecond Confeflion of Helvetia give this Right of Election only to the People, as they give Impofition of Hands and Ordination to the PresBytery. So the learned Afolonii, that Man of great Weight, as Ru~ therfttrd calls him, in an Epiftie to the Synod at London in 1644, when writing in the Name, by the Command 3 and at the Anointment of the Churches of Chrift in Zetland, he fays. • We c grant indeed, as we faid before, That there is a * Liberty of Nomination or Election allowed by c the Word of God, to all the Members of a c Church, fo as no Minifter may without the c Agreement and Confent of the People be ob- c tfuded uporr a Church, whether they will or c not ; which Nomination or Fieftion doth not € yet confer Miniiierial Power on the Perfon e~ c ledted, but only deligneth a Perfon on whom c it may be duly derived, according to the infti- f tuted Rules, by thofe who have under Chrift € received that Power, whereby Ecclefiaftical c Authority is derived on this or that Perfon/ Now, here we have Churches, which were not Independent, declaring for this as the Right of Church-Members,* and fo do other Churches in their Conf&flions ; fo did the fublick Rejoluti- cnersy as was fhown in Jus 'Populi, p. 8tf. And for Proteftant Divines, many were particularized tc him in that Book, as Rutherfurd y who iays f € Eledion is an elicite Ad: of the People, and c their Birthright and Privilege Chrili hath gi- c ven to them : If there be any Ele&ion it muft c be made by the People ; the Presbytery, even * in Cafe of the People's Aberration, cannot u- * forp the Aft of Ele&iqn. Becaufe the Apoftles, who who yet had the Gift of difcerning of Spirit* in a greater Meafure than the Multitude, re- mit the Choice of the leven Deacons to the Multitude > Ergo, the Presbytery fhould do the fame.' Thefe Words were cited to him in Jus Topu- U (a), but hath he ever attempted to difprove )r anfvver to them I No ; and yet, after this he peaks, as if never Proteftant Divine hadlpoken :o this Purpofe. 3. Whereas again he affirms, c None but In- dependents contend for this, That it is the r People^ Right originally, and that they are ' the proper Electors/ The Falfenefc of this Affertion hath been (hown already ; Ruther- furd was no Independent, and yet he hath af- firmed the quit contrary in the laft Citation ad- duced : So the London Minifters, as was noticed above, who, in the ^Preface to their Jus divi- num regirninis Ecclefiaflici , aflert this of the People's Right is a Presbyterian 'Principle, and that they are of the fame Mind with the In de- fendants* as to the Point of Right in People to eleft their Pallors, affirming it is an Excellency of the Presbyterian Way that it is fo, as was al- ready obferved ; and many others cited in Jus iPofwli. But, 4. Whereas he fays, c It is the favourite c Charafterifhck Principle of the In dependents, That the calling of a Minifter doth effentially € confift in the Flt/tion of. the People/ If he mean, that the Ellence of the Miniiterial Call to the Work of the Gofpel lies in the People's Election, (aj p. 133. ( *I? ) Ele&ion, fo as this is enough to make a Minifter of Chrift without the Presbytery's Ordination : then he knows none among us are of this Mind i But, if he mean, it is their favourite Ckarafte- riftick Principle, That they are for the People's Election, declared by Suffrage or Confent, as cflenrial to his being fettled a Paftor among a People or over a Parifh, then, might we ufe hi* own Words, This flow^s from Abundance of Ig- norance, for this is no peculiar Principle of the Independents. 5. He affirms (a), € Every Body muft think the Author of Jus pcptili all along imperti- nent in citing Dr. Owen and Amefius lo fre- quently, as being for the People's having the fole Right of Eledtton, asking, Is it of any Weight with a Presbyterian, or is it therefore a Presbyterian and a Reformation-principle, becaufe Independents hold it ?* For Reply, Had I cited him alone for Proof, this had been of fome more Weight ; but this is refufed : And, to ufe his own modeft Word, was not our En- quirer impertine7it to cite the Epifcopal Author of an original ^Draught, and none elfe but him for his Opinion, {pending two full Pages of his Book in Commendation and Vindication of what hs fays againft all 'Presbyterians, and a- gainft the Throng of Epijcopal Writers alfb 1 Andj albeit fometimes I had cited Owen and A* rnefms only, feeing this of the People's Right to eleft their Paftors, is no peculiar Tenet of the Independents, but a Trotejlant Principle, I could not been much blamed. 6. He (a) p, io8w iglMMMMifk ( w ) . 6. He would have us believe he is not lingular ere : For he cites Rut kerf urd 3 laying, * Nor are we of Dr. Amefius his Judgment, Thar the Calling of a Miniiler doth eflentially confift in the People's Election ; for, his external Calling confifteth in the Presbytery's Separation of a Jvlan for fuch a holy Calling as the Htiy Gbq/l fpeaketh.' For, Anfro. i. Tho' he quarrels le tor citing Dr. A^e/im, yet the learned Rtt- lerfurd cites him fur Proof of his Aflertions on lis very Subject, tho' there he fays he will not p his Length (a). 2. As Rutberfnrd would ot go Amefim his length, neither v ill I, nor ill any among us that plead the Peopled Right > this length, to fay,That in aconlUtute Church )e People's Call is enough to make One their linifter ; for we are all for the Presbytery's mo- srating in the Election, for their having the Ex- Tiination of the Perlbn chofen, and alfo the Or- ination. But, 3. I affirm, it is unworthy of Minifter of the Gofpel, unworthy of any Per- >n pretending to Ingenuity, to make fuch afalfe .eprefentation of any Writer's Opinion, as here jr Author doth of Rutberfurd's Words: And, it might not offend fys Modefty, nothing can b cited more impertinently, than the Words of iutherfurd ; for, in that very Place cited by the nquirer (b), he is proving the *People have '5 Right to eleft their ^Pajiors ; affirming, ^hatfo the Word prefer ibetb. And that, c Tho* poffibly the People have nothing pofitively to lay againlt a Perlon ; yet, if they rejeft him, and chule another fitter, the Eledion is reafo- • nable, (a; Z)ue Right of 'frest. p. 46$. CO Zta* light, p. 205. ( 320 ) r * nable/ Nothing of levelling here, and then he proves from ancient Fathers and Councils that in the primitive Times the People had th< Election. And,in the very Paragraph cited, Ru therford owns, ' Amejwfs Arguments prove c That the Ele&ion of a People is necefiary t( c appropriate a Paftor's Miniftry to fuch or fud € a Congregation ;' tho* he denies the Eflena of the Ministerial Call lies only in that ; and fo dc we, affirming, The Presbytery's Ordination is ef fential to this. 7. The Enquirer acknowledges two Things it this Paragraph (a)- I, He owns, € That a few * Proteftant Churches and Divines do own, oi € feem to own, the People have a Negative ? which is, that Miniftcrs are not to be fettled without their Confent and Approbation. Butj he is wifer than to tell what Proteftant Churches or Divines they are, who own, or feem to own, this, left, upon Enquiry, they fhould be found to own it very pofitively, and to go a greater Length than to allow the People a bare Nega- tive- But, if he grant fome Proteftant Churches and Divines have gone this Length, then, ac- cording to him, they haye ruined Presbytery by their Acknowledgments ; for the Wit of Man cannot invent a Reafon, why the Author of Jus 'JPopuli his giving the People a Negative, or pleading the People had a Negative in the Ele- ction, fhould ruine Presbytery more than the fame Things affirmed by others can do it. 2. He owns in 1690, at that Syncretifm or Agreement which was between the Independents and (Pref- € byterians\ (*) f. 1 08, 109. yterians in England. c It was agreed by both* that the People in each particular Church hai a Right to chufe their own Officers/ Bur, tsks he, ' Was it fuitable for the Author of Jus Toptili to adduce this here, when he kr.evv Presbyterians went in to this for their mutual Peace, and not becaufe it was a Presbyterian Principle?* Tor, Reply, i. This was owned o be a Presbyterian Principle by Presbyterians n Scotland, Lngland and Ireland ; yea, in all he reformed World long ere that Time, as has >een evidenced by many Authors of good Credit ited already. Presbyterians in England about 552, which was many Years before that Syn- retifm, as Baxter fhows in his Life, gave this as ne Reafon why they could not join with the Church of England, namely, That, in Commu- lion with her, they could not have the Choice f th.irown Paftors. So Flavel, in his Anti- harm acum Saluberrimiim, which was written 3ng before that Agreement, plainly affirms, That free Election by the Church, to whom the /liniftery is given, is nccefTary to a Min.fter's -all. And, if this uas not fo^then the Enquifer \u([ think Presbyterians in England at the Re* olution,hzve been very untender, in that,for tha ake of Peace, they would give up with their Tinciples. Had they only agreed each particu- iv Church fhould have Liberty granted to chufe heir own Paftors, perhaps it had not been fo nuch ; but their Expreflion is, Every particu* tr Church have Right to chufe their own 1*4" tors. And, for uhat he fays of the Puple's Ught to eled, becaufe the *Paf}ors have no En* ouragement a$ to their Maintenance, km what X tbi . ( J» ) tie People give them > this hath been anfwer© already. 8. He affirms, c The Author of Jin yet ftill there was great Har mony of Opinion among them as to this, Tha it is the People's Right, and their Right original ly^ to eled their Paftors, and all are pointed an< pofitive againft our Enquirer. SECT (a) p. 78. ( w ) SECTION II. vhicb the Enquirer's AJfertions as to the Sentiments of the Belgick Churches, the ^hurches of Helvetia and Saxony, are cour- iered. I U R Author comes next to conflder more particularly what is faid in Jm Topuli from Lonjeffions of foreign Troteftant Churches, the Peopled Right to ele£t their own Paftors; d here, after citing the Confeffmis of the Scl- Helvetic, and Saxonic Churches, he fays, *rom all thefe Conjeffions, becaufe Election is iven to the Church, he (viz. the Author of his populi) would infer, That the Right of E- e&ion belongs to the Members of the Church, r the People ; but, it will appear, that this Vriter reads Confeflions without any Manner f Judgment, as he feems to have done a great nany Books cited by him in his Jus populi? R e Pty> The Author of that Piece is in fome afure lenfi^le of his being a very weak Man, I is far from pretending to be of a great Reach; , with all Submiffron to our Enquirer's vaft dgment and deep Wifdom, by which he is Cble of his Reafoning after a fine Manner, and which he tells us he hath been fo thankful ; I y uith Submiflion, the Enquirer hath %iven no traordinary Evidence of a fingular Judgment, affirming his Oppofite hath read Coiifeffions d t at many Scoks without all Manner of which, upon the Matter, is a calling rotheran ignorant Blockhead, void of com- an Senfe. But, might not a fgfeer Expreflioh X i done ( 3*4 ) t done the Turn ? feeing he knew the Revenj Mr. Gills/pie (whom he calls a great Man, 2 of whom Rutherfurd fays, He did more in 2)ay for Chrifi, than an Hundred godly Grt headed Pafiors) was as weak here, and as v« of all Manner of Judgment as the Author of j populi : For,in pleading the People's Right (\ he argues from the very fame Topick with < Author of Jus populi \ namely, The Teftiim of tProteftant Churches, citing their Confeffi for that very End which he doth, particulal the Helvetic and Selgic Confeffions, and 2)ij\ fline of the Church of France. But, asjforn: ly he called that great Man impertinent, faid, he cited impertine?itly ; fo, tho* he 1 him a Fool, reading Confeffions without all Ma ner of Judment ; yet furely this is modeft in < Enquirer, feeing he hath taken the Epithetsl Modeft and Humble to himfelf. And, for weak and void of Judgment as I have been| reading thefe Confeffions ; yet I fee the judicu Author of an Enquiry into the Method ofj fling Varilhes conform to the AEis and 'Pratt of the Church of Scotland,hath been fully as v of all Manner of Judgment, as I have been ; he cites (b) and argues from thefe very Con) /ions to the fame Purpofe that I did. Well, hath he given a fingle Inftance in th Confeffions of the Selgic, Helvetic, or Sa. nic Churches, or any other Confeffion of t reformed Churches cited in Jus populi, wh the Word Church is taken in (uch a reftrifi Senfe, as to exclude the People's Suffrage or Cc ^ ft -*- (a) Mfcellany £>uefi. p. & (#) p. 70. • it in the Affair ? No, nor hath he given an In- mce where the Word Church muft be taken jr the Cburch-Reprefe?itative> or for Heritors 1 id Elders ; nor hath he particularized any Place . all thofe ConfeJJions, where the Word Church ; uft be underftood of Minifters and People : No, ? never attempted that ; only he fays (a)/ The ; Reafoning ot Jus poftili is falfe, if it be con- * fidered, i. That the Compofers of thefe Con- ! fefHons wifely laid down their Judgment in a general Expieffion and Phraie, when they a- fcribe the Election of Minifters to the Church : for they did not think it fie to defcend to Parti- culars, and thereby fix Bounds and Limits as to f the Perfons who are to be the Electors. They mew very well that Doctors differed very much among themfelves concerning this Sub- ject ; and, finding they could not be all of one Mind, they judged it preferable to leave fome Things undetermined/ Now, for Reply to lis, I refer to Page 31 , 32. of the Remarks up- n his mod eft a?id humble Enquiry, pubiifhed in Irne of the laft AfTembly. ^But, fays he (b), € Now, it will appear that fl fpeak not without Book, if we call to Mind what a National AfTembly of this Church did 1645, l£c. y But pray, what did that AJfera- 'b!y ?They only declared, 'That the Rights of ^People and Presbytery in the Ele &c. Election is almoft afcribed by Ecclefiaitick Writers to the Chriftian People, and to the Bifhops ordaining that they approved of the Election, and confirm- ed it by their Confent. So Ru furd, Apl- lonii, and others. That the Presbytery hath a Claim to ad in the Ele&ion, none among us deny ; their Part is to give Advice in the Election, and moderate^ having alfo a Right to try and ordain the Perfon elected. He charges me as noV adverting to the Word Church in the Confeffions of 'Protectant Churches \ and therefore faid, / had read Confeffons with- out all Ma?zner of Judgment \ aflerting, Had I adverted to the Meaning of that Word in thofe ConfeJJionS) I had been of a different Mind. But nothing can be further from Truth, than to lay, I did not advert to the Meaning of the Word Church, in my Observes upon thefe Confeffions ; And,to convince the Reader of the Groundlcfnefs of this Charge, and to (how the Honefty and In- genuity of our fair and candid Reprefenter, here I'll give fome of my Expreflions in Jus foj.nU to that Purpofe, where, having begun with, and cited, the Words of the Selgic Confeffionjn which it is (aid, ■ We believe Minifters of God's Word, ' Elders and Deacons ou^ht to be chofen to their f Functions by lawful Eledtion of the Church, % and in that Order which is taught in the Word ■ ofgtf,' X 4 An ( 32* ) And, having fhown that, by this ConfeJJiont Election of Minifters, Elders and Deacons is given to the Church ; and told, This ConfeJJlon intimates it is only the Church's Ele&ion which is the lawful Election of Church-Officers; I ad- ded, c The 'Church is a Word of various Signi- * fication ; but I think the learned and chief Pro- f feilprof Divinity in the Univerfity oiGrontii- € gen, Marefius, was as capable as many to tell f us their Meaning of it here ; and in his fixe* € gejts, or Explication of that Confeflion, dedi- * cared to their High MightinefTes and Lords € the States General, and to all the Reverend, € learned, and vigilant Paftors and Reftors of ' the Churches in the united Provinces,he,in Ex- € plication of this Article, fays (a), 'Preffius de- f bet attendi, &c. Here it ought to be more * clo/ly confidered what we are put in Mind qf c by our Confejfion, viz. That lawful Election * of Pajfors pertaineth to the Church ; for that * Jljjertion is oppofed to the common Sentence * of Romanics, whofe Thefis it is, "That the € Election of Mini fieri of the Church doth not 6 belong by divine Right to all the People, nor f doth it depend upon their Confent and Suffrage. * And, after citing %ecanus,Tirinus and Bellar- * mine, as having this Thefis or Pofition, pre- * tending that all Right of Election belongs to f the, Roman Pontiff; and having alfo fhown c why Romanifts move that Controverfy with ? Troteftants, and fhown how Cyprian, and a * Synod of Bifhops with him, were for the * People's Right, he fay§, Et fquum eji ab om- * nibus 60 P- 450. ( 1*9 ) nibus eligiy qui omnibus pr^effe debet. It is e- quitable or juft that he fhould be chofen by alJ, who is or ought to have the Charge oi ail. This Confefliun ufed to be read and ligned in all the National AfTemblies of the Seigic Churches at every Synod, and it was unani- moufly figned by the famous Synod of "Don (s). Again, having cited the firjt and fecond Con- fejjions of Helvetia , in both which Election is given to the Church ; I fay, 'The Word Church in thefe Co7ifeJ}1ons is not to be taken in a reftri- ded Senfe for the Church Reprefentative, but for thatChurch whereof the Pallors of the Flock are Minifters, as it is rSkcn through thofe Con- feffions. Indeed the fecond Confeflion Jeaves it either to the Church h^rfelf,.or, if fhe pleafed, to fotne deputed by her,to e]e£t Miniftersof the Gcfpel ; but thereby the Right oi Eieftion is originally given to the Church, elfe fhe could not depute others to chule for her, and thereby fhe hath a Negative ; for fuch as are deputed, muft account unto thofe by whom they are de- puted : There the Power of Election is given to that Church, w hich, they fay,may depute ; and I apprehend, no Body ever dreamed of the Church-Reprefe.itative's deputing the People to chufe for them/ Again, having cited the ConfeJJion of the Churches of Saxony ; • 1 fay, It is evident from thefe \Vords,thty juJged it is the Right of the Lord's People in his Church to'eleft their Pa- llors, and that it is well pleafing to him when 9 the {a) Marefms in Confef Be/gic. p. 5, 11, ( 33° ) € the Ele&ion of Paftors is given to his Church c And it is evident to any that conliders the Senfe f in which the Church is taken in that Article, € they mean not theChurch-Reprefentative,whe- € ther Elders or Paftors, but that Church whereoi € Chrift's Ambafladors are Minifters, Paftors 01 c Shepherds, without diftinguifhing one Part ol € the Church from another.* Now, after this I leave it to all the impartial World, if this Author can have a juft Pretence to his being a confeientious Enquirer : His Cor* duft would tempt fbme to think his Confciencc was none of the niceft, when he faid, 1 read thefe Confeffions without all Manner of Judg- ment ; and that in thofe I never adverted to the Word Church : May not his Conduft here tempt us to think, he hath made this Mifrepre- fentation with a Defign to impofe upon hij Reader/ * € But, fays he, I fhall fhow him how the beft c and moft learned Profeflors of Divinity have € underftood it (to wit, the Word Church') And then he cites Arnandus ) P- 33>34j35>3*' ( 333 ) < € of calling Paftors, excluding the reft of the € Church/ And, tho' he allows the Presbytery to eleft, yet he affirms their Power is all from the Churchy in whofe Name they ele#, and to whom the Right belongs originally and radi- cally, being given to the Body of the Church by Chri(l Jefus ; affirming alfo, The Church hath a Tower and Right to life and exercise this Privilege themfelves ; where, by the Word Churchy he means the People. In the laft Place, The modeft Enquirer quotes the Profejfors of Ley den uflng the Word Church for Paftors and People both j f The Paflage, fays he (a), is from Juspopuli, Jus paftores eligen- di eft penes ecclejiam y ac provide plebi commune cum presbyteris 3 jus ordinandi foli presbyterio eft proprium : I tranflated thefe Words thus, The Right of chufing Paftors belongs to the Churchy and therefore common to the People or Commonalty. Now, becaule I omitted to tran- flate cum presbyteris there, the Enquirer makes a mighty Noife, faying, € Here I am very much c offended and fcandalized at the Art and Crafc c of Jus pop. by his Tranflation ; for, that he c may impofe on his Englifh Reader, and make c him believe that it was the Judgment of thefe c great Divines, that the Right of Ordination c only belonged to Presbyters, and that they € had no Right of Election ; he gives no Ver- e fion of thefe Words Cum Presbyteris: Where- c fore the true Tranflation is, The Right of E- c letting belongs only to the Church, and there - c fore is common to the People with Presbyters. c I +Mm 00 p. 113- ( 334 ) I appeal, fays he, to the World, if this is € honeft and fair Dealing ; is not this to make * Authors fpeak as he would have them ? ' Now, pray, what is all this great Crime which the Au- thor of Jus populi hath been guilty of, that the Enquirer hath been thus offended and fcandali- tized, much, and very much, offended andfcan- dalized, and fo very much offended and fcandiU lived, as to charge One bearing the Chara&er of a Minifter of the Gofpel with Art, Craft* and a *DeJign to impofe upon his Reader ; zn&fo cff°ndei and Jcandalized, as to appeal to the World if this be honejl and fair Dealing in htm ? This, upon the Matter, is an Appeal to all the World, if he be not a Rafcal and a Knave. Now, all the Crime he can alledge is only this, I had omitted to tranflate thefe two Words cum 'Presbyteris, tho' he could not re- fufe I had given them fairly and fully in the La- tine. This flowed from nothing but mere Overfight : Nor could I have any Defign of Impofing ; for, when the Words are rendfed with the Presbyters or Elders, they may be meant or Ruling Elders, whom I reckoned a- mong the People : Or, grant by thofe both Ruling and Preaching Elders are meant, it makes not againft my Defign in that Place, which is to prove that the People have a Right originally to eleA thc-if own raftors. Our Enquirer's Conduft here, puts fome in Mind of the common Saying, None fo ready to raife the Hue and Cry, Hold the Thief, as they that are mod guilty ; for in the immediately pre- ceding Lines he is thought to be guilty of fome other Sort of Art and Craft, namely, in his Ci- tation L (lis V c „, . ration from the 6th Paragraph of Turret ine % 24th Queftion of the Church ; where he pafled ty Turret'ine's Words in the Beginning of the Paragraph , and again in the Middle of that Para- graph, and alfo the Jafl Words thereof, which ike very plainly a°ainft him, without the jfual Mark ollinea re£la thus/— to let us know rhere is more in that Paragraph than he judged proper to cite, while he culls out fome Expref- ns, which, as placed by him, do make for his Purpofe. In the Middle of his Citation he leaps over thefe Words, Scdquia fresbyteri nonfunt tot a ecclefia, fed t ant urn pars ejus, non deben^ ad fe folos vocationem rapere reliqv.is ecclefie membris exclufis. And, tho* there is only one le in the Paragraph behind his Citation, he leaves it ; the Words of that Line are, Atque eoclefids corpori manet fernper profritwi jus Vocational j And fo the proper Right of Calling abides always in the Church. I pafs thefe, as alfo our Enquirer's making Tiirretine fpeak Non- fenfe, or barbarous Latine once, and again, and a third Time in that Paragraph, by the Tran- iption of his Words ; the like to which might be noticed in other Places, particularly as to his Creek Citations, I know not how often. Having cited C J .us, JValleiis, turret 1 and the WrojcJJbrs oj Leyden, he fays, c Thefe 1 Proteltant Divines explain the Term Chtircb € lo, as lometimcs to comprehend both Paftors € and People, and at other Times fo, as to take € in the Magiftrate with them: How then can € this Author underftand thefe Confefftom when f they lpeak of Lle&ion by the Church of the * People only, and by thefe Confeflions pre- • tend ( ,33* ) c tend that the People have the Ele&ion give f them ?' Is not this Query pungent, feeiri thefe Divines, when they are not (peaking no writing of, nor have they the leaft Eye to, thoi Confeffions, they fometimes ufe the Word Church fo as to comprehend both Paftors and People therefore it muft be fo taken in thefe Confeffions Had fome others put fuch a Query* he had fure \y faid, It flowed from Abundance of Ignorance and Want of all Manner of Judgment. I fup pole, it is no difficult Task to cite a vaft Num ber of learned Writers, who ufe the Won Church only for the People, when fpeaking c the Eleftion of Paftors ; Will he therefore thin] that is enough to prove it muft be fo taken h the Proteftant Churches their Confeffions q Faith ? But, hath our Enquirer ever at r empte< to bring an Author, affirming the Word Church in thofe Confejfions muft be taken as including Paftors and People ? or hath he attempted t< ( bring any one Inftance from all thoic Confeffions in which the Word Church cannot be meant o the People, or cannot be meant of them only i No ; he faw that could not do. But, having given the Words of the Belgic. Helvetic, and Saxonic Churches, and infilled at fome Length upon the Meaning of the Wore Church, he comes again to confider thefe Con< fejjions : And, i. As to the Confeffionof the &elgicChurches r I told, Marefius, in Explication of that Conjeffi- on^ fays, 'The Word Church there is meant of the.'Peopk. The Enquirer doth not deny this: But, fays he (a), c I oppofe Marejius to Mare- -ma (a) $. rai ( 537 ) fun, citing h»s Words thus, Curaquam in eccle- € fits be?2eco?j(linttis y Sic. where, fays the Enqui- rer fce exprefly afcribes Election to theEcclefiafti- cal Senate, which is the Presbytery/ But, in this Citation from Marefws^here is not a Word of the Selgic or any particular Church. And, tho' he had cited him affirming the Paftors of the Church are to have a Suffrage with the People in the Election, it had not been to cite Marefitis againfl Marefitis as to the Meaning of the 'Belgic Con- fejfion ; No • it had only been to cite Marefius of a different Mind from that CcnfeJJion : But there is nothing like this in the Citation ,• and our Enquirer here hath not afted fo fairly, for he be- gins in the Midft of a Sentence; and, that this might not be noticed, he puts Ctira for Circa, pmitting the former Part of the Sentence, which is in direA Contradiction to our Enquirer's Prin- :iples, and it is this, Ordinationi per %*po0€ In Anfwer he fays, T'hey have due EleEiion either from the King or 'Patrons, into ivhofe Hands the c PariJho?2ers, for eviting Con* fufion, have delivered that Right which they bad. ^jiod habuertmt ; by which Expreffion, tho' he allowed of Patronages, which cannot be juftified, yet he clearly intimates, It is the Right of Parilhoners to eleft their Pallors, their Right from Ghrift, their Right orginally and radu cally. Next, The Enquirer comes more particularly to confider the firfi and fecond Confeffions oj Helvetia ; in the firft of thefe it is faid, When an Election is God's true Ele£iion, it is approven by the Suffrages of the Church, and by the Laying o?i of the Minifler's Hands. I humbty think, nothing can be plainer than, by that Con. feffion, as Ordination or Impofition of Hand* is given to the Presbytery, fo Eleftion is gi- ven to the People, who are the Church diftin- guifhed from trie Paftors. And in their feconc Co7tfefJion of Faith, which was agreed to, anc fubferibed, in 1566 by all the Proteftant Mini- Iters in Helvetia, Zurich, "Bern, Claris, Safil Schaffhanfen, Appeitzel, St. Gal, Malhauzen, and Geneva : and was received bv all the Churches o (a) Fafciculus Vbeol. p. 24 J. ( 34' ) ■ -, of Savoy, ^Poland and Hungary ; and alio ap- proven of by the Church of Scotland in 1 566 in all Things, except as to the Obfervation of fome holy 2)ays : That Confeflion lays,Let the Mini* fters of the Church be called and chofen by law* (ul and ecclefiaflical Elcftion ; that is, Let them be chofen religiozifly by the Churchy er by r uch as are deputei by the Church for that Ef- *e£l, in the jujl Order, and without Tumulty Seditions and Contention : ■ And thofe that are chofen, let them be ordained by the Elders, with publick 'Prayers, and Irnfofuion of % Hands. But, fays the Enquirer, ' Here the People feems : rather to be excluded ; for this Confeflion al- f lows of a Deputation which the Author of : Ju$ populi denies/ Indeed I own, and (b much is exprefly owned in jf us populi, that the fecond Confeflion of Helvetia leaves it optio- nal to the Church that fhe herfelf chufe, or, if fhe pleafed, it is left to fome deputed by her to elecft Miniiters of the Gofpel for her ; but there- by, as was noticed before, the Right of Electi- on is originally given to the Church, elfe fhe #ould not depute others to chufe for her, and thereby fhe hath a Negative ; tor fuch as are de- puted muft account unto thofe by whom they are deputed. There the Power of Election is £ ven to that Church, which , they lay, may de- pute ; and, I apprehend, no Body ever dream'J of the Churcn-reprefentativc's deputing the People to chufe for them. And whereas he fiys, J difapprove of a ^Deputation in the Affai I own, I difallow of any fuch Deputation, as gives a Liberty to any Seflion, Presbytery, Per- n or Perfons under Heaven to chufe whom they Yj ill ( u* ) will for them ; yet I do not refufe but a particu? lar Church or Congregation may depute fuch or fuch a Number of Heritors, Elders, Deacons, or any of their Number, or of the Presbytery either, upon Suppofition they fliall ele6fc the Per- fon for Paftor they have fixed upon,ftill keeping a Negative to themfelves,in cafe they give their Suf- frages for another than the Perfon nominated and defigned by them; and I take that to be all the Deputation which is meant in that ConfeJJion. The Enquirer comes to the Churches of Saxo- ny, and fays, The Word Church in their Conjef- fion cannot be meant of the People ; (where it is laid, He much approves of Ele&ion hy the Church. He, that is Chrifi, approves ; for of him there that Confeffi&n is fpeaking. In Jus fopuli I faid, It is evident to any thar confiders the Senfe in which the Word Church is taken in that Article, they mean not the Church-repre- fentative, whether Elders or Paflors, but that Church of which Chrift's Ambafladors are Mini- fters, Paftors or Shepherds, without diftinguifhing one Part of the Church from another. The En- quirer attempts not to take oft the Force of thij, no ; but,fays he, c Chemnitius, whom I had cited c as being for the People's Right,gives the Nomi- c nation to the Magistrate, and Eledion to the * Church-reprefentative, and only Approbation c to the People/ And he fends me to the Right cf Patronages reconfiderei for Proof of this, that Chemnitius was of this Mind. Now, for Reply, Tho 5 Chemnitius had been of this Mind, it had not proven his Point ; Chemnitius was rot the Churches of Saxony, his Mind might differ from theirs. But, if the Enquirer pleafe to o confult Voetius (a), hecmay fee his Reconfi- yerer is not to be trufted in all his Citations ; for * hefe Words which are cited by him from Voe- \iiis> are not the Words of the Learned Chetnni- is % but the Words of one Havmanmts : I hall not fay he defigned to impofe upon his leader by this Citation ; but I'm fuie the Re- :onfiderer, if not our Enquirer alfo, hath either lefign'd this, or been very inconfiderate. SECT. III. In which the Enquirer's Scn f iments as to tk* Churches oj Bohemia, France, England an Ireland are confidered. VyHEN the Enqui rer comes to confider the ** Bohemian ConfeJJicn, he is greatly ftum- lled at my Tranflation of the Article of their Confefficn ; and here he makes a mighty Cla- mour, as if I had afted fuch a villanous Part as is not to be met with among Proteftanta, and but rarely among the worfl of Romanifls. Now here, i. I will give you the Enquirer's Weeds upon this Point. 2. Reply to his Charge. Now, his Words are, c 'I am again {tumbled, fays he, c at the unfair Tranflation of the Article of the € Bohemian Confejfwn, Jus Populi/. tf;. Utque c ad hoc tmmtts vocentur ex plebe pia ££ fidcli iri pleni fide $5 inculpati ; which he tran- € flates thus, And that they ftould be called to c the Exercife of that Office by the Teople tb< ( are godly and believing, being Men full of c Faith, and blamchfs : Such a bare-fae'd Per- Y ; ver- '••« (a^ Tart 2. Chap. 9. p. mibi, 6 58. ( 4 V * verfion of an Author we will fcarce meet with. c Could the Author of the Index expurgatori- € tis do any worfe Thing than this ? Ex plebe * pia$$ fideli, \$ to be rendred thus, Out of the € People that are godly and faithful, and not by € the People. Thus he would again impofe on c his Englifh Reader, and make him believe, c that the Bohemian Conjeffion aflerted in that € Article j in exprefs Terms, 'That the godly and € faithful People are the EleBors. Muft not c this Author be exceedingly put to it, and have c a great Mind to deceive Perfons into his Opi- r nion ? I fay, Deceive, for fuch a Method 5 can never convince. c tPttdet hrofefling to deal fairly and confcientioufly, tel- ing how he prayed to this Purpofe, and what not. And, whereas he lays, Such a bare-faced ^Perverjion of an Author and not by ; yet there was no Deceit in the Cafe, nor any Milreprefentation of the Mind of the Bohemians, becaufe it was their Principle, That the People have Right to elect their Pallors ; and this was proved there by undoubted Au- thority. And further, as is well known, the Bohemian Churches, Waldenfes and Albigenfes are the fame in Principle ; fo the learned 5V£76?'sTefti- mony is further confirming upon this Head, who! < 347 ) who fays, Such ds haw fiudied Antiquity with Care ypret end this was the Practice for the People to chufe their Pafiors till the i$th Ce7itury ; At which "limey fays he, the Council of Avignon difcharged the Laicks to meddle in the Choice of any Church-Guide : And, adds he, it is thought this "Decree was made in View of the Albigenfes, who followed without Doubt the ancient Cujiom. Next the Enquirer comes to confider the Sen- timents of the Church of France, and owns, That by their Difcipline they allow a Nega- tive to the "People. By this the "Presbyteri- an Church of France was fo weak and foolifti, as to make a Canon, which, according to him, doth ruinc Presbytery for ever* and makes the 'popular "Tribunal the dernier Refort, feeing he owns they give the People a Negative: And no great Wonder he owned this ; for, by that Di- scipline of the Church of France, Tho y a Per- fon had been libelled by a People, and found never fo innocent, yet he was not to be fettled a- mong that "People agamfl their Will, nor to the Difcontent of the ^reatefi Part of them. That Regulation was not made for any limited Time, nor was it a temporary Regulation, as the Enquirer fays, tho J that Church might be fome- thing in the dark afterwards, queftioning, whe- ther the People ought not to have the decifive Voice, and not a bare Negative} He fays, c The Author of Jus populi has c great Light in this Matter, and is now no f doubt confulted as the greateft Oracle in our € Church/ The Author is far from pretending any Thing like e;reat Light on that or any other controverted Subject, and is ready to learn of fundry < 54§ ) fundry on his Side ot the Queftion, who have written upon this Head, and of many others who, fhould they write their Gleanings, would be better than his Vintage. And yet, when fuch a weak one hath faid fo much, that this learned Champion our Enquirer cannot an Aver, it fays our Caufe is good, however weakly it may be managed. As to the Key he gave concerning Morney laord de 'PleJJis, Chamier, Cafellus and Amy- raid, it will not do the Turn, and he might kept it to himfelf. He comes next to confider the Churches of England and Ireland, who, he lays {a), are known to be of the fame Judgment. And, as to the Church of England, tho' he notices the Au- thor of Jusfopuli faid, It was hard to tell what is her Judgment upon this Head ; and faid, He was wifer than he who could tell : Yet, fays the Enquirer, I do not think this fo difficult a Task ; , and then he gives the 2?d of the 39 Articles which I had cited in Jusfopili, where it is faid, c It is nor lawful for any Man to take upon him c the Office of publjck Preaching, or Miniftring c the Sacraments in a Congregation, before he € be lawfully called and fent to execute the fame ; c and thofe we ought to judge lawfully called € and fent, which be chofen and called to this c Work, by Men who have publick Authority c given unto them in the Congregation to call € and fend Minifters into the Lord's Vineyard/ Now, upon this the Enquirer cites Bifhop Beve- ridge in hs Expofition of this Article, fhowing, That Wp. n6. ( 349 ) , That, by fuch as have pubhck Autnority.in the Congregation, fuch as fucceeded the Apoftles in the Miniftry are meant ; affirming, The Word Congregation, in that Article, is all one with the Word Church. But, let all this be granted, ftill it is as da. k as ever, who are to be the Callets to particular Congregations, tho* the licenfing of fuch as are to preach in the Congregation or Church be given to Miniilers : For, if the Word Congregation in that Article be meant of the Church in general, then that Article gives no Direction as to the Perfons having Right to call and eledt for particular Congregations ; and fo our Enquirer, for as eafy as he thinks it is to tell this, is as ignorant ai> his Neighbours. And, however eafy a Man of his vaft Reach thinks it is to take up the Meaning of that Article, yet that great Man Dr. Rynolds, at the Haraptoim- Coitrt Conference in King James VTs Time, he xxepted againlt that Article as not fo clear ,* and why thele Words, /;; the Congregation, are ad- Jed in the firft or fecond Claufe of that Article, may be a Queftion. The Enquirer fays, The Practice of the Churches of England is pretty well known ; no Joubt it is, and the Author of Jus popnli was in no Strait as to this ; only, when he Ipeaks of a ^onge d y Elire, if he had pleafed, he might told lis Reader, that this was nothing but a fham E- eftion, a mock Eleftion, a robbing both Pref- )ytery and People of their Right; feeing the Man nuft be chofen and fettled, who is named in the Conge d y Elire. Mr. Anderfon fays, fins is a meer Sham, and it is a If Inder how the Clergy m the Chapter have Freedom to pray for the *Di~ region ( Vo ) reffion of the Holy Ghoft, to chufe a fit ^erfott for that Vacancy y when the Man is oho fen before- hand, and they have no Liberty to eleB ano- ther. The Enquirer hath told us what is the Praftice of the Church of England ', which, as he fays, was well known before ; but he hath neither told us from the 39 Articles, nor any of their Canons, what is the Judgment of that Church as to this Right of Calling to particular Congregations : So, for all his fair Promifes, as was juft now faid, we are as much in the Dark anent this as ever, SECTION IV. In which fome general "Things are noticed, and the Enquirer's Authorities are confidered. C\ U R Author (a) adduceth Marejius, fay- *"* mgyThe (Protejiant Churches are not agreed about this Right of Elefiion ; but, becaufe ah ?nofi every Chtirch has an Order peculiar to it- felf concerning the electing and calling of her ^afiorsy it would be rafh to frefcribe any fpe- cial Rule here, which all are bound to follow. Now* our ingenuous Enquirer, whole tender Confcience was fcandalized, and very much of- fended, for my omitting to render Cum Tresby- teris into Englijh ; and cried out, Such a perver- fion was rarely to be met with, asking, If an Index Efurgatorhis could do worfe than I had done, in rendering Ex, £y, in the Bohemian Conjejfwn ; here he hath been far more guilty : For, 1. He affirms, Marefius reprefents, The c I fhall now^conclude this Per- formance, by animadverting a little upon the Words of Jtis fopuli. What Profeflor is he, that ever wrote, and hath not owned, that the People have a Right from Chrift the King of Zio?i to chufe their Paflors ¥ In anfwer to this, fays the Enquirer, / have named two al- ready ; Marefius ProfefTor at Groningen citing his Words. But concerning his Citation from Ma* (a; p. u8, ( 3P ) Mare/iuSy as our Author had it before (a ) ; fo I anfwered to it already upon the fecond Chapter. And the laft Part of the Citation is a plain con- demning of his Scheme, by u hich he robs the People of all Right, allowing them no more Pri- vilege than if they were Heathens living at the greateft Diftance. 2. Having cited Marefius as being of his Mind, in the next Place he quotes Vitringa, and this is the third Time he hath cited the fame Words from him ; only, he alters his Verfion as he thinks meet : What formerly he rendered, It is not fo plain, here he renders, It doth not fo much a$ appear. Hand iteft. 24. p^ M9- of Ambrofe, Cyprian, &,. There Bucan proves from Scripture, it is the People's Right to eled by Suffrages, tho', ad evitandam confnfionem> he was for giving the Ele&ion to the Presbytery, but not as their Right originally from thrift, giving the People a Negative. 6. Cluto is adduced, laying, c The Right of c Calling belongs only to God and Chrifi ; neK 1 ther is it repugnant to this, that in thefe laft c Times of the New Teltament, when the Go- c vernment of the Church is eftablilhed,theCal- c ling of the Minifters of the Church ihould be € by the Presbytery/ For Reply, Tho* Cluto feems to be of 7//r- retims and c Pi5let y s Mind, who allow of the Presbytery's exercifing that Right which the People have from Chrifi originally to chufe their Pallors, while the People have a Negative upon them ; yet, as they, fo he is clear and po- fitive for this, That no Presbytery upon Earth have Power to thrufl in a Pallor upon a People without their Suffrages, or againft their Will. And this is evident from what Cluto fays in the 3 3d Thefts of that fame Chapter which the Enquirer cites, where it is faid, Toflquam vero eleftio, &c € But after the Eleftion arid Call is inftitute ac- c cording to thefe Laws, before proceeding to the c Ordination of the Perfon chofen and called. € Further alio, The AfTent of the People is to be c gathered by Suffrages, left he Ihould prepare € himfelf for the Exercile of his Office, the * People being unwilling. For indeed it would € beabfurd, feeing a faithful People unite is the c Church of God, and therefore the Spoule of c Chxiit, and his Wife ; and the Body is the * Mothci Mother of evet Member, as we have proven "from Scripture : But all the Guides are het Servants and Sons, as is fhown, Servants to the Spoufe and Wife, ££?c. of Chrift, and con- fequently to their Lady, and foto have Chil- dren obtruded upon an unwilling Motherland her Aflent not asked, whether fhe would have them for her Service/ This he hints would be moft abfurd Thing. And there he adds* Wherefore the Apoftles themfelves appointed none for the Miniftry of the Church, unlefs the People declared their Aflent by open Suf- frages, or ftretching out of their Hands. And then, for Proof of this, he cites Atis 6- $. 14* ' 25. 15. 22. 1 Cor. 16. 3. z Cor. 8. 19* Now, let the World judge, if our Author be not very ingenuous, a candid Reprefenter, and fair Dealer ; And fee if he had not Ground to cite Cluto, as being a°ainft the People's Right in the Affair. And further, I might fay here 3 out Author hath been guilty of what he calls a bare- faced Perverfion, that fo he may impofe upon his E?2gltjh Reader, in rendring, a 'Presbyterio 'miniftrortim ecclefiee vocatio fiat, the Calli?ig of the Minifters of the Church Jbould be by the Presbytery ; whereas, the Words ought to be rendred, The Calling of Miniiters may be> ot can be , by the Presbytery. It is one Thing to fay the Presbytery may do it, and another to fay they fhould do it. 7. He fays, Zuinglim affirms, Minifters hava I this Right in common with the People. I ftiall give Zuinglim his Words, and leave the Reader to judge, if rhey make for our Enquirer's Schemf* He fays, c It leems there is nothing fo agreeable i ( "35* ) c to the Ordinance of God, and to the old la c ftitution, as that all the whole Church of thi € Faithful among a People, together with certah c godly and learned Bifhops, and other faithfu c Men having Skill in Things, Ihould chufe c Paftor. — Let therefore thefe proud Bi € Ihops and foolifh Abbots go (hake their Ears € for it is convenient, that the Ri^ht c € Eleftion fhould be in the Power of theChurci € of the Faithful, and inftrufted by the Counci c of learned Men- 5 What can be plainer thai this, that that eminent Servant of Chrilt was fo; the Right of Election belonging to the Peopl< that are faithful, together with fome godly anc learned Bifhops to counfel and inftruft them,mo- derating in the Election ? or, let them have i Suffrage with the Faithful, the whole Faithful, all the whole Faithful, and it makes no vaft Al« teration. 3. He cites Tolanns again ; and all that Tola- nus (ays, even according to the Enquirer, is., c That to the Election of Paftors, there is requi- € red the free honelt Confent and Suffrage of the c whole Church concerned, L e. of Presbyters € and Flock/ There he requires the Suffrage ol the whole Church : And, for any Thing in the Citation, the Presbyters may be the Presbyters or Elders of the Parifh. 9. He cites the TrofeJJors of Lyden, as being for the Presbytery's having a Right to eled: with the People. Their Words are (a), Jm paftores tligendi eft penes ecclefiam, ac proinde plebi com- mune cum auaito' nomine paflor is eligendi, mm ftrffragium Tresbyterii feffragio confen- meum tnanibm fublatis indicabat, A£ts 14. 25. xcording to that, the common People, as well others, are to have their Suffrages in the Af- lr. J 10. He adduceth Walleus one of thefe Lyden Irofeflors in particular, as being for the Presby- Iry's having this Right of Election in common nth the People, and that the Eleftion belongs p them chiefly. But, as I noticed before, the nquirer tells not on what Account. Walletts ys, The Eledion in a great Part belongs to the resbytery, which is, becaufe it is to the Presby- ry that che Examination of Do&rine and Man- ers and Ordination doth belong. 1 As to what he fays (a) of his Minifters of Fife, nd .Sentiments of the Compofers oi the firft took of Discipline, hath been anfwered already 1 the ;d Chap. And whereas again, for the lird Time, I think he comes over chis, c That the People cannot have a Negative in the Ele- ction, for this overthrows the Presbyterian Conftitution ; in regard, that, if the Presbytery fhould elecft Clave err ante, the People for Re- drefs can appeal to the provincial Synod, and from that again to the National Aflembly, the dernier Refort. As for the Phrafe, Dernier leforr, this being the third or fourth Time he fe* thefe Words(^J, fome would think this *Pe- antry. And as to the Presbytery's being ruined y giving the People a Negative, this hath been ifwcred already. Z 3 But -»_•«- (a) p. 119. (b) p. »ii 8tf, 123. > ( 11* ) I But our Enquirer hath adduced a new Argu* ment againft the Poffibility of the People's ha- ving a Negative over the Presbytety ; and no doubt it is a mighty ftrong one, feeing it is his laft Eftort : Well* what is it ? even this, That the People >not being Members of the Presbytery K s their Renitency or Qppofition cannot derogate frow or nullify the Presbytery's Tower. But this fays, the Ad of the General Affenibly laft: Year, giving the Power of calling to Heritors, and Elders, can be no Embargo upon Presbyte- ries but they may fettle Minifters, whether fo much as one Heritor or Elder or fingle Perfon inthe Parifh fhould be for the Candidate or not ; for pone of thofe, if it be not one of the Elders^ are Members of the Presbytery : This is, as he lays, a Swatch of his ftrong Reafoning. It is aj little ftrange of a Member of the laft Aflembly^i th^t he did not urge this Argument for prevent ting Debate, and tell the Aflembly, They might be eafy to whom they gave the Suffrage in E4 leftion, for none of them could have a Nega- tive oyer the Persbytery ; or he might have advifed to make an A&3 that every Heritor and Elder Ihould be Members of the Presbytery : Or^ if he was not a Member, he might have infor- med fome of the Members of this Argument, that they might urge it ; or at leaf!:, he might have directed a Letter to the Moderator to this furpofe to be communicated. He fays, If the People think them/elves inya- fed by the Presbytery, they may appeal to a higher Court. But he tells not what they fhall gain thereby ; the Settlement being once made, {ho 1 deeded to b§ ckve errmtt* it niuft be con- 1 inued; witnefs the Settlement of fundry Parw hes in Scot/and at this Day, with the Manner of which Settlements the Aflembly teiiined their Diflatis action, and yet they continue. And; in Conclufion to this Performance, he fays (a )> * Thus I have fufficiently fcattered and f dilpelJed the Ootid of Witnejfe$> loudly pre- ( tended to be for the People's Right ; but hu • r man Authority in this Matter is of fmall Con- f fideration with me, when I can find nothing r in the holy Scriptures eftablifhing this alledged I f Divine Right of the People/ Now, for Re- l ply to this, i. Tho' I own human Authority is of fmall Weight, when there is no Scripture for our Principle ; yet, could our Enquirer found clear Authorities for them, then I doubt not he had made no fmall Matter of it ; and when we have plain Scripture for our Principle, Authorities may have their own Weight, as was faid al- ready. z. I remark, That in all his Book he hath not adducedione fingle Teftimony, denying it is ti People's Right to eleft their Paftors, nor affirm- ing,this is only the Presbytery'sRight. Tho' fome eminent Divines have been of Opinion,the Cler- gy have a Suffrage with the People ; and fome are for allowing the Presberery to exercife the People's Right, elefting for them,the People ha- ving a Negative over them ; yet thefe Divines, as Tiirretme> and Viffet alfo,whom it is a Won- der our Enquirer hath not cited, they give t! Ele&ion to the Presbuery, not as their Right Z 4 from -•-•>• (a) p. 121. ( & ) , 1 ftom Chrift, but only as from the People, pro- | ving at great Length, and to good Purpofe, as -was noticed before, that it is tbe People's Right from our Lord to eledt their Pallors. Tho' he fays (a), He thinks he hath Sufficiently fcattered and difpelled the Cloud of Witnejfes loudly pretended to be for the Peoples Right \ yet I know not how he could affirm this, when he hath not faid fo much as one Word in Anfwer to what is cited in Jul popult from Calderwood, Rutherfurd, jDurharn, Wood, fPark, Rule, Jamefon, Lauder, Halyburton, nor to the Citations from thefe Englifh Authors, the LondonMiniJiers, nor to the Authors of Sme- flymmius; nor to Bowls, Hudfon, Manton> Dr. (Pearfon ; nor to thefe Trip Authors, Mr. Soyfe, and the Author of the Modefi Apology ; nor to the Citations from thefe eminent foreign Divines, Voetius, fDaneus, Sullinger, Martyr ', Mufculus, Calvin, Seza, Zanchy, Junius, the Centuriators of Magdeburgh, Luther, Gerard, and others. If he thought he had fcattered that Cloud of Witnejfes, I am fure no thinking im- partial Reader can think fo ; and his Aflertion here is fuch an impofing upon People, that I wonder he had the Freedom to affirm it. In the Beginning of this Sedion, he propofed to mak£ Enquiry into the Sentiments, not only of the foreign Churches, but alio of foreign Di- vines ; but it feems his Memory failed him, or rather he was convinced it was better to pafs them in deep Silence, thinking his bare Promife might fatisfy. And, inftead of all the Clouds being (a) p. 121, I pmwi ■ ' n ' ■ ' »« ( 1*1 ) ; being (battered, if I be not far mifhken, there is not ib much as one Vapour ot the Cloud difc pelled ; for all the Fathers, Councils, and c Pro- tejlant Divines mentioned in Jus populi frand in full Force for all he hath laid ; And of all the Authorities he cited there is not fo much as one of them againft the People's Right in the Affair. Tho' fome of them are for the Presbytery's ele- cting for the Peopie, while they grant the People have a Negative ; none of them denies this is the People's Right originally and radically to chufe their Pallors : None of them ever faid the People have nothing to do in the Affair, if it be not barely to give their Confent, which if they refufe, they are not to be regarded, unlefs they libel the Candidate,and prove him guilty of Vice or Error. It is true, his eight Fife Mini- fters, whom he cites again, again and again, tho* no Body can tell who they arc give the Eleftion of Paltors to the Presbytery : And, u- pon the Presbytery's Choice, they fay, the People ought to give their Confent ; and Co 3 with our Enquirer, they rob Nobility, Gentry, Magiltrates, Town-council and Elders of all Right in the Ele&ion, as well as the People : Yet they do.no t fay Paftors are to be placed whe- ther theFlock confent or not; for all they fay,The Flock may have a Negative over the Presbytery. And, if I want not all Manner of Judgment of all the Writers ever I read on this Subjed, there is not fo much as One of what feems almoft to be of our Enquirer's Principle, namely, That it is the Presbytery's Right from Chrilt to chufc the Pallors,* and that they may fettle Minitterj whether the People confent or not, unlefs they lhall ( 3 62 ) fhall libel the Candidate, and prove him guilty of Vice or Error, I am fure he hath not cited fo much as one of them. I am apt ro think it ofay be fo with Relation to his Citations in his laft Performance, intituled, A Continuation of the Modefi and Humble Enquiry x &c. And, from the overly Look I have caken thereof, I am fure it is fo with fundry of them. And, as for thofe prefixed in the Title Page thereof, they militate not the leaft againft us; for no doubt Minifters have a Right to fend unto, and fettle Minifters over, a refraftory People, who will not chufe a faithful, orthodox Paftor, as is intimated in his Citation from the Author of the Apofiolical Ca* wns. And no doubt the Election of a Paltor is not to be left to the Multitude in general, for it belongs only to fuch as fear the Lord, and are obedient to his Law ; and this is what is intima- ted by his Citation from Calvin. And, for his Citation from our Second Book of 'Difcipline, we ^ant it is the Presbytery's Right to ele£t fuch as are to bear Ecclefiaflical Charges in the Church, licenfing them to preach the glorious Golpel, tho' ftill it is the People's Right to eleft fuch as j are to labour among them in Ministerial Work. And that Book exprefly requires, That none be intruded upon any Congregation, either by the 'Prince , or any inferior 'Per/on, without lawful Eleffion, and the AJfent of the People over whom the Perfon is placed^ as the Pratlice of the Apoflles and primitive Kirk, and good Or- der craves, Chap. 12. As for this Boaft of having fufficiently fcattered the Cloud of Witnefles ad- duced for Confirmation of the People's Right, if ( 3*3 ) if he really think fo, let him enjoy the p'eafant Dream of his heroick Atchievements. C*H A P. VIII. In which a few "Things in the 'Enqui- rers Appendix are confidered. A S to the Enquirer's Appendix s tho 3 I 7\ had prepared a particular Anlwer to jC 1l a " ^ e fays therein ;yet,feeing this/ 7 //;- dication hath fvvell d far beyond my Expe#ation, and there being nothing of Moment in his Appendix, I fhall not now infift fo par- ticularly in anfwering thereto : Only, whereas in Jui populi I had barely faid, Some Divines, in pleading the People's Right, argue from the Gift of the Keys, which is given to the Church, Mat. 16.19. Mat. 18. 17, 18. being of Opinion that Gift takes in the Power of Ele- ction on the Part of the People, as well as the Pewer of Ordination on the Part of Miniftefs. Upon this the Enquirer fays, He dotibts not to convince we it had been more for my Credit and' Reputation not to have mentioned it. Now, the Reader would know, I did no more but mention this, as an Argument from which fome learned Divines do argue, particularizing c Tttr- retine and others as pleading from this Topick, where I gave not the leaft Hint of its being a ftrong or weak Argument. But, fays the Enquirer (a), "The Ajfemblf gives (qj p. 12:. 1* ( 3*4 ) gives the Keys to the Church -Officers ; but this . Argument gives them to the People as well as Church-Officers. And, feeing it is an Article of our fVeftmi?2jier Confeffion, That the Keys are given to the Officers of the Church ; He asks, ' If I'm fo fond of popular Ele&ions, as to part c with an Article of our ConfeJJion for them ? or, € will I adhere to the Article, and complement € away the Proofs For Reply, i- Speak a- gainft giving away fuch Rights or Truths who will, it ill becomes our Enquirer to fpeak upon this Subject ; feeing he was allured from Scripture and Antiquity, that the Right of Calling belongs to the Presbytery ; andyet it feems,/. 126. not- withftanding of this* he can giveaway or part with that, by fubmitting to a Directory, that leaves the Presbytery no Power more than the People in the Eledion. But further, 2. In an- fwer to this, and all he fays in the firfl three Pages of his Appendix, I might tell him, I am not concerned to anfwer it, for it was none of my Arguments. Bur, 3. Many of our moft learnd Divines, who were no Independents, befides Turretine, argue from this very Topick,as Pro-' feflor ». (c) Art. 14- p. }96. ( 3*6 ) c preponderate that of Jmefius and Owen in c our Church/ But, for all this, what if Pro* feffbr Rutherfurd fay fully as much and far more than the Author of Jus fopilli ? and as much as thefe Divines that have been cited ? for, in his Survey of Church-'Difcipline (a), he afferts, € The Power of the Keys belongs to the Church c of Believers, as the firft vital Subject ; to the * Rulers and Guides, as the formal Subject: c The Keys are in the whole/ Again, in his peaceable Qlea for Presbytery (b), he fays, * There is a Power popular of the Keys which r belongs to all, and a Power authoratative which c belongs to the Guides only. There is a c Power popular about the Keys given to the * vifible Profeflbrs to make Choice of their own € Office-bearers : T his Power of chufing f about the Keys is common to all Believers who * are not to take Paftors as the Market goeth/ € upon a blind Hearfay/ But^hath Rutherfurd altered his Sentiments in his Tiue Right of Presbyteries ? Not in the leaft : And when he lays, c None ever dreamed * while of late that in this Text, Matth. 16. c the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven are given r to all believers, but only to the Stewards of € the Houfe f I humbly think, he means no . more, but that they are not given to Believers in general, fo as to exclude the Paftors : And when he fays,, € They are given to the Stewards € of the Houfe/ he only means, they are given to them as the formal Subjedt ; for, in that very Place, viz. in the very preceeding Leaf to the € Words (a) $. *$6> 29^ (bj f. 2, h 4; h *• f J 67 ^ Words cited by our Enquirer, Rutherfurd \zys t € But the Text (to wit, Matth. 16.) evinceth, c that tbefe Keys are given to Weter, as repre- € fencing the Church-Guides especially, tho' c not excluding Believers : And more to this Purpofe may be Teen in that Place {a). So the Author of jus foptili needs not be afhamed of any Thing he faid : Nor was the Argument far illiterate People, who may take "Things upon itrufjt ; nor needed any Caveat be given. And let our Enquirer confider how the Argument is managed by the Learned, and he will lee more Strength in it than is eafy to anfwer, and that a Man may plead from it, and yet be no Inde- pendent. He exclaims againft me for referring the Electi- on of Minitteis to the Key of Difcipline ; but hath he reterred it to any other Head himfelf ? No ; And it is furely more properly referred to that than to the Doctrine, Worfhip or Go- vernment of God's Houfe ; and if he refer it to none of them, then he muft fay, Doftrine, Dif- cipline, Worlhip and Government is not a fuffi- cient Enumeration for as ancient as it is : But here ouf Enquirer fays, c If this of Election be c a considerable Part of the Difcipline of the c Church, then no found Presbyterian ever put c any confiderable Part of the Difcipline or Go- € vernment of the Church in the Hand of the c People ' Anftv. I call this a confiderable Pare of the Difcipline, as it is a Matter of Weight and Confideration, and as Divines, when trea- ting of the Dilcipliue of the Church, give a #■■■■■ ■ ■ ■«■— — w>— — w~mmmmr+^*+ * um m (a)/. 7,8, 9 , 10, ii.. < ?<58 ) a confiderable Room to this Subjefl: ,* as in the firft Book of "Difcipline y where it is laid, c And c becaufe the Election of Minifters in this curfed c Papiftry hath altogether been abufed, we think c expedient to intreat it more largely/ And in the By, I lay, it was never worfe abufed by or of libelling the Candidate called by the Presbytery : And in the fecond Book of 'Dif- cipline; the whole third Chapter is fpent in ihowing, How the zieries, I told it was on that very Account, I called this a confiderable Part of Difcipline. And do not all who treat of the Election of Paltors, refer it to the Difci- pline of the Church ? Let the Enquirer look back to the \\6 Page of his own Book, and there he will fee the Church of France defiring the Paflors of Geneva to write them their Judg- ment about fome principal Points of Church* Difcipline, as about the Election of Church- Officers, &c. And, as ouvfirjl and fecond Books of Difci- pline refer this to the Difcipline of the Church, the Word being taken in a larger Senfe, as in the ^ueries ; fo the Commiffion^ in their feafonable r arning and Exhortation to fome who fepara- ted from the Communion of this Church in 1698, take it in the fame Senfe. As the Enquirer began his Book with an un- fair Tr inflation in the Title Page, and as in the Middle Leaf of his Book he charges the Church of Scotland in her pureft Times with makin ■ making a Canon, which he lays, is direRly oppofite to that of the dpoflles •> lo here he ends his Performance vuth Sophiflry, as to the Word ^Difapline : What I have faiu in this Vindica- tion, the Enquirer made neceflary by oppofing the Protectant Doctrine of the People's Right, as his own Mare/ius calls it ; and charging fuch as plead this Right with being more zealous for it than were our Anceitors. But, if there be 3 polltion in Jm popttli^or this Vindication, anent ihe calling of Paftors, but what w as maintained )y eminent Presbyterians, as Cartvcright, CaU hrwood, Rutherfurd, Rule, Sec. then let the Enquirer reprefent me as one lingular in my Sen- aments upon this Head. I have traced our Author a capite ad calcem y nd to the belt of my Knowledge I have pailed •y nothing in his Book having the leaft Appea- ance of Argument. I may have fallen into bme Mifiakes, yet, if I miftake not, I have erverted no Man's Words, nor cited any Au- lor falfly. And, for the Enquirer, be who he ill, tho* I fuppofe lie's the firfi: profefled Pre«- yterian that ever took the Pen in luch a Caufe; et, the worft I wifli him, is, that, feeing his rror, he may forlake the Camp of Romanijis this Point j and fo I bid him heartily farewel. A z A V 37° ) A few Remarks upon the Ttthlick Teftimony made more puhlick> be- fides thofe already noticed in this Vindication. I, f JE fays, f ; 14, 15. The People, and the Sixty honeft Minifters in their Reprelentation, and the Au- thor of the Enquiry into the Me* thod of fettling 'Parijbes, they differ from one another as to the Right of calling; while the firft in their Reprefentation fay, 'This is only the Right of the Chrifiian People ; The Minifters again in their Reprefentation iay, It is the Right of the Elders and Teofle : And the Author of the Enquiry into the Method of fettling Tari- fbes y Sec. fays, the Elettion of a Mini fter con- flfis in the Confent of the Congregation and Pres- bytery. Now, for my Part, 1 fee no Ground for alledging any fuck Difference among them ; for fuch as plead this is the People's Right, un- 4 der the Word Teople thev include the Elders as 1 ■well as Heritors and Magiftrates in Burghs. And if any of the Minifters figning the Reprefentation have different Sentiments as to the Exercifeof the People's Right in the Election of Paflors, Fm fure nothing like that appears from their Repre- fentation, nor was there the leaft Appearance of Difference among them as to this at figning there- of. And they who appear for the People's Right in the Affair, they own the Presbytery's Confent is needful, fo as the Perfon chofen by the People cannot be their Paftor, unlefc upon Trial the Pref Presbytery find him meet for the Minifleriai iWork among them: So our modeft Enquirer had no Ground to charge the Minifters with In- conllitency, nor the Signers of the Reprefenta- tions, and the Author of the above Enquiry as diriering from one another, for all the three con- tend for thisffiat it is the People's Right to eleft \tfreir Pajiors. 2. He advifeth the People to meet again, and take along with them the Judgment of the Sixty Minifters, forne of which Fraternity compofect their Reprefentation, that they may help them in refolving that fhort Queftion, Who are thofe Chriftians that have a 'Jjivine Right to vote in the Election of Mmifters ? For Anfwer, The Author of Jus populi told him. He thinks fuch as had a Hand in the Nomination of Matthias y and in the Election of the Deacons, were fuch as joined in full Communion with the Apoftles : And, feeing there is no Diitincftion of Perfons made there, he thinks this is the Right of every Man that is meet for a Communion- Table, and to this I luppofe the People fubferi- bing the Reprefentation, and molt, if not all, that plead the People's Right, do agree. And if iome fhould be for lodging the Right in Heads of Families, as others may be for giving the deci- five Voice to the particular EUerfhip, while they allow the People a Negative over thofe, the Ditferencc is not fo great : And I know of none among us but think this is the People's Right originally. And, tho' I never heard a Scripture cited to prove that Heritors, Magi- Urates, or Elders have Right in this Cale beyond pthers ; yet, I fuppofe, the People, and fuch as A a 2 plead ( 37» ) plead their Right in the Affair, as Matters now itand, had not appeared againft the Over- ture 1 731, if it had but Riven the People a Ne- gative, without obliging them to libel the Candi- date ; or, if our AfTembly had but declared they intended fo much by the Expreffion of being ap- proven or difapproven by the Congregation. And Ihould there be fome Difficulties attending this, of admitting every Man that is fit for a Com- munion-table, our Enquirer may more eafily let them pafs, that once, and, I think, again he tells us, He defpairs of ever feeing fuch Regu- lations made in the Affair > as (ballfolve all 'Dif- ficulties. 3. When anfwering our Argument from the Eieftion of the Deacons, AEls^6. he fays, Thus I have mentioned a National Synod of the Church of Scotland, the Gallican Synods, and the Provincial Synod of London, all of them Presbyterians, contradi&ing your Argument. 1. As for the Church of Scotland, I refufe ever ihe declared againlt this Argument. And, as was hinted above, I am perfwaded in the Book of Common Order, this Argument is pleaded by her. 2. I refufe alio, that he hath cited anyG^/- lican Synod againft this Argument. And, 3. As for the London Minifters, I have fhown already, and given Inftances of tfyeir arguing from this very Topick, in pleading for the People's Right to eleft their Paftors ; and^ if they contradicted themfelves in the Heat of Difpute againft the Independents, I cannot help it. 4. Tage ji. he conqludes his Pamphlet, with acquainting the Sixteen hundred Chriftian People of their being in the Company of Socini- ans, { 37? ) ans, harmonizing with them ; and alfo with the Free-thinkers and modern Deifts, T'mi.u and his Club arguing as thofe Gentlemen do : But praJS what of all that? fo far as they have Truth and Right on their Side, we are to f.armonize with them. But, may he not be told, how he harmonizes with high Flyers, the gr-at Enemies of Presbyterian Government ? yea, with the Grand Antichrifl and his Abbettors, in pleading againft the People's Right in the Affair? And the People may humbly advife a modeft and humble Enquirer to forfake the Camp of fuch as have always been the open avowed Enemies of Presbytery and the Proteftant Religion. ■ ADDENDA. ' PHE Enquirer fpeaking of Seza in his ?P«- * blick 'Tejtimo?iy i &c. p. 43. calls him a Mi~ racle of Learning, and an e™**euc Refor??2er ,to whofe Sentiments all the Reformed Churches paid the greateft < Defere?icts. And therefore I hope he will have a peculiar Regard to his Notes upon Afts 1. 23. where he fays, Jofeph and Matthias were appointed openly and by the Voices of all the whole Company. And upon A6h 6. 2. he fays. The Apoltles do not chufe fo much as the Deacons without the Confent of the Church. A. pon Acts 14. 23. he fays, The K oilles committed the Churches which they had planted to proper and peculiar Paftors, which they made not rafhly. Neither did they thruft them upon Churches through Bribery or lord- A a j ly ( 374 ) ly Superiority, but chufe and palced them by the Voice of the Congregation. Some (f the Enquirerj Principles , i. LJ I S Principle is, That the People's Oppo- fition is no more to be regarded than the Opposition of a Madman to a Phyfician; if they fcruple to call a Perfon for accepting a Prefenta- tion, after once they were for him, and he makes no Exception, tho' his Acceptance had been in never fuch abfolute Terms, f. 30. %. That Children not forisfamiliate and Servants, are to receive their lawful Commands from their Fathers and Matters, not only in Mat- ters civil, but in religious Things. And fo, in cafe he think it lawful to hear Epifcopal Mini- Iters, then it is the Duty of Children and Ser- vants to leave Presbyterian Minifters, and hear them upon the Commands of their Fathers or Matters, ete. or, if he think it lawful to pray by a fet Form, then Children snd Servants muft Iceep by that, if commanded by Parents or Ma- ilers, p. 37. 9. 5 That Deacons are not Office-bearers in Chrift s Houfe of Divine Inflitution, p. do, 61. 4. His Principle is, That Heathens and Infi- dels have as much Right to eled Paftors to Chri- flian Congregations, as the Chriliian People themfelves, for all the Right he gives the People is a* bare Liberty to give their Teftimony or Con- fent, and this he owns Infidels and Heathens which are without the Church have Right to give, f. zo> 84. 5. That V 37* ) <;. That People are never to withdraw from their Paftors, till the Church-reprefentative, by whole publick Judgment they are to be directed, declare they may feparate, unlefs the Church be univerfally corrupt, as in France ; and by this he condemns all that feparate from the Church of England, and all Presbyterians, who had not Freedom to hear in the Jate Times of Prelacy, POSTCRIPT. / Have feen a Piece publifhed laft Week, in * which the Author hath fundry Remarks by Way of Query on the Reverend Mr. Ebenezer Erf* fane his Sermon before the very Reverend Sy- nod of 'Perth and Stirling, OBober 10. 1732, and on another Sermon of his at Stirli?ig, June 4th, that fame Year : And upon my Sermon be- fore the very Reverend Synod of File. Septem- ber 25. 1732. As huuJQp-*^ are anent the planting of va^nt Churches, fo I fuppole he may find an Anfwer to the moft of them in this Vindication : And feeing the Author hath not particularized the Expreflions in our Sermons againft which he makes Exceptions, I do not think myfelf obliged to give any Anfwer, tho* his Performance comes abroad in the Form of an Epiftle to U5. finis. 1 ( 37(5 ) By Bijhops in this Vindication, for the mofl Part MiniflerS) who arc the Overfeers of the Flock, and not tDioce/ian Bijbofi, are meant. ERRATA. PAge 22. Line 2. after fo add /» offor Cd/*/. jx 25 1 if. after />"0W add Epifcoptl Authors, as, p, 128. 1. 1. f. Scriptures, r. Arguments p. 176. 1. 20. f. Simon, r. &y Simon, p 22p. 1. 31. f tlereajter, r. *£f/V */f*r. p. 240. 1. p f j>n>ve, r. prcv*ng. p. 2. Reader, whereas p. 46. TSmc Copies after trie Word Here in the nth Line have adducing the jol lowing Words from his Due Right of Presbytia 1 be pleaied to expunge thofe, and, in- ftead of them, n.+A._/ aV f f ur j r fo r as j can gather from lis Due Right of Presbyteries, re j v *h riot maintain that the Deacon is a Church-officer : For, fays the tncjuircr, his his Words are : And, if your Copy be of them that need the former Amendment, then, inftead of the Words which " that at Enquirer s perjon, be who he will-, yet, might 1 ujehis own mode ft Phrafe, this is fuch a bare-jaced Perverfion, as liznow not where the like is to be met with. p. 353. 1, p. £ will, 1. may. p. 364. 1. 14. f. tells us % r. itfeems. \ VI J 1