k""( h ! ^ PRINCETON, N. J, "^^ \ 1 Presented by Mr. Samuel Agnew of Philadelphia, Pa. Division *!!> W^X-^ Section 1^10 1 Number J^ ;^35kL V y^^y^^L^^y^ ,U\ ^CU/e^c /j/fac.^ cri^- •vr^ j 7^- PROTESTERS VINDICATED ^ O R, A Juft and NeceiTary Defence O F Protesting againft^and V V i t h d r a w i n g from This National Church of Scot la /td; On Account of Her many Grofs and ConLinucd DEFECTIONS. More Particularly, Her Approvikg of, and Goirp into the Legal Establishme.^t of the PRE- LATICK CGNSTrXUTION of ENGLAND. The Generality of MINISTERS Swearing, in the Oath of ABJURA- TION, to Maintain ERASTIANISM; PRELACY, ^nd EtrHh Pcpijh CEREMONIES. ""l Non-turants Joining with jurants. Judicially Approving that Practice to be free of SCANDAL. •...--" . " ■ . The Church's Eftabhfhing TYRANNY in GoverH>rTcnr,. a^-ainil all who will not join in Communion with her, and Approve iitrPRACTl-C'ES Without Redrcfs of G R I E V A N C E S. WHEREIN -n^^^OhQ(no:.L Thefe and feveral other Causes of Witi^dr awing, ai^v^SjSH^J^^^" Chargeable on this C H U R C H, Demonflrated to he c8f^^Sff^^^xhc WORD of GOD and Reformed Principles of this Church, and J.ifl Grounds of VVithdi awing, and Setting up JUDICATURES Diliind from her ; and the Objcftions of Jurants and others fully Anfwercd. J E R. XV. 19. Let them rettr/n uhto thee, lut return act thou umo tf:em. JuDE Ver. ^.Earne/Il) contend fer the Faiib.iuhid) was once delivae.itu the Saints Printed in the Year M. DCC. XVI. w^ C ] TTW An Epiftle to the Rfri^lR. Christian Reader, "vl/vSTt^AT has made it Fnjhionabhy that 1 Jheuld fahite thee, e're thm enter ' on the folUiJuin? Sheets ; and I have two or three Things to info C\ ' on the folUiiiing Sheets ; and I have two or three Things to inform thee of, •which I think 7nay mt be unnecejfary to be propofed, for thy more clear uff n derjlandmg my Dejign therein. In the fir ft Place^ I would have it confidered, I'hat not Choice but Ne- ce/fity, has drawn me forth into this Field. Vrnfenfihle the Theme voill look a little odd in the View of a great many, who, becaufe they either never faw, or never allowed them- felves ferioujly to think »n Better Times, than thefe Deplorable Days of ours, are Perfeffly pleafed with ^7;^ prefent State of Things. IVhat ? A JUST AND NE- CESSARY DEFENCE OF SEPARATION FROM THIS NATIONAL CHURCH? M^)9willfeparate from a Church Jo Orthodox, Jo faineus thro' the JVorldyfor found Principles f/;^^ /;^r Parallel cannot be found among the Churchbs that are az/Zf^ REFORMED ? 'This Frtjudkc againfi the whole, the very TITLE, may fuggeft: But I only deprecat, (with the Poet) That I be not condemned before I be underftood. My Defign isfofar from Vilifying the Church o/ScotlandV Reforma- tion, fo far from Pleading a Separation from Her TRUE and ANCIENT PRIN- CIPLES, "That I dare fafely fey ( without Difparagment to any ) jhe is that National Church, which, ajnong all the Reformed Churches, may ju/lly claim the Preeminencffj for Soundncfs 0/ Doctrine, Pimty of Worfhip, exaflnefs of DiCcipline and a Govern- ment, exaBly adjufied to the Pattern fhowed on the Mount. A Church honoured •with much of god's Prefence, beautif/d with many Glorious LightSy and Eminent Inftruments 0/ Retbrraation, a Church upon which the SO^ of GOD has bsfiowed a peculiar A leaf ure of Zeal in /j^r Minifters, Holinefs in her Members, andBcsLuty m her Conftitutioii and Adminiftrations. IVhut then, may fomefay, own all this, and yetphadfor Separation from this Churchy fo Honouj;ed, Dignifyed and Adorn- ed ? This is a Matter of the utmofl Surprife ! And, I own, it would be fo indeed, had this Church maintained her former Purity : But as the Corrupting of the beil Thihgs is worft, fo the Falling of this Church from her once attained Ptirity and Glory in Re- formation, is me of the Jaddefl of Falls. And tlW a great many, who have voluntarily iKZ'ohed themfehes in this lamentable Defedion, are fo hardened in their Courfes, tijat I' Argument is fuffi;iem to convince 'em of their miferable Fall ; yet whofo Impartially, i^ * 0fid An Epirtle eo the READER; ani without the Byajs of ordinary Prejudices ^ views the miferable Declining of this J^a" tional Church, cannot chufe but owny 'That the Cro-^ii of Beauty and Perfedion, is iadly fallen from our Head, hy our Lukewavmnefs and Indifferency in GOD*s Matters, our Tteldings and Paintings in thefe Tilings which our worthy Anceflors judged worthy of their deareft Lives, to fnaintainy and their mod precious Blood, to Jeal and cm" firm them to Poflerity. ButfoitiSt now of along limey this Church hath ken declining from her prif?ine Zeal and Purity ; and to gain an unworthy Eafe, thefe who were fet on the Watch- Tower, have yielded to the Encroachments from Time to lime, made upon the Prero- gatives o/f^i" LORD JESUS, and freedom of His Courts and Officers; and the WitYieffmg and Contending Party^ whom the LORD has in the fiveral Periods, both cfthe late Suffering, and of the prefent Peace, fiirred up to bear Teftimcny, and in their Stations to contend againft thefe Declenfions, ha've been fo far from Prevailing to get Things bettered, that they haiie been flighted and defpifed, and the Prejudice of the Meannefs of their fecu/ar Condition, has made their Humble and Juu Pleadings, Grievances, Declarations and Proteftations, to be difegarded, and the external Gran- deur of the oppofite Party, has encouraged them to go on in their continued Defeclionfrom mir National Reformation. And now that Things are thus carried on by a Party, who /;^T/e Power and Authority on their Jide, and have refufed to be win by the continued Arguments, Pleadings and WirnclTiiigs of their Brethren, what is left, but that they in their Stations and Places, adhering to the Ancient Reformation, endeavour to carry on their Teflimony, for the Exoneration of their Confciences in the Sight of GOD, and Tranfrntttng true Reformed Religion pure to Pofterity, in a Way feparate from filch, as after all fuitable Endeavours, refufe to be reclaimed, and gained tQ a vigorous Profecution of our ancient Covenanted Principles. To vindicate fuch, is the Defign of thefe following Sheets ; and the unjuft Cenfures, and importunate Clamours and Banter of the oppofite Party make it plain- ly nece [far y, feingthey treat all who WITH DRAW /ro;«,*^K^ PROTEST againfl them as SEPARATISTS /m« tlye true Reformed Covenanted Church ©/Scot- land; And here the Impartial Reader Jhall have both the true Principles of this Church laid down, the Motion of Separation /row? thefe true Principles clearly fiated, and a Convincing Demonftration of the Departures luhich that Party that arrogates the Nameoj this National Church, hath n-tade from thefe Principles, and of the fincere Adherence thereto, that is defigned and aimed at by the poor defpifed Handful they call SCHISM ATICKS, that fo the Judicious Reader may with the more certainty and facility Judge, which Side hath the truefl Claim to that Odious Charader. As for the Performance it felf, Ifmll not preoccupy, but leave it intire to t/jt-'Reader's Judgment. I know 'tts the common Cant, that People oj that IVay, whole Adherence, to Covenanted Principles I undertake to defend, have not a Alouthful o/Senfe, and far lefs Learning; and for me to claim either, might look like too much Arrogance ; to fay I have neither, would be but Self-flattering Affe Elation : but this I ha've to f my in Fa" %ouxs of the Principles I go upon, they are m NOVELTIES, hut the found Prin- ciples ^ An FpiftI© to the READER. ciples of our Reformers 3 atid I have all along endeavoured to fupport whatever 1 ad lenture to advance, with the Authority of the mofl Orthodox Divines, Criticks, and Commentators, that thePrctefiant Church has been bleft with : So little have I trufled to my own Judgment in this Ccmroverjie. And whoever [hall effny to refute what I have here advanced, he muft remember. That it is not the WritQv of this he hath fi muchto dowith, as the JSo^j' 0/" Orthodox Divines, and Confe/Tions of the Reformed Churches. And till the fe aYeffmlen andoverturnedy I judge the Main of this Ca.ufefafe. I doubt not butfofne will undertake an Anfwer; but Idejire it may be conftdered. That it is not fnarlingat Expreffions, ^7?^ /o/^/;?^ Branches, thatjhallbe reputed an Anfwer. " Whoever will undertake it, let him fairly enter into the Merits of the Caufe, and overthrow the Principles ^»^ Opinions of the Reverend Divines and Churches which defend it, elfe he dees nothing: For, a meer Carping at Phrafes or Method, however it mayaffeElthe ^ Author, will never ferve as an Anfwer to the Matter itfelf; and the Write-- isperfeSily eajie as to his own, if the Reputation 0/ TRUTH, in this Controverjie^ befafe, 'Ibe Author had not before his Eyes, in the following Sheets, either the pleajtng of any Party, or advancing of ^/Ty Secular Intereft .-■ And therefore his Aim has been (whe- ther he has comejhort or not, mufl betidged of by others ) to advance and defmd the Inte- • reft of Truth in general; without adapting his Arguments to the fmaller Differences among , VKOTESTEKS themfelves, which however fome make a Handle of, to mifreprefent their Common Caufe ,• yet are not of that Importance, astojigmfie any thingto weakenthe 7«- flice of That Tefiimony he pleads for, againfl the Palpable Backflidings of thsfe that irreclaim- ably go on in a Vtfible DefeElion from the Ancient Principles of this Reformed Church. And the Author is alfo perfwaded, that there is no fuch Fundamental Difference ^- 7nong the PROTESTERS, as to affetl the Foundation and Subftance of the Tefdmony, or occafioH any Litigation among them, in Things here maintained and propiignedj in that Common Caufe (?/ Covenanted Reformation, to which they all defire to adhere. As for what 1 have faid concerning the Principles of the Protefters anentthe Civil Au- thority, lefi any Miflake or Mifreprefent them, as f me thro Ignorance, others thro' Ma- lice, may be ready to do. I mufl here fay once for all, that 1 know no People 7mre Loyally difpofed than they are, and none more ready to difcover it in all theEi\xtks enjoin d in the Holy Scriptures and our Confeffion ; All they plead for is, that Perfons in Publick Truil and Office, be qualified according to the Rules o/GOD's Word, and our Ancient Lau- dable Laws an J Sacred Covenants ; and that they be inveRed with, and exercife their Government, according to thefe Laws and Covenants, and for the great Ends of Advan- cing and ProteEling True Religion and Vertue, andfuppn^mg Error and Vice ; which is the Only Thtng pleaded for in thefe -Subfeqtient Sheets. All the PROTESTERS m'e Jo far from any the leafi DifaffeBion toK Whether Adam was our Foederal Head and Reprefentative in that Covenant ? And whether his Sin he Properly Imputed to us, fo a? that our Impotency to obey GOD's Law, is Culpable and Voluntary, ns we finned in him ? And therefore, whether all Infants, both o/Chri- Um^md Pagans, dying in Infancy ^ an not javed, as not having done that hr which t^}e An Epiftle to the READER. I the LORD can in Jufiice damn them? 'The Differ erne nozv is not ahm luhat People \ rowwo«/y ca// Circumftantials in Religion, but about the Foundation 0/ Religion, vihHherthe Wor4 of GOD W^,- or Man's Reafon nlfo, he the Rule and Ultimate ' Principle of true Tli^lbgy?^ And about ,tJv> great DoBrine of Julli/icatioH, ^uhether JuRifying Faith include mks formal Nature, good Works and Obedience? ': Whether there be a Two-told Juilification, one by Faith here, and another at the ' lafi Day J on Account of Good Works ? Mout the DoBrine of the ever Blejfed TRI- 1! NITY, JVhi^ther it be an Error that the HOLY GHOST proceeds from the ! FATHER and the SON both, and'fmh like,, be/tdesthe NOVEL OPINIONS I ef no Sinning in HeH after the laft Judgment, ?/j^ Obfcure Qbje^fve l^evelation of i the Gofpcl to the Heathens, &c. Noiu xvJyen fuch D Brines at thefe, are judicially And openly Defen^d, by 7nany of no ' fmall Note in this Church, by their Affixing contradiBory Senfes upon abfiird and un- I found Propojitionsy And Placing thefe that are evidently contrary to the Confeffion of I Faith, in 'the Clafs of Propofitions contraverted among Orthodox Di- I vines , and oppofed, ( as 'tis their Duty ) by ethers , it is hard to fay I how anXJn'ion amongft them can be praBicable; for they cannot fay that theje are not Svih- i ftantial Do6i:rines,Tu/;^/'£'/K they differ or that the obflinat Propugning o/Errors about thefe \ Points is not HERESY^^W Herefy inDodrine has by all theOahodo^ been accounted a I Ground of Separation. And when thefe in the MiuiBry, who are endeavouring to op- pofe themfehes to the prefent Current of Error, are fo maligned and born down by a Prevailing Fadion, and like to be funk in a Caufefo clear and i?nportant, it is no tuonder tho' other Minifiers, endeavouring to bear Teftimony, meet with the fever eji Ceniiires. So that we may take an Efiimate of the Perlecuting Spirit and Temper now regnant y frojn the Treatment fuch Ministers meet with, and Judge what hard Meafure others are like to 7neet with, in Oppojing National Defections. ff' As this Treatife is defigned to vindicate the True Principles of the Church of Scotland, in Oppoftion to Prelacy, ErastiaxNism, and other Errors, and the PraBice o/PROTE- STERS, againft the palpable DefeBions of fuch as call themfelves the National Church at this Time -, fo 'tis hoped it ?nay be of ufe to Poor People, to firengthen their hands in the Truth, and confirm thein againfi the Cunning Artifices and Cavils of the Oppofite Party ; (indwiU upon that Account, not be unacceptable'toanytC-ho confcienticu/ly endeavour a Solid Clearnefs in their Adherence to Duty, in Withdrawing/r(?w, ^WProtcfting againfi this National Church on Account of her Deplorable DefeBions. And if any think it is not Confcience that ABs us,' but only an Inclination to gYittify our own Caprice and Wildnefs, let 'em but confiderthe Propoful of the Terms uptn which we are willing heartily to join with Minifters and Members of this Church, and if they be not mofl Reafonable and Juft, we /ball freely yield our felves lyable to v^ Cenfure is proper for unjufi Separatifts. THE [ ] The CONTENTS of the Chapters and Sedions of this Book. CHAPTER 1. Se£l. I. Contains eHe Method of Handling this Difp«te concerning Separation. Seft.^ II. A brief Declaration ©f what Prirvciples the P R O- TESTERS hold. Se^. III. The ConceflTioni that both Jurant and Nunjurant Minifters of the National Church grant to be jiift Ground of Sepiration. Se^. IV. The 'Conceffions of the P R O T E S T E R S, riz,. What Faults of a Church the PROTESTERS grant are not Juft Ground of SepararioHj Chap. U. which contains the plain State of the Qtieftion concerning Separati- on in the ifi Se£tion, and in the id Seftion, it is proven by Scripture, and AO:^ of Affembly, That the National Church, by going into the legal Eftabliihment of the Incorporating Union, is guilty of fych Defe^ions as are Juft Ground of Separation. Chap. III. wherein it is plainly proven from Jurants Conceilions, and their printed Affertions, That the Oath of Abjuration, io its genuine literal Senfe, ob- liges Jurants to maintain the whole Conftitution of England^ both of Church and State \ and the fame is proven by Englifl} Laws, and the Judgment of the greateft Englifl) Lawyers, idly. It's proven, That Jurants Swearing, and Jursnts and Non- jurants by A£ls of AfTerably declaring that to be no Ground of Separation, is juft Ground for true Adherents to our Covenanted Reformation, to make Separation- both Negative and Pofitive from the prefent National Church. Seth. 11. Wherein it's proven, That Swearing and Defending the new Forna of the Oath of Abjuration, ■ is alio Jufl Ground of Separation. CH a p. IV. Wherein it is proven from Scripture, and the Judgment of many Di: vines. That the prefent Nuional Church of Scotland ^ her Tyranny in Government, is juft Ground of Separation, both Negative and Pofitive. CHAP. V. Which contains Remarks on the Introduction of that Pamnhlet, intituled , 7loe Oath of Abjuration no Ground of Separation •, as alfo Remarks on three Concel ^ fions, which both Juranrs and Nonjurants of the National Church, grant to be juft Ground of Separation. In StEi. I. there is a Defcription ofHerefy, inthe4Staion of this Chapter, it is clearly proven. That the National Church Impoleih finful Terms of Communion, which are )uft Ground of Separation. CHAP. VI. Which contains Remarks on the Conceffions granted by Jurants and Nonjurantsof the National Church, to be Juft Ground of Separation, viz.. StSt. I. anent what islntrufion intothe Miniftry, and the Original of Patronage is difcribed, and Patronage proven to be Tyranny in Government, and that the Church ot Scot- land hath gone into it.notwithftanding ot her fending, a (ham Memorial to the King's Secretary anent it, Sed:. II. dekribes the lawful Flight of the true Paftor, and un- lawfnl Fl'ght of the Hireling. StB. III. Concerning Notour Scandals, in which it's proven the National Church is guilty offuch fcandalous Defeftions, as are juft Ground uf Separation. GAAP. 1. The CONTENTS. C H AP» VII. Wherein Seven Arguments in Defence of the Oath are anfwered. The JurantsArgumentb are thefe, jft. From their Suppofiiion of the Lawtulnefs of the Matter of the Oath. idly. Ot the Authority of the Prelatick Parliament impofingit. 3<}/v. From their Suppofing and AflVrting Peoples Offenccf at Minifters for Swearing the Oath, tobea Groundkfs O^ence taken up by the People /[thly. Jurants al- fert the penal Sanftion of the»LaWj impofing the Oath, under the Penalty of Depri* valion of Minifters Office, to be a juft Motive to fwear it. $thly. That tbo' Mini fters miftake the true Senfe of an Oath in Swearing it, they fin not in Swearing the fame. 6tkly. That Minifters Ignorance of the Oaths Obliging. to maintain E- raftianifm. Prelacy, &c. wasfinlefs Ignorance of Faft. ythly. Jurants argue from Divines different Interpretations of one and the lame Text ofScripture. CHAP. V 1 11. Wherein Ten Arguments for Defence of the Oath are anfwered, viz, jfi. Concerning Mr. Rut herf or d"s?r\nc\pU about God's Vindiftive Juftice zdly^ That upon Suppofition that by Swearing the Oath, Minifters did not through Ignorance oblige themfelves to maintain the Englifl) Hierarchy and Ceremonies, but thro'meer Unfaithfulnefs, yet it*s no Ground of Separation. 7,diy. They defend it by denying Confequencesindefinitly. 4fWy. Upon Suppofition that Minifters, thro' Unfaithlul- nefs, fwore to maintain the BngUft) Hierarchy and Ceremonies, it was not Herefy in Dcftrine, Nor 2«//y. Idolatry in Worftiip, Nor idh. Sinful Terms of Communion, Nor ^tloly. Intrufion into the Miniftry, Nor %thly. Is it intolerable Perfecution, Nor 6ihly. A Scandal fo grols and notour, and that cannot be gotten removed, as that the great End of Edification can not be attained. CHAP. IX. Which contains a plain Refutation of the Jurants great Argument for Defence of the Swearing the Oath of Abjuration, its being no Ground of Separa- tion, from the Practice of Elt% Sons, i Saw. 2: 17, 24. C A A P. X. Which contains a Refutation of the grand Argument for Defence of the Swearing the Oath of Abjuration, it's being no Ground of Separation, from the * Suppofition and AfTertion, That our Saviour by command obliged his Difciples to join in Communion with the 3^fip//; Church of Scribes and Pharifees, and that he him- felf did alfo aflually join in Communion with thefe Scribes and Pharifeesi CHAP. XI. Which contains a Refutation of Jurants Argument, for Defence of Sweating the Oath of Abjuration, and Nonjurants joining in Communion with them without Removing the Scandal •, from the Jurants falfe Suppofition and AfTertion, that all Orihodox and Hereticks, Clean and Unclean, who made any publick Pro- feftlon of the Chriftian Religion, within the Bounds of the Chnrch of Corinth^ did join altogether in Communion in all Gofpel Ordinances, and were commanded by GOD lo to do. And Jurants Objections concerning Minifters Convidlion and Con- feftion of publick Faults and Defc£Vions anfwered. CHAP. XII. Which contains a Refutation •f the Jurants Argument for Defence of Swearing the Oath of Abjuration, with an JExplication and Proteftation of their own Framings for Determining fhe Signification of the Odth in an other Senfe, than determined by the Legifiators and Laws impofing it, as appears by the profeflfed Senfe that Jurants pretend to fix upon it. ^• CHAP. XIII. Which contains an Anfwer to the Argument that Jurants and Non- jurants of the National Church of 5cof/a»^, advance from Philip. 3: 15, 16; for their Defending the Swearing the Oath of Alljuration to be no Ground of Separation. CHAP. XIV. Contains a Vindication of the PROTESTERS from Schifm, which Jutarts and Nonjurants unjuftly charge them wiih. CHAP' '£k CONTENTS CHAP. XV. Wher7,''f6r^^M-' t.' n^t - lOKfe-.^ p. 24, VI ult, anted^r. of the Covenanted, p. 29,1. 25. for (!of[//?af/ nr}R Setting upland Adhering to Presltyteriai Judicatures difiinSt therifrorri, INTRODUCTION. T is an Uncontcftable Trutli, maintained by all Sound Philorophers aAd Orthodox Divines, Tliac UNITY, TRUTH and GOODNESS, ^r'e the Three Trayfcmdent Properties- eGunUy hfcr.g^rig to the EjJ^ritial ConfiitUt'i^- rly cal'ed a BEING; But in Oppofirion to thtf' T B m of nery Ihing that is prope J^ Mairaaining this Truth, I plainly Perceive one Thing in our Day and Time, which, as it is m-oft highly Surprifing, fo it is no kfs Grievous tO the moft eminently Godly, namely, That many Minifters pretending to be fodnd' Di tncs of the Presbyterian Chnrch Qi Scotland^ do Difpute moft Hotiv tor the UNITY of the Church ; becaufe (<% they ) fheis the BODf of Chtift, while'' at th • fame Time they are fuperlativdy Gold m Pleading for TRUTH ark? GOODNESS, to be as EOential Propei^ties as UNIT.^ is, of tjae fame BQDY^. o. O-irLord J_fus .- For feing they plead for- UNIT¥, becaufe theChiifch i^ Chrift's'Body, they ought to conteixi as raush for TRUTH and GOODNES^i as equally Eflcntial Properties oi the fame ; Bi>t fo it is, that while th6fe MiniTl^tsr argue moft keenly for Unity of the BODYofChrul, (whkh UNITY, irt tieir' Way otRea foiling, is not the true one of Divine Tnftijntiort as afrerwar-d' vs^iilJ^ appeax, ). they arc fo far from Difputing a«! Z^aloufly for TRUTH, rn--iU"' tW' FundaitTental and Subflantial Principles of triie' ¥A\iW-m' <^\\nii the Miidiatdi-^^ accocdiigto the Tenor of the Cowitant oi Grace^ to Bfc^an- EifeirtialPVyp^rty'' or ihetme Chtirch of Chrift, called his BODY, thar they bofd^y ifflViA; ' 'tHtf^ Scribes ami Pharifees, who utterly Rejeded and Griicified the Mlffiah, yea,Vl\oniJ our Lord condemned,- iVf/i/M. iiChap. for being" Guilty of r le Sm agairfil:'th6' Holy Ghpil, and f onfequencly the vileft Apoftatc5 Irom the true t'^ith,' y^tthd^ Minillers, I fay, boldly affirm, That thefe Scribes- aiid Phatil^es weiri t^e trdfe^^ C^hnrch'bi Chrifti to be joined with in- CommuwMin,, And-jflce^if^^' they are- f^'^ far h-om.Contejidmg mplt Zealoiifly for. Holinefs, u'ithout :u)bitf)n'a Man JImllfih the Lord^ and in^ Partiailar,'?'^/?^ thtfe that be'at'ilT^Veffets ofihe'%m'dhHol^;ixH that hisM.mlters beBlamelefs, accorduig to r Tim. 3. 2^ thcH' ^ii-e fo iat; I raV;,' from Zeal6i:s Contending forthe GOODNESSo^HOLPNEffev-tl^t' thecMy-J^' ller^ ofGod's Houfe be Holy and Blamelcfs, without piiblickS<;»tndal, That they 2 Th}> I NTRGr>VCTIO JV, mofl ftrcnnoKfly dercnd Eli^sSons, to have been lawful Mnifters of the Houfe of God, notwitnflanding of their moft abominable adulterous Uncleannefs, in . ly- ing with the Women at the Door of the Tabernacle, i Sam. 2. 22. and under all that abominable Uncleannefs , that they lavvfuUy offered the People's Sacrifices at the Lord's Altar; and People were obliged to join in tlrefe Impure Offerings, as Lawful Services to GOD : fo that it was indifpenfable Duty for the People to employ tliem to Ofter, and confequently, for them to f^crifice to the Lord, under aU t-hdr Uncleannefs, and notorious grofs and ineorfigible Scandals. And who feeth not, how plasnly contradiftory their Reafoning is to that Exprefs Law, lev. 22. 3. which exprefly appoints, that any Pricft who did minifler in Holy things, orfo much as touched them with his Uncleannefs on him, fiiould.be cut ©^ from- •the Lord's Prefehce, -viz,, by Excommunication, as the Word ordinarly (ignifies. See the Lcarn'd Mr. Gilkfpis's Aarcn s Rod Book i. Chap. 5. lag. 55. Butthfife Miniflers, who difpure lo muchfor UNITY of the Church, in manner above exprefl ; and in the mean time pretend to be Bold Defenders of CHRIST's Prerogatives, and the Divine Order of His-Houfe ; tiiey afibrd the Godly fufE- cient ground, with gridved Souls and heavy hearts, -to fay to them, as ^0^ laid to his Friends, vi%.. VVilljejpenk wkked/yfor Ged, aiid talk deceitfully for him'^. Job 13. J. And as the Lean>ed Mr. James VVebner in his Ij^fcotnfe, de7noriJlrating^ ^h at Church Gozernment, that is cj Divine Right, is F/xed, and net A?nhulatory. Pag. I. faith, Icomintud a Def.gnfor Peace andVNlON, provided that Tuith and Holinefs^ fuffered nothng by it; kit aUer all, ice mtifi m^arter TRVT'H for PEACEy nor can voe facrifice HO LINES ^to PEACE. We ate commanded to luytheTluthy a^dnotto fell it. A Profane Peace is a league with Sin, and makes m of a Party with Hell. Formyfelf (faith he) ai on the one hand, I hate all Make- baits, Fir&brandsy and In- ctndiaries in Religion ^ fo on the other handy Icannotfuppre-fs a jufl Indignation again ft a- •wojuf Neutrality andcriminal Lidifference in the matters of God, a Ga.]\io~7emper abju- itd hy our National Oaths. I find thejneekefl Man on Earth very angry when GODisfo. 1 cordially agree to what the Reverend Mr.VVebJier faith, in this matter of Peace aipd Union. And the Pr.4Sth€ Church oi Scotla^td once enjoyed, by her being cftabhflied in Do- ~- ■ — :,' — ■, ■•,..^,■:^t^• ftrinc. pe INTRODUCTION. j j^ritie, Worflifp, Difcipline, and Government, according to the Word of GOD ♦ and theretore he bends bis whole power of Malice and Delufions to overturn the fame; .ometimes by raifin^Enenues without, as Heathen Emperors were; ando- ther-nmes he makes ufeot Idolaters and Apoftates within, fach as1?apifts and Ma- lignant Prelatids, to deilroy the True Church of Chrift, and cut oft'the Name of Ilratl, by Bloody Perfeciition ; and when he cannot pra Calfj andwiih3'^»-o/o^;;?, ai;d the Ten Tribes, to fet up the Calves oi Dan and ^Betlel i and by ciic f-ame way, he by Degrees fedaced the Church to Antichrifti- an Idolatry; and in the Year i6oSy he prevailed with the Afpiring Miniflers in Scotland, lo affirm With the greateil Boldnefs, I'/m they had gotten a neiu Light, by •which they [aw that PnJAtical Government is an O, dinance ofGcd ; as C aide, wood in his Hifiory tells us^ Pag. 582. Whence it is evident, that Satan by that way carries on Dtfvdion from one degree to another, until the True dhurch be overturned ; and that he hath, by that Engine,- been carrying on the Ruine of the Church of Scotland, now ot a long time, is publickly known by the Pleadings, Cohtendings, ana Grievances, which the Protefters have publiflicd thereanent : From the Con- fideration of whicJi Defedions ottheQiurch, arifeth the prefent Controverly,T//&. Are the Deftfiions of the i^refent NationalCimrch o/Scotland/ ^re^f, that they afiord fujjxum (Sround of withdrawing frc?n CommnmonwitJ) her^ C H A P. L SECTION 1. Wjjefein a brief Method of Handling the Qiieflion is laiddowit. IN Order to handle this weighty point of Cotroverfie with all Brevity and plain- ntfs that the Nature of it will allow, and my Judgement can reach, in an- fwering tlie fame in away agreeable to the Word ot GOD, oorContefTioii of Faith ai^d Covenants; The Method (hall be this, v/z-. I. Ifhall f}:ow what Principles the Pn/f/^m hold. 2: What ConceflionstIi€ pre- fent Church grants as juft Groundsof Separation. 3: What Concefllons tl>e Pro^. ee/iers givcii) this Debate. 4: Enumerate the Principal Dcfcdions ot the Church A 2 tiiat 4 Prifjciples whhh the PROTESTERS hold. CHAP L that are thcfpecial Groundsofthis Debate. $: Fix the State of theQtierfion, 6- Advance fome Arguments tor proving the Aflertion that the Protefierx hrld. 7. And laftly, Aiif^xrer all the moft weighty Objeaions, made againft the Proreflers •Judgement arid*Praaice, in withdrawing from the National Church, on account of fier DeFedions, and^fetting up Presbyterial Judicatures diftind therefrom. S E C T. II. lV/-ich contains aBrief Account ofthePrinciples that the PROTESTERS hold- AS to Principles oFReligion, the ProteHersfmcercly Profefs and Adhere to the |:ruc|leformcdPrQteftant Religion, in Dodrinc, WorHiip, Difcipline, and Government, as it is contaihed at large in tlte Word of COD, in the 0:d and Mew Tellaments, and briefly fumm'd up in oar ConfcfTion of Faith, oommonly called the Vl/efmmfter Confeffmi of Faith, Catechifms Larger and Shorter, Sam of Saving Knowledge, Diredory for Worihip.Propofitions of Church Government,, and to our Covenants National and Solemn League j As alio, to the Acts and De- clarations of the Church of Ao?/W agreeable to the above faid Confedion of Faith and Covenants : And cfptcially, the Ads i.n I findtheirConceffions in the Pamphlet the Authoc'sown Words in full, i^/z-.T/;? , , , , r ■ , , \ r fyahle Grounds of Separation, Firfi, Herejte inDoBrine ; by M ( fanh he ) lun- Irjiand, Errors mtrary to, and Vnfirumve of the Fundamentals of Fatth and Religt- ^ I filldtheirConceffions in the Pamphlet above faid PageS, p, ro, and Ifhall give the Author's own Words in full, uix.. There are only thefe Six warrantable and jufti- CHAP T. CONCESSIONS ofthFrefent National Cht^rch. 5 an ; when Errors are taught and maintained that are inccnfiflent with Sahation ; 7 hen and in that cafe there ought to he Separation. Thu^ the Jtzus denying yefm o/Nazareth to be the MejPah; 'The Socinians denying the God-Head 0} Ch 7/?, thefe andfuchlikt fire to hefepa"atedfro?n, hecaufe tiefe Errors ar ahogether iy.confijient vjith Salvation. Secondly, Idolatry in JVorfiip; ivken the IVojhip we are to join in is_ corrupted, u-e are to feparate from it ; As in Popery, their Vl/'i.rjhipping of Saints and Angelsy their Bowing to Images, and their -Idolatrous Mafs i "thefe things make Coi^munion with thijn limply U^. lawful , as is clear fr^m 2 Cor. 6. 7. Rev. 18.. 4, 6. Thirdly, Sinjul terms of Communion impofed, warrand Separation', -me are not to ftay in that Church where we are necefftat^d to fin bj joining with it : iVfltu this-iidone fever at ways, as fiifl, when Rites ar/dCercmcnies of Mens Invention are urged m hecef- fary tit theVl^orJhip of GOD ; thmin tie Church 0/ England, Separation from it is necejfarj hecaufe of this, they require of us what GOD has not required of m in his word^ as the Cr(^ in Baptifm, Kneeling* at the Lords table, withfeveral diher things which we 'judgefinjulj becatife they want the Sta7np of Divine Authority, and are required m necelfary parts of 'PVo^jfiip. idly. As the worthy Mr. T>mh3im fays, when a Perfin k fut to condemn any thing hethiaketh Lawful, either in his own*former PraHice,.or that of others ; or if required t$ conde/m any Point of DoSirme he thinketh to be truth E. G. If the Church jhould require of her Members this conditidn of Communion with her, that they Jhould exprefly condemn our Covenants, or the cohtendings of the Godly in this Land, againfl Prelacie and Eraflianjfin, or any Point of truth held by them, this wo^ld zvarrand Separation, sdly, Vl^hen a Perfon is rejuired to approve the Deed or PraFlice qffime other which heacountethfinjul, or to Affirm that cu atruth which he thinketh an Error. E. G. If we require any to approve of the' Oath of Abjuration, and MinifierT taking of it, this would warrand Separation alfo. 4thly, When fome Engagement is required for time to come, which doth re/lrain from atiy Duty cal'ed for, or that may be eatledfor. E.'fj. If ?eop!e jhould be required to Engage never to feparate from the Church cf Scotland be theCorruptions never jo g^eat, or to bear any tejlimony againji Mtnijlers whatever they do, this were a finful condition. FoLir hly, Vfurpaiionor Intrufion into the Alinijiry, I, (^Lith he, reckon a fufficient Ground of Separation, tl^eace is a threefold Intrufion into the Minifiry, ' lil^ An In- truding into it ,withmt eithW a Call from the People, or Ordination by Mtnijlers. idly, An htrudingmto it mberly upon t^^e Call of a People, without Chrdination or potefiative Mtf- fivn, both thefe ufurptbt/ Office, and are by all acknowledged to be fufficient Grounds' of Separation from tl'em. ^dly, IVhen a Perfon has Ordinal on, but takes the Charge of' a particuLir Flock, wholly without their Confent and aganfi their H'^ilL entering ( it may be ) meerl) by the Prefentation of a Patron, and Collation of a Bijhop. this was oUr Cafe under the late Prelacy, and was fffcient Ground of Separation- When a PeCple have their own Faithful Miniflers violently, and for their Fathfidnefs, thruft out, and ethers intruded in their Place, in this Cafe there is jufl Ground, yea it is pvfitive Duty, to ad- here to our 'Faithful Mini fiers, who Juffer for Right eoufnefs, and dfert thefe Intruders. Fiithly, Int (filer able Perfecutm, is reckoned ajufi Qround of Separatmn, Our bleffed Urd 6 CONCESSION of the PRO! ESTERS, . C H A P. I. 'LorHy bids uSy ivhn thrujl out of one City^ fee into another, and under this Head ( Taith he) I reckon unjuf? and /ii-ful Excvmwunicaticn, ]oh. 3. 54. arid 16. 2. hut this co^ incidingfome way -with the 7*hiyd, I ( faith he ) Jhall not enlayge upon it. Sixthly. ( faith he) t jhall add one particular more y and that from and in thelVo'ds ojthe Reverend Mr. Hog, w'ofe Principles are not lax upon this Head, Viz. W>th' drawing from Q-dinances is juf^ when Offences and Scindalsare fo Grievous a'4d ATo- tour, as alfo all Acccfs towards Removing thsm in a regular Way, is rendred impo[JJble, in fuch a Matner as the great End of Edfication cannot be reached : Th s, fays he; // 1Z0 Vi^'^ajs to be undey flood cincerning Matters which may remain under Debate, among thefe who Jincerely fear ^ the Lord ^ and own the received DoFfrine ad Dijcip':re of the Church, nor to Jfe ext elided Jo jar as to teach thefe, who becaufs of Difficu'ty^ er upcji prudential Confide rat ions , tolerat Evils , which may be Reputed G ofs andManifefl. Jt'sleyond all Debate, that conflder able Scanda's were in the C/urch of Cov'mthyAvbich nci^wtt'flandrfjg the Spirit of the Lord hontureth with th: Dejigna ion cf San^ified inChyifl Jefus, and called to be Saints: Tea the Churches of AiitL a e§:or.ed ly the Lord asfucb, and the Lord himfelf- did walk amidfttkcfe golden Candhfichs \ never- the kfs fever al great ai:d cyyingEnormitieswerefiffered amongthe'H as plain y appears from the Epjft'es diretied to them. All I intend, iays he, in this, is. That Pefns manfeflly •Infufhcieutj Erroneous or ScandakctSj may be withdrtvii-n p'omj tho* net ce, fired thro' the Iniquities of the Times j or the Uke. SEC T. IV. Wherein there is an Enumeration of the ConceJJions of the P R 0- Testers, viz. What Faults m a Church they gradt are no ^u/i Ground of Withdrawing from Communion with her. N the Fourth Place, I IhallTreely giv:; inch Concejjions^as the Word of God, and _ the Acts of the General Aflemblies of the Cnurch oi Scotland, in her piireit Times, will allo-w ; For we exped and deiire a Faithiul, but look r^t for aSui- lefs Miniftry,in the Church Militant hereon Earth .• For the Apoftle James 3. Ch: Ver- 2. includes himielf andtherellof the Apoftles, when he lays, In many Things ■weofend all ; and therefore I fhailfctdown what Faults of a Church the Proreftcrs freefv grant are not juil Ground of Withdrawing from Commun.on with her, Fiz., 1. That there is no uflGrowd to ivithdraw jrom MiiMers on Accour!t of their VVeakhefsin Natural 'Abilities, Spiritual Gijts,or moral Qitalifi cat ions, VKOVIDV^G \(l Thefe WeaknelVes be noc fuch as rerder them unfit to Teach, Vtz,. Make, them unfit to be Edifying Miniiteri; ; B t if their WeiKnelfes render them unfit for Edification ol'the People to whom ciiey Preach;thcy cannot be Lawful Mmiiicrs, as is.cleai-frcm i Tin. 3. 2. 2^/k, PRO VlOlHp their Weakuyflcs render theru not Scandalous and Diiordcrly j For Men may have fuch Dciedts in Things Na- tural, Spiritual and Moral, as make them Scandalous and Diforderly, trom whom we are commanded 10 withdraw, 2 Thef 3. <5. 2. Nor is there J uf? Ground of withdrawing f urn Mm'' flerSy for Pejjnal Faults and Efcapes, p'.ch as are incident ei:m to Fafthful Min^/iers; form many things thj A- pLO^tks did ottend, Jaines 3. 2. ■ ^ Nor 1 CH A p. T. CO ACCESS JONS ofthe VROTESTERS: 7 3. Nor for every Defeci in Faithfuhiefsjvchich may proceed froin Ignorance y' vjant of. Courage, or heinghyaffcd with JffeSiion to fome particular Per fans ; as Peter and" jparnahas were Guilty cF Judaizing in Favours of a few Jevvs^ for which Paul very feverely reproves the ApoHle Peter ^ ( tho* he was the Elder ApoRle ) GaL 2. £3. PROVIDING Mmiflers will take Warning, or Admonition, and amend as Peter znd Barnabas did. But if P^/^r and Barnabas had obflinatly perfifled a- gainfl; P^sf s Reproof, to defend Judaizing, and Taught both by Dodrine and Praftice, the Church ofthe Gentiles to obferve and keep all the Ceremonial Law, ^ as neceffary Duties of Religion ; that would have been plainly contradidory to the Doarine given by the Holy Ghofl and Apoftles, ABs 15. 28, 19. and fo they would have been Guilty »fcaufing fences r.nd'.DiviJionsy contrary to the Do- 'tirine already ta'fght, and then there would have been Caufe of withdrawing, froiri them, Rom. 16. 17. For neither Apoflles nor yet Angels, had Power to teach any Dodrine contrarJ^to the Gofpel, elfe they were lyable to the heavy Curfe ttl Cod, Gati r. 8. . 4. Nor for every Appearance ofHypoaiJie. Tho* we may have fome Ground to fufpeft a Man's Principle and Motive not to be- Right, yet if he be carefully and diligently Performing all Parts of his Duty and Office, without any fcandalous " Blemifhj.andhave a lawful Call, What then > notwithRanding every yi/hy, whether ; iy^retence or in I'mtby thrift is Preached^ and therein i^ve Rejoice, with the Apoftle ' Philip, i: 18. For tho' a Pe^le may have fome Ground"^ to fufped that fuch a ' Mmiiler drives to Preach mm: i-f:.4.- Jcis 4: . CHAP. II. The CHVRCH's t^'^ng Into the VNIQN, 9 4, ip. and 5. 19. iCor.y. 23. Mat.^i^. 8, 5?, 10. 2 Cor. i. 24. Af^^ ij-p. Co/. 2. 20, 22, 23. Gal. I. 10. and 2. 4, 5. and 5. i. Rom. 10. 17. and 14, 23. 7/^.- 8. 20. ^£?j 17. II. "yohn ^. 22. //?/; 5: II. Re'v. 13. 12. i(5. 17. ^f^r. 8. 9. So that, feingthat Ronij^j Superflition of keeping r«/;Ko 1548, and rcftifed to giv:e publick Satisfadion for their Scandal in go'ng into that Engagement. 2d'y, I fhall prove, that upon the Yanie Grounds 2nd Reaforil^ it h as pofitivcly the Duty of Minifters, Elders and Other Chrifiian ProfefTors,' in Adherance to the above laid Covenanted Reformati- on, to mnke« Scparaticn both Negative and Pofitive, from the Prefent National Church oH Scothifd, which hath gone into the legal Ellablifhment of the Incor- pbi;;iting Un-on, with the Prtlatick Conftitution o£ E?igland\ and refufe to' give publick Satisi'adion For their Scandal in going into the legal Eftablifhment of that Incorpcrating Union. * For Proof of the firft ofthefe, I adduce the Afts of the General A/Tembliegi and firft, the/ 61 of the General Affembly Amo 1648^ 6>/*i8. being an Ad and Dcclaratzon of the General Aflembly againft all new Oaths and Bonds in the common Caufe, impcfed without Confent of the Church; in which Aft il is fa id, 7'he General A [fe7nl7}y profeffing all tender. RefpeEi to the High and Honour ahle Court of Pariiament; and Co7nmittee of Efiates, but finding a firaiter lye of Gqd lying upin their Confciences,t/:at they be not found unfaithful Watchmeny and betrayers of the Souls committed to theif Charge^ do unanifnoufly declare y the for ef aid Suhfcriptiony ( Viz: of the Boad of that Engage tf.ent ) to be Unlawful and Sinful ; and do war n^ and in the JSiame oj the Ltrd charge all the Members of this Kirk, to forbear the Subfcribing of tbefaidABandDeclaratU/n, mikh more the urging the Subfcr/ption thereof as they would not ir.cur the IVrath cf God, and the Cenfures of the Kirk, idly. That Engage- ment was .condemned as^bcmg contrary to Scripture, and everyone of the Ar* ticks of our Solemn League and Covenant, by thcGencral Adembly.y^w^^o 1648, Seftcnii. 5bytheir Ad" dreffes to the Kirks ieftify their Diflike thereof ^ and giroe Ev^tce of their Repoitance therefotc, that thefe be preceded and contimiing Obfiin.ite, be wfj^ommumcated -^ But if yjithal they go on tn Ihomoving Malignant Dejtgns, that they be forthvoith ExcommuYii- cnted. And thus I have clearly proven the firil Point^amely, That it was po- fitive Duty of the true Covenanted Church of Scotlam, to make a Separation both Negative and Poiitive, from all thofe that went into the unlawful. JEngage- ment, refuied to give publick Satisfad:ioi) ; And ffeing all the Engagers who refufed to give Satisfaction, were pcremptorly to be Excommunicat. Tiiere was pofitive Separation with a'VVitnefs : Tho' for lefs Scandal than going into 'the Union, and adhering to-it, as the prefent National Church doth.: • - Now I iliall proceed to prove the fecond Point, which; i* to make it evident, Xhat it is as pofitivc'a Duty of all Perfons,Miniflers, Elders and Profeflbrs.who adhere to the above {;iid Covenanted Reformation, not to join in Communion with the prefent National Church of^cotland (I mean all that join together, ].a- rants and Nonjurants, now in their prefent pretended G^^neral Ailembly) which: hath gone into the legal Eftablifliment • of the Incorporating . UNION, with the Prelatick Conllitutron of £«^/^;7^, and refufe to give publick Satisfadion : And alio to make a pofitirc Separation from her. _ , / Yv,-", -^ -,.,|,'. In proving this point,! fhall firft make" it evident,. Tljat going,' into tjie legal Eftablifliment ot an Incorporating Union, with the Prelatick .Coniiitiition df England y is as, great, yea, and greater Breach of our Covenants, fand' i more l^rievous Scandal, than going into the unlawful Engagement was. ' 2^//, I firall prove, That the prefent National Church oi Scotland, .harh gone into die leg^l Eftabliftment of that Incorporating Union wifh the Preiatick CenTllturion of England, and is lb far from making- publick Satisfaftion, that fhc adheres ;o thaf Union. And i,dly, fliow. That upon that Accoant, -it is as-poiiciye.a 'Di|ty of allPerfons, Mimliers,. Elders and Frofellors, who adhere to the Covenanted Re- formation of the; Church of ^co?/^i«^/, in her pureft Times, tsfefarate Negatively and* i^ojhiTelyfyoinihc prefaU N agonal Church of »ScW^wJ,^ that refuledi to ^.ne pub- lick Satistattion for going into that Union, as it wiis tor the Church of-SVof/^/zito make Negative ancrPofitivc Separation fi^om all thefe tliat. went into the unlaw-" hil Engaj^ement, y^w^o- 1^48, and refufed to give publick Satisfaction. ' . For proving the lii'il of thefe three Points, I oi^er this plaiiV. Argument, Viz,, l^ Aflociation \vith foine Malignants in a Mijrtary Expedition, Be contrary to the Word of GQD, our Principles and Coveaants ^ then-going into a Legal Eib- blilhmcnt of Erailian Supremacy, and MaHgnant Engi:fi Prelacy y is like wife nor only contrary to the Woi^ of God ; 'butalfo a more gi'ofs Breach oi our Cove- wants, .efpecially the Solemn League. .. H . But the fir il; 'of thefe is true, and:, therefore alfo the lad." . ^ .. ForConficmii>g this Argument, I Uy^M. it 'istvideht ^already by Acts ol .Ai- -.■■'•■■■ • .... fembly 1 CHAP. TT. :h .Jtift GROVr^D of SEPJIUTION, i^ {embly above cited, that by the Judgement of the Church oi' Scotland, the.Mili- trii-y Allbciarion with Malignant Prelati/Is^W3.s declared to be finful, and a jiift caitfe ot* Nee \tive and Kofitivc Separation .- Eat for clearing this Point further, 1 {hall fhow -by what Scriptures, the General AlTeinbly ^;mo i6.iS, _ Se/f. 21. did prove that'dich AHbciations are finful, and contrary to the Word of GOD, and oiir Coveniints; And! fliall cite the Words of the Ad: of Afifembly K548, Se]f: 2 1-. in Pages ^9-]: ■^9'^. Yiz. Suppofe the Ends «/ this Engagement to be f€od ( which they are mt) yet the Means and H^ays of Profecuti9n, are unlawful ; Is^ . cnnff^ there h not /w e^n^l' a'voiding of Ricks on hth Hands-, kit a' joining with Ma- lignant s to f::pf>-efs Si:6tanQS, a joining Hands ivitb a Black Devil to beat a li^fte De- mil ; th^y are bad Phyjicians zvho would fo Cure one Difeafeas to breed another as evil, 'Cr -worfe. 'That ' there is in the pvefent Engagmient a Confederacy and Afjociation in M^ar withfjc^ of the ^ngllih, who according to the Solemn League and Covenant, and Dethnatilns oj bvth^Kingdoms Anno i<^43, canbeno otherzvife looked upon but as Ma- lignahts, and Ene:nueh/)f Reformation, anJtheCaufeofGOD, is'no-jj made fi mai}ifefl.. lefo-t e Sun and Moon, that we fi^fpofe none will deny it ; And 'tis no lefs jradenyable, tfat not only many known Malignflnts, but diverfe who jotnd in the late Rebellion with- in this Kingdom are Ejnplojed, yea put into Places sfTrufi ; All which, how contrary 'tis to the Word of GOD, no Man can be ignorant, who , will attentively fearch .the Scriptures^ for we fii:d therein condemned Confederacies and Affocidtions with theEne- tfites of true Religion^ whether .Canaanites, Exod. 23. ^i. and 24. 12. ij.Deut. 7. 3 or ether Heathens- i Kings 11. i, 2. Such asACa. his Covenant xu/f/? Benhadad, 2 Chron: 16. to Vcr: 10. Ahaz his. Confederacy with the Kmg of Ad'yu^L, 2 Kings i^. 7. 10. 2 Ciiron.- 28. 16. to Ver; 23. Or whether the' Affociation was zvith wickid Men oftloe 5(r^ o/*Abraham as ^eholaphat's U7>/; Ahab, 2 Chron; 18. 3. compared Tt7>/? Chapter ip. 2. Alfo his Affociation zvith Ahsiziah, 2 Chron» 20. 3^. And A* maziah's Affcciatingto hmijelf 1 00000 of the Ten Tribes, when GOD was not liith ■ them, 2 Chion:.25. 7, 8, 9, 10. The fin and danger of fuch Affdciations may further Qpp ear from Ifa.- 8. 12. 15. Jer.- 2. 18. Pfal: 106. 35. HoC 5. 13. and'j, 8. 11. . ^ Cor; 6. ^4." 15. and if we jUtild effecm God's Enemies to be our Enemies, and hate them with a perfe[i hatred, Pfal: 139. 21. How can we then join with them as Con- federates and Affoci/its ; efpecially in a Caufe wherein Religion isfo highly concerned, and feiytg they have been formerly in Oppofttion to thi fame Caufe ? Fortuuher clearing, who are thefe that were reckoned Malignants by the De- clarations of the Two Kingdoms anno 1^43, I fliall ^vfz the Account I fincf of it in the Declaration of the General Allembly 1647, Seff. 15. Page 3 3 5.. Where it's faid : By the Deilarrationof both Kingdoms foined in Arms anno 1*543, fuch- as would not take the Covenant, were declared to be publick Enemies to their Religion and Countrey, and that they are to be Cenfured and punifhed^ as pr^feffed Adverfaries and Malignants. ' ' - . Thus 1 have made it clearly evident^ thatthe General Aflembly oftht Church ot Scotland in her Pureit Time, hath declared and proven from the Word of God, that .2^ ,5 The Primipd GROVNDS of the DISPVTEI CHAP T. that Confederacies and Aflbciations.with Malignants; To wity AWthu Oppofed the Solemn League and Covenant, were fmful and unlawful Ailbciacions : 'And I amfureno Man can denythatall the Prelats and E^rdatic^- Party in England no\v joined with in the Incorporating UNION are all Malignants in this Senle ; And therefore a Confederacy and ^flbcktion wkh them is contrary to the Word of GOD, and plainly contradidory to oitr Solemn. League and Covenant. ; Yea fur- ther, by what hath beenfaidjit is evident, that AJbciations andConfederacics,with any known Enemies of true Religion, are contrary to the Word of GOD, whether they be Inteftine Malignants, luch as Papiits and Ptelatifts, or Forreigners, fueh as Popifh Kingdoms Abroad are.. .^. I having thus cleared the way, the firft Point I have to pf ove is this, viz.. That going into the Legal Edabliflimait of an Incorporating UNION with the Prel'a- tick Conftitution o'lEngland.^ is not only as directly concrary to the vVord ot GOD, butalfo amoregrofs Breach of oar Solemn League and Covenant, than the Un- lawful Engagement anno 1^48 was: For proving. this, confider firft, That li>J- CORPORATION is a ilraiter Conjiindion than a Confederacy, . fo:- Inco,:)ora- tion is an Imbodying Two into One Body, whereas Ailociation is a Joyningift- to Society or Neighbourhood; Bat Incorporation is like- the" Marriage Covenant that firmly joins'Xwo into One, and therefore by undcnyable conlequence, it is a mote Heinous Tranfgreffion againfl theWord ot GOD, i,o make an Incorporate UNION with Malignants, than to wake a Corviederacy of Affociation w.th them ; Efpecially an Aflbciation Only for one Expedition, as the UnUwral En- gagement was. 2dly, Becaufe Incorporation inckides the ilndeft Ooligation on every Member to fupport and derend the Being and Conlbtation of all and e- very one of the Members of that Incorporate Body ; Every 'M-.n of Reaion knows, that his Neighbour in Society is not under 10 ftrid: an Obligation to de- fend his Body, as the Members of his own Body arc to defend one another ; {olikewife by Incorporation, there is the ftiridteit Obligation on all thefe who • go into it witn England^, to defend all the Members, which includes all the £;^- lijh Prelates, and other Malignants, being all Members of that Incorpforate Body.. 5^/j, Becaufe the. Confederacies and Military Alfociations with Prelatick and Popifh Malignants* fuchas the Aflbciations in the Wavsoi^ Flatiders, were con- trarto the Word of GOD, our Prii-u;iples of Reformation, and Covenants, 'as is dear already; Yet they are not fo grofs aTraiifgreflion as Incof;->oration with Malignants,as was made evident above: And alfo becaufe,by thcfeMociations the Malignant Rulers in thcfe Nations were not made xhe Civil Magiitrates of .S^^o^- laKdy as EngHJj Prelates are EilabHfhcd to be for all Time to come, .by that In- corporating UNION. Andfo much for fliowing that the Incorporating UNION is worfe, than Atlbciations with Malignants, in a general Senfe. But next, I fiiall (how in particular, by many evident Inftances, lio v the^ In- corporating UNION above faid, is a more grievous Breach oi every one of tht Articles of our Solemn League, than the Unlawful Engagement amio .1648 was. 1 CHA.P. 11' Is 'Juft Ground of Separraion. 17 In doing of which^ I fiiall cite the exprefs Words of the Genefal Aflembly, ^p- ving a Dcmonftration how the Unlawful Engagement was a Breach of all the j^L'ticles of onr Solemn Leagues, and as- 1 go along, I ftialf" compare the'Incorpq- ratiiig UNION with the, Unlawful Engagement. This Judgement of the Gene* raliflembly 16^^, Se(pon ii. I find Recorded in i^/7^tj "3 8>>,. 3^0,^*591, of tlie 'Old Aa<; of Aflembly, the words are thefe, viz,, X^e Engagmmt i) Unlawful and Shrfuly as. being a B-each of Covempt^^ and fo contrary to the fi'^ordof. GOD j That the f/efent Lngageinent is a Breach of Covenant nuoy appear] by cjimparing it xmh each of the Articles, for itjs agaihfi all the Jj., Articles of the Covenant. Again/} the firji Article, becaufe in fie id of the J^refsrnjation of the D'o-:.iri,;e, JVorjhip, Difciplim and Gc.^nm:'nt f of this Kirk; 'jfitreis not only a great quarrelling bythlfethat do Engage, Atthepre^ ftnt Doclrine. and free P>eaching. a dijlurbing oj^~and withdrawing fro'rn the Ivqy- Jliip, and namely from the lat^ Sdemn humiliation :■ But alfo a Refufal of fuch things as we e defired by the Ccmmiffion of the late Ajfembly^ and Provincial Synod s, as ne- ^ceJfarytothe'Prefervatitm of the true Refonncd Religion;. And we have ]ufi . Caufe of fear J that the Reform :tionof Religion in Doctrine yWorJ})ip^ Difciplin^ a-id Governmet^ty is not intended to be fufficient-ly maintained and prefefved, when we find fuch Li nitatiojis and Rejlriciions, jn the late Declaration of the Committee of .Ejlates to the Parliament and Kingdom of Y.rK^\^\-i^,'N-\-L.rH at: ^HET WILL MAINTAIN AND PRE- SERVE "f HE REFORMATION OF RELIQION DOCTRINE, PVORSHlPy DISCIPLINE ANDmoVERNMENTAS- IS BT THE MERCY OF GOD, AND HIS MAJESTY'S GOODNESS E^TaIILISHED BY LAIV AMOJSIG US But how much more do the Scots Members of Parliament, withdraw from DiVine Worship in the Presbyterian Church, wl-ien thVy join for ordinary, the mod Part of them, with the Englijh Prelates and Curates in Cgmmunion,' while they remain at Parliament in London ; and yet when ever they come Home, they are received to the Lord's Table, if they will Join, without any. Requirement pf Satisfaction tor their Joining in Communion with the Abjured Prelates, idjy, U the Engagers gave not-fufficient Security for Preferring 'Reformation of Religion^ according to the Solemn League," in Dodrine, Worfhip, Difcipline andOpvero- -ment; btcaufe the Aflembly in Page 389, faiih concerning the Committee qf Eitates, their Limitation in that Declaration. As there is no fuch Limitatim iu the Covefianti fo we have net had fuch Pjoof of hih Majefiy^s Goodnefs, as to e/iablijji hy L^w,allt\mt.hflth been by the Mercy .of God,. enaSied in. the General AJfembfy. ; ,• Put liowmycii kfsis there a fufHcient Security • (.of ajl the Degcles ofR^focr macion, pjice attained in purelf Times ) by this Iiicorporatiiig Union ? .Tpa, on the Contrary, the Minifteft of this National Chur(;h are brought txD own 25 Englijh Prelates as their Lawful M^iflrates, aud in Praying ior th^ Britijh ^it-- lumeut, they give the Prelates a fhare of their Prayers •; for the Prelates are ii> eluded in their gene ralPhrafe of Pr^'iiig, Jlut God. would blefs prderve. and gpide ail in i^tlwrny over them, iif the.^xercife of Government, zdly,. By the ,:jucorporating Union there is an Eftablilhment of the ^;7>/j^ ParUment, wh^re- # . C in l8 The Church's going into the VNION, GHAP. II. in 2^ £^/i/S Prelates are principal conflituent Members, and the Generality "of the reft o:"the Members being Prelatick, they can e'afily carry any Thing they pleafe by Vote, in Prejudice of the Presbyterian Church of Scctkiid ; and ac- cordingly there is an A(5t made for Tolerating the Superftitious and- Idolatrous 'Englijh Popifh Ceremonies; and Damnable Herefies, in Scctlandy and the civikMa- giftrats are by L^w required to proted all that pleafe to Pradife the Superflition, Idolatry, and Damnable Hcrefies above faidj And fo it is plain, That the Incorporating Union, puts j Power in the Hand of a Parliament, that cart and doth eftablifli all thefe by a Law, -without controle , as fad Experi- ence proves. Bu#ndeed I cannot coiylain, ^^ x.\\t General Affemhly^ Ayiyio 1^48 did, that there is great Quari-elling at the Minifters of the prefent National Church of Scctlmdy their free Preaching againft the grofs and heinous Breaches of our Covenants, by Joining in Aflbciations and Military Confederacies, with Fopifli and Prelatick Malignants, ever fincc the Revolution; for feing they have not fuch faithful free Preachings, they cannot be Qiiarrelltjd for tliem by any ; But the Union hath brought in juft Quarrelling aboutMiniiii^rsfree'Swearing the Oath ©f Abjuration. '^. . . Nor can T complain of thefe that made the Uieiony as the General Aflembly 1548," did oi the Engagers^ That they refufed theDefire's of the Church ;. for the Vnioners ftrongly affirrh. That the Commiffion of the General Affemhh defired no more but the Ad of Security, and to make it an irritant (Saufe of the Eftablifh- ment of the Vniony 'Viz>. An Eflential and Fundamental Article, and that they got. And here I fliall take" notice of fomething Remarkable of that AB of Security oftheChtirch oi^ Scotland, Viz,. That the ACT is contradidory to it felf ; becaufe in one Claufe of it, there is a Statute, declaring the Church ©f.&:«/flK^ to be hereby fecured, for all Time coming, in Doctrine, Worfhip, Difcipline and Government, as (he was before the Union with England. And in another Claufe of it, Xhat AB'of S^c^/rZ/j is made an irritant Claufe of that In- corporating Vnion with England ; foe the Ad exprefly bears. That, the faid Adot Security is a Fundamental and Eflential Article; fo that Ad being an irritant Claufe of Eftablifhment of the Incorporanng Union, thereby 26 Eng- /(/H'relates are eftabliffa^d to be civil Magiftrates in 'Parliament, to rule in their tcivil Lordly Power over Scat^and in all civil Affairs ; and Minifters as well as other Subjeds, are to obey them, as much as any Lotds in Parliament. •And furely none will fay. That the Church, before-thc Union, taught that Do- ftrine, that all in Scotland muft obey the civil Lordh Power of the Englijh Pre- lates ; nor was the Church. bound *to pray that Goa would blefs them in the Exerctfe of their civit Power, -as now fhe is. . So that by one Claufe, it fecures the Church in the fame Freedom of Dodririe, VVorfhip, Discipline and Govern- ment, that (he had before the Union ; but \^ another Claufe, the 'ACT it felf i$ made an /m>zg/W, and extirpating ■■ Prelacy, are under f*c greater Oppreffion ^ for no fuch Pcrfoa muft appear m ParliameniS .GHAP.it. Is 'jufl Ground of SEPJRJTION. 21 Parliament, fo Hluch as to plead for thisCaiife of GOD. Aiid iliftead of the • friviledgcs of a Presbyterian Parliament, which was fworn, to be defended by that Ardcle of the Solemn League; by the Union, the Priviledges of a Prelatick Qlie, are.eftablifhed for all Tifne to come, to be the only Parliament of the three J^ingdoms; the Parliament of /r^/.z;?^, "being not only Prelatick alfo, bnfra Cyphec as to Power. Aiid what grievous and crying Oppreflions, this Incorporating UNION luth brought upon th^Subjeds of Sco?/^^, that are really well affected to the Covenants, and Work of Reformation, both as to their Sacred and Civil- Liberties aiid Priviledges, is manifeflly known by fad Experience, feing it is only owing to the Power of the united Parliament, that Scofj Subjeds are opprefled with the A&. of that Parliament, eftablifhing a Toleration o^ Englifi Prelatick Cu- rates to fet up and pradife £«^/7/!?)-popifli Ceremonies, and almoft all Hereticks to let up and praftjfe their Damnabk Herefas in Scotland; and the Civil Magi- ftrates are obliged *to proted all' thefe in the peaceable Exercife of thefe Superfti- tiens,and Hcrefies. And by another Ad of that united Parliament,Patronagesare ♦cltablifiied, which deprive People of their Chriftian Liberty of calling theit awn Miniftcrs. And by another Ad of the fame united Parliament, Intituled, An Aci for further Secmity of His Majejly' s Perfon and Government ^ and the Succejjioti oj the Croxm in the Heirs of the late Princefs Sophia, &c. Anno primo Georgii, Page 8,»9. of that Ad, it is fiatuted and ordained,?/?^? every Perfon thatrefufeth tofwear the Oath of Abjuration ( which obliges to maintain Prelacy ) Jhall be incapable to be any Magi flr ate ^officer. Civil, i)r Military, Minifter of the Gofpel, Pr»feJfor of Philofophy, er Divinity^ or Schoolmajier, Chaplain, "Tutor, or Guardian-, yea that every Perfon -who. rejufeth to fvjearthat Oath,Jhall be deprived of all Benefit of Laiw to recover any Debt^ or purftie any Bdl, Bmdj or Plaint in any C^urt /?2 Britain, and fhallbe liLewife incapa- ble of being E>:ecutor of any Perfon, or of any Legacy. And what grievous oppref- fmg Taxts are impofed by that united Parliament, all Men know. And iemg, the carrying on theunlawftil Engagement, in a- Way that made Du- ties to GOD and Religion ( to wit the Covenanted Reformation of the three Kingdoms) qualifit:d and limited , and Duties to the King'abfolute and unlimi- ted; becaufe the Engagers did not require and obtain Security from the King, before they brought him to London ( as was faid on the fecond Article') that htf- wOuld abolifli Popery, Prehcy and Superftition ; and fo the reiforing hin^to thef Exercife of Government wichoat this Security, is the making Dutiesto the King abiolute and untiraited, and Duties to GOD, and Religion fworn to- by thac Covenant, to be limited ; which the Allembly faith, is contrary to this third Article 01 the Solemn League; beca^ife, fay they, the Duty in preferving andd^^^ fending ins Majefiy's Pcrrlon and Authority,. is by the third Article of the Cov€-*' nant qualified wkh, and fubordinate unto the Prefervation and Defence of thcf true Religion, and Liberties «i: the Kingdoms. Then furely,itjs undeniably evident. That' the fame thir^ Article is farhior^ grofly broken by thQ Imorporatmg Union,'\vh^iQby the Covenanted Reformation 01 " ■" ~ Englaf4 22 'The CHVRCH:! going into the VNION, CHAP. IL England and If eland, is thruft out of Doors, and a Law eftaUIiflied for obliging all Kings o^ Great Britain to fwear, to maintain Prelacy, and be themfeives of that Communion, for all Tim© to come. ,^ Page 391. I'he fourth A, tide of the Co'Uenant isfo foullj br^hn, that they "Mo were hy that Article declared Enemies, Incendiaries^ Malignant s, and therefore to be brought^ to condign l^rinl and Punijbment, are now looked upon as Friends and AJJo^iats, and are the Men -who get mofl Favour and ProteBion, andfufHry of them implojed in Places of 'Trufly in the Army and Committees. But feing the fourth Article of the Solemn League was foully broken by fa- vouring, protefting, and not bringing^ to condign Punifliment malignant Prelatifts, but aflbciating with them^ and imploying fome of them in Places oi: Trait in Ar- my and Committees ; then certainly, that Article is far more foully broken by the Incorporating Union, becaufe by it the Presbyterian Nation of 6'cof/rt»^^, isn.oc aflb- ciated with a few, but incorporated with all the malignant ftrelatiUs and the Prelates themfelves oi England; and inftead of a few Malignantsin Places of truii, by the Union, a Prelatick Parliament is eftablifhe'd to rule the three Kingdoms Page 391. As for the fifth Article , inflead of endeavouring ti preferve Peace and UNION, 'a Breach is 'endeavoured between the Kingdoms, not only by taking in, and garrifbning their Frontier 'Towns, but alfo entering the Kingdom of England 'xu/V/r an Ar- my,. and joyning with the common Enemies of both Kingdoms, notwith/landingof an Of^r tf_a Treaty, upon the Propofittons of both Kingdoms, made by the Parliaf^ent 0/ England to the Parliament of this Kingdom. And whether the IVaj of thk Engagement can con- (til with the large Treaty between the Kingdoms, we [hall wi^h the honourable Committer of Efiates may yet take it into their (trims fecond Thoughts. And feing the Engagers did break the fifth Article oi: the ^lemn League, by catering England with ^n Army, and joynirjg in A(!bciacion vyith the common E- rjemies of both Kingdoms {vi^.. a Party of Prelatiils that refufed to take the So- lemn League; and therefore Malignants, as appears by the Declaration of both Kingdoms, Anno 1^43, cited before ) then certainly, the gomg into the Incor- porating Union, isa'greater Breachof that Article of" the Covenant; becaufe al- tho' the going into the Incorporating Union, is not the breaking a National Peace With Armies; yet it breaks both the Peace and Union that were fworn to, in the Solemn League, which was the peaceable Enjoyment of the Reformation, then eftablimed in the Kingdoms ; and that Union of the Covenant was a clofe Con- junftion of the Nations in profecuting the Ends of the Solemn League, in prefer- vin^ and propagating the Reformation of the three Kingdoms ; and in preferv- ing the King's Pcrfon'and Authority, the Priviledges of Parliament and Civil Li- berties ofthe Subjed, m Subordmation to Religion; and this Incorporating Union hath not .only more grofly broken that covenanted Peace and Union, than that unlawful Engagement did, but wholly ovctturned. the fame, both in England and Ireland, and eftablifhed a Prelatick Peace and Union in its Room : and the N;itionandChurchofJco///7«^j7?i II. and. his Brother's Time. • Pages 391, 592. T*he fi.\this alfo manifejlly broken i for we are thereby obliged to of' fijl and defend all th fe that entered into this League and Covenant ^ in maintaining and pwfuing thereof : whereas the Army now entered into England, is to afjifi and defend many, who have not entered into that League and Covenant : And for thofe who took the Covenant in tlmt Nation^ and continue faithful in it, what they may expeSi from fhis Army, may be colleBed,notonly from their Carriage towards their Brethren at Home: but alfo jrom that Claufe towards the Clofe of the late Declaration of the Committee of Eflaiesys'vL. And that We will do Prejudice, or use Violence to nonb (as far as We AILE AILE ) BUT TO SUCH AS OPPOSE Us, OR SUCH EnDS A- BOVE MENTIONED. It cannot be unknown, that many of the Englifh Nation, who are firm and faithful to the Covenant, and Presbyter ial Government, do, and will, according t9 their Places and Callings, oppofe fdme of thofe Ends above mentioned in that Declara- tion, as namely the reRoring both of King and Queen, without any Condition, 6r Security firji had from them ; and fo by that §.uk in the Declaration, they mufi expeB to be ufed as Enemies, not as Friends. That fixth Article is alfo broken i by a departing from the fir ft Principles and Refolutions : (ind by diniding and withdrawing from thofe that adhere thereunto, which hath been Before cleared by 'the Commifflon of the late General Affemhly in their Declaration in March, RepreJentatioUi and tther Papers publijhed in Print. By what the Qeneral Aflcmbly anno 1^48 faith here upon the fixth Article, it, is plain, that they charge the £w^^^m with breaking this Article of the Soleipii League, i. In that they Aflbciated* with many in England that did not take the Covenant, and fo defended thefcMalignants, being Aflbciats. 2. That they were cruel againft their Brethren at Home, who adhered to the Covenant. 3 . In that they would do Violence againft all tliat Oppofed them,ih Reftoring the King and Queen, without any Security had from them for abolifhing Popery and Prelacy. 4. In that the Engagers departed trom the firft Principles 'and Refolutions of pre- fervingand and propagating the covenanted Reformation in the Three King- doms. 5. In that they were Guilty of SCHISM, in dividing and withdrawing fiom their Brethren, who adhered to the Covenant and Reformation Efiablifhed. And it will be found,that thcfe who have gone into the Incorporating UNION, , have more grolly violated that fixth Article of our Solemn League, than the En- gagers d\6, in the mod part of thefe Particulars above exprelt, as by Comparifon will plainly appear. -Forj i. TUq Engagers did only by Allbciation flicker and defend MANTmEnglanf, who fhewed themfelves to be Malignanrs by their re- fufing to Swear the Sokran League aivi Covenant: But thefc who have gone intq C4 TheCHVRCH's gohg into theVNION. CHAP' 11. into the Legal Eftablifhment of the Iiii:6rporating UNION, have thereby g§ne ■ into, and firmly Eftabhflied ■ the Prelatick^Gonflitution of the* whole Kingdom of England, and alfo of poor Ire/an'dy being under Eyigltfh Power and Government .- And all'this in difeft Oppofition to that Article of the Covenant, which only o- bliges 5'cotJ Covenanters to defend all thofein England and Ireland, who enter into . this Covenant wmi us. idly. The Engagers were cruel againft- their Brethren at Home in^cot/and who adhered tothe Covenant ; in this 1 freely grant, that-tbe Soldiers of the Engage/s Army ufed many crtieri/j/?///t/>^agairvil the firm Covenanters in .ScofAz^;^, whi'ch the UNIONERS did never yet ufe againft the molt firm Adherents to the. Co- venants in this Nation : But it muft not be pad over m Silence, that of late, fotne oi thefe, who have gone intb theLe§al Eitablifnmcnt ofthatlncoiporatingUNI- ON are Threatning that all fhall be Banifii>d to J^me-ica, who withdraw from Communion with theprefent National Churchy which tne PROTESTERS are obliged to do, upon account of the Church's going into- that UNION; and p- thcr grofs Defedions, tho' ftideed, fo far as I can hear, none m Scotland are ar- rived-fo xhat pitch of Mercifefs Rage,againftM'eny for firm adhering to the Cove- nants, except Jurant Mmifters ; nor are they all fo viokn* either, l^ut only the mo9i'High-Fliers of them, who feem only to want a Prdatiek Lordly Power in the^r own Hand, . and tRen no. more living in Scotland for Covenanters. And. in . the mean Time, Tome //?^/j-i^/rm^ Jurants (how their I^rfeciitingSpirit, by an un- Yuft and Tyrannical Sentence, "^ot Depofing the Reverend Mr. Taylor MimiXp: of the Gp.^pel zt PFa?nphrayy the Tyrannical Injuftice, of , which Sentence, is foPub- lickly known, I flialHay no more about it. Ano her Iilftance of Jurants Cruel- ty a<^ainft Adherents to theCove.nants, is,That at their pretended GeneralAflem-. bly in the Year 1715, m^'hy oithera did vigoroufly Plead ibr having an Aft mSde tor Proceffing all Perfons who Withdraw from Communion with Jarants," ahdNon-Jarers joining together ; And thus they {>}amiy manifeitedto the World, their Pthgnsof inflicting the Cenfures of the Kirk, 'Excommunication not ex- cepted, upon air the PROTEST.ERS, and this is a palpablc.Evidence of Cruelty againil Men, for firm adhering.ro the covenanted Reformation. And what Ty- rannical Proceedings the Church' has ufed in her Judicatures Su-enorand Inferior lagain'fl: the Ke\^erend Mr. Jobn.Hefltmh andr'Mr; James Gikhrifh and HtJ-John. ■ Mmillan, are abundantly known. -idly, Tht Engager s^\^ declare, an4' refol-ve to do Violence agarnft all that would '©ppofe their Reitoring the King and Queen, without Security had from them for aboliihing Popery, Prelacy and'Superltition, Hcrc^V, Error, and Pro- fahenels, out of the Three Kingdom^, accordii?^ to the Solemn League and Cove- nant • Bat thefe that have .gone into the Incorporating UNION, have fettled an everlaft'ing'ConltitutioiTOfPl'elacy-ih England md Ireland;. 2Ln(i by a Fundamental Law appointed, that the ptefcnt, and all Succeeding Kings and Quecn,s, who fiikli Reign andRule Britain, fiiall at" their Coronation, Solemnly Swear, not on- CHAP. T I. Is jr.'fi GROVND ofSEPJRATIOIV. 25 \y to pf^fervc the Prelatick Conftitution ot'the Church of England^ including her • E}7glijh-?opi{h Ceremonies ; Bat alfo to join in Coramunion with the faid Church Oi England: And by uecejfary mifequeyice that Efiabl/fimem of the 'C^lONy hatk 'for ever excluded Presbyterians from being KINGS or QUEEN'S R'/lin^ Britain. And likewjfe, by evident neceflary confequence, all that hdvs gone into that Unalterable Eftablifliment of £W;}7j Prelacy, and Prelatick Kings over Britamt are obliged, in defence oi that Fundamental Law, to their outmofl Power, with Violence to Oppofe the Eftablifhing a Presbyterian King or Qiieen to Rulcthefc Nations. . Some Minifters, yea themoft part ofMinifters, for ought I know, m Scotland do, contrary to the clear light of Reafon, deny this plain and neceflary confe-- qiience, which mikes the Prelatick Ch^co^y o^ England md Lela/d wonder at Sects Mrnifters, for denying the plain Scnle of a Fundamental La-vv ; Yea, even ■; when the BritiJJj Parliament that Ratified the UNION, hath with a Witnefs,de- ' Glared before Sun and Moon, that the true Senfe of that unalterable Fundamen-* tal Law, is to Exclude Presbyterians, and by Solemn Oath to oblige the Kings of Britain to be of the Comm inion of the Prelatick Church o^ England ; And " -accordmgly the prefent King GEORGE was S.vorn at his. Coronation: And thac when thelaft Parliament of Quclu A\W was in Being, which was not DiiVolved for fome Months aiter the King's Oironation .- And is it not furprifing, that: Miniflers fliould deny both plain 'Reafon, and vifible Experience ? For feingthc Eritiib Parliament makes it evident. That by the UNION there is a Fundamen- tal Law Eftabhfhed, obliging all Kings and Qiieens of Britain to fwear, .they ihall be only of the Communion of the Prelatick Church ot £»g/^«^ .; Then furel/ there can be nothing m.ore pLiin, than, that thefe ihat have gone into that UNI- ON, are obliged with Power and Violence to Oppofe fetcing up either King oc ' Qiieen, contraty to their Fundamental Laws .- Efpecially feing, That by the •"Oathof Alleg.ance,Subje(5tsare fworn to Dei end the King's Perfon and Authori- ty, in Defence 01 the Conilitution of Government and Fundamental Laws ; but '' of that more afterwards. But if any Minillers in Scotland vvould have People Be- ■ lieve, that by the Union, all Presbyterian- Kings and Qj^ieens are not Excluded froni the 5)7>?;/j Throne, as I have faid abore, let no Man of Reafon believe' ir, contrary to both Reafon and Experience, until the Parliament of Britain either \ fet up a Presbyterian King or Qiieen to Rule Britainy or elfe give an Act ot Par- liament, declaring that the Senfe of that. Fundamental Law, which ooiiges all Kings and QLieens,who fliall Rule Britain.to be folemnly Sworn to be ot the Pre- latick Church of England, does not exclude, but allows the Rings, and Qiieens to be Presbytcriiris j but fuch a Contradidion is not to be cxpeded from a Parlia- ^ ment of fo miich Zeal for Prelacy, in direct Oppofition to the Solemn League. 4t/jiy,- The Engagers did break the fixth Article of the Solemn League, by de- parting from thehril Principles' and Refolntions, qtpreferving and propagating the Covenanted Retormation in the Thrgc Kingdoms ; For tho' tlie ^ms Pres- I> byceria^ 25 The CHVRCH's ^nrn^ hto the VMON, CHAP TI.' byteriatvEngagers did noc turn Profefl'cd'y Prelj.tick, more than vSVwj Ja rata ts, "yet they departed from thcfe Prmcip.les and Rjlblutions fworn to in the Covl- ■ , nant, by thftr Ailbciating with, a d thereby fhdt^ring and defending tiu^ny Ma- lignants, and by their Tolerating the Kmg and Q^veen's Idolatry and Saperfti- tion, inftead ot Extirpating Popery and Prelacy without Reipec^t or* Perfons, and by fetting themfelves to Oppo'e all that would not allow the a to Reilorc the King, without any folemn Security firfl had rrom him lor al^olifhing Popery, Prelacy, Superllition, JHerefy, Error and Profanenefs, and Eitabhihing the Cove- nanted Reformation of the Three Kingdoms. ^ ' Butthefe, who have gone into the Incorporating UNION, have departed far further from thefe Principles and Refolut.ons ot preferving and Propagating Reformation of Religion in Do^rine, Worfhip, Dilcipline and Government, in all the Three Kingdoms, according to the Solemn Le;.gae: For iniiead of Ihelter-^ ingand defcndmgfome Malignant Prclatiftsin Englat.d, The UNIONERS have Eilablifhed the Prelatick Conftitution ot the whole Kingdom of £;;^/rt«i and Ireland too ; And inftead of Refolving to Oppofe all firm Covenanters that would withftand TOLERATING the King's being of the Communion of the Prelatick Church oi England -y by the UKICJN there is a Fundamental Law E- ftabUflied, obliging all Kings and Queens that fhall Rule Britain, folemnly to :, fwear to be oi the Communion of the Prelatick Church o{ England: And how UNIONERS are obliged to Oppofe all Covenanters that.withftand the fame ; ^ that is fpokento above. And tho' Popifli Kings and Queens be excluded by; . the UNION : Yet all thePapifls in Scot/and, England^ and L eland are Tolerated by it, yea. fo far is the UNION from fecuring Rtformation,according tothefirft -Principles and Refolutions fworn to in the Solemn League, that on the contrary • it hath been likcPandora's Box, out of which have come all thefe demdly Maladies ^ De- ■_,flruU:ive to true Religion, viz-. Tolerdtion of Prelatick Minijlers, and Englifh Popijh - Ceremnnies in Scotland, together withfwar?ifs of Damnable Herefies, Refloration of Pa^ tronagesj and Multitudes of Oaths that are contrary to the Word of GOD, and our Ctienants -, Juch as the Oath of Abjuration, and unlimited Oaths of Allegiance, or . fit leafi having no Qf her Limitation than as they aye Relative to Enghfli Laws, and the Conflitutton of Government ERablijhed by the UNION, including Englifh ErafiiaH Supremacy and Prelacy, and obliging the Swearers to maintain all thefe. But ot that -inpre afterwards. - i $thly. The Engagers did break the dth Article of the Solemn League, \^y their waking a SQ\i\S^i; in dividing and withdrawing from their Brethren, whoad- riered to the Covenant and Reformation Eftablifhed. We have a very plain De- -icfiption what is the UNION of the Covenanted Church, and alio what is SCHISM from her, in the fixth Article of the Solemn League, i;/x.. Tloat lue Jhall -Affifi anS Defend all that Enter into this League and Covenant, inthe^maintaiHing and ^furfuing thereof, and Jhall not fuffer §ur filves direSlly, or indiretVy, by luhatfoever X^mbinatiQiti Perfittajion, or lerror^to kOivid^i or ^withdrawn from this kleJfedUNI- ^ r ' ON CHAP. n. Js 7///? GROVNDof SEPARATION. 27 ON and CojijunSiion, vhether to make Defe^ion to the 'contrary Party cr to give our fehes to deteJiable'Ldifierency^ »r -Neutrality in this Caufe. By which Deicription it is plain, that the UNION otthc Covenanted Church, confifts in this, that the Members thercoV firmly and ftedtaftly adhere to, and defend one another, in main- taining and Purfuingthe Ends of the Covenant, that is, in performance of alJ the Piities to GOD, and N4an, that the Word of GOD, and our Holy Rdigioti require ; All thtfe being fworn to in the Covenant to, be fledfahly • performed, whatever Combination, Perfwafion, or Terror fall in the way to hindir the Pre- fervation, and Propagation of Covenanted Reformation ofthefe Three King- doms, according to the Obligation of our Covenant, liz.. Tlie Solemn League. idly- By this Dvfcription it is evident. That the making of SCHIMS and RENTS in the Covenanted' Church, coniifls, ifi. In Mens making JpejeBionjrcm thif Caufc of GOD^'vh,. the Work of "Reformation of the three Kingdoms , £iKdjoy}.ing with thefe Parties^ cgainfl •vjhom the Covenant -was made. In plain Terms, when Men by any Combination, Periwafion or Terror, fall from the Duties of j preferving and propagating the Reformation of the three Kingdoms, fworn to, in- j the Covenant, andjoyn -with, fupport and defend the Parties againft whom the Covenant was made, liz,. Papifls, Prelatifts, 6"c. and relinquifh thehoneft Ad- •hcrents to the Covenant', that is making a SCHISM in the Covenanted Church. , ^dly. In thati luhen Men for any Combination:^ Terror or Perfwafion give themfehes. todetffluhle Indijferency, and' Neutrality in preferving and propagating the Covenanted Reformation oj the three Kingdoms : Like fo m^ny Gallio's, h they c-an get worldly- Eaie, and Advantage ; they are indiiferent whether Covenanted Reformation of thefe.Liindsfink qr iwtem; i^l^that they cowardly and difgracefuljy, confraryto; the very Letter ot the Covenant, forfake the Caufe of GOD, and honeft Adhe-^ rents to the Covenant^ as if they thought it Sin and Shame to own Chrifl liis. Caufe and Followers, and for Fear of Trouble orLofSj they quit Chrifl *s Party, SivA efpecially in the Day of publick Tellimony : And thus they are guilty of fliametul Sch.fn, in rcPxting from the Adherents to the Covenant and Work of Re- formation fworn to^and once eflablifhed in thefe three Kingdoms. For ^f^/i^j is not. ii'ithtis is againfl us, and he that gathereth not with usfcattereth. I find the UNION and> EENTING of the Covenanted Church thus explained, by the General- Af^^* bly of the Church of .^c(^//7»^ ^K?/o i<^45, Seflion j8,in their folemn and feafona- ble Warning, Page 283. Yea, in that Page, Men are declared Malignants, Eoe- mies, and Covenant-breakers, tho* they joyned not with Papiffs, or Pirelatifls, but were guilty of deuflable Neutrality, fpoken of above. And altho' ihe Engi^gcrs publifbed in. their Declaration, I'hat they would de" jendReligiin, Dothine, Woyjl^ipy Difcip'Une andGoverninent, as is by the Mercy of GOD^ md his Majfiy's Go&dnefs^ e/iab/ijfjed by Law among uSy Cited above: So that thejp piolcikcly'kteped i.p an outward Face of Presbytery, as well 2iS Scots UNIO* NHRS do j yea, and more ; for Engagers profefled to keep up the Reformation jQt the tliice Kin^oomS; thtn eflabhfhed by Law, tho' not with tnt King-^ Con- ^ D 2 Uut Z^ The CHVRCH's ^oin^ into the VNIGN, CH A^ fent ; yet thefe Engagers made, a SCHISM in ths Covcninted Chiipeh, by making Pefeaionfrom the Bka'ed UNION and CONJUNCTION fworn to, in the Co- venant, as above faid, and on the contrary, joyning in JVilbciation with Malignant ;^ Prelatifls againil whom, the Covenant was made : By which .fcandaloiis De- fedion, they wilfully threw themfelres out ot" Communion with the Covenanted ^ Church ; fo that fhe could not joyn in Communion with them, but judicially de- " barred them, until they gave publick Satisfadion, as above faid. .' '' But feing.the Engagers were guilty of SCHISM, by making Defedion to tltt contrary Part, in making an Ailbciation withw^^jy Malignants m England, as faiU above ; then furely the making an Incorporating UNION, for eitablifhing the ■ PrelatickConflitutionof the whole Kingdom oi Engl and y to Hand for all Ages, is' a far more grievous Defedion from the Union of the Covenanted Church,fwoai to ' m that fixth Article of the Solemn League, and^a far greater SCHISM : For thefe chat have gone into that Incorporating Union with the Prelatick Conditu-- tionof the Kmpdom otEnglayid, to ftand forall Ages,«they have not only with- drawn kom their Brethren, who adhere to. the Covenanted Reformation, and on tlrt; contrary joyntd with the Prelatick Patfy, againil whom the Covenant was iriude; b.-t .tifo '.uabUflied chat SCHISM, by a Law, to Hand to all Generations, and thereby ior ever thaift o it of Doors, the Reformation of the three Kingdoms, Iworn to , in the Solemn League. ■ _ Ohi that everfucn a Thing fliould Jiave been told in Gatlo, and publiflied in the Streets of v^jA'f/o«, to make ail the Malignant Prelatick Party rejoice I Quis'ta- liafando, temi-erei a Lachr)mis ? And by what I have faid, in compuniig the Incor- porating Union with the Prelatical Conftitutionof ||jeK.ngdomoi.£:,7^/^«^, with the unlawful Engagement, I have clearly proven that fceond Point I promifcdj namely, That gouig into the Legal . Eilabhfhmjnt of that Incorporating Union with England, is not only contrary to the Word of GOD, and true Rerbrmed . Religion of the Church oi' Scotland, in herpureft Times; but alfoafarmore grievous Breach ofevjsry one of ti.e Articles of our Solemn League, than the unlawful Engagement was .- For the Incorporating Union with England, ^doth b)^ a Law eftabliih a total and final Subvedion of our Solemn League ; as L have made dearly evident. ■ " . . _, , .;, The next Point I have to prove, is, That the prcfent National Church oiScct- land hath gone into the Eifablifhment of the Incorporating UNION, with the Prelatick Conflitutiou of the Kingdom of England. The Truth is, I think this fo evident to all, that do not wilfully fliut their Eyes, that I know no necefTity of Advancing Proofs for it; Except ift, for Formality of Difpurc, to offer Rea- Ibns tor Proving what is affirmed, zdly, Bccaufe many Miuifters of the National Church,* deny maniteil Tt-Uths, and would have People believe Things that are contrary both cb Reafoii. and fore felt Experience; as appears by what hath been faid on the Union, and will be made out iUrthe-r, in the following Part of this I CHAP -I r. // "J a (t "Ground of Sep ir at 'urn. 29 . But I proceed to ^rove, That the prefent National Church of Scotland hath ^one into the legal Eflablifhineut of the Incorporating UNION, with the Pre- latick Gonllitution of the Kingdom ot Englajid ; For Proving which, I offer thefc Reafons, Viz,. . .; ■ / . _ , _ ■ Firft, B'^caufe'the prefent National Church, hath gone into, and accepted of the A&: of Security of the Proteflant Religion, and Presbyterian Church Govern- ment, Ccncluded and Ratify 'd by th'^ Sects l^3.diim-:nty ymuary idt/j, 1707; in which Ad it. is. laid, 'That'this A i of Par'iament^ and Settlement therein-contained'^ pall be infert, and repented m an AEi of Parliamenty that fiall pafs for Agreeing and Concluding the forepiidTfreaty or Vnion, betvj'. t the two Kingdoms; and that th> fame .fiall 5e therein ejipre/ly declared to be a Fundamental and E[fe:tial Condition of the f aid 'Treaty of Union, in all 7ime ccvtirg. And accordingly in tiie Statutory kdi ot Ra- tification, it isexpreOy (aid; Wh:ch Articles of Union, and Acl immediatly . above- m-itin, Her Majefty, -with Advice aud Co}Jent aforefud. Statutes, EnaElt-and Orda'ns to be. arid continue mail 'time corning, the fire and perpetual Foundation of a Compleat ay^d Entire UNION of thj two Kingdoms of Scodand and England. Aid. that the. National Church hach gone into, accepted or, and relyes upon that Ad of Security, as the only S-carity and legal Eilabliftiment of the Church ot Sat,'a,:-d, is und»;nyably Evident by the Addrefs of the Commiflion of the Ge- neral Allcmbly, An;w ij 12, March 27th, fen t to the Qiieen, in which Addrefs t\-,zy (ly. And that Acl of Par liamf^nt Securing our. P-esbyterian Church Government y and the Efiablijhment tl:ereof,is tQ be held and obferved m all Time coming, as a funda^ 'r,:ehtal and EjJlmtalCondticn of the Treaty of Union, concluded betwixt the two King- do?m, Without any Alter atwntlmeof, or Derogation thereto, in any fort for ever. And a little before, fpeaking .of P.^cronagcs, they fay, IVliich we cmceive' is. contrary to .fiur Chuuh's Cvn(litution,fi well SECURED by the Treaty of Union, and likeways ratified byAdsofPavliamehtofboth Kmgdvms. And in the fame Year, Mrs. CarBairs, Blackiuell ^.ud Bailie, Comm.ffioners, did in the Name, and by the Appointmenc of the CommifTioniof the General AlTembly, prefent a Reprefentation to the Houfe of Lords of the Parliament oi Great Britain; in which, fpeaking of the Bill for Eftabhlhing Patronages, theyiay. That a Btll, as we humbly conceive, Jo nearly AffgEling the late Tnaty (f Union, in one of its nwfi Fundamental and Effential Articles, ■Rifpei'iing the- Prefe.vation of the Rights and Priviledges which our Church at thiuTtme was poffeffed of by Law : as a Thing, unalterable by any Judicature derivingitsCotJlitution from the faid Treaty. Secondly, Both Jarants and Nonjurauts, Commiflioners of the prefept National Church oi' Scotland, being fent by tne Commiilion of Affembly to King George, without any Reprefentation of. Grievances, freely accepted of Iiis Oath for Maintaining the Church oi Scotland, as fhe was eftablilhed by the Ad of Se- curity made at the Union ; ana the Aflembly of the National Church hath ac- cepted thereof, and acquiefced therein, and thanked King George for Ratifying and CQnficraing their legal EftabUiJbimeat by his Oath, as is evident by the Ge- neraj ,0 The CHVRCH's^owg irjto theVNlON, CHAP. IT. neral Aflemb1y*s -Letter to the King, recorded in the AflfofAflembly 171 5. Thirdly y Another Reafon to prove that the prefent National Church of Scot- IfltJ hath gone into that Incorporating Union with England, is an AB. made in their General Aflembly Anno 1710, whereby they appoint aH Members of the Church of Scotland to keep and obferve Fafts and Thankfgivings* when appoint- ed by the Civil Magiftrates • when its known to all Men, that the Civil Magi- flrates, who then and fince appoint thefe Fads andThankfgivings, were the Queen, King, and Privy Council of England^ of which for Ordinary, fomcfewot the Prelates ate ; -And making an Adi to obey them as lawful Magiftrates, was a clear Evidence of the Churches Confenting and going into that Union, by which Engltjh Prelates became Lawgivers to Scotland, idly. It lets us fee the Cfiurch her giving up a Part of the Minifterial Office to the Civil Magiftrate, in allowing the Mag iflrate, for ordinary, in a fettkd State of the Church, to appoint Fails andThankfgivings, contrai^y to theWord ofGod,and Juidgmentof the Reformed Church oi Scot! and in '[otm^T Times 5 as appears from CaMeriiwod's Hiftory, Page 179, where he proves from Jeremiah 4 Chap, and from the Pradice of the Church m Babylon, that the Church ought to appoint Fafts and Than|ifgivings ; For that which belongs to a Church qua Church, under a Heathen Magiftrat, the Chri- ftian Magiftrat hath no Power to take trom her. And, faith h«, if that be not a Part of the Minifterial Office, Mihifters have no Office till they be conflitute'by the Civil Magiftrate ^ and this was approven by the General Aflembly, which approved his Labours in that Book. But becaufe the National Church knew the great Diflatisfadion of many Godlf in the LanJ, on Account of the Church her giving up that Part ot the Mimllry tCKthe Mtgiftrat,the Commiffionof tjie K\x^ Anno I7i4,pretending to cxercile die Kirk's Intnnfick Power^publilhed a.Papcr that thty called an Ad of the Conmiiitioi^, appointing all the Members of the National Church of Scotland, carefully ;o ob- ' ferve and keep a Day of Thankfgiving for King George's peaceable and profperous^ Acceffion to the Throne of England ; and leaft People fhould miftake the Day of Thankfgiving, the Commiffion tO' Evidence rhe Truth and Faithfulnefs of their Intrinfick Power, appointed the ThawkfgiiMng tobekeeped precifcly upon the Day of and i:equired all Perfons to be careful in Keeping tha.t day ; But on the Back-fide ot their Printed Cypher, the King contradids the Com- milTion, which Intituled it an kti of the Commiflion; But the King in his JPio- clamation, calls it only ah Application to him to make an Ad by his Magiftra-. deal Authority ,for Keeping a Day of Thankfgiving-; and accordingly he declares in that Paper, That he with Advice of his Ptivy Council, made. the Ad for Keeping the-Thankfgivnig, and fix^d the-Day. And if he had not done fo, the Commiffion could never have kec'ped their own Day, for they bad determined none; Yea, by his Pioclarta^inon, he declared the Commiffion to have made 110 Ad for it, but only an Apphc^tion to him to make one .• And this is another Evi deuce of r|i© Nadonuft Qxaick ifte owning the Prelatick Privy Council of England CHAP. TT. /*■ 'J'i II Ground of Separathn jj EnoUnd to be theit Lawful Magillrates, eflablifhcd by the Incorporaf Ing UnicJn , with Eng'and. * . • • A Fifth Evidence of the National Church her going into the Legal Ef^abhfh- ment of that Jncorpor-it:iiJ? Union with EyigKr^d, iind r.ot only fo, bat firiiiy Adhering to that UNION, iSy becaufc neither their Co n.rjinion, the former half ■Year, ror their Pretended General Airenibly ir\ Afay ij\<; ^ would b/ any Meuns allow of a Rcprefentation.ot the liieorporating Unoh its bein. 30. Si^. 3. 4. and I Cor. ^2 f -The CHVRCH's going into the VNION CHAF, TI. 1 C r. II. 27. to the End of the CUapter. Jude 23. i Th;ff. 5.. 12. 2 'TAf/f. 5. 14, isr. I Cor. 5. 4,-5, 13. Matth. 18, 17, 7/>. 3. 10. And moreover,the '>k)n)urants, who join with J.irants in Aflembly, have Sworn the Oath of ATkg'ance, and S ibfcribed the Solc-rii Obligation of Allurance, to maintain and de'^nd the prefent Conftitiuion ot Government, which is undenyably the Con- ftitution of Government eftabUf|?ed by^ the- Unjon ; which Aflarance the J jrants" likew.fc Sabfcnbe, and the National Chiixh m lo doing, hath undenyably gone into the legal Eitablifhmcnt of that UNION. 8f/;//, It evidently appears, the National Church hath gone into the Legal Eftablifhment of the Incorporating UNION, fc-ing the Minifters of the Church both Jurants and Non-Jurants have by Confcnt'and Pradice gone into a Bond of Ailbciation, publifhed in Print through tlie Nation in 171^ .- For Defence of the prefent Conflitution of Government iii' Church and State by Law Ellablifhed, which, in thatBond ot Aflbciation they c.illed, THE GLORIOUS CONSTITU- TION OF CHURCH AND STATE. Their going into; that Aifociation is undenyably evident by their Prafttce, _ . ' '*, And altho^ the PRO FESTERS are truly; againfl the Popifh Pretender; As their Appearance in Arms againft hnti, makes manifeft; Yet they cannot underfland how the Minifief s of the National Church can lay "down their Lives, and perfwade their Flocks to lay down their Lives for Defence of Eraftian Supremacy, Prelacy and E'.gh]h-?6^\{h Ceremonies,- which are all in- cluded intheEftabhfhment ofGovernment by the IncorporarmgUnion : Surely the ■ Minifters and Chriflian Proteffo'rs of the Covenanted Church of .SVo^/^w^, aire bound by our Covenants, with their very Lives arci Fortunes, to Extirpate Pope- ry, Prelacy, Eraftianifm, Superftition, Herefie, Error and Profanencfs. And bence it is manifeft, that the Church's entering into folemn Obligations by Oaths and Bonds, obliging them to lay down thtir Lives in defence of the Le- gal Eftabliftiment ofErailianifm,Prelacy,and£:>2^/;);6Po .MfliCeremonies,andtheLtgal ■ Toleration ofDamnableHerefieSjwhich are parts of the preflntConllicution o:Go- , vernraent, as is manitefl; I lay the Church by ner fo doing, acteth plainly con- trary t6 the- Word of GOD, and our Covenants, as is clearly evident by what bath been faid,in comparing the UNION with the Unlawful Engag-menc. And .let the Minifters ot this National Church tell the World, if Prelates and Curat? can do more for the Defence of Eraftianilm and Prelacy; than to engage them- " felves by Solemn Oaths and Bonds to lay down their Lives in defence thereof? Andfeing the Ancient Covenanted Church o'i Scotland^hm^ clearly Demonff rat- ed, that the LORD hath by Commands exprefly forbidden AObciations, ^ and much moreincorporating UNIONS withMalignants, and all fuch, being Abjured by our Covenants j'neitherMinilters iiorMagiftrates can count itRebell/on againil the Lawful Power of Magiftrates that GOD hath Indicute ; when PRO- TESTERS refufe to lay down their Lives in Defence of Etiglrjh Eraftianifm and Prelacy ; For that would be, to make GOD's exprefs Command, and our Covenants, Rebellion .- Which would be Arbitrary Government and Per- fecucing Prdacvjfet up again. Thcl CF1fAP.II. ' JsJ.'^(lGrofwdofSEPJP..'JTIO.V, 35 The next Point, I promifed to fpeak to,, was to fliow that Miniflcrs, Eiders, and Chriftian Profeflbrs adhering to th.c Covenanted Reformation, have as;uft Ground o^ NEGAtlVE and POSITIVE SEPARATION from the prefent Nati- onal Church, upon account of her going into the Legal Eftablifhment of that Incorporating UNION with the Prelatick Conflitution of the Kingdom o^Eyig- landy and adhering to the fame ; as the Church of Scotland, in Adherence to the. above (aid Reformation, had to make both NEGATIVE and POSITIVE SEPA- RATION froin all thefe that went into the Unlaw£il Engagement, amio 1648, and retufed to give Publick Satisfadion, for the grofs §candal of going into that En~ gagement. **■ • - Now I have clearly Demonftrated, Firft, That going into the Unlawful En- gagement, and adhering to it, and fo refufing to give Publick SatisfatSion was julT Ground, for the true Covenanted Church, iti Adherence to the Covenanted Reformation, to malie both NEGATIVE and POSITIVE SEPARATION from all fuch Engagers. 2 J/y, I have alfo Demonftrated, that going into the Legal Eilablifliment of that Incorporating UNION, and defending that Conftitution, is plainly contrary to the Word of GOD, which forbids Aflbciation with Ma- lignants, and much more Incorporating, Union with them; And that it is al- fo afar more grofs and heinous Breach of all and every one of the Articles of our Solemn League. ^dly, I have made it clearly and unconteftably Evident, That the prefent Na- tional Church hath gone into the legal Eftablifhment of that Incorporating Union, with the Prelatick Conftitution of the Kingdom oi England, and by Solemn Oaths and Bonds, have obliged themfelves to Maintain and Defend that Prel^tirk Conilitution, efcablifhed by the UNION. From all which it ■plainly "follows, by evident neccflary Confequence, that Minifters, Elders and Chriftian'Profeilbrs, adhering to the Covenanted Reformation of the Church of Scotlandy in purell Times, naniely, between the Year of our Lord 1^38, and 1549,' Inclufive, have juft Ground to make, not only NEGATIVE, but alfo POSI- TiyE SEPARATION from the prefent National Church of Scotland ; and fet up Judicatures Diflinft and Separat from the faid NaticJnal Church. And thus I have made it clearly Evident, That the National Church o^ Scotland,- her going into, and Defending the Incorporating Union, with the Prelatick Conftiturion of the Kingdom of England, is juft Ground and Caufe of Separation, both NE- G ATI.VE and POSITIVE, from the faid National Church. CHAP. m 34 Stvedrhg the Oaib^ and Judicial Jpfrovi»g it ro he; free CHAP. JII C H A F. III. S E C T. I. Wherein Arguments are advanced for Proving the fecond Part of the J/fertionyWhich was this;Viz. That the mofl Part of the Minijlers of the Prefent Nati- enal Church ofScothndM^'eSworntoMaintain Euglifh ERASTIJNSUPREMACIQ pRELACZand Englifh ?opi{h CEREMONIES; and that lf i Jurants do not deny the Major, or firft Propofition of this Argument; for one of the keeneft Jurants, for Defending that Oath,m his Anfwer to the Sin- ful Nature of the Oath Difpla/d, Page 22^, faith. He ( viz. the Difplayer ) tnffis^n the IVord \ Dignity,'] andconfders-that Ecclefajiical Supremacy may he very j airly compre- hended in it. In Anf wer to which, the Jurant faith, / do conpjs, tf he would make it appear from one gocd Argument, that that is in it, I fiould rem/unce the Oath, and 'whoever ( if of the Church 0/ Scotland ) apprehends that to be in the Word, a^>d not- roithfianding takes the Oath, Sackcloath will fcarce Remove the Scandal given thereby. But 1 remark a Word here, that he Names no Cenfure due to ^hem that were not of the Church of Scotland, wRo apprehended Ecclefiaftical Supremacy to be ill it and yet took that Oathj fo he looks on it to be Lawful for £^^^7/^ and Irifi ^ ' ^ Nations CHAP. in. ^ ef Scandal Js';{ufi Grou^-jd of bLPJRATlON, ^^ Nations to Swear t5^ Maintain Ecclefiaftical Supremacy .- But fare he will never reconcile that with our Solemn League, idly. He fuppofes that others that arc not of the Church of 5co^//z,W, might iinderftand the Word,DIGNITY, to comprehend Ecclefiaftical Supremacy, and Swore the Oath in that Senfe. His SuppQlition alio weth, that the £;i^////6 Parliament, that framed it, might all Swear it mj^hat Senfi ; and furely they that framed it, knew beft what Senfe tliey in- tended by tlie Words of it. *' And feing the J.irants grant the firft Propofition of my Argument, I fiiall pro- ceed to prove the Minor or Second Propofition, which was this, Viz,. But the prcfent National Church, is' that National Church oi Scotland, of which the moft ■ Part of Minifters liave Sworn to maintain Engh^ ER ASTlAN SUPREMACY PRELACVand£/^5/^^-/'(?/'//^ CEREMONIES^.andiVow/wr/i^^^i joining with^^w- >- 19. Gen. 6. 5. fo when a Quaker faith, he hath lived fo many Years and hath not finned, the Apoftle anfwers by Confequence, you Qua- kers make God a Liar. O ! faith the Quaker, I abhor that Confequence, for in my Confcience I have no fiich Perfwafion, that the Eternal God of Unchangeable Truth is a Liar. Thus it is plain, that thefe who deny neceflary Confequences, they contradift the Spirit of God, fpeaking by the Apoflle. idly. This Scrip- ture lets us fee. That by the plain Rale of God's Word, wc may juftly con- demn Errors, Defeftions from Truth, and the like, upon neceflary Confequences, tho' the Parties Guilty deny never fo obftinatly. See Cahin, Vullichiuiy 2Lnd Bui- iinger, on i John i. 10. But I proceed to prove the Propofition by Parts,^a:,. iy?,To prove,That Jurant Minifters have fworn to maintain Englijh Eraftian SUPREMACY,PRELACY,and Eyighjh Popjh CEREMONIES, idly. To prove,That bothjarants and Nonjurants joyning together have made A^s of their GeneraiA flembly, whereby they have " " "^ ' . E a in ^6 Swe/tringtheOxth, and'Judici.il npprov:n^it to.b?fre4 CHAP. III. ( in a Judicial Way, materially approvcn the fwearing that Oatli, to be free of pub- lick Scandal ; fo that,-Thac grievous and notour Scandal cannot begotten removed in a regular Way, to reachEdification. 3dly. That thefa?ne isJuJiGrouud of Separatiabeth was inverted with; and by Vertue ot hisRegal Commiffion, delegated three Perlons, of whom one was a Lay-M ui, vi^.. Sir John Coggel, and the other two being Bifliops, to fit, and judge, cenfure and depole, as they faw Giroundfor, theBilliop of Dozv^, and other interior Clergy in his Diocefs ; and accordingly they depofed the Bifliop of Down, viz,Bi(hop Racket, Dcm Ward, and Mr. Mills : So did Qiieen^^w, by her Regal Parliamentary Eraftian Power, with Confcnt of Parliament, judicially fentence and fufpend Dodor Sacheverah And all Men know, That the Bifliops ot England duo, ilill conltuutQ in Manner ' ■ aiwl CHAP. III. Of Sandal, tsjuflGrotwdofSEPARATION. ^7 and Forra,as in Qiieen Ehz^abeth's Time ,• fo that the Kings and Queens of England, are invefled with the fame Power of Supremacy with which fhe wasj for Eccle- \ fiaftick Supremacy was annexed forever to the Crown oi England, by a Statute of ■ , King i/f^rj-' the ith. as is evident by his Statutes, Chapter 17. And this was corroborate by the Statutes in Qiieen EUz^abeth's Time. See her Statutes Chap, ik And King IVtlUam exprcfly declared, in his Commiffion for the Regal Vifi-. tation, above faid, Ihnt he gave that Commiffim to thefe three Mm aforefaid^ by ^r- iueof the Prerogative of Supremacy,, inherent in the Croiu«o/ England, annexed to it by King H^my^s Statute,- and corroborate l^y the Statutes of Qjieen Elizabeth. 6thly. That the Oath of Allegiance confined in the Oath of ABJURA-^ TlONj in its true^literal Senfey- did oblige Engliih Prelatick SubjeSis, to maintain and defend the Qiieens Perfon, and Government of England, while Jlje maintained and preferved the Conjlitution of Government^ Laws of that Kingdom, and Liberties of the Subjech, according asjhe ivasmof Jolemnly obliged by her Coronation Oath of England : For all Men grant. That the Oath of Coronation, and the Oath of Allegiance are Cor-*, relatives. And the Jurants grant, yea affirm, in the Dialogue betwixt a Mini- < fter and two Elders, Page 38, 77;??^ the Parliament of Englan* rt;^^ Scotland decla^ red the Forefeitme ( viz. of James the jth ) and entail' d the Crown to his^Protefiant Children, who fwore to govern according to Law, and have all along done fo : 7 here- fore /he Qneens Right' fiands good. And fo £;7^///// Subjects before t^e Union, did in their Oath of AlIegiance,contain'd in theOath ofAbjuratiOn ( in the Senfe oiScot^s Jurants ) direcfcly hvear to defend and maintain the Qiieen's Riglit, founded on her Coronation Oath, whereby fhe Swore to Govern England accordini^ to the Law, by which Law, ERASTIAN SUPREMACY, PRELACY, and Englijh Popi(h CEREMONIES are eftabliflicd ; And that it is unconteftably pla]n,that£;?^////j Frtlatick Subjtfts, yea all the Subjefts of England,by the proper Literal Senle of their Oath of Allegiance in the Oath of Abjuration did fwear to maintain and defend the Queen's Right, and Government, in defending and maintainmgERASTIAN SUPREMACY, PRELACY,and Englifi Popijh CERE MONIES. And this is the true Literal Senie of that Oath of Allegiance, as 'originally • intended by the Englijh Parliament, and their Aits of Limitation, •and further Limitation, by which it was*impofed on all Englijh Subjeds. ythly, That the Oath of Allegiance contained in the Oath of Abjuration, did by the. Particle AS, refer to the ASi of Limitation, and further Limitation, whereby the Pro- tejlant Sv.cceffion of Queen Anne, and of the EleBoral Houfe 0/ Hanover wasfet'led. 8thiy, All grant, T'hat the Ati of Li?nitatiGn) and further Limitation, a,e FundU- mental Laws, Eflabklhing the whde Conjlitution &f England ;« Chunh and otate; And particularly Supremacy and Prelacy. ''.___ pthly, All do freely grant. That the Prelatick Parliament of GvQOit Bntaiv did never y^'t a'ter the Matter and Form of thefe Aces of Limitation, nor give any Parliumen" tary Explication, declaring that thefe Acls by which the Oath of Abjuratun is impofd,- do not now, oblige the Swearer to iKaimain Englilh Erafiian Supremacy and Prelach ^ ' " ■ ' ' the wmm |S Siveifing the Oith, and Judicid approving it to he free CHAP. III. the Oath in it's Literal Senfe, formerly obliged all SubjeBs under Englifll Government ^ hy their Oath of Allegiance contained in it. '" lothly. All mi*ft grant, That the United Parliament of Britain did ne'v'er give an\ j^xplanation oft he Oath of Abjuration y declaring. That the faid Oath doth not now bear . the fame Literal Senfe, that originally it had for maintaining Englifh SUPREMACYy and PRELACY by the Oath of Allegiance^ contained in that Oath of Abjuration. 1 ithly. The Coinmiffioners of the General Afl'embly of the prefent National Church ot Scotland, who were the Reprefentatives ot the Church, Inverted with a • Commiflion to aft inName and Behalf of theNational Church, in the Conference be- tween themand thcPROfESTERS^heldatP^^/^owf mjuly i7i4.Thefe Comwif-' fioncrs above faid did pubhckly grant in that Conference (I meaathe Extrajudicial Conference)chePROTESTERS there prefent,havingProtefted againft theConftitu- tion,Authority,and judicial Ads of the General Aflembly and theirCommiflioners. Thefe Commiflioders, I fay, did in Publick Conference, before many Han- dreds grant -^That Scots Mimfiers didjiuear the Oath of Abjuration in dire:l Obedi- Ufon which the Ati of Toleration was founded, and to which it refers, and with which, as its Foundation, 'it is infeparably connected. For the Ad of Toleration is only a Con- fequential Law, which following upon the Union, extends the' Power of the Englijb Adsot Limitation^, and Oath of Abjuration bver Scotland, where neither of them could reach, befoYQ Scotland did incorporate into the Prelatick Confti- tution of England. 2ly. That they d[dfwear the Oath, in Obedience to thefe Funda- mental Laws of England, which eRablijh the whole Conflitution of Church and State of England: Becaufe, tho' the Oath was f worn in Scot land, m Obedience to the Ad of Toleration,- it was principally upon Account that the Ad of Toleration ex- tended the Power of thefe Englijh Laws and Oaths over Scotland ; to which En- glijb Laws the Oath exprefly refers, and in Obedience to the Authority of which It was fworn. \%ly. Jurants,inthe Dialogue betwixt a Minifterand two Elders, Pages 23, 24. grant, 7«a? the /wearing the Oath of Abjuration, is aa owning and ratifying of the UNION. The fecond Point I promifed to clear, was upon thefe ConcefTions, which Jarants grant, and cannot in Reafon deny ; I promifed to prove, Tnat the Oath of Abjura- tion, even in its proper liceral Senfe, obliges Jarants to !*iaintain and defend Englijh ERASTIAN SUPREMACY, PRELACY, and ^ ^t/h-popi/h CEREMONIES. And firfi, I prove tWs by a Maxim of Reguiai Monarchic til O^vernment of the Kingdoms of £«ro6*, i/ii. * ) ,v. THE KING'S OATH OF CORONATION, AND THE PEOPLE'S OATH OF ALLEGIANCE, ARE IN EFFECT, BUT S^VEARING TO THE CONSTITUTION, IN THE ONE TO GOVERN, AND THE OTIiER CHAP. in. " Of SCANDAL, is "Jufi Ground of SEPARATION. J9 OTHER TO BE GOVERNED ACCORDING TO IT. That is, ac- cording to the Conflitutioii then eftablifiied My Law. For this/ee the Book intitu-. led, T'he Judgment of -whole Kingdoms and Nations. Page 1 1. And by this it is evident. That the true Literal Senfe of the King's Oath of C«- ronation,is to Rule and Govern' according to Law, (as Jurants fay,) in preferviiig the Cotiiiitution and Laws Eftablifhed, and Ruling according* to the fame. And hence it is alfo manifeft, that the true Literal Senfe of the Subjeds Oath of AUe- giance,isto obey i he King according to that Conftitution, and to Maintain and Defend his Perfon and Government, in Maintaining and Preferving the Conftitu- ticfn and Laws then in Being ; Efpecially Fundamental'Laws. And all Men know, that the Incorporating UNION, is the prefent Conflitution of Geat Britain. which hath Eitabliflied Englifh Eraftiari SUPREMACY, PRELACY, and.£^.^/«^ fopfh CEREMONIESjby Fundamental Laws,fettled to ftand to all Generations, as was proven already -. And therefore it's undenyable, that the Swearing the Oath of Abjuration,containing an Oath of Allegiance,which in it's true Literal Senfe obliges the Swcarers,to maintain the United Conflitution of Britain^ and Fundamental Laws of that Eftablifhmcnt; whereby in theLiteral Senfe oftheOath, Turants are obliged to" maintain Englifli Eraftian SUPREMACY, PRELACY, and Englijh-poptfi CEREMONIES. Yea, according to that Maxim, anordinary Oath of Allegiance, under this United Eftablifliment, in it's Literal Senfe, will oblige the Swearers to maintain Englifi Eraftian SUPREMACY, PRELACY 2iud EngliJh-PopijhCEKEMO^mS, But feing the Oath of Abjuration contains an Englijh Oath of Allegiance, Properly and Originally Intended by the ^w^Ay/j Prelatick Parliament, to oblige the Subjeds to Maintain and Defend their Prelatick Conftitution, eftablifhed by thefe very Fundamental Laws, to which the Oath Refers, and in Obedience to which it was Sworn, long before the Union, and tl^ Parliament of Great Britain utterly refufed to put any other Senfe upon it; Scotland now being an Incorporac Part oi England; the Prelatick Parliament of Great Britain, being more tendec of their own Security of Supremacy and Prelacy,than regardful of ^c^jj Men's Con- fcicnces, they allowed the Oath to retain the fame literal Senfe ithadfirft, to try UNIONERS in Scotland, how they would digeft Enghjh Oaths, in Matter, From, and literal Signification, intended by the Impofers, and Sworn before by Enghjh Subjeas,for Preferving the Prelatick Conftitution of £/f^/j»/^. And hence •we fee, that Scots "Jurants haye Sworn that Oath, as Subjeds oi England, it being an Englih 0..n, contaming 4l^e^iance for Maintaining Englijh Conftitution m i Church and State 2^{y, Rerening to £«^/^^ Fundamental Laws eftablifhing the fame. 3 J-V, Swornin direft Obedience to thefe Laws. 4f/[>/>', The Prelatick Par- liament utterly rtfulingtogivc eafetotheConfciences ofany in ^m/^«^, by de- claringi that It was not intended by the Parliament of Great Britain, to fecure the iV^ Conftitution of Supremacy and Prelacy, (as indeed it had been a Con- tradidion to therafelves to make an Oath of AUcgiance not to fecure their Con- ftitution 40 Stvearin^ theOAth^cwd ^jCidicUl ./ipproviKg it to he free CHAP. III. fiitutlon, and Fundamental Laws eftablifoed by the Union ) and therefore it plainly contains an Englijh Oath oF Allegiance, as it wasfirft framed and intended. Andfe.ng it contains an Engliji Oath of Allegiance, I (liall flibw what an Eiiglih Oath of Allegiance, in its true genuine literal Senfe, obliges to, according to tiie . ' Parliament 28. Edivavdljl, the Parliament by exprefs Ad, wrote to Pope Boniface y faying. By venue of our Oath ..we are bound to the OhfevucJion and Dejcnce of the Liherties, Cujloms and Laws of our Country^ which, by the Help of Gody we will defend with our whole Power. ' ' And, in Jh Judgment of whole Kingdoms a>id Nations page 2)th;, fpeaking h( England, it is hid by the Author, a ftrong Rev olutioner,0^r ^/iCfy?(;rj?/;o«{j/;? it ahfolutely necejjary, that whoever would be their Kingy Jhould make a Compacl with them, and he as jnuch engaged by Oath, to grant their Priviledges'to them, as they were to Swear Allegiance to him; and commonly that was fir fl dene by their Kings, before tha would engage to be their SubjeBs. And when thefe Patnx leges, thefe ancient Lazasy were violated, they conjiantly complain' d of^oe Injiiftice of the ABion, requiring the Obfervaticn of them ; and when they could not prevail by fair Means, they quitted, their 'Subjellion. and fought to recover their Right by Arms. In JJmfy this Oath and Com- faliy is -the very Ground and Caufe of the Oath of Allegiance. Accordingly Lord Chan- cellorFonQkvit declaresy Lib. p. Pag. 23. That our Kings are Political Kings y who re- ceive their Power from the People. Thus we fee. That by the patria leges, the An- cient Country Laws of England, the Oath of Coronation and Allegiance, were two Parts of .a Compaft of equal Extent, binding in their genuine literal Senfe,. both King and People, i:o maintain their Conftitution of Church and State, and Laws eflablifning the fame. • . But feing Scots Jurant Miniflers, life a World of unintelligible. Quiblcs, upon" SUCCESSION ESTABLISHED BY LAW, alledging, it means only a Settling or Defigning and Appointing a certain Line of Perfons to fucceed, without any refpeft to the Eftablifliment of the Conititution of Government of that King- dom in Church and State, over which that SUCCESSION is to Reign ; fo that, according- to them, Swearing to the Succeflion, includes no Obligation to defend the Conilitution of Government of that Kingdom, over which the Suc- ceflbr is to Rule. In Anfwer to this,. I fliall offer the very Words of one of the moft learn 'd and firm Friends to King George's Litereft, holding forth to us the trueMeaningof^UCCESSION ESTABLISHED BY LAW, according to the Judgment of EngUJh Revdlutioners ; as we have it in The Judgment of whole Kingdoms and Nations y which was Printed at London, and entered according to Law, Anno 1714, and therefore fpeaks" the true Mind of Hanoverian Revpluti- oners, by whom it is recommended to all the Families o^ England, to' let them underftandtheEftabliGiment ofSucceffion in its true Senfe, as fettled by. Law. In t\i^tBooV,Pagf2^, it's faid, Grotius de jure belli. Lib. i. Cap: 3. S^B. 11. -fnith^ Succefm ahni4Qfsm dsnminat the Manner, orfpecify th tmrnlai Form of CHAP. in. Of Sc and aI, is "JuH Grour^d of Separation' 41 the Governor, but is cnly a CcntiKuation of that Right which v. as firjl fettled', and as much as zvas nv ft given, is afterwards continued by Succeffon, and rib more. A^d then zvith htm, faith the Author, we mas reafnably 'InfeYy THAT SUCCESSION ON- LY BRINGS DOWN TO KINGS WHAT THE FIRST ELECTION GAVE, AND MAKES THEM ONLY KINGS ACCORDING TO COMPACT, AND WITH THE CONDITIONS AGREED ON AT THE FIRST ADMISSION OF THEIR PROGENITORS TO THE EX- ERCISE OF THE ROYAL AUTHORITY. This puts the Matter out of Doubt,- that Euglifi Rcvolutioners nnderil:and and defign EflabHfhraent ot Suc- cefiion by Law, to include all the Conditions of .Government, that former Kings and Queen Ann were Sworn to by their Coronation Oath,^2:,. To maintain t*RE- LACY,SUPREMACY,6~c. eftabhflied by Law. And hence it is-plain,That thefe who Swear the Oath of Abjuration in the true literal Senie, according -to Endifh Laws cLiablifhing the Succefpon, are obliged to defend the legal Eftablifli- maitof £;«^///Z. SUPREMACY, PRELACY, &c. included in that ESTABLISH- MENT OF SUCCESSION fettled by Law. And in The Judgment of whole Kiyigdoms and Nations, Page 2^, it's faid, In the Tear 1269, a Parliament was held at Marlborough, where the Statutes called the Sta- tutes d/MarlbqjfOUgh were enaHed; in the $th Chapter of which, it is decreed, T'hat thf GREAT CHARTER, and CH^RT'ER DE FORREST A, P) all be obferved in all their Articles, both concerning the King and his SubjeEls. And here ( faith the Lord Coke)//- is to be obferved, That after this Parliament, neither Magna Charta, nor Charta de Forrella, xu^i- ever atte'mpted to be impugned or quefiionedy whereupon Peace and Tranquility have Jince enfued. Inflit. Lib. 2. Page 102. [ Magna Ch^arta being on'y an Abridgment of cur Ancient Laws and Cufloms, the King I thatfwears toit, Jwearsto them all, and I^ NOT ADMITTED TO BE THE IN- I TERPRETER OFIT, or to determine what is g$od or evil, fit to be obferved -or annull- ed in it, and he can have no more Power over the ref}. This Jjaving been confirmed by [, 7nOYe Parliaments than we h.}ve had Kings fmce that Time, the fame Obligation mu(l ly I fiill upon them all, as upon Kings John and Henry, in whofe Ji^^ that Claim of Right I was compiled. ^We know the Value our Ancefiors fet upon their Liberties, and the Cou- j rage with which they defended them ; and we can have no better Example to encourage j us nezsr to fuffer them to be violated or diminijhed. . This lets us fee, the literal I Scnfe of the King's Oath of Coronation is fixed by Law, and put out of his Power to interpret or alter the fame. And the Subjeds Oath is Reciprocal of the fame Ektent, and therefore fixed in Extent of its Senfe by the fame Laws. I prove ihat the Subjed's Oath of Fealty "or Allegiance is reciprocal with the King's Oath of Coronation, from The Judgment of whle Kingdoms, &c. Page 24. Florence 0/ Worcefler,Siraon 0/ Durham^W R. ofH.ovcdcn,expre/ly fay. That VJii- liam called the Conqueror, made a League or CompaEi with the Arch-Bijhops, Bifiops, Eat Is and Nobles of the Land, vdho met him at BwOrcham, and Swore Fealty to him ; fo he reciprgcally beivg required fj to do by the Arch-B^hfip of York, mad^ his Perfonal F Oath 4-2 Siveafhg the Oath^and ^udicUl Apprcwin^ it to he free CHAP. Til ♦ Oath Ifefor^ the Ah at 0/ 6V. Peter, to defend the Holy Church of God^ hnd Re^ors . of the fd^e, to govern dllthe People Sub jeB to him Jujlly, to ef?a'jiijh e'-^ual Laujs, and to fee thim duly executed. And Ingulphus, hii Secretary, faithy That in Performance of -. hisOathy he under fevereB Penalties, proclaimedy that the Laws of King Edward the tonfefforfbottld lie perpetual and autherUicaly dnd be obferved inviolably thro' the whk KiHidoni of England. Seing IVtUiamtht Conqueror, and the Lords and Bifhops oiEhglatidy iJiade a League or Compad, and mutually or reciprocally Swore to each othef, for the Prefervation of their Conftitution, both of Church and State, and Laws ellablifliing the fame, it is moft clearly evident,That the. Oaths of Coronation and Allegiance, were of equal Extent in literal Scnfe, both being fixt and determined in^their Senfe, by the Laws and Conftitution to which -they , referred, and for the Prefervation of which they were Sworn. And we plainly iee, that Kings have.no Power to Literpret their Oath of Coronation, and then how unreafonable it is for Scots Mmifters, to affirm. That they have Power to Interpret their Oath of Allegiance, contained in their Oath oF Abjuration,! leave "^ to all fober rational Men to judge. However, by what is faid above, it is plain. That the Oath of Allegiance, con!ained in the Oath of Abjuration, in its literal Senfe obliged all Engl§t Subjects to maintain the whole En^ijh Conftitution In ] Church & State,SUPR£MACY,PRELACY,drf. included ; andfeing Scotland is an i Incorporat Part of £«^/^W, itismanifeft. That the fame Oath in Matter and ] Forin, referring to, impofed by, and Sworn indired Obedience .to the fame 5 Fundamental Laws of Engtandy without any Parliamentary Explication, it muft oblige Scots jarantstothe fame Things that it obliged EngJtjh. But that which puts it beyond Debate, among all Men,who have notfetthem- felvesto deny plain Truth, is the exprefs Words of that Aft of Parliament, by which the Oath was impofed, and to which it exprefly refers, and in Obedience to which it was fworn, Viz., The Ad of further Limitation, Printed in FoliOy Pag. id, where it's faid', Ork-vihichfaid Acls ( viz. of Limitation and further Limitati- on ) the Pr^ervation of your Majeflys Royal Perfm and Government, and . the main- taining of the Church 0/ England as by Lazv ef7ablijhed,do (under God) entirely Depend ' to the intent therefore, that thefe Ath may be for ever inviolably preferved, it is hereby EnaBedy That Magrjirats, Officers y Civil and Military , and Miniftersy 3iC. jhall take the following Cathy viz. of Abjuration. « . , . 1 By that Ad, the Oath of Abjuration is as direaiy and exprefly mtended an^ appointed for Obliging all Jurants to maintain the' Prelatick Church oi England, eftablifhed by Law, as it r^ tor the Defen2:e of the Queen's Perfon, and Govern- ment : For aljl thele Three, viz.. The Qiiccn's Royal Perfon, and Government, and the Maintainitig of the Church of England, as by Law eftablifhed, are join- ed together in one afffirmative Sentence, by the copulative Particle CAND,) and fo they are J^ll Three equally affirmed to be maintained ; becaufe when Divines and Philofophers join fevcral Parts of an affirmative Proportion by the copula- fiv« Particle AND, they affirm ali the Parts alike. As for Example, / believe ^ ^'- • - ■ ^- - - ^^ CHAP. in. Of Sarjdd, is jufl GROVND of SEPJRJTlON. 43 ' in'God the Father Almighty, and in'Jefus Chri/i, and in the Holy Ghofl. Emlifi Ju- rants grant it obliges by that Law, to maintain xhtEngUJh Conflitution of Church and State ; but Sats Miniflers think fliameto fay, they have Syvorn to^aintain Prelacy, and therefore they fay, that Ad appoints the Oath to maintain only the fubftantiai Things ofthefe Ads, which, they fay, are only ):he Safety of the Queen, and Uie Proteftant SuccefTion in the Fatnily of Hanover ^ as in the Dialogue betwixt a Minifter and Two Elders, Pag, 104 ^ but that is fatfe, as appears by what I have faid on the copulative Propofition of the Ad abovefaid. 2dly. It's odd .to hear Minifters affirm. That when the Eftablifhraentofa Na- tiotial Church is made a. principal eflential Part of a: Fundamental Law, its no fubilantial Part of that Law, to be inviolably preferved by that Nation ; for that fuppofes, that a Nation needs not contdid for their Religion. 3^/y. It is accounted fo great a fubftantiai Part of the Fundamental Laws of Ey:gland, that the altering the Conilitution of the Church was one of the chief Caufes,that dethroned j^^zwfj jth'. as in 77je Judgment of whole- Kingdoms, 5cc.)p3,g& 47, Where was the DoBrine of ahfolute pa/Jtve Obedience and Loyalty, when the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, Gentlemen and Commonality invited the Prince of Orange t» come with armed Forces, to oblige the LORD's Anointed, GOD's Vice-gerent, once their Lawful Sovereign. 'To oblige him to revoke what he had done amifs, and bind him in Chains-, and hii Nobles in Fetters of Iron, thathefhould not govern according to. his Will and Pleafure, but according to Law, their MVl and Pkafure ? and when the Bijhops re- jufed to difown {to King James ) their inviting over theFrince, or tofubfcribe an Abhor- renct of the Invitation, by vchichit appears ( faith the Author) that they did inhfite him \ . over^ or allowed of Rejiflame, when their Church%)as in Danger. This makes i^ plain. That the Eftablifhment of the Church of England is a chief fubftantiai Principle I of the Fundamental La.\vs of England, zs Englifi Men underftand it, xho* Scots I Jurants moft unreafonabJy deny the farift. I 4/y. It'sundenyable, That the Oath of Allegiance in the Oath of Abjuration, i in its literal Senfe, aod as appointed by the Aft of further Limitation, obliges I the Jurants to maintain the Queen of £»^A?k^'s Perfon, and the Government of I ' tl^ united Realm oi Britain, or elfe it had not the common Senfe ofan Oath of Al- I legiance at all, and her Government of the united Realm of Britain, did undeny- I ably include her Prelatick Supremacy in governing S.v^Ai;/^ ; For Jurants grant I in the Dialogue betwixt a Minifter and'^two Elders, Page '38. Yea, affirm, I ^hat the Parliaments of England and Scotland entailed the Crown to hii ( viz. James 1 the Jth's) Protefiant Children, who fwor^ to govern according to Law, and Imve all a- long done fo;. the Queens Right therefore ( fay they ) /lands good. And fo her Go- I vernment ot Gre.j; Britain according to Law ijicludes ER ASTIAN SUPREMA- CY, 16" c. But then Jarants flee to another Shift, ^s bad us the former, for defending theic I . AUcitioiju That the Oath obligesyiot to maintain the Prelatick Churcii of Eng- I land, m The Dialogue betwixt a Minijier and rm E/dersy?^QQ 6p. viz.. That at the F 2 fraining 44 Swedrin;ithe Oatky a^d Judicial a^^rovin^ it to lefree GHAP. Ilf. 'framing the Oath m Parliament Anno 1701, there was a CIaufe_ offered to be ad- ded to the Bill, forfecuring the Church o^ England, to be included in" the Body of the Oath ; the Ciaufe was this, viz.. And I will to tie utmcflof my Po-vcer fupport, maintain a-'id defend the Regal Government of this ReaUn in King^ Lords and Commons ^ and the Church of ^i\g\a.ndj as by Law eftahlijhed, with Liberty ofConfciencej as is tO" Jeratedby Law. The Queftion put, Shall the Ciaufe thus amended /land in ihe Bill (viz,, to be- formed into the Body oFthe Oath, or, /hall the Form.xujthout that Ciaufe be^ as now the Oath Bands at this Day ) it carried in the Negative : And theretore Scots ]a- rants conclude. That ieing thatCIajufe was nor put in the Body oF the Oath, K . cannot oblige jurants to maintain the PREL ATICK 'Church o[ England. But every Man oFSenfe and R.^aroh plainly fees the Falfliood oF the Scots }a- rants Argument, in that, ///?, BvCaufe I have proven the contrary already by the Judgment o^ Engli/J} ]urants,-that,befl knew the Sqnle oF their own Laws and Oaths, idly. According to Scots Jurants the Oath of Abjuration obliges not Ju- rants to maintain any thing that was contained in that Ciaufe, that the Engli/b- ■ Parliament did not put into the Body of the Oath j and then the Oath did not oblige Engli/h Subjeds by their Oath oF Allegiance tg fupport and defend the Re- gal Government of £:»^/^«^, in King, Lords, and Commons, but then their Oath ol Allegiance could have no common Senfe. ^d'y. The. Reafonwhythe Engli/h Parliament put not in that Ciaufe, was, Becaufe they knew well, that their Oaths of Allegiance in the literal Senfe oblige to defend their whole- Conditution in Church and State; and therefore faw it an'e^dlefs Repetition, to put that Ciaufe into the Body of the Oath, feing b)fctheir Aci of further Limitation, they had as ex- prefly appointed that Oath for maintaining their PREL ATICK Church, as For defending the Queen's P.erfori, and Government j as I have clearly proven already. v m ^ rn" But in ^e 'Dialogue betwixt a MiniHer and two Elders ^ Scots Jarants flse to a third Defence, the woril of all, by alledgmg, That thefe Ads ot Limitation, and furtlier Limitation no other VVay fecures the Prelatick Church of England, but only by Confequence, viz,. In fecuring the Protestant .Succession, the Church; of England, and Scotland, and . Diflenters in England, with all the Sedarians, are fecured againft Popery. The Author's Words are thefe, liz,. The Secu,ity,-> of the Church 0/' England againfi Popery, depends upon the firfl and principal Ciaufe of ■ thefe AEis, vii.the PROTESTANT SUCCESSlON^andf doe.- the Security of the Q/fi Jenters in England ; yea, and our Church Government in this Nation. The/e A is dc not fecure the Di ([enters again/i the Church d^ England, nor the Se^arians and othey Prote/lanti ff\ neither do they fecure the Church of England againf} the Di/fenters, and Other Prote/la its, but only agam/i Popery, by the impregnable Bulwark of a Revolution md- Prote/lant Succejfon: And I think it no way contrary to our Principles ( faith he) tofwearmOath, [M'OSED IVITH THIS INTENTION, I had much raihef have the Church of England to /land; than Popeij to come m its Place, AND THAT Thet ^^^ ^^ ^^^ St AND Together. ^ "^ CHAP. IIT. OfSu^fdal, is ^uft Grofwl of SEP'JRJTION. 4^ I cann<7^ fA^ ^rroughs choojingyand fending Reprefentatives to the united Parliament of %ntz\r\y the faying "Taxes upon Ale^ Candle^ and^ the like, the receiving, or paying Britifh Coin, and- ifging Plaintif or Defendant before any of her Majefifs Courts of Witi.in fince the Vnion, ■ihe ohtempering any of the ABs of Parliament 0/ Great Britian. 7^/>? Man that does any efthefe, dees a f much to hoipologate the Union, as the Abjurer doeu The Jurant Author doth talfly charge thefe, who m Adhercnge to the Cove- natited Reformation of the Church oi Scotland m pnreft Times, viz,, between the' Year of out LORD K538 and i6^^*inclujive, do withdraw from, and protefl a- gainft the prefent National Church : For the Author alledges, yea, affirms, That any tuhopay any Duiies on Candles, Leather. &c. or receive,' or pay any Britifh Coin, or chtemper any Aci of the Parliament of Great "Britain doth as much to homologate the. Union, as the Abjurer does. In Anfwer to which, it is to be underflood.j That one Part of the PROTE- STERS do freely grant, that all adive Obedience to any 'Afts or Laws made by that Conventio*! of Men, who take to tnemfclves the St^le and Title oi Zhe Par- liament of GREAT BRITAIN, if it be giifcn thereto, upon Account of its being, a Conftitution of fuch a Parliament, is indeed, in their Judgment, an approba- tion of, and virtual Confent Unto their CcnlHtntion and Legiflative Authority jj . and confequently involves the Perfons, Co obeying their Laws, into the Giiilt of a virtual Approbation of the Union, upon which that Legiflature is founded as to its prefent Form of Eflablifhment : And therefore 'they are againft paying any ■ Duty upon Candles, Leather, Salt, dec. impofed by that Legiflature, or confe- quent upon the Stipulation made in the Unhappy Union of the Kingdoms : And tho' they doiriake Ufe of the Goods, being they are Neceflaries of Life, upon which thefe Taxations are laid ; yet, they judg^ they give no Obedience*there- by to the Laws impofing thenj, feing they pennit none in their Society to pay any fuch, to the Colledors appointed by the prefent Government, which would (intheir Judgment ) beati adiive Badge of Subjeftion to the Government, and €xprefs owning of the Juflice of the Law impofing thefe Taxes. And if any will needs call their veryufing the forefaid Comniodities, a virtual Payment of the Taxes j yet, they look upon that as a Piece of fuffering, in fo far as by the oppref- five andunjufl Taxes, the Price of thefe Commodities is raifed ; bu^it cannot in any juft Conftruiftion of Law or Reafon be reckoned any aftive Obedience to the Law. And as for Cefs and tand-Tax, 'tis abundantly known, they hold it un- lawful to pay the fame i both from the Confideration of the Authority impofing it, which they hold to be fet up in a.Way different from, and oppofite unto the Laws and Covenants of our Anceftors,* which we are bound to Aand by; and likewife from the Ends and Ufes to which it has been, and is yet imployed, namely, the fupporting that. Government, which, by its prefent Conftitution and Adminiftration, bears down and hinders the true Reformation, by advancing Engliffi PRELACYjEraftian .SUPREMACY at^i Englifi-?o^i^ CEREMONIES ; And i CHAP III. Of Scandal, ts Jufl Ground of SEPARATION. '47 ^ And therefore the\» fay, Sappofing it feoiild be granted. That the voluntary ' Payment ot fuch ^axes, as flow from the Union, and are impofed by thefe Men, who poflefs the Place of Governors, and call 'eni fclves RePrefematives of G RE Alt BRIJAINy is a real Approbation of their Authority and Conftitution; yet he unjuftly charges thefe Diflenters with it : For 'cis evident, they do not allow the Payment thereof : And as for a full Narrative of the Reafons of their Judg- ment in that Matter, and Anfwers to Objedions made againll it, I refer to their. Printed Papers upon that Affaa: : Yet I know, even thefe are far from allowing thatfuch Payments are any thing equal, inrcfpet^ of approving the Union Efla- bliftment, tothatof.fwearingan Oath, which is impofed for that very End, to bind the Swearer to a formal Approbation, and Support thereof, as Jiath been already proven, and fhall be further manifeft. 2-Jly. The Author unjuftly charges thefe of the PROTESTERS, who pay Laud Taxes, and Taxes upon vendible Goods, ^hat their doing fo as much homo- logates the Union, as fwearing the Oath of Abjuration : His Aflertion is noto- rioufly faire,asplainly appears by thefe Reafons ; <:^/z,. iR. Becaufe I have clearly proven already. That fwearing the Oath o£ Ahju-^ ■ ratiOKy is a moft folernn Ratification of the Union .- But thefe Proteftexs pay- ing the T^xer above faid, is not a Ratification or Approbation of the Union at all, as will be made evident anon; but tho* paying thefe Taxes were a Ratifi- cation of it, yet furely it cannot with any common Senfe, or Reafon be faid. That it as firmly and folemnly ratifies the Union, as a folemn Ratification of it made by Oath. And it is notour. That thefe Protesters, who do pay thefe Taxes above faid, did publifh their Judgmtnt concerning that Union, by a Printed Proteftation againft it, declaring it unlawful and finful, as being contrary to our Solemn League, and inconfiftent with our juft Liberties and Priviledges, Sacred and Civil ; and that therefore itfhouldnot be binding upon thefe Pr.o- TESTERS, as their Printed Proteflation againft it plainly bears : See The humble Pleadings for tl'^ good old IVnyy Part 2. Page 250, And accordingly thefe Pro-' TESTERS do judge Kmg GEORGE* s Right ot Kingly Government over Scotland^ being founded on, and eflablifhed and detern^ined by that hcorpormmg Unions is notthe juft and lawful Right, that the Kings oi Scotland ought to have: J^or, tlie Juft and Lawful Right that the Kings o£ Scotland ought to have, is foimded on the Word of GOD, and our Covenants National and Solemn League, as is undenyably evident by the Book of the Form and Order of the Coronaticn of King C7;a'/7fj the id. Anno 1651. And by that mialterable fundamental Law of Scotland^ Viz. The ACT fov fecuring RELIGION and the COF^J^AiVT, made Anno iTo/ioTi Kaitretpi Perfohite Cafari, that . is, Pay to Cefar, as a Tribute due to him, that this Text.may plamly fervc to explain that Text, .Re;;/. 13. 6, 7. as Giotius following iJ^z,^ interprets it. And Bez,a on the Place obferves ; That our Lord's Command did oblige the ]^ir/, commonly called ^«^«, was unalterably fixed and determined by the exprefs Law of GOD, Deut.'ij. 15. 18. ip. 20. Thou fhalt in any wife fet him King -owr thee, whom the Lord ^hy Godfiali choofe : one from among thy Brethren /halt thou Jet a King over thee: thou mayefi not fet a fir anger over thee which is not thy Brother. And itjkallb^ when hejh- teth uPonmthe Throne of his Ktngdm, that he fhall write him a Copy of this 'Law in a Book, out of that vihich is before the Priefis, the Leiites,and it Jhallbe wlthhijjt, and he (hall read therein all the days of his Life ; That he may learn to fear the Lord his God, to keep all the words of this Law, and thefe Statutes to do^ them, that his Heart- le not lifted up above his Brethren, and that .he .turn jiet afide from the Command- ment to the Right Hand or to the Left. Thus it is undenyably evident, that the '^H A P' III Of ScwdaU ^^ J^^ Ground of "^epAVAthn. . 49 'i;a and LawtbJ RIGHT of Regal Government of the Kingdom of W was malterably fixed and Detcrminea by the exprefs Law ot GOD ; Which UGHT contain'd three Eflential Articles, vix.. ifl- That he pmdd be an IJraelite, re' of their Brethren by N^on. idly That hejhouldh anrcthermRelmonv^ho lid Profefs and Pradife tlietrue Religion eftabhflied by GOD in theCoye- lantedChift-chofy/W, according to GOD's exprefs Inftitution. .3^/^ Tj^tAe hould not lift ufhmfelfdcvehis Brethren; hy ArbitraryGover^mem ;butKu\t theKmg- iom according to the Uw oF GOD, luithout departing afide from God s Law and Statutes, totheRtghtHan^.crtothe Left. And this beiiig the Juftand Lawful I^IGHT of Regal Government oUfrael, eftabUfhed and determmed bj^the Dir /ineLaw, the Jews giving Confeiit to Cefar to be King at the Time of their Hirrcnderto P(w/'^jth«Ro7«r/« Emperor, cduldnot Conftitute C^A'' to be King )f Ifrael by a Tuft and Lawfol RIGHT, but only made him King defaSio: For Vicn have no Power to overturn the Law ofGOD, and make that to be juft and 'awful which GOD'S Law has expreQy forbidden, the Lord not having Re- sale i that Law : Becaufe Cefar was a Heathen and a Forreigner, and continiied I Heathen and fo could not have a jufi andLawful RIGHT to be King ot Ifrael, k i"-e ■ And therefore thf^Jews Confent could only make him King de faSio: And' it is Indiiputably true, that the Church oafael was a covenanted Church, ic well as the Church of i'fOf/^«^, as appears plain trom Dtut. 29-Ckip- Nehent. '0 Chap -> Chrom 1^. Chap. And tha; the Covenant of die National^ Church of r^^/ did oblige all following Generations of that Nation, to prefervetheir cove- Lte^ Rdieion and Conftitutibn Pure and Intire, without alteration, accordmg TgOD's Inaitution ; And confequently, thefe PROTESTERS conclude X)ur Sviour's Command to 'Pay Tribute to C?>r, did oblige the ^ews to patient lufi. eriip- but not to finning againif the La v of GpD, and Covenant oi Ifrael : l\r our Lord could not Comm^d to doany thing that was fin. . ^, . v Jj/v Thefe PROTESTERS think it. is a Truth received by the Church of - tlaid in her pureft Times of the Reformation, that oar Saviour in Matth 22. T d id' expreOy and pofitively command the Jews to p?y Tribute to Cafar ; ' d the Reafon why they think fo, is,, -becaufe in oar Larger Catechifm, m An- '"er to that Qiieftion, -vtz.. IVhat is tJx Honour that Inferiors ovie to their Superiors .? riie Scriptures that are adduced, for Proving that Inferiors fhould give Main- ainance toP^rfons in Authority, avc Matth. 22. 21. Rom. 13. ^, 7- And thefe JcriPtutcs being fet down as Contexts, for Proving that Claufc ot the Anfwer ; t ftiows thefe 'Texts do ferve to Explain one another, and both pro- )erly fignifyan exprefs Command to pay Taxes, to Cafar, who was only King Lfi7o.in Authority over the Kingdom of 7«^f^. ' r . ry. ' But thefe PROTESTERS above faid,do Judge it unlawful to pay fuch Taxes, ! ^^^ Cefs that w^s required by Law, in King Charles the II. his Time, foe ,inc Soldiers to cut off and deflroy-alltrue Covenanters, for adhering to out >vcniints, National and Solemn League, and the whole Reformation ot Religi- G ' " oil iO Smtringthe Oath, nrtd Judicial Approving it to he free CHAP. Ill on, in Doftrine, Worftip, Difcipline and Government, fwom to in out Covenants. . . ' > ^diy.Thtk PROTEST-ERS do judge it Lawful and Duty for Covenanters, t^deny the Title of King, and. Paying any Tribute |t all, when the King by a Law rcfcinds our Covenants, and Perfecutes to Death and-'Banifliment, xhofe Perfons wha adhere to our Covenants, and Reformation of RelIgion,tn Dodrine, Worftip, Difciplineand Government, eftabliflied in the Church o? Scotland m pu- ^eii Times, Namely, between the Year of out Lord 1638 and 16^9 Incluiivej when ever there is fuch an Ad Refciirory,and P^rfecutidn for adhering to our Co- venanted Reformation, it is Judged by thefe PROTESTERS to be fufficieiff Gjound for all true Adherents to our Covenants, in Point of Duty, and in imi- tation of thefe that did bear the Teftimony againil Tyranny, in Tnne of King Charles t\\Q IL and of the Duke of Torky to deny both Title af King, and Pay- ing Tribute. \^ But after all, the Jurant Autlior inPage 48,of 7/>?yf/7/a;?r tf the Oath DifpJafd, plainly holds, T'hat PayingTaxesy doth not imply an Approbation or Ratification of the Confilitution of Goi/ei-mient. The Author's VVords are thefe. Fit. To come jet nearer to our Difplnyer, ( fays the Jurant ) does he think that Ohedien€e to all the LaXuful and Uufl Commands offuch as are in Authority oi^er «j, m^ke fuch as do obey^ partakers luith thefe over them in the Guilt by which they acquired that Power ? What a wild and ridiculous Whim and Notion-would this b^? The Confequence of this would be no lefs than Blafphemy : For at this Raley our Bkffed Ldfd ihould have fimied in Paying Tribute to the Romans: For hereby, according to our t)ifplayeiy he hid involved him- feiftn all the Guilt the Romans were chargeahle with in their Subduing Jadea. Jfhe ( viz. the Dilplayer ) pay any Duty on Candle s^ Leather ^ &c. or receive or pay any Britifh Coi«, I am ofrfhe Mind, lays tl^ Jaranr, he does. as much to ho- Tvglegate the Union, as the Abjurer does. By the Jurant. Author's Argument, he defigns and intends to prove that J.i- rants do not approve the Coniiitution of the Union to be a Lawful Conftituti.- cn, and that King George his Right is not Lawful, it being an eflential Part of^he Conflitution of that Union; and in that flops Jurants Mouths fromObjeding againft the PROTESTERS, who judge the Union finful and unlawful, and King George's. Right not to be a lawfully Ct)nftitute Right/ 2dly» The Jurant aflferts, That Paying Taxes does not import an ^approbation of the Conflitution of the UNION, and of King GEORGWs Right eftablifhed by the faid Union ; which the Jurant, by comparing it to the Roman Conqueft o'f Juded^ ' plainly fuppofes to be bnful : * And fo according to the Jurant, paying of Taxes, fpoken of above*, is no Approbation of the Union zhd King George's Right to • be lawful. But 3 dly, He falfely aflerts. The fwearing 'the Oath to be no Appro- bation of the Union and King George's Right ; lor I have proven the Contrary .- And if the Union had been properly Lawful, Fk.. In it's general and individual N^ure, he ought to have jpproven it, which he denys they have done by fwear- ing :HAP. TTI. . Of Sc^wdal^ is ju(l Ground of SEPARATION. ^^ rig the Oath, ^thly. He aflerts, Our Bleffed Lord fayed I'a^es to the Romans, cr which he cites no Scripture Proof, and therefore (e'errw to have doubted the Friith of his own Aflertion, otherwife he ought to have proven it ; (otaffirmantc vcu'ml'it pYcbatio. The Scripture that feems moft plainly to favour his Opinion, is i\\ Matth. 17. 27., but that will not prove the jurant*s bold Aflertion. I find ihe learned Pool'mhis Synopfis Criticorum, upon the 25 Verfe of that Chapter,' joUowing Eeza, Hammond, and the. Hebrew Dodors ; and learned Jofephus, ob- lerves. That it •a!airio Tribute to tte^ivil Magiftrat^ but a 'tribute that the ]ews ufed [0 pay for Keeping^ up the Fabrkkoj the Temple. The Reafons fof this Expofition, !rc I/?, Becaufe in the .Original it is xtto viZv 'avj^v xhdX is, from their own 'Som, |,nd lo the- Argument, runs thus, by a parallel, ^j the Kings of the Earth do not fek Tribute from their own proper Sons by Generation, tho ' they ExaB Tribute of their, iuhje^s of the Kingdom ; fo neither ought the ExaHors of the Tribute for the Temple ^ vhich they require in the Name., and for the Houje of God, to feek thai Tribute from me^ fhatayn God's^cwn Son. A Tecond Reafon is,Becai;fe if the Word (CHILDREN) # nourTrahflation, be taken to fignify proper Subjeds of the Kingdom, in oppo- lition to Strangers and Forreigners, that Senfe is falfe. For ift, It's indifplitable hat the Romans exaded Tribute both of natural born Subjefts,and alfoof thefe hat they Conquered, idly, Becaufe at that Time the Jews cguld not Exa6t iny Tribute at all in that Senfe ,• for there was then no Nation fubdued by their 5word, and under their Power, as Strangers, to pay them Tribute, ^dly. The ^ueftion is indefinite' of any Kings of the Earth, and it was ordinary for aU :Cingsto exad Tribute from the born Subjefks of their Kingdoms, tho* not from heir proper Sons of their own Families, ^thly. It's plain firom Excd. 30. ij» hat God did impofe a Tax upon Jfratl for the Ufe of the Tabernack, and. the femple coming in- Place of the Tabernacle, that Tribute belonged to the Temple, find from the whole, I think it's plain. That the Jurant doth Pervert infteadof nterpreting that Scri5)ture. I do grant indeed, Ch'oofing Representatives, and fending them to the Britifi Parliament, doth ratifie the Union ^ but however the Miniflers of the Natiemal Church of Scet/a^d got the Start, for Hafte of getting their Stipends fecured, hey went into that Union, by accepting their y^i? of Security, and thereby ap- iroved the Un.m, and paved the Way ^or the Borroughs to follow the Minifters example, who went into it fo readily, and as foon as they got their ASi of Se- urity in their Hand", the Generality of them preached it up for a Bhjjed UNION', :ho' ihe fharpeft of them could not fee the Hew of Bleflednefs in it, before that A.fl fccured their Stipends .• And the Borrows but followed the Example of the Miniflers, who approved the Union as above faid, before ever the Borrows :hoofcd Rcprefentativcs. . But feing the Jurants,in The DiaTngue b'^twixt aMinifter and two Elders, Pape 22, md in The Arfv:ertethe Oath of Abjuration difplayed. Pages 17, 18. acknowledge, Ihat their fwearing that Oath, is an owning and Kitifying the ' Iticoii orating G s ' ' Umon ^2 Swearing the Oath, and Judicial Jpprovi^io it to he free^ CPI^AP. Ill.i Union, with the Prelatick Conflitution of England. It's birt a poo* Shifty to recriminat upon thfrBh^yroughs, xhat they have ratified it alfo ; for two Blacks vrillnot make one White ; and the Borroiighs may blame the MaiillcrSjtto went into it before ever it was finally concluded by the Parliameitt, and preached it wp for a hlejjed^ Union, and influenced the Body of the Nation to pafs from their Proteftations and Addrefles agamft it. As for receiving and paying BRITISH Coin fince the Z7/2/yH,*tho' the- Valiie.pf that Coin be altered and determined by Law^ fince the Union; yet, tlic receiving and paying fuch Coin doth not make the ReceTvers and Payers,to be thereby Ap- provgrs of the Union : ^ Becaufe receiving afid paying Coin, is a thing morally lawful, in all lawful Bargains, wherein Men need Money ; and the making Ufe ot it inala^vful way, doth not make the Ufers, to approve the ConlHtution to be lawful, more than it would make a Man to approve of an unlawful Conflitu- tion ot Government; if that Man fhould be required-by a Law of that uealing from an inferiour Judicature to a fuperiour, upon Account of falfle Accufation and unjuft Judgment, obliges cfencknt againilthe unjuft Acciiration of his Accufers/o he is a Plaintiff in Complaioin^ to' th©. fuperioiir Jvidicaturc, of the Injuftice of the Infej; iour which was unjaft ill wronging the Appellant by partial Judgtnent. And thus Paul was in one Refped Defendant, and in another Plaintiff, before C^far s Gourt; as alfo Defendant before that abomnable Cornell of the^^xu; at Jerufa- iem that had condemned and murdered the Son of God. Bat furely it were jiiafphemy to affirm,That aur Lord J .fas,i!nd the Apoltle Paul might have fwoni an Oath of Allegiance, to maintain and defend the Conilitution and Authority of that Council oftfic ^aw, that were the Monfters or" Mankind, in Condemn- ing and Murdering^he Son of God. Nor could Paul have fworn to maintain and defend Cf/m-'sConli tut ion oi Regal Government, as King ot //JW, lawfully Con- flitute according to the Rule oi: God's Word,. aixl Covenanted Conftitucidn of Jfrntl. Yea, the Er.ghjh Hano'verian Jurants plainly ai^rm it to be a fundamental Lawof England, I'hat.bctore the Subjedt can be obliged to fwear Allegiance, the King mult firft by his Coronation Oath, be inverted with the Regal Confti- tution,' according to their Ancient Fundamental Laws, and to Ue a Brother - in Religion, vi^. Of the Communion'of their CRurch. And furely Ifrael had ftronger Reafon,' viz,. The Divine Rule, Deut. 17. 1 5. to rcqure all their Kings to be efta- bliflied according to their Fundamental Law, viz.. The Word and Covenant or God, before they could fwear- Allegiance ; Nor doth it appear^ that If ae I coiild make a Forreigner King, without a pofitive Law from God given, which I can- not find. For what Ifael did in refped of C^/zr,did not make him King de Jure, fader is Dei, The Hahoveriaii "JuraMts of England, tell us their Mind in this Mat- ter ,in rht 'yudgrhent of uhcle Kingdoms, See. Page 14. on i Sam. 10. 25. "Tis plain, the' Manner 9J the Kingdom, ftgni fie s the Conjtitution of the Government, by zvhich ivas meant 'the Conditio., s omvhich Saul was to be King, and they his Subjecls, and tl^s Compati between Saul and t^e People being wrote in a Bookf- and laid up before the Lord, was n iiery good Equivalent' to our Oath recorded on both Jides, as an Oath. of Ah pJegiame, and his Oath iff Goverument. , _ : ^ And furely Samuel the Prophet ofthq Lord, ordered the Form of that Com^Et. - between .S'a:// and the People, according to Deut. 17. i5> i<^> i7> ^^j ^5>> 20. 'to be the {landing Rule for the Kings and Peopk ot Ifael in following Ages. T he 4aft thing 1. have to Anfwer the [furants, is "their faying, that v/hoever. hath obtempered any kixs of tlK United Parliament of Britain have as much ratified the Union, as f wants by fwearing the OATH; But that is aiTf\vered. already in fpeaking upon Pay.ng Tribute required by the Ads ^i BritifhPz.i\\2.^ mcnt; For our Saviour according to the y^vaKfj- did obtemper Ads; of the Rfimifh Heathen Government in Paying Tribute, but he di4 not command tofweac that Ce/^j's Right and Conftitution was Lawful and. agreeafclc to Deut. 17. 15. And that they would Maintain and Defend Cefaf'^ Right, and Conftitution and Government as Lawful King oUfael. -But let none think that I am Equalizing a Heathen Emperor to Kmg Gmge j For King Charles the lid, tho' the SOn of- - - ° .- r King '^4 Swpuftuzthe Oith, and 'Judicial approving it to he free CH^^J^j^IL King Charles the firft, yet needed to be ConRitute King as a BrotheWn Re- l^gioik asweU as Blood anno i6^iy elfe he could not.be King of ScvtJand. Now I have anfwered t\\Q Scots Jur ants ftrongeft Arguments, by which they enBeavoured to prove. That the Oath of Abjuration doth net oblige Jurants to Defend and Maintain th^ Englifh Frelatick Church and her Popijh CEREMONIES. And I have clearly proven by TeveralEKj///^ Afts of Parliament, and efpecially the ASls of further Limitation, that the Oath wa* exprefly appointed by that Ad to t)bli§#- ^urantSy as direftly to Maintain the Prelatick Church of England, a.s the Queen's Perfon and Regal Government. And I have likewife plainly .proven tha,t Jurants by that Oath have folemnly ratified the Union with England, and fworn to Main- tain Englifi ERAS'flAN SUPREMACY, and PRELACY, atid Popij]} CEREMO- NIES of the Church of jE:;^//2;z^eftablifiied by- that Union. I fl-iall give an other clear Te{^imony by Englifi Laws, that the King's Oath of Coronation and Sub- jeds Oath of Allegiance oblige the King and Subjeds to Maintaii^ and Defend the Conftitution and Laws of England, in The Judgment «/ whole Kingdoms and Nations, Page &: tVe me affiiredby Fortefcue,Lib. j. cap 8. and^. cap. 9. that he ( viz. the King) Governs not his People by a Regal and Abfolute Powers, but by a Politickyi. c. by aLi?nit£d Legal Power, fajs the Author; Hence our Princes were ^ and are bound tofwear at their Coronation, that they will Govern according to Lou:, and preferve all their Cufints, and Franchifes. Stat: of Provif. 25. Ed; 3. Nr tan we have a clearer evidence of the Legal Extent sf the Kings Authority, and of the D.menjion of the Obedience which the Sub jeB is bound unto, than that which we have in the Oath of Fealty formerly taken by the Subjefl. Namely, That hejhouldbe Obedient to all the King's Laws, and to every Pyectpt and Precefs prcceedin'g front the fame. Wilkin's Treatife Coron. ^c. Court. Leet. dTc. Page 140. Here u'^ remarkable, that it's not faid, thefe Oaths Jlow what was tht Dim nfion of the Sub etls Obedience long ago; but what tlft Subjed IS BOUND UNTO, Thatis,'no^v by the^ Oath" of Allegiance, tho'the prefent Oath differ in words from the old' one; and all Men fee that the EjigHJh Hanoverian Jurants explain it fo; And I think,' iti.7^ in v*in for Scots Miniflers to deny the literal Senfc of Englijb Oaths, that all the Hanoverian Englijb- Subjeds defend, who hav fworn the la ne : viz.. To Maintain the Conjlituticn of England in Church and State. For Englijb Hanoverians explain new Oaths of Allegiance by that old Oath, that bound to all the Laws m ex- preis Words. And Englifi Hanoverian Jurants not only hold it to be their own Judgment, butmaintam it to be a Maxim in all limited Governrifients Ruled by taw, and not by Arbitrary Tyranny ; That in all limitd Monarchies, Oaths of Coronation and Allegiance, cat tear hO other true fenfe than an Obligation on King and SubjeBs to maintain and defend their jvhole -Ccn/itHtien efiahlified by Law, as m The Judgment oj whole Kingdoms and Nations, Page 11. it's fafid. Laws and Oaths in limited Governments are Tyes npon King and People, and mvft he interpreted according to • the Nature' of the Government, fo as to prove Fenfes for the Conjlitution, as the 'Coronation Oath and Oath of Allegiance are in ejfe&y Imtjwtaring to the Conflitution, w the CHAP. ITL or Scandal, is Ju/I G^ou?id of SEPARATION. ^5 ^ the omto Govern^ and in. the other ^ to be 'Governed according 'to_ it. And in Page 17' fpeaking of th£ Dfterent Modes oF Government in th« Dominions oi Europe and the Power otPrcfcrving the Liberties and Properties of the Nations : It is faid in Germany; -Spain, France, Swedland, Denmark, Poland, Hungary, Bo- hemia, Scotland, Engird, and generally aU the Nations that have lived under the \ Gothick Polity y it has h^emin their General AffemUieSy under the Names of Diets, Q)rtcz,Parliamcnts,S.enats, and the like, ht in what Hands f. ever it is; the powtr of ■ making, ahrogatingi changing, CorreBing and Interpreting Laws, has been in the firm* This plainly proves two things, Firli, That the Oath of Allegiance contained in the Oath of Abjuration can bear no other true literal Senie, than to bean Obligation on Jurants to defend the prefent Conftitution of Government efta- bliflied by the Incorporating Union with England, including Englijh E^ASTlAN* ISUPREMACr, PRELACY, and Englijh Popijh CEREMONIES, idly, Seing Ju-* rants ^rm that the Oath of Abjuration was firft formed in a -Bill, and. then by jtlie Engltjh Parliament eftabliflied into a Law. It alfo proves, that not only the i Parliament that eftablifhed it into a Law, has fole Power to interpret the fame. And this ^\d\n\yCo\\Azm.\\sScots Jurants iox\5^i\v^'m^ the Power of theParliament in explaining the Oath,and putting a Senfe upon it inconfiftent with its true lite- ral Ssnife fixed by Law, as above laid .• And m Page 12. ThcCc Englijh Jurants affirm. That their Chrillian Religion being eftablilhed by Law, is one of their Principal Rights to be Ddended. And 'now I having clearly provtn by Englijh Laws, the Subjects Oath of Allegiance in its true literal Senfe, obliges the Subjefts to Defend the whole Con* ilitution of Government at that Time eftabliflied by Law, as fully as the King is obliged by his Oath oi Coronation j I fliall in the next place, give the'Tefti- mony of King y.mies the 6th, in his 4th Speech at Whitehall, (inm i^op. Shew- ing how far he granted, yea affirmed, that the King's Oath of Coronation ob- jliges, his Words are'thele, vix^. 'the King is lex loquens after a fort binding him- felf by a 'double Oath to the.Obfervation of the Fundamental Laws of his Kingdom : tacitly as by being King, andfo iound to proteB, as well the People, as the Laws of his Kingdonff^ and exprefiy by his Oath at his Coronation, fo as evagy juji King ina fettled Kingdom, ts bound to obferve that PaBion made to his People by his Laws^ in framing his Government agreeable f hereunto. I| And feeing the SubjeSs Oath of Allegiance, is of equal extent with the King's lOath of Coronatior^ ( ii^hath been made evident ) their Oath obliges them to j Maintain and Defend all thefe Laws by which the King is fworn to Rule the j Kealm over which he is made King. I And in the Judgment of luhole Kingdoms, &c, Page ap. I find that the Judges 1 JO^Englard do underitand their Oath fwbrn to^be King, ( when the^ are cho- fen to be Judges of the Land ) to be Eflentially one and the fame with the old Oath ot Fealty above fai'd, becaufe it is Correlative to the Oath of Corona- ,,tion, and of the fame extent with that of Allegiance, obliging to Maintain and . Dc- ^6 S,ve.irtr}g the Oath, an J 'Jt^dicictl Apprcvipg it. to be free. CHAP {IT, Defend the Laws eftablifhed : And therefore its (^iidi IVhen . Qiieen .'EMzih^y^i and her Cni^fe^rs, prejfed the .judges "viry hardly to obey the Patent under her Great' Seal in the cafe o/^a.vendifh ; But they a.fwered, T/mt both Jle and they had taken an Oath to. keep the Lathy andiftheyjhculd obey her Commands y the Law would not fT' ar- rant them. See Andef/cns Reply, Page 153'- . * And laflly, I fhaU-make it evident by the Teftimony of great Englijh Law- yers,**that the Kings , Oath oF Coronation, and the Subje6s*Oath oi Alii-giance " are correlatives for Securing and Maintaining the, Coniiitution of the R^ealin E- ftabliljiedby the Law, as a Mutual Compad or Covenant between tile King and Subjeds; And accordingly Lord Chancdlf^r i^rf^/fKt^ declared, Lib. 9. Page .2 5. *That the King s Oath andCompaSi'is the -very Ground and Caufe of the Oath of Al- legiance. Becaufe it is a Funda?nental Maxim^ Lex facit Regem, for the King hath Originally fubjeBed himfelf to the Law by his Corona ion Oath : This proves a King ef England to be K^ng by Law; As alfo,that th'e Coronation Oath is a Fundamental' Law of England, and is Antecedent to the SubjeSis Homage and Oath of Feaky. See Judge Jcnkfti's JVorks^ Page i^^.' And Horn his Mirrour, Page 225. And Judg- ment ot Kingdoms and Nations, Pag iS.^And Lord Chief y.'i/iice Glanvil in Hen- ty the Second's Days^ahove 500 Tears ag^y InjOrmsuSyl'hat High Treafon is not only committed againft the King^ but alfo the Kingd: ^n, viz. Againji the Cmflt^tkn of the Kingdom eftablijhed by Law. His words are, *CK/>?zf« quod in' legilms dicitur crimen lafe Maje/latis, ut de ngce 'vel feditione Perfona Do7nini Regis vel Regni, See Cowel's Inter. Tit. Glanvil Lib. i. cap. 2. Page i. Tnis lets us'feewiiat Subjeds are obliged to, that are under the Government o^thcEngliJh Parliament; And alio • what £K^//y^ Government and Laws make High Trcalon. And that' which will make this Pomt more fully evident, is by coniidering; 7/;/i^ Trefiliaii ' and five fudges 7rtore with one. of the Kings Serjeants at Law, and one of the King s^ Council at Law^ for delivering their extravagant and extrajudicial • Opinions., that the King might avoid a Statute Ordinance and Commi£ion, which' had been ncade for the Safety of Jpoih King and Kingdom in the la ft Parliament ; By the Psers and Commons of ■ Land with the*AJfent oftheKing; wereExecuied as falfi Traitor s^by a Judgment from the Supreme Court of Judicature in the Kmgdom, viz. the Parliament, andfo uj./^^irafford, and other Sy Executed as 'Traitors for fubverting the Laws, tho^ tt was in Obedience to the King's Command ; ' For this fie the nth, of Kick: the 2 &, Rot. Pari, part i. 3. 3. And the Judgment ot Kingdoms and Nations, Page 28. 2p. ^_ And fiirely, this totally overthrows the Power of Interprsj^ing the Oath of Ab-* juration, and putting a Senfe upon k contrary to the Laws, whereby it was De- termined, to oblige all Jurants to maintain the Conftitutionof Britain, including SUPREMACY .and PRELACY, &c. eflabliflied by Law. Nor can I fee how Scots Jurant Minifters can fave themfel^es, except by offering that Sacrifice of A- tonemcnt, vix.. That tho* they gave an Literprctati<^n contrary to Law., even the Fundamental Laws of ^>7M/«eilabUfhed by the tJnion; Yet they did -in Contradiction tOj and Condemnation of that Interpretation of theirs, fwearthe ■ Oath CHAP. III. OfScdftdal^ is ]u(l anOVND ofSEPJRJTION, $7 Oath jadicially,in exprefs words and common Senfe of them,as they were intend- ed by the Legiflators, and according to the Laws by which the Oath wasim- pofed ; Which I .have proven t^jear in its proper literal Senre,an Obligation to maintain and defend the whole ConlHtution of the Realm of Great Britairty and Principally, the Conflitution of E//?/^w^ ' in Church ^n& St ate y including ERAS- ri AN SUPREMACY, PRELACY, &c. by Law ellablifhed. And this lets us fee, that the Juflices had no Power to accept oijurants Interpretation of the Oath, and how Scots Minifters have forgotten, that the Noble Marquis, of Ar^k; his Interpretation of an Oath of like Nature, was made an Article of his Lybel on which he was Condemned; I fay, how Scots Jwr^wf Minifters have for- gotten that, isnoteafily conceivable: Except Jurant Mmiht^s fay, that Civil Judges of the Realm, Serjeants of Law, Members of Council, or yet any Lord Dr Marquis have no Power to Interpret Oaths inanSenfe contrary to the Mind Df the Parliament and eftablHhed Laws, as is clear by the Inftances given ; But set Presbyterian Minifters have a Power tti do it. Surely they wijl not aflert fuch an Abfurdity." For as its a Maxim that holds in the Laws of GOD,, fo likc- uvife of Nation*, viz.. Cujm eB eondere ejm eft interpretari, i. e. the Power of Interpreting Laws, belongs only to thofe that make them .• And this Maxtpi is tnaintamed- by the SupremeLegifiativeCourts of Judicature in Germany ySpain'ySwed^ hind, Dcnmarky Polandy Hungary y Bohemiay Scoilandy England ; 2Lnd France, while it lad a Parliament, and the Councils of States of Republieks, fuch as Venice -y foe :his fee The yudgmeiit of whole Kingdo?ns and Nations, Page. 17. Nowbywnat Arguments I have advanced . againft Scots 3^«)vzk^ Minifters, on |:his Head, J/tz.. The Oath of AbjUranon, I have clearly proven thefe Points, name- y. Fir ft, That the Oath ot Abjuration, in it's true literal Senfe, ^obliged all Englifi Mibjeds before the Union, to maintain and defend the whole Conftitution of Englandy in Church andState,.in Eraftian SUPREMACY,, PRELACY, CTc. efta- ^lilhed by Law. . ' 6'fcoK^/y, That the Oath of Abjuration ftill retains the fame literal Senfe, ob- igingall Scots Jurantsto maintain Engli/h ErsidisLn SUPREMACY,PRELACY,crc. idabliiheci by the Englijh A&.soi Limitation, and further Limitation, to which it exprefly refers, ^nd in Obedience to which they did /wear it ; Becaufe it is Plainly evident, by what is faid above, that the Incorporating Union did not take iway the former Security of the Prelatick Church of England, but on the con- :rary, eftabliftied it to ftand to all Generations, and extended the Power and Authority of thele Laws, whereby the Prelatick Church of England is fecurcd, pver the Nation oi Scotland, obliging Scotland to maintain the EwMEraftian SU- PREMACY, PRELACY, and EngHJh Popijb CEREMONIES, as an cflential jind tundamental Pan of the Incorporat Conftitution of the REALM 01 Great- nritatn. Auvl tho' the Oath of Allegiance, contained in the Oath o^ Abjuration nits hteral^nfe, ohliges^ll Jurants ( ftnce the Union ) both oLSouthmd No^h- 3ritam, to maintain the whole Conftitution of the United REALM ofGrjoi Bri- ^8 Smirlng the Oath^nfid Judkid npfrcv'tng it to he free CHAP. III. ^^«^ including the Laws of ATorfA, as well as South Britain, ofwhkh Laws, the A<^ . of Securitv of the Church 6t Sc6tland»h onz ; yet principally it obliges to maintairiihe chief Fuhdamehtal Liw's df that*Con(Htution, fuch as the Englijh Aas o( Limitation arid f'urifjer timiiation^ by wliich SUPREMACY dnd PRE- LACY are eftabjjlhed. . 'ThirMiy THo' in t;hat Senfe, the Oath obliges to maintain the kO: of Security ofthe Church oiSchhndy yet by that very' Ad or Security, the Church of Scotland ^ath lonf int^ the legal E'flahlijhment of Erafliait SUP RE MAC! And PRELACY, njid phjeBed her'felftQ the Power o/Englifh ^relats and Erafiian SUPREMACT, -which tj the Union J the Church o/Seotland hath oMigedherfdftooley. So that fwearing to jnaintainthat A(^ofSecurity, isafwearing to two Thmgs, F/z. i)?. That they Hiall maintaiti an irritant Claufe of the Eftablifhment of an UNION, whereofthe Eftablifiimentof Erafiian SUPREMACY, and PRELACY, is a principal Fun- damental Article. 2^§',That they fliall rhaintain an Aft whereby the Presbyterian Church of Scoiland) is obliged to obey the Lcrdly IcWer of. Bifhops, the inglilh Prelateshcing Members of Parliament and Privy CoLincil,& alfo the Erafiian J SUPREMACY, efi^lifhed by that Union 1 and accordingly the Church oi Scotland^ Anno 17 lo, made an Ad of her Aflembly, Obliging all her Meinbers, Mi' mjlers and others, to keep the Faffs and Thqnkfgivings ofthe National Chilrch qf Scot-' land, in .Obedience to the Authority of the Queen, with Co.fnt'of the Prelatick Parliaf. mm, and ^rivy Council of Btitain.- And all Men kno v,that the Church of Scotland will not appoint now, either National -Fafl or Thankfgiving, upon any Occa- fib.n, ordinary or extraordinary, but has wholly given Up the Power to theMa- giftracy and Prelatick Authority, to be her Didators in thefe folemn Datie_s of God's Worfhip. * ^dly. It is clearly proven, that the Oath of Abjuration, obliges to maintain the Incorporating UNION, and feihg that Union is contrary to.ifl the Articles oj our Solemn League, as was made evident in Speaking on the UNION. And it "being undenyable. That the Oath of Abjuration, in its proper literal Senfe, ob- liges ro maintaih that UNION, by which SUPREMACY and PRELACY i; feftablifhed, then it is a con trad idory Oath to the Solemn League, thit 'Obliges tc Extirpate PRELACY, &c. If that be not an Abjuring of our Solemn League,-] ieai^e it to all fobcr imbyadcd Chriflians to Judge ? For every Man of rationa iiit%ment,1crtbws, thatlwhen^iieOarh is cbntradidory to another, in the triii t^ral Senfe ofthe Words j the lafl abjures 'the M. Audit is plainly fo in thi CiTe V'^or by the Solemn League, ^W RanliS of ?erfons, Miniflers as well aj others x^ei-yi^ne in their Station and Vbcation, arefolemnjy bound to propagat the Re formatidti of Religion in England and J, eland, in Dodrine, Worfhip, Difciplini Ifed 'ObVerhment, accbrdihf to the Word of God, and Example ofthe beftl^e fefiired tliurches; and t6 Extirpate POPERY, PRELACY^ SUPERSTITION 'HERESY ^d'PROfANENESS. But the Oath of Abjuraticfn obliges all Jr iii^tOXn^ritainEr'aftian PRELACY, and fuperftitious Engh CHAP Tit. Of Scandal, js Jufi GrMfJci of SEP JRJTION. , ^^ Vopih CEREMO>WES, both in J2«///2«^ and Ireland, as they are eftabliilied by rhe Incorjforating UNION, tor all Generations to come. And every -Man knows, Tliat by ^c Solemn League, every oilfc of the Natioi!^ refpediively wUs fworn to «ntain and defend the Liberties of the Kingdom, and Privikdges of Farlia^ meat : Bat by the UNION, the Friviledges of a National Parliament oiScotlavdi are taken away ; whereas all the Priviledges of the£«^//)^ Parliament are eflablifli^ C(l by thftt UNION, and fwearing to maintain that Conftitution ; if ix. be not ; 'an Abjuring the Defence of our Priviledges of a National Parliament, in plain. ; contradidici to our Solemn Lea^e ,• I leave it to all Covenanted Presbyterians to: \ J idge,while the Nationi^daily fmking into Mifery, under the Weight ofuKMfuppo«r; I able Taxes,tho' fome ^cc>fj Members of Parliament,do, to non^Medt, ftrive to- i favc Sco^/aW froln Raine by-thefe Taxes; For Sixty Members, tho' thiey-were i unanimous, and all zealous for the Good of Scotland^ yet can never cayry ..any. 1 Thing.by Vote, agaiqll Six Hundred £^r^/7/'^. Members. And every one knows. That by the Solemn League thefe Nations aremoft' folemnly obliged to defend the King's Perfon and Authority in the Defence of the Covenanted Reformation of Religion, and Liberties of the Kingdorhs i but by the I Oath of Abjaration, all Jurants-are obliged to defend his Perfon and Authori- il ty, in*Dcfcncc oi English Eraftian SUPREMACY, PRELACY,- and fuperili- !| tious Englih-fopfi) C EREMONIES; j»id as to the Liberiies of the Kingdoms, i| Jjrantsar^' fworn to defend the King's Authority, in Defence of all the Liberties \\ that tha Kingdom pt" England had,, together with its Dominion over Scotland lleftablifhed by the Union ; but the Liberties of the free Kiftgdom o^ Scotland II vifere taken away by that^^Union, which did eftablifti the Subverfion - of the Li- [iberties ot a freeKingdorn of ^co?/^«^, and the Oath obliges to maintain that' nS^bverfion. And thus that Union hath firmly eftablilhed the whole Prerogatives : I of the Crown o^Englaitd, andalfo ratified the Enghjh Coronation Oath : Bat oii i I the contrary, the QAO\H^oi Scotland hath loft all Legiflitive Authority, to make, i! alter, or interpret Laws, to call Parliaments, or do an/, thing belonging to the '[Grown of a ti;ee Kingdom, for Prefervation of National Liberties. And by the . I fame Reafon,the ^corj Coronation Oath contained in our National Covenant, which I in it's true literal Seniv, obliges our Kings to maintain the Covenanted Refer-' itmation of Religion, and the Conflitutiori of thisReahn, and Rule by laudable I La^^'S, no way contrary to the^ord of God ; I 'fay,^y the fame Reafon, vix.. The I Sub verfionol" the Prerogatives of the Crown otSco//^W, as above faid, the Scofx ICoronaiion Oath cannot be (vvorn now •at all in its true literal Senfe, and for the propei' Ends for which it was appointed^ and therefore is rendered wholl/ ufelefeby this UNION ; whiclf-Union, Jurants bythat Oath, • have fworn ta maintain. And femg it is evident above, That the King's Oath' of Coronation,* and the Pcop It's -Oath of Allegiance, are two Parts of a mutual Covenant be- tween King and People, for ■Jwlaintaining and Preferving the ConiUtution of Go. v^crnmcnt, and Fundamental I^ws in being at the Time ^ An4 ieing the Kingi .Hz can- T' 6g Sfvearhg the Oath^and JudUial Approving it to-he free G H A P. I II cannot fwear the ^'co/j Coronation- Oath at all,but only the Engli/h ihtnct it -clearly follows, by evident neceflary Confequence, That Scots Jurants. have nude a fo- lemn Covenant with Queen ANN and King* George, for Preferving the whole Conftitutionof £»g/«H both ofPrelatick Church and State, together with Subverfion of the National Liberties of a free Kingdom, Parliament and Prerog tives of the Crown ot 6^0^/^;;^^, and the Subverfion oi o^xt Solemn League: all which are eftablifhed by the Union, which, in that Covenant, they have fwom to maintain : and Nonjuranti joining with Jurdmsy have judicially approven the Swearing that Oath to be free of any publick Scandal, »^to hinder Joining with Jmants in Communion, even in the Sacrament of the L6td's Supper; and fo .that Grievous and Ndlour Scandal, cannot be gotten removed in a regular Way, fo as to eeds. And therefor«3.I fay,upon the fame Grouuds and Reafons, that the Covenanted. Church did mikc SEPARATION both Ne- mative and Pojitive, from all Perfons that went into the unlawful Engagement, and refufed to give publick Satisfadion ; likewife all Miniikrs", Elders, and «ther Chriftian Profeflbrs, who adhere to tTie Cmjenamed Reformation of the Church ciSmlandin her purell Times, Namely,, between the Year of our Lord K538 and :i6A9,Inclufiv'ei havejuft Ground to mzkc Separation both Negative a.\\d Pofiive, from the prefent National Church of Scotland, upon Account that the moft part ol her Minifters have fworn that Q^th pf Abjuration^, and Nonjurants joining with — ..--—.-- Jurants^ €HAP. III. Of ScAndal, is Jf^fi Ground of SEPARATION, • 6i Jurm/ts, have judicially apprc^en the fwearing that Oath to be free ofpiiblick Scandal, and appointed by A6is of their Aliembly, themfelvcs and others to join with 5^«)rt«^j in the Lord's Supper, without. Removing that Scandal : for they jydgedittobe none. *,. # . And thus I have proven the Second part of the PROTESTERS Aflertion ,- Namely, That fwearirtg the Oath of Abjuration, and Non-Jurants 'joining with Jurants, judicially declaring it to be no Ground of Separation from,Communion with Jurants in the Sacrament of the LORD's Supper; So that. That grie- vous and notour Scandal cannot be gotten removed in* a regular way, fo as to reach the great «end of Edification, and fo is juft Giround for Miniflers, Elders, and other Chriftian Profeflbrs adhering to the Covenanted Reformation of the Church Kil Scotland in her Pureft Times, namely between the Years of our Lord id? 8, and 1649 indufi've, to rnake Separation both Negative and Pojitive, kom the. prefcnt National Church oi Scotland. § EC T. H. IVherein it is proven, T'hat Swearing the Oath of Abjuration^ even after it was altered, by an AEl of Parliament, in the fir fi Tear of King George, is nif} Ground of Separation,both Negative and Po/itive, from Jurants, zu/;o fwear and 'defend it, and from Nonjurants, 'who%y venue of former Acls of ^Jfembly, bold the fwearing it to be no jufl Ground of Sepa. aticn. SEingnear the half of the Minidersof the National Church o^ Scotland, had re- fuied to fwear the Oath of Abjuration, in the Terms it was firfl impofed on them\ the Parliament of Great Britain, judging little hindered many Minifters to fwearir, and therefore made as little Alteration, and nothing of Amendment: For except Changing tKe Terms, Viz,. King George for Queen Ann, which he- hoved to be altered, the Queen being de^d, and he made King, the 'Parliament made no Alteration in the Oath,but changed the little Word (AS) into (WHICH) the Reafon of .the Alteration was, becau^ many Minifters who were required to take that Oath, did refufe to fwear-it; and their Reafon was, becaufe they judg- ed, that feeing the Oath obliges 7«r/z«^j, to Mawtain and Defend the SUCCESSI- ON, of the Crown, ( AS ) the fame Rands limited by an AH intituled. An AB de- cb.rirg the Rights and Liberties/if the Subjet^, and fettling' the SUCCESSION of the tJlO\VN ; and by another AQ for the further Limitation of the Crgwn - to tie Eleflorefs Dnfchefs Doxuager 0/ Hanover, and the Heirs of her' Body being At)- teflahts. I fay, many Munfters judged by jhe Word ( AS ) in the Oath, it did Reduplicatupon, or. included all the Conditions and Provilions • of Governmenr, that the Succeilbr is obliged to, by the/e Afts of Limitation and further Limita- tion, among which Conditions and Proviiions, that is one. Viz.. thcu the Suc-^ ckffor fmllf-iiiear in his Cot enat ion Oath, to maintain Englifli Prelacy, and the., whole Ccnjlitution of that Church, which ingludes all their Engli/h-PopjJh Ceremonies, and Erillian Supremacy ; and therefore thcfe Mmiilers rcfulcd to Avear the faid Oat. 6^ « SweAving 'the O&tJ'^ An2 'jndhid approving it to he fiee. CHAP. II f. Oati^ And for Remoring this Objeftion, the 5r?^//S. Parliament took out the Word ( as; awd pu:in the Word ( WHICH ) in Itead oi it ; by which A^t?ecat4oni many Miniflcrs who ibrnierly tefufed to fwear that O^th, have now^fworn itT . '. . Beibre I advance Re'afons and Arguments for Proving, that Taking the Oath of Abjuration in its new Form, and -Defending that to b? no Scandal,' is ju^ Ground of %paration, both Negatwe and P^/Jttive,- 1 (hall- fct down both the Old and New Forna, ol the Oath of Abjuration, the one oyeragainll theotlicr, that Jurawts may not fay. I m:f-reprefcnt the new Form. The Old Form ©f tii« O ATH^ of ABJVRATION., ,T A. B. Do 7nily and Smerely Jc- ^ A knmledge, .Pr2, hath not any Right or Title-whatfoever to the Crown of thisR^lm, or any others the Do-- minions thereto belonging; And Id.® Renounce, ReKifc, and Abjjre any Al- I legiance or Obedience to him. And I ' do fwear, that I will bear Faith and I true Allegiance to his Majefty Kin^ \ George, and him will detcnd to the [ utmofl of myPower, againii all traiter- ■ous Confpiracies and Attempts what* Ifoever, which ihail be made againii iiis I Pedon CHAP. III. Of Scandal, is Ji^ft Grott?7 clofe and make known to i/er' Majefiy and Her. SuUeffors, all Traiterous Confpiracies. •which I pmltkkovyto be againfi Her or any cf them ; Jnd I do Faithfully Promife to the Utmojl ofniy Power to fupport^, main- tain and Defend the Succefjion of the Cy^own againjl him th? faid James, and aU other ?erfoni 'yiihatf)€v^r ^ AS the fame is, and (lands fettled b^ an AEiy Intituled an At: Declaring theRi^lts and Liberties of thr Subj[ly and fettling the Succejjicn of the Gro-wn to Hitr preftnt Majefiy and the Heirs of Her Body being FretefHai ts ; And AS jhefa?m by another ASl Lnituled, An Ati for thg further Lirnitation of the Crown, and better fccuring the Rghts And Liberties of the Snbj'eH:, is and fiands fettled after Deceafe of Her Majejiy^ and for Default oflfjue of Her Majefiy, to the Prince fs So- phia BleBorefs Dutchefs Dowager of Ha- nover, and the Heirs of Her Body being Protefiants. And all thefi things I do plain- ly and Jincerely Acknowledge andfwear ac- cording to thefe exprefs IVofds by me fpoken, and according to the plain and commonfenfe and uitderjianding of the fame -words, wtth- tui any Equivocation, Mental Evafion, or fecret Refervation, ivhatfoever. And I do make this Recognition, Acknowledge ,merit^ Abjuration, Renounciation, and Vromife, Heartily, rvil/ingly and truly, vp^ the true Faith of a Chrijiian. So help me GOD. '/" Sep-iratiof. 6^ Perfon, Crown an^ dignity. And I wll}%l6 my HtmofV endeavour, to diC* dofc and make known tq bis.Majeft/ and his Succeflbrs^ ^11 Treafons and Traitorous Cofifpiracies, which I fhall know to be againft him or any of them. And alfo I do faithfully Promife, to the urmoft of my Power, to Support, Main-* cain and Defend the Succe/Iion of the Crown againft him the faid James, a.nd all other Perfonswhatfoever; WHICH Succeflion, by an Act. intituled. An A6t ior the further Limitation of the Crown,' and better Securing the Rights and Li- berties of the Suhjed, is and (lands li- mited to the Princefs Sophia, Eleaorefs •and Dutchefs Dowager of Hanover^ and the Heirs of her Body being Pro- teftants. And ail thefe Things I do plainly and fincerely acknowledge and fwea,r, according to thefe exprefs Words by me fpoktn, and according to the plain and common Senfe and Under- ftanding of the- fame Words, without 'any Equivocation, Mental Evafion, or fecret Refervation whatfoever. And I do make this Recognition, Acknow- ledgment, Abjuration, Renunciation and Pfomife, heartily, willingly and truly, • upon the true Faith of a Chri- flian. ^0 h^Jp me GOD. And m Order to prevent- Jurants cavilling on tliis Head, ahd to give the more diftind and clear Light in this Contr5verfy, I fliallcite the exprefs Words of that Aft of Parliament, whereby the new Form of the Oath of Objuration is impo- fed, which IS Intituled, -^nAclfor the further Security of Hs Ma^eRys Perfon and, Covernmerrt, and the Simeffon of the Crozvn in the Heirs of the late Princefs Sophia leii^g Vriitefiants, Annoprtmo GEORGH Regis. I fliall beg leave to give a laree Ci- tation out of that Ad, ior givingclear Light in this Debate.' la '64 S)veirtrtg theOdth^Afid 'judicial Apprcvhg h to he free .CHAP. 111. . In p>ag. <5. in ' Polio y of the faid Ad, it is laid, And he it further enaSied by the Au- thority aforefaid^ 'That all and every Pgrfon or Fetjbns, as well Peers as^CommonSy who, hy Venue of. any AH or AEls made fmce the Union of the two Kingdoms y werehund to take ^ (f,ndfubfcribe the Oath of Allegiance ^ fubjcribe the Ajfuraacey and to take and fign the 4 Oath of Abjuration^ fir and on Account of any Office Civil or Military y or any other Caufe or Occafany within ScotUndy fiall on or before the firjl Day 0/ December one thoufand feven hundred and fifteeny take andfubfmks th^ Oath of Abjuration above mentionedy and Jh all , take andfuhfcribe the faid Oath of Allegiance j and fubfaibi tlx Ajfu- ranee. ~ ^ ■■' . Ahdinpag. qth of the fame Ad, itisfeid. And be it further enacied by the Au thority aforefaid, That all Heads y Maflers and Members 0} CollegeSy Halls or Claffes in\ the Univerjities of Saint Andrews, Aberdeen, Glafgow and Edinburgh and alfo all Probationers y or Licentiates of Divinity, before they enter upon Uwir Trials ^ or obtain Licences to preachy and all Sehool-mafler^ in Scotland. _ And in pag. 8. it is faid, Be^ it further enaSied by the Authority ajorefatdy That all, and every the Perfon and Perfons aforefaid, that do or /hall negleSi or refufe to' take the faid Oaths y and fubfcribe thereto y as aforefaid y in the [aid Courts and Places (viz. at Quarter Se/jions, or elfe at the Circuit Courts) and at the refpective Times aforefaid, jhall be IPSO FACTO adjudged incapable, and di fabled in Law to all Intents and Purpofes Vihatfvever, to havet occupy or enjoy the faid O^fue or Offices, Imployment or Imployments or any Part of them, or any Matter or Thing aforefaid, or any Profit or Advantage ap' pertaining to theniy or any of them, andeveryfuch Office or Place, Imployment or Imploy- ments fball be void, and is hereby adjudged void. And every fuch Perfon or Perfons who Jhall' neglect and refufe to take the faid Oaths within the Time and at the Places aforefaid, aruf being thereof lawfully convifled in- or ufon any Informationy Prefentment or IndiSi- mem before the Circuits, viz. Circuit Courts in Scotland, every fuch Perfon or' Perfons /ball be difabled from thenceforth, to fue or ufe any ASiion, Bill, Plaint, ^ Informa- tion, in any Court of Law, or to profecute any Suit in any Court of Equity; or to be Guardian of any Child, or Executor, or Adminifirator of any Perfon^ or capable of any Legacy, or Deed of Gift, or to be in any Office within this Realm o/-Great Britainj-or to vote at any Elefiion of Members to ferve in Parliament, andjhall forefeit the Sum of five hundred Pounds Sterling, to be recovered'by him, or them, that jkill fue for the fame, to beprojecuted by way Aciion oj-Debt, Suit, Bill, Plaint, or Information, before the Court offufiiciary in Scotland. ' . . . ■ And in pag. 9. oi the fame All', it's faid. And to the Intent and Purpofe, That no Perfon may avoid taking the fever al Oaths in this A[i particularly mentioned, upon any Pretence whatfg^er. Be it .further enacied by the Authority aferefaid. That it f mil and may be' lawful to and for two or more ^Jufiices of Peace, or any other Perfon or Perfons, who Jhall be by His Majefiyfor that Purp(fe fpeci ally appointed, by Order of the Privy Council, or by Commiffon under, the Great Seal, by writing tinder their Hands and Seals, to SUMMON ANT PERSON to appear before them at a cer(ain Day and Time therein to be appointed, to take the faid QATHS; which fr{jd Stfmmons Jhall be ferved , " * upon CHAP. III. OfScarjdd, is jafl GROVND of SEPARATION, 65 uponfuch PeyfcKy or left at his Dwelling Hoiife, or Place of Ahcde with one of the Far mil) there] and if fvch Perfon^ -a-hcfiall be fo Jummoned^ negkEls or refufes to appear ac^ cordti g tofuch Summons:, that then upon due Proof to be made upon Oath of theferving the (aid Summonn:, ivhich Oath Jlich '[fufiice^., or any tther Perfon or Pefuns^ fpeciaHy to be appointed as afcrepiidy are hereby enabkd to adminiflery and are hereby required to certijie tie - I And fo both the Particles ^^ and ^/H/C//-, being Relatives referrin- to a De- Icription of Snccefllon, contained in, determined and fixed by o le and the ^ fame 66 Srvearifjg the Oath^ a;^d Judicial Jp^foviz-fg it to he free CHAP. TIT. fame Law, viz.. The Act ofturcher Limitation : It is Keiice very plain, Tiiat the Relative WHICH, obliges the Jarants to maintain and defend ail the Limitations, Conditions and Provifions, which arc contained in the Ovtennination andCir- cumfcription of the Succeffion, according to the Tenor of that Ad of further Li- mitation J and that is all that was, or coald be meant by the Word, AS. idly. It is very plain. That when the Relative iVHICHrckvs to a fpecifick Defcription, determined and limited bfaLaw.- Li that Cafe, a folemn Obligation to defend thatPe(cription. or fhing thus defcribed, isas extenfive in Signification bytiie Word r WHICH'] as it is by the Word [AS]- For when a Man obliges hir.i- klfytolive accordiyig to the Rule of glorifying and enjoying GOD, WHICH ts mra .! mthe Scriptures of tJye Old and Nezv Tejhffjent ; the Obligation is of *as large 1 - tent in Signification, as when he oblfges himfeli, fo live according t^o the Ru\ ,.; dor if ying and enjoying GOD, A.Sy it is com allied in the Scriptures of the Old and N..10 'Xefiament. ^ -^ . , _ 3^/y.It is plain,That the Legal Eflablifhment oi the Snccejfim or the Kings ot iDig- /W,includes d.\\ the Conditions and?roviftonsofGovernment,'iir^ their Kmgs are bou^d • to perfqrm in the Excrcife of Government, as I have pioven already^ and ihis is further manif^ by what we find in 77;^ ^w^^w^/z^ of-u^hole Kingdoms, &c. pag. 7. where it's exPefly faid, 'Tis true that, the executive Fat &/ the Government ts, both by our Com?nonand Statute Laws, conveyed unto, and vejied in the King; but at the JmeTtme, there isfuffi:K>nt PROVISION inade, both in the tERMS uf our ConRitw tion, andin our Parliamentary Alls, to prevent this from being hurtful unto us,, unlcfs cur Sovereigns become guilty, bofh of the highefl Treachery, and withall make an Lt^ri-^ fim upon, and endeavour the^ Subversion of the whole Government : A RIGHT OF OVERSEEING THE EXECUTION OF THE LAWS, B'-ING A PRERO- GATIVE INSEPARABLE FROM THE OFFICE OF THE SUPREME M h GISTRATE; BECAUSE THE VERT ENDS TO WHICH HE ISCLOATHED WITH RECTORAL AUTHORITT, and FOR WHICH HE I ^-DESIGNED AND ESTABLISHED, ARE CONSERVATION OF THE PUBLICK PEACE AND ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE toiva-dsand among the Members of the BODX POLITICK. And fo the plain Intendment, and geniune Signification of the Law, by which a Man is dcfigned and eilablifhed to fi«:ceed m Regal Government, is only this That he fhall be King according to Law, and according to the Te- np.rofthe Coronation Oath of England, which obliges to maintain SupRtMACY, ^^J^rHorn'm his Mirror, Chap. i. faith. That the Saxons having put an End to the Heptarchy, by Reafon of the' continual Wars that attended the Retgnmg oj fo miny Kims info narrow a Ompafs of Land, they chofe themfelves one Kmg to maintamand de- fend their Ferfonsand Goods tn ?eace by Rules of Law, and made him fwear. That he 'jhould be obedient to fuffer Right, a, well i^ his ?eople Jhould be For according to BraBon^Lib. 2. Cap. 9. The whole Power of the Kings of Englmd ts to do good, and m to 49 Hm : Nqy cm hs do any Thing, but what he can dfi Legally : Quia Lex CH'AP. Tir. OfScandd, is Jr^fl Ground of SEPJRJTION. 6y fncit Regem : That is. He is to be King according to the lenor of the Law that eflablijb^ eth him to he King. And the fame is dcmonflratcd to be the Legal Eftablilhmeiit oF the Succcffion of the Kingly Oovcriiois of England, liy Lord Chancelor For* tefcue. Lib. i. Cap. 8. and Lib. 3. Cap. p. Thus by the yudgmentofHiLnoveviaziRe* W/^/70wr J 0/ England and by the molt learned Lawyers of England, it is plain. That the Succession eftabliilied by Law, includes all the Conditions, Terms and Prcvilions of Government, that the Kings of England are obliged to per- form in their Adminiflation of Government, which includes Supremacy, Pre la* CY, &c. all which iVc^jJurants have fworn to maintain. ^thly. Hiave proven already, fpeaking on the Old Form of the Oath of Abjura- tion, That the 0,-th o^Allegiance contamed in it, which is the fame in the new /Form, obliges to maintain Erastianism, Prelacy, &C. ^tly. Both the Olda.nd New Forms oblige to maintain and defend the Incorpo- rating Union, which includes the Eitablifhment of Erastianism, Prelacy, and Engltjh'popijb Ceremonies. ^ But many ^SVo^j- Minifters, who formerly refufed to fwear the Oath of Abjur.^.- tion in the Old Form, luvc now fworn it, in the New Form ; 2.ud for their Defence they fay,^ Not only is the Word [ AS ] taken out, and the Word [ WHICH ] put in Place ok it : B.it alio King George^ Ad impofing the Oath; has declared ( as thele Jurant Minifters fay) that the Parliament o't Britain never intended, by any Word in that Oath, to oblige the Jarants to maintain Erastianisxm, Prelacy, '^c. ot the Church ot England. And-tho'Ihavefufficiently proven the contrary already, yet to remove this Objeftion, I ftall fet down the exprcfs Ciaufe of that Afr, which they flee to, for Defence, and then fhall remove- their Objedion^founded thereon. That Ciaufe IS m the -jth Page of the above faid Ad of Parliament, the ^ords are thefc 'vi't. And whereas, dizerfe of Hts Majefifs good Subje^s, who have given convirtcitfz Marks of their Loy.ilty to his Royal Per fin, andGovermnent, have fcrupkd to take t^ faid Oath, apprehending that the Reference in the faid Oath, may he conftrued in fime Refpech to be inconiiitant with the EJiabliJhment of the Church 0/ Scotland acc^rdin^ to Law, andtoa Clanje^oncerning Oaths to be impofed in Scotland after the Unton,con- tain din an Aii made m the Parliament ^^'Scotland, in the Year 1707, Intituled, An vl/Hr 'r'apI '^^ ' nTr^'i'p^/^S^°"X^^ Church Government ,- * WHl -H ACT IS DECLARED TO BE A FUNDAMENT A I AND ' ESSEN HAL CONDITION OF THE TREATY OF UNI O^ AND 'FUklHER, THAT BY NO WORD IN THE SAID OATH OR ^ OAFHS FORMERLY IMPOSED, CON TAlS IT OR W^S * MEANT TOOBLiGE HIS MAJESTY'S SAID SUETECTS TO A^^ ' ACT OR ACTS, ANY WAYS INCONSISTENT WITH TO^^ ' TO LA^"" ""^ ™^ ^"""^"^'^ ^^ SCOtZaNdT ACCOR^^^^ I s Now: 6S Swearing the Oath, and Judicial Jpprovho^ it to he free CHAP. HI. Now it is plainly^ Evident, that Declaration of Parliament,contains two Parts, P^iz,. ifl. That the AB of Security is declared to l?e a Fundanjental and Effential Con- dition of Efiablijhment of fhe Incorpordting Union^^ by which Enghjh Eraltianifm, PRELACY Siud. EngliJh-Popi/i CEREMONIES are eftablifhed, as was fufficiently proven already). And idly^ It is declared by Parliament, That the Lep/lature did mt intend that any IVords in the Oath fiould oblige '^lirants to any ACl or A'cis incon- fiftent ivith that legal Eflabhfiment of the C/?«rc/; 0/ Scotland And fo the plain Senfe of the Declaration, amounts only to this, That the Britijh Parliament did not intend that the Oath- fhould oblige Ju'rams to any Ad or Ads inconfiflent with the Fundamental and Eir^ntial Eitablrfhment of the Union, whereby E- raftian SUPREMACY, PRELACY, md Englijh-Popijli CEREMONIES "are efta-j blifhed to fland to all Generations. .» ^ ^ And hence it is plain, that Declaration is far from freeing Jurants from an' Obligation to defend Erajlianifm and Prelacy j And "-fo- that Objedion isf- re-' moved. And as for the Multitude of Quibles about the Words in the Oath,' Vi-z. (REALM, CROWN, and DIGNITY ) with which J/^r^;?^; have fluffed feveral Pamphlets, they fall all to the Ground ; fcing it is plainly proven, thar the Oath in its proper literal Senfe,obliges Jurants to defend tlie Pt^l^ick Con-; ftitution of the Realm of England, eftablifhed by the Union, and fworn to, by that Oath ; and alfo the Crown of England, a.hd all its Prerogatives, of which E-j raftian Supremacy is one, as'it is alfo an ellential Part of the King of England's^ Royal Dignity ; as was proven from the 17th Chap, of the Statutes of King^ Henry the VIIIth,and Statutes of Queen Eliz..abeih, and of King Wdliam. '{ Now having Proven, that Svyearing the Oath of Abjuration in the New Formi_^ cbliees Jurants , in the proper literal .Senfe of the Words , to maiotairv En^fh Eraftianifm, PRELACY and Engliih Popifi CEREMONIES, and th0^ whole Eftablifliment of the Incorporating Union. It plainly follows, 'by evident! neceifary Confequence, That fwearing that new Oath, and Defending it, and Konjurants Judicially Approving the fame to be free of pub lick Scandal, i« juft cauie for Mmiflers, Elders, and other Chriftian Profeflbrs, to make Separatioa both Negative and Pofitive^ from the prefent National Church oLScotland. But ii> thelaft Place, intheClofe of this Chapter, I fliall f|5eak a Word con^ cerningfomeNonjurants Pradice, who refuie to fwear the Oatii of Abjurationi^ either in the Old or yet the New Form of it; but yet they do readily Cw^ar the 1 Oath of Allegiance, and fubfcribe the Brnd of AJfurance, according to the Appoint-^ mentofthetorefaid Ad of King G^^or^^ ; which Oath and Bond, are fet down - <5th Page of the faid Ad, in thefe exprels Words following, yiz.' IA.^B.doJtnce^ely Promfe and Swear , thai J will be Faithful and bear true AJlegp ame to his Majefly^Kmg George. c u , n r^i^ " - So help mc GOD CHAP. III. OfScAndd^ is 'Ju/l Ground of SEPARATION. J>() T A. B. 'i-> ackmivledge and declare y 'That his* Majefly KirgQto\-gt^ is the only Lavjful and Undoubted- Sovereign of thif Realm, as welide Jure, that is of Right, King, as de Fa.d:0,that ts in the Pojjejjion and Exercife of Government ; And therefore I do Jincerely and faithfuHy Promife and Engage, that I uill, with Heart and Hand, Life and Goods , Maintain and Defend his Majefiysnitle a::d Government, again fl the ^Perfon pretending to he Prince of VVales, during the Life of the late King ]xmes, andjtnce his Dcceafe, pretending to be, and taking upon himfelf the ' Stile and Title of King of Engkyid, by the J^ame of James the- III. or 0/ Scotland by 'the Name 0/ James the VIH. or the Stile and Title of King of Great Britain, and , his Adherents, and all other Enemies, vjho either by open or fecret Attempts, Jhall difiurb ' or difqiiiet hi^ MajeBy in the Pofjeffion and Exercife thereof. Seing it isindifpiitably true, That in tHe Bond ef Afurance, THIS REALM, is the united Kingdom, eftabliflied by the Incorporating Union,' Scotland not be- ing a Nation by it felfj but, on the contrary, in all A6ts of the Britijh Parliament, fpeaking o( Scotland, it's called that Part or Gnat Britain ; but in none of them is 'it called a Kmgdom or Realm! -And for King George's Right, it is founded upon, eitablifhed and determined by that Incorporating Union, . that he fliail be Khigo^ Scotland. And as for his Government, it is nndenyably that Government, which is eflabhflied by the faid UNION, which includes the whole Conftitution ,of Government ot £/z^,W^, of which the Eftablifhmcnt of Eraftian SUPRE- MACY, PRELACY, and Englijl-?opifi CEREMONIES is a Part', as was made evident :n the id Chapter. And feing this Bond of Afliirancc,is a legalExplication -and Declaration of- ail the Conditions of Obedience that the ijm/;7j Parliament re- quires of £;/g///Z? znd Scots Subjeds, equally to defend the whole Conflitution of the united Kingdom, and for Defending and Maintaining the ConBitution and E flab lijhmcnt ^i)f King George's Right, as it is eftablifhed by Lavj, to be a ju/l: and lawful Conltitute Right, and for Excluding the Popifli Pretender; and thefe being the whole Things that are contained in and fworn to, by the Oaths of Abjuration and Allegiance , and thefe Minifiers having fworn the Oath of Allegiance ( feing I do noi judge thefe Minifters to be Jacobites) whatfliould hinder them to (wear the Oath of Abjuration, I cannot conceive ? unlefs it be to fave their C REDIT among their People, who are unwilling to join in Communion with Minifters ..that have (worn that Oath of ^^y«j7Z/;ci«. ^ And feeing the Ad of Parliament above faid requires Protefting Miniflersno ' lefs, thitn other Minifitrs, 10 fwezr thefe Oaths and, Subfcribe that Affurance : I fliall fet down what they Declare to be their Judgment ancnt King G^fo>,ge*i RIGHT, and the Exclufion of ihe Po/)ry-& /'rfffWo'. And Eirfl, asio the Pcpijh Pretenders All the PROTESTERS DECLARE, they Judge the Po/*/;/; PrfffW^r hath not any RIGHT, either by the iVord of GOD, or the Laws of Britain, to be King of thefe Proteftant Covenanted King- doms fO JSwearir^ fheOtth, nnd'^fadtcird Jpprnz'f'??^ ft to he free. CHAP III. doms ] BeczuCc by the JVfyrd of GOD y our CovsvantSy and ' Lavjs KJlallijling the^ ^ovenant^d Reformation^ all P(?//,^5 Kings are for ever excluded from the Throne of thefe Lands, this is Linder>)'ably evident to all : A nd the PROTESTERS J'.:dge and Declare it to btimonJtJleJt with the IVord of GOD, their Principles and Covenants, to receive and acknowledge the Pc^ijh Pretender to be .their King. 2% As to King (;^m-ge's RIGHT, all the PROTESTERS DECLARE. I. They do own and acknowledge, he is truly the Neareft Heir by Bhod of the R«f/(/« eltabliflied by the faid UNION, which UNION being contrary to the l^^ord of GOD, and ihcon- ^ liftent with the Liberties and Privihges Sacred and Civil of the Covenanted Church and Kingdom of Satland, and everlive of our Solemn League, as was made evi- dent ; Therefore the PROTESTERS cannot fwear the faid Oaihs, nor f;;b- icribe the faid Ajfurance. ^thly. That none may have Ground to fay, that the PROTESTERS rejea or deny the jT^y? 'and Z,^iufz^/ RIGHT of Regal Government of this Nation, cfla- bliihed by the Ancient Fundamental Laws of Scothind, agreeable to the Word of GOD, and fworn to be unalterably preferved in Scotland boih by Kings and Peo- ple of this Nation : For giving a plain Demonflration of which Jufi and Lawful KIGHT of Regal Goverjument oH Scotland, 1 fhall Cite fome of tlie Ancient Fun- damental Laws of the Kingdom, by which the Jufl RIGHT of Scots Kings is Conflitute,Circumfcribed, Determined, and Unalterably fixed to fland to all Ge- ner^tiops. For Demonflration of which, let us confider. Firfi, The 15th. Act of Parliament 2d. of King Charles ad. Anentfeeurirg of Religion and Ptace of the Kingdom, February j. 1649. In whicli Ac^t it is laid; T^hs EJtates of Parliament taking to thm wojl ferious C&njtdtration, the unhappy Dif- " ' Terences CHAP. IT/. . Of ScAMdal.is '^uflGro/iKAof SeparAtiot?, 71 ferences betiveen tfjeir Late Sever aign and thefe Kingdoms, caufed ly the evil Councils ^ahoiit him-, unto the great prejudice of Religion , and long Dijinrbance of the Peace of l-thfe Kingdcms : 'As likfwife the manifold Aci^ of Parliament and Fundamental Con" ■fcituiion ofthisKingdoin, anem the Kings Oath at his C(.rouatiou, wl ich judging it necef fary, tiat the Prince aKd th>e People be of one perfeyl Religion, APPOINTETH, that all krngs and Princfs who fiall Reign or bear Rule over this Realm, Jhall at their CO- RONATION, cr RECEIPT of their PRINCELYAUThORI'Ty SOLEMNLY SIVEAR TO OBSERVE IN T'lIEIR OWN PERSONS, aid to V RE SERVE THE TRUE R E LIG 10 N, as it is prefcntly ^(iablijhed and ?rofe/fedy and Rule the People commit ttd to their Charge AC- CO R DING to the WILL of GOD, revealed in His Word ; and the Law dable Conftitutions received within this Kingdom, and do fundry other things which are ' more fully expreffed therein. And withal pondering their manifold Solemn Obligations to endeavour the fecuring cf RE LI G 10 N, and the COVENANT before \a^id ABOVE ALL WORLDLY I NTR R ESl S- Therefore they do ' EnaB, Ordain and Declare, that before the King's Maje(i\',who now is or any of His 'SUCCESSORS .SHALL'be ADMlTTH b to the EXERCISE ,j his Oath, which hefwore,not as a Private Perfon, but* qua Rex Scotia,.i. e. as King o^ Scotland, "and that not only for obligmg himfelf,- but alfo all his Succes#rs Kings oi- Scotland, and therefore that Solemn Oath and. Covenant; as formally and fully binds all fucceeding Kings oi Scotland, as Jo- Jhuah's O^th to zhc Gfbionites bound King Saul: Compare yojhuah 9, 18, with iSam: 21. I. And al:ter*the King had f\vt|rD the Covenant in Manner above ex- preft: Then the Oath of. Coronation, as it is contained in the8?A. Acl of the firft Parliament oiKing'James the^dth. was read by my'LordZ^w, the Tenor ^here- iecaufe that' the Increafe of Vertite, and fupprefflng of Idolatry, craveth, that the' Prince and the People be of one per feci Religion, ivhuh of GOD's Mercy ts now,prefently pYofeffed within this Reahn ; " therefore it is Statuted and Ordained, by our Sovereign Lord^ my Lord Regent, and the three Eflaiesofthis'prefent Parliament, that all Kings, Princes ^ and Magiflrates vjhatfiever, holding their Place, which hereafter at any timefiall hap- ten to reign, and bear Ruk over this Realm, at the Time of their Coronation and .Re- ceipt of their Princely AiJ^rity, make their faithful. Promife, in the P/efence of tht £- terrnil GOD, that during the whole Courfeof their Lives, they Jhallferve tim fame Eter- nal ' GOD, \o the utmo/i pf their Power, according as he hathrequtred in , his mojl holy Wovd revealed and contained in the Old and New 7e/iaments, and according to. the fa^ne JVord)hall maintain the true Religion of Ch7iji Jefus, Preaching of his holy fVord, and' dtie and right Mimflration of the Sacraments, now received and preached within this Realm,-^ and jhall abolifh andgainfland allfalfe Religions contrary to the fame. Andjhall rule the Veople committed to their Charge, according to the Will and Command of GOD re-jealed, in hisforefaid Word, and according to th^ Laudable Laws, and Confiitutions received in-, this Realm, no ways repugnant to the faid Word of tloe Eternal GOD, and jh all procure to the utter mo ff of their Power, to the Kjrk' of GOD, and whole Chridian People, true. - " ' ■ and CHAP ITT. OfScwdal.n JufGrokridofSEPARATJOM 7] ' and perfehl Peacfy in Time coming, the Rights and RentSy with all the Jujl Vriv Hedges rf the Crown oj Scotland, toprefiyue and keep inviolnted; Neither- jl all they tramfevy nor alienate the fame. They Jhallforbidy and reprefs in all EJlates and Degrees^ Op- pnffiony and all Kind ofPProng: In all Kind of yudgmentSy they Jlmll command and orocure, that jfu/iice and Equity h keepedto all Creatures without Exception^ as the Lord and Father of Mereiei be ?nerciful to them. And oitt of their Lands andEmptrt '.hey^jhall he careful to root out all Hereticks^ and Eneynies to the true M or/hip of GOD, ihatjhall be conviB by the true Kirk of GODy oftheforefaid CHmes. And that theyfoall faithfully affinn the Thmgs above written by their Solemn Oath. Thus we plainly fee, that the Juft and Lawful RIGHT of the Kings o^ Scotland contains three eflential Articles, viz.. ifi. That the King fliall not only by -Pro- fefl^on, but alfo by Pradice be a true Protestant, Presstterian, and fervc GOD, to hisuttermoft Power all the Days of his Life, according to the Word of GOD, and true Religion eftablilhed in Scotland, and fworn to by Corenant, both by King and People, feveral times, viz. 1580. and 165 1. idly. That tiie King Ihall rule all People of the Nation, under his Charge and Government, accordmg to the. Word of GOD, and Laws agreeable to the Lavr of GOD. ' ^dly. That he fhall preferve Purity of Religion, and Peace of the Nation and Churcli ro his utmoft Power, and root out all Herefie, Error and falfe Religion out of Church and Kingdom. So that the ]aft and LAWFUL RIGHT ofthe Kings of Scotland is principal- ly founded upon, attd regutotcdby the Word of GOD : Aftd formally confti- t-iite and eiiabiiflied by Laws, and Solemn Covenants, agreeable to, and foun4- ed upon the Word of GOD, to ftand to all Generations. And accordingly King Charles the i/i. Anno 16^^. at Edinburgh, was invefted in Regal Government by the fame Coronation Oath, ellablifiied by the %th. Ad of ifi Pari, of King 'James 6. as is plainly evident by the Record of the Order of Coronation of Charles ifi. knd it mull be remarked; That the JUST AND LAWFUL RIGHT of Kingly Government of Scotland, as is delccibed above, was eftablifhed not only by that iith. Ad ofthe i/i. Parliament of King James the 6th. but alfo repeated and ratified in the 99 Ad of Pari. jth. and 23 Ad of Pari. 11. and 1 14. Ad of Pari. 12. or King James the-6/A.and the fame was ratified by the 4. Ad of King Charles the i/?. And fo the King o( Scotland's ]i ft and Lawful Right of Authority, is infeparably conneded to the Covenanted Reformation of Religion, n Dodrme, Worfhip, Difcipline and Government, as it was eftabhfhed in Pu- reft Times oi the Church, 1/2.. between the Year of our Lord 1638 and 16^^. I'hclujive : According to the Tenor of the Ad of Parliament Anno 16^9. February ^^th. above faid, which Ad was plainly agreeable in all Jtiflfential Parts," to the Ads: 3f King Jair.es x\\t 6th. and King Charles the ifi. above cited. And accordingly- t'6 declared by the 47 Ad of Parliament 3 . of James 6th. That the Caufe of jOD'j irve, Religion J and his Higtnefs Authority, me fo joined, as the Hurt of the ont, is mnmn tvlvth. K 2dly 74 SwearitJg the Oath, and Juiicid approving it to he free. CHAP. Til. idly. Let it be confidered, that King James the VI. Anno 1580, did fubfcribc the National Covenant, whereby the Kings oi Scotland their juftand lawful Right, as defcribed above, was folemnly ratified to iland inviolable to all Generations : For the King did fubfcribe the faid Covenant, Qiia Rex Scotiayi. e. As he luas ^rK| 0/ Scotland j and thereby obliged himfelf, and all facceedmg Kings of ^cit- land, to Profeis and Pradife all their Lives, the truly Refoi-mjd,Protelfanr, Presby- terian Rehgion, founded upon, and contained in the Word oF God, in the Pld and New Teftament, and according to the. Tenor of the faid National Covenant. And both King and Kingdom, by their fwearing and Iwblcr.bmg the faid Co- venant, did thereby oblige themfelves, AS King and Kii.gdom o/icodand, and .'.Jl thcir-Poflerity, with their utmoft Power, Lives and Fortunes, to maintain and defend the true Reformed Proteftant Religion above ^aid, and to live in the con- ftantPradice thereof, all their Lives. And likeways with their Lives and Forw tunes, to maintain and defend the Juft and Lawful RIGHT ot Regal Govern- ment of Scof/;7S Ceremonies are eftablifhed. ^fthly. By that Union, there is a Fun- damental Law of the united Realm oi B.itam eftablifhed, for requiring and commanding all Minifter's of the Church of Scotland, to fwear to maintain the faid Union, and Erastianism, Prelacy, and Englijh fuperftitious Ceremonies, under an Eraftian V^naXtY oi Deprivation o^Office to all Intents and ?urpofes, as the Aa of Parliament exprefles it. ^thly. By that Union, the Prerogatives of the Crown of Scotland, for calling the Parliament ot this Kingdom, lor making Laws for preferving and executing Juftice and Equity, and for fecuring Religion and our Covenants, are wholly taken away. 6thp. By the faid Union, the RIGHT of Kmgly Government obliges all Kings oi Scotland and England, to preferve the whole Conftitution of the faid UNION, and to fwear to be only of the Com- munion of the Prelatick Church ot England, and to maintain Eraftian SUPRE- MACY, PRELACY, znd Englijh-poptjh CEK^UO]^lES, without which Oath and Obligation, no Perfon is to be King or Queen, to reign and rule Scotland^nd England. • Whence it is plain. That, the RIGHT of Kingly Government of thefe King- doms of Britain and Ireland, now eftablifhed by the UNION Confifts in this That the Fundamental Laws of the United Conftitution, have'ftatuted and ap- pointed to inveft King George, and all thefucceeding Kings of Scotland and Em- land, with Royal Authority and Power of Kingly Government of the Nations lor prefervmg the whole Conftitution ot th^ Incorporating UNION, and princioal- 'LnUllt^'J ^^/^"" SUPREMACY, Pr/lac! and Eng/^oprcmi MONIES, and to fwear to mamtain the Pidatick Conftitution' of the Churcli oi England, and her Ceremonies, and to be only of the Communion of the faid Prelatick Church: And that thefe fliall be, and remain to all Generations the Elkntial Articles and Conditions of the RIGHT of Regal Government o(' Scot- land and E«^/^«^ ( now united ) without which no Perfon fhall ever reien and rule thefe Kindgoms. ° And here, for Vindication of the PROTESTERS, I fhall adduce fome Maxims of Government, allow d by the Chriftian Kingdoms oi^ Europe; recorded in that Book, mtitdled, The Judgment of- whole Kingdoms and Nattons, pag. 12. Firfl When the Chriftian Religion is become a Part of the Suhjeth Property, by the Laws and . ConfUtuttoa 7? Swearing the Oath^ind Jadtcid af)provwg it to le free^ drcCUAP. III. ConHitution cf the Cmntry ; then it is to be conftdered as one of their principal Rights ; and fo may be defended as ivcUas any other Civil Right, idly. T'hat Caufe is imjufl ■which 'violates jufi L CIVS, defends the Breakers of the Laws^ and proteEls the Subvert ers of the Conftitution, and would abolijira Ju/i Government. And in Pag. 9. By the Lau: ^fNature,SAL\JS POPULI, i.e. the Weltare oithe People, is both the Supreme and Fir ft Law in Government y and the Scope and End of all other Laws^ and vf Govern- mentit felf. Ibid. "dly. No humane La-^ is binding, which is contrary to Scripture, cr the General Law of Nature. And in pag. u. No Power can exempt Princes from the Obligation to the 'Eternal Laws of GOD, and Nature. Ibid. No Man, or Society cf Men have Power to deliver up their Prefervation, or the Means of it. And in pag. 2. No Body, or Society of Men, can transfer a Power unto thofe whom they JeleEl, and jet apart from among themfelves, to-4'^ Rubers over the Community • by Vertue whereof thcfe vefled with Magi fir atical Authority, can withdraw their SubjeBsfrom their Al- legiance to GOI\ or aEl arbitrarily in prefcribing and impofing what Religion they pleafe ; or deflroy the meanefi Perfon, faving upon a previous Crime, and ^ujl Demerit. ... All thefe Maxims are advanced by Englifh Revolutioners in the Book above ci- ted, for Defence of the Fundamental Laws 0I England, Liberties of the Subjeds, and Eftablifhment of their Preiatick Church againft Arbitrary Government. And how much more jufily we may advance them, for Defence of the ancient Fundamental Laws of Scotland, the true Reformed, Proteftant, Presbyterian Re- ligion and Covenants, againft tlie Incoi^orating Union, all impartial true Chrifti- " an Readers may fee. However, by the Englijh Revolutioners own Maxims, it's plainly proven, That ieing the Incorporating Unioii is contrary to the Law of GOD, as was proven, and tends to withdraw Ayco^j- People from their Alle- • giance to' GOD, fwornby our Covenants- it cannot, be binding. I (hall conclude what I defign on this Head, with a Citation or two out of our National Covenant, viz.. in the 47. Ad of Pari. 3. of King Jajnes 6th. It is-Declared and Ordained, Seing the Cauje'of GOD's true Religion, and his Highmfs Au- thority are fo joined, as the Hurt of the one is common to both : . And that none jball be reputed as Loyal and Faithful SubjeSIs to our Sovereign Lord, or his Authority,, but bepuniffmbleas Rebels andGainfiandersofthe fame, who Jhall not give their Conjeffion, and make their' Profeffwn of thefaid true Religion. What they meant by this true Re- %/o«, is indifputably plain, by the Covenant it felf, and by A6i: d^. oi Pari. 6. ct king James 6. which, Declares, T'hat that there is none other Face of Knk, nor other Face of true Religion,than was prefently, at that limeJ^ tl'e Favour of GOD,e/iabliJkd within thi, Realm, which is therefore filled GOD'S YRVE RELIGION And hence it is plain. That no Man m Scotland, is a true Loyal Subjed, but he that is tor maintaining Covenanted Reformation of Religion, and tor extirpating Popery, Prelacy, Erafttantfm, Herefte,Error and Profanenefs, according to thefe Fundamental Laws o£ Scotland, and our Covenants ; and ^y ne^^eflary Conicq^^^^ thefe that made the Umo;i, for eftabliftiiig ERASTIANISM, PRELACY, and Superfti- tlOliS CHAP. TV. Is "Juli Grou^j^ of SEPARATION. 79 tious CEREMONIESjWerc Rebels againjl the Kings of Scotlma their Juji Authority, And feing the National Covenant is the Oath of the Nation, what is faid in it, is every Man of Ao^//z«^, in after Ages, his Declaration upon Oath, which he fvvearstobe true; and fo the Unionsn own Oath condemns their making that incorporating UNION. C H A P. I V. CQyjtaining Arguments and Reafons for Vroving^ Ihat the lyranny in Government, iex- erci/id by 'this National Churchy over the Confciences of Minifters and Chriflian PrufejfO'S, in commanding them to join with Ja rants in the Lord* s Supper , is jufi Ground of Separation, /-w/; Negative and Poiitivc, from Communion with her* THat I may prove this* Point, with all poflible Brevity, I offer this plain Argument, yiz.. Alini/lers, Elders,and other Chrijli am, "who adhere to the Ancient Covenanted Refor" matitn of the Church of Scotland in her purefi Times; Namely, between the Tear of our lord 1638 and 16^9 Inclufive, have juflGvoundy not only to withdrmv from Communi-' en, but afo tefet up di/linCi judicatures Jeparat from that National Church ©/Scotland, that hath made (landing Acls of their pretended General Affembly, whereby they free Mi" nijiers the Church of Scotland from any publick Scandal, on Account of their, [wearing publickOath impcfed by the MagiRrate, for Maintainiyig Englifli Eraflian'SUPRE" MACr, PRELACr, and Englifli Popifli CEREMONIES ; and alfo ejlabltjhed Ty- ranijy in Ggvernmeiit by a /landing Law. But the prefent National Church of Scotland, is that National Church of Scotland, that hath -made flanding AEls of their pretended General Affembly, whereby they free Minifers of the Church of Scothnd from any publick Scandal, on Account of their fwear" jvg a public^ Oath, impofed by the Magi fir at, for Maintaining Englifli Erafiian SU^ P REM ACT, PRELACY, and Englifli Popifli Ceremonies ;, and alfo eiilablijhed Tyrann) in Government by a flanding Law. Jind the-.efore Mmifiers, Elders, and other Chrifiians, who adhere to the Ancient Co- venanted Reformation of the Church of Scotland, in her pure ff T'imes ; Namely, betxveen the Tear of our Lord 1 6^ 8 ^^^ 1649 Inclufive, have jufi Ground, not only to withdraw from Communion, but alfo to fet up difiinEl Judicatures feparat from the prefent Niticnal Church of Scot\md. ' ■ For Confirming this Argument, I fay, firfi:, It is plain, That all Orthodox Di- vines freely grant, yea, defend the Major ov firfi Propofition of it : And all that I have to do, is, to prove the Minor orfecond Propofition, which is this. Namely; But the prefent National Church o/Scotland, is that National Church of Scotland, that hath made fianding Atis of their pretended General Affembly, wheieby they free Mi* nifJers of the Church of Scotland from any publick Scandal, on Account of their fwearing . a publick Oathfimpofed by the Magifir ate Joy Maintaining En^lUhErafiianSUPREMACl, Vrtiacj^ jj(c Tie {Ihurch^s TjrAfi)iy in Governmefit^ CHAP. IV. PRELACTyandY^gXi^Vo^i^ CEREMONIES', and alfi eRablijhed Tyranny in GovetrmenthyafiandingLcrj).. _.-\ There are Three Things in this Prof oHtion, Viz., ifi, That Tome Minifters or' .this Chutch ot* Scotkmd y _ wz,. -The Juranfs, have fworn to }dimti.m EngliJbEraJiianSvpKEMAcry Prelacy, and Englijh Poj^ijh C^KLMomis.' And this is fully evinced already, and therefore I need (ay no more to prove . it. The id Thing is. That the preicnt National Church, by her Ads or* Af- fembly, free the Jurants from Pubhck Scandal, on Account of their fwearingthe Oath of Abjuratiop, whereby they are obliged to Mviintain.£«^/?y^ Eraftian SU- PREMACV, PRELACY, and Eit^^b PcpJfi CEREMONIES. ._ The 3^ Thing- is, That the pr^fcnt ^National Church hath ^idabliflied Tyranny in Government by a {landing Law. '1 fhall, as fhortly.as poltible, prove thcfe Two lafl'PointSjas they \y in order before me, • And foe Proving the iirft of thefe, it 19 undenyable. That the Ge- neral Aflerablyof the prefcnt National Chprch oi Scotla^id, An?io iji^^ made an Act, Peclaring the' SweariiTg the Oath of Abjuration to be no Ground of Sepa- ration from the Jurant Minifters, in their Adminiihation of the Lord's Supper ; and the General Aflembly Anno iji^y enaSed the fame over again. And tho* Turants utterly refufed to ackijowledge tlieir fwearing of the Oath to be fmful and fcandalous; yet, not only JurantS, but alfo Nonjurants, joining in Allembly, freely went into thefe Afts, declaring the fwearing that Oarh, no Ground of Se- paration fromjurants in the Ad miniThation of the Lord's Supper; And m both their Acts, prcjVtd all Perfons to make no Exceptions, on Account of fwearing that Oath, to join with Jurants in that Sacrament. Now feing by their Acts, they declared the fwearing that Oath to be no Ground of Exception, that could juftly hinder Joining with Jurants in their Adminiftration of the Lord's Supper; then by evident neccflary Confequence, the fwearing that Oath was no publick Scandal, according tp their Ads of Allembly. . For all Perfons Guilty of publick Scandal, ought to be debarred from the Lord's Supper, till they give Satisfadion and be Reclaimed ; as is undenyably, clear by our Confeffion of Faith, Ch3.p. 30. Sed. 3^. And hence it is plain, That whatever is a publick Scandal, is juit Caufe for Chriftians not to join in that Sacrament with Perfons Guiltv, till the Scandal be removed. And great Mr. (?/^/c//?/>, in his Aaron's Rod Bhffoniing, Book.L Chap. 2. Page io6,arguing from 2 Epiftle of ^ohn 10 Ver. concludcth,'?/;^^ all Perfons ivho conflnt to Admittiir^ JcaKdalous Siirnersto , the Lord's Table ^ piake thtmfehes Partakers of thefe fcandalous- Sinners -evil Deedf. And this was approven as Orthodox, by that Venerable Affendiy at Wefiminfler, which cpmpofed our Co«/tjtf/o« of. Faith \ And by plam Coniequence, the Joining Non- jurants ha:ve made themfelves Partakers of the Jurants evil Deed of iV/earing the Oath of Abjuration; feing, ty their. Ads of Allembly, they appoint Joining with Tiir^nts in the Lord's Supper^ withoCit Removing the Scandal, / Aod feing both Jurants and Nonjiirants, Joining in Allembly- of the National Chap. IV. Js Jufi Ground of SepAVdtian, ChvLXch oi ScotUiid, have jointly, by their Ads, made ' the fwcaring the Oath Abjuration to be free of p.ublick Scandal; then, by neceflary Conlequehce, they have freed the Jiirantsfrom publick Perjury in fwearing it .- For thefer that nude the Afts of Aflembly that freed Jiirants from Scandal,could not with anyfliadow ©f Reafon, at the fame Time, judge them Guilty of fwearing contradictory to, orlnconfiftent with the Word ot God, our Principles and Covenants ; for that would haye been a Judging them Guilty of very grofs Scandal. And tlujs the Joining Nonjurants, by thefe Ads of Alianbly, have declared before God and the World, that they do not Judge the fwearing the Oath of Abjuration, to be contrary to, or inconMent. with the Word of God, our Principles and Covenants,- ifor then it would have been, even in their Judgment, a. grofs publick Scandal,' which, by their Ads of Aflembly they deny. But one Thing I cannot omit, vinj. That the Joining Nonjairants have ac- quired a politick Ignorance of the Nature of the Oath ; Vol: even thefe of them that haye preached againft that Oath, and fome that publifhed their Judgment in Print to the World, by many Arguments proving that Oath to be contrary to our Covenants, thefe very Men now iay,that they arc not clear about the Oath,. and think it fomething Smful ; but when we ask them wherein, or in what Rc- fpeds they judge .that Oath finful ? They If ill wave that ^ and tell us- only they were in the Dark about it, and think it fomething finfnl, but , no Caufeof Separation. But I truly ^ think, a namekfs fomething, \s a^ judiual Nothing ; for would a Man complain to a Judicatory, that his Meigh- bour had wronged him, and he fupplicats the Court for obtaining Redrefs ; upoa which the Court inquires; wherein was he wronged ? He anfwers ftill he was wronged in SOMETHING, but cancot tell in the World what it is ; fure the wifeil Court in the Nation, will make the Man's SOMETHING to be a mcci: NOTHING in Judgment; and yet the Nonjurants that join with Jurants, havQ no better Argument now of late, againft the Oath of Abjuration. And by what hath been faid, I have clearly proven, that by evident neccf- fary confcquence, both Jurants and Nonjurants Joining in the Grenei-al A€cm- bly ofthc National Church of ^tWrt»^,by their flanding Ads oi Aflemlly, have freed the 5f«;-^«fj from Perjury and publick Scandal m'their fwearing the' Oath of Abjuration, -'---'- -'-«• — - ~ - ^* • ■ -- '--- ^ Prelacy Ihall prov ed Tyranny in Government by a ftanding Law, to -wit. By makinj^ an Ad'of their General Aflembly rt;7«o 1714. Commanding and requiring aIi^M?//«r^«t Presbjterian Minillers Within the Bounds of the National Church of ScotJand-to join with j^«)Yi«t Miniflers, within their refpedive Bounds, in the Lord's Sup- : per, without making any Exceptions on account of jurants having fwomthe jOath of Abjuration, This Ad being made for requiring a continued Pradice i|of fo doing, no\v^ithHanding that fome Minifters and a great Body oi.CmHim L Pro- of I ^ g2 The Churclj^sTyrAvny in Government. . CHAP IV. Profeflbrs ire clearly convinced in Confcience, that the taking that Oath of , Abjuration wa? a grofs flep of Defedion and a grievous nocoar Scandal ; l^ fay,- is ancRablifhing Tyranny in Government by a ftJndingLaw of the Church. And for the proving this the more clearly, i fhall fho v what Tyi-anny in Church. Government is, according to the Judgment of the moft Learned Orthodox Divines; and granted to be fo, even by the 'Conceffions oi Papifts, and i?re- latifts, and by that defcViption it will be manifeftthis church Ruleth Tyrannically. That FamC) IS Light of the ProteftancChurch,Mr, Genge G/lkfpe, in his Difoute againft.Englijb-PopiJh Ceremonies, Part i. chap. 6. he hizh, B'rh^.p Lindfay xy/V/to^ the -will of the Lajo to rule our Confciences, luhtch hy interpretation ( faith Mr. Gil- lefpie ) is Sic volo fie jubeofit pro ratione voluntas, he givssus not the reafon or Equity of the Lavj, but 'only the Authority of it, to be our -Rule. And Bijhop Spotfr ; wood, viz. In his Sermon at Perth- Affembly, will have us to be fo direEied by the Sen- tence of our Superiors, fhat we take their fentence as fifficimt Ground to our Confciences for obeying. And downward in the fanie Chapter, Mr. Gillefpie laith in anfweD to the Bifiiops, T'hey who give their will for a Law, and their Authority for a rear Jon, and anfiuer all the Arguments of Opponents, by bearing them down with the force of a publick Conjlitution, and the Judgment of Superiors to which their' s ( to -uiit, the Judgment of the Party born down ) mufi be conformed, do rule the Lord's^Flock with force and with cruelty, as LorHs over GOD's Heritige, Ezek. 34. 4. i Pet. 5- 3. ' Nor luas Mr. GiHefpie fingular in holding this dtfcription of Tyranny in Church Gcvern- ment, for in that Chapter he citeth great Divines holdiig the fame. Viz. Auguftin. I epift' ^4- Nazianzen in Apologet. Tercullian inr Apologetico, and ■I>x\ix\xs Polit. Chrifl. Lib' 5. cap. 3. Janius Animadver. in Bellas. Cuntr. 3. fib. 4. cap. 16. Chemnitius Exam: part 3. de caM. facer d. page 38. The Dutch Prof efors of Di- vinity in their Synopjis Purior.\ Theolog: Difput: 49; Thejf: 73. rt«/ Magdeburg; C^»- t^r: i. lib: 2. cap. 4. Co. 443. Calvm.- /'« i. Theff: 5. 21. Parasus on 1 Cor. 10. i<. Yea the Ro nan Law prohibiting to depart from the, Rules of Difcipline of tlje Ro- man Churchy yet permitteth Men to do otherwlfe than the Church frefcribeth, if it be done cum diferetione Juititis, ut Decret: Part i.DiJl. 12. cap. i. And Aquinas faith a private Man may examirte the Statutes of the Church, and negleCi the fame ij he feeevident caufe for fo doing. 2. zd^e. 4. P: 147. Art. 4. And Pajbody That ftout Defender of Pr^/^c)','granteth in his ^/'Jo^j' Part ^. chap. i.Sechiy That it is Unlawful to do in GOD's IVurjhip any thing upon the meer pleajure of Man. And Mr. Gillefpie in his Aarons Rod Bloffoming ( which was approven by the Venerable Aflembly at Weflmnfler ) Book 2: chap:' 3. Page 1^9. faith. Tyranny in Church Government excrcifed by Prelates, is thus defcribed, - vi-z.. Ihe Prelate. did not allow Men to examine by the Judgment of Chriflian and private Difcretion their Decrees and Canons, fo as to fearch the Scriptures and look at the Warrants, bu would needs have Men think it enough to know the things to be commanded by ihem tha ftre in Place and Power. Presbyterial Government doth not Lord it over Mens Con [dmssi but (kdmitmh{ yea commendeth faith he ) the fearchin^ of the Scriptures, whe m CHAP. IV. If Jf^ft Ground of S spar At ion', 8^ thr theje things which it holdcth forth be notfoy and doth not pr^fs Mens Conferences vjith fie volo fie jubto, ha defireth they 7nn^ do in Faith what the) do. . . And what Mr. GtlJefpie hath faid, is plainly agreeable to ourConfeflfiOn of Faith, 'xhap: ^i.feB.^. Where its faid. All Synods or Councils Jtnce 'the Apofles T^imesy 'whether general or particular, may Err, . and fnany have erred ; t her ef ere they are not 'to ie made the rule af' Faith cr P)^aBice, but to be ufed as an help in both. But how ftalj thty be an help in Faith and Pradtice ? That is anfwered by what we have in the third Sedion of that fame 31ft clap- of our Confcflion of Faith, viz,. Synods or Councils cught to determine cafes of Ccnfcience and ccntrcverjies of Faith Minijierially, and Jet down Rules for the better or- dering the pubhck H'^or/hip of God, and Government of the Church, and in cafes ofMal- adiwnifyation Authoritatively to determine the fame. But how tar are thefcDecrees and Determinations binding, and to be received? The Anfwer is in the following words in the fame Seclion of that 3 i chap' of the Ccmfefl:(7li of Faith, to wit. The fe Decrees and Determinations of the Church are not to be received any further, than they are confonani and plainly agreeable to the Vf'^ord-^God, and if they be fo, they are t&be received with Reverence and fubmiffon. And the Reafon of this we have it in the 2oti) chapter of our Confe/Tion of Faith, SeSlion 2d, where its faid, God alone is Lord ef the Confcience, and hath left it free from the DoBrines and Commandments of Men ^ which are in any thing contrary toHisU'^ord, or be/ide the fa?ne in Matters of Faith or IVorfip. And the requiring implicite Faith and blind Obedience, js to defiroy' Liberty ofCorfiience and Reafon alfo. And all fobcr Chriftians mufl: grant, that it is Tyranny, to deRroy Mens Liberty X)f Ccnfcience >and Reafon alfo. And we plainly fee by the Confeffion of Faith, that the Church is Tyrannical, when by her Acts and Commands fhe requires by im- plicite Faith to obey what the General AfTembly commands and requires, wz-. To Judge the fwearing the Oath -of Abjuration to be no publick '-Scandal, .to hinder us to Jom yNilh^urants in the Sacrament ot the Lord's Supper j without giving Warrants from Holy -Scripture, proving, that that Oath isplainly agree- able to the Word of GOD, our Confeffion of Faith and Covenant.<^; which they never did, nor can do.- For, fcing the fwearing that Oath hath hctu ^ Contro- verfie in Religion, and cafe of Confcience, the Afl'embly ought to have Apealed to the Supreme Judge pf Controverfies, viz,. The Spirit of GODipeakingin the Scriptures, by whofe clear Determination they ought to have walked: Accor- ding to our Conftflion of Faith chapter i.SeBion 10. and all that walked not by that Rule, walked by their own inv^'ard Light ; but not by the Light of GOD's W.ord, as the event hath proved. But now feing Ncmurants Joining with 3^«- rahts, by their A6ts command and require Men to Join in that Sacrament with j^/^;/r;/ff, without any Exception on account of fwearing that Oath oj- Abjurati- on, they ought to warrant their Afts by proving, that that Oath is truly and plainly agreeable 10 the Word of COJy, our Confeffion of Faith and Covenants, and the fwearing of it free of any appearance of evil ; an4 io ''jHfami are free S4 "The Church* s Tyramy in Government. CHAP. IV. j of publick Scandal in fwearing the faid Oath. For both Jurants and Nonju- * rants Joining together, having made Unanimous Ads requiring Obedience, as a- i)Ove faid, both Jurants zndNbnjurants ought h'kewife to make an Unanimous Aft, ; proving Iw Holy- Scripture, that Jurants are free of fwearing contrary to the ' WordofuOD, our Principles and Covenants, in their taking the Oatli of Ab- juration. And here I would have all Men to remark, that if the Nonjurams that have Joined with the 5^«r^«?j in making thefe Ads requiring Men to Join in Com- anunion with yurams ilhy^ if thefe A/ow «r/?«f j refufe to Join with Jurants in f'iving plain proof from the Word of GOD, for Vindicating the fwearing that. )ath as above faid, how inconfiftent wiU they be with themfelves in making the -former Ads ? But all Men know, that tho' the Affembly commands and requires Obediei-ice to Join in Communion i yet the General Aiiembly never gave an Ad for Vindi- cating Jurants by Warrants of GOD's Word as i^ faid above ; and that by the Judgment ol this National Church Handing on Record, Jurants are tree of pub- lick Sc^adal and falfe 'fwearing in their taking that Oath ; But inftcad of givin^^ Warrants from God's Word, they multiply Ads only commanding by tlTe Au- thority of the Church, as is undenyably evident ; and thereby the Natioual Church makes it plainly mahifeft, that fhe makes her Will and Authority to be the only Reafons andWarrants of her Laws and Ads,by which (he commands Minifters and Chriflian Profeflbrs to obey her Laws, in Joining in Communion with Jurantsy and to judge the fwearing the Oath of Abjuration to be free of publick Scandal ; Meerly^becaufe the Aflerably faith, the fwearing that Oath is Xio Ground of Separation from Communion with Juramsy even in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper. Now by what hath been faid, I have clearly proven, Firfl, That both Jurants and Non jurants, who joyn in the Aflembly of the prefent National Church ot ^o^/^?7^, have made Ads of their Aflembly, which by evident neccflary Confe- quences, declare it no falfe fwearing, nor publick Scandal, for Miniilers of the Church o(ScotIandy to fwear an Oath impofed by the State, for maintaining- Englilh Eraftian SUPREMACY, PRELACY, and .BngHfi-ppih CEREMO- NIES. 'idly. 1 have likewise fufficiently proven, That theprefent National Church of 'Scotland, hath eflablifiied Tyranny in.her Government by a Handing Law ,- Be- ■ caufe file makes her WILL and AUTHORITY the only. Reafons and War^ lants ot her Ads, by which fhe commands and requires Minillers andChriftian Profeflbrs to joyn in Communion with Jurants, and to judge the fwearing the . tiath ot Abjuration, which in its true literal Stnfe obliges Jurants, to maintain Erailian SUPREMACY, PRELACY, md.EngUJb-pop,Jh CEREMONIES, to be no talie fweariiig, nor publick SiC|tidal, to hinder joyixing with Jurants in the LQIlD's Supper, " ' *^ ; ^" - — *- - - * - * And CHAP. IV. Is 'JuflGrounl of SEPARATION. 8^, And this obliges me to fay with Mr. Gilkfpie in his Difpute ngamjl Engliflj- popifh CEREMONIES^ Chap. 6, Sxnce Men give us not leave to try their Decrees and Confiitutions, that we may hold fafi no fmre than is Good; GOD be thanked^ that •we have a War ram to do it (without their Leave) in his own IVordy i Theff. 5.2?. And feing all Orthodox Divines hold,' That when a Church hath eflablifhed' Tyranny in Government, it is juft Ground to withdraw from Communion with that Church, and fet up diftind Judicatures, fepararc from the faid Church ; and it being clearly proven. That the prefent National Church of Scotland hath eflablidied Tyranny in her Government, with that dreadful Aggravation, viz,. That it is in Defence ot fwearing to maintain Enj^lijh Eraftian StJPREMACY PRELACY, and £Kg//)^-^(,;^//^ CEREMONIES, in dired Oppofition to our Co- venanted Reformation. Therefore it is an undenyable Confequence, That Minif}ersElders,andChri- flian ProfefIbrs,who adhere to the Covenanted Reformation of the Church of ^co?- land, in her pureft Times, namely between the Year of our LORD 163 8 "knd 1649 imlufive, have juft Ground, not only to withdraw from Communion with the prefent National Church of xS(:(j^/^Ki j but alfo to fet np diftind Judicatures fcparate from her. Now feing I have made it evident, That both Jurants and Nonjurants, who joyn in AHembly of the prefent National Church o^ Scotland, have by their Au- thority eflablifhed a Law, requiring Miniflers and Chritlian Profeflors to joyn in the LORD's Supper with Jurant Minifters, without making any Excep- tion to joyn in that Sacrament, on Account of- Jurants having fworn that Oath of Abjuration ,- notwithftanding feveral Miniflers and Multitudes of ProfeHbrs are upon good Ground convinced in their Confciences, that the Oauh obliges tp maintain Eraflian SUPREMACY, PRELACY, and Englifi-popijh CEREMO- NIES ; and therefore the fwearing it is a mofl grievous and notour Scandal, which is juft Caufe (in the Senfc of all Orthodox Divines } of refufing to joyn in that Ordinance, with thefe that are guilty, till the Scandal be removed. But commandin-g Minifters and Profeflbirs to joyn .without Exception, as above faid, muftby ncceffary Confequence, command every Man's Confcicnce, to judge the fwearing that Oath to be no publick Scandal, meerly becaufe the Church hath ludicially declared it to be fo. I /lull give, another Argument on this Head, ircm and in the Words of famous Mr. George Gillefpie in his Difpute againft Eng- li(h-popifli CEREMONIES, Part. 3. -Pag. 117. Either we mufl judge a JImg to be repugnant, or not repugnant to the U'ord of GOD, to be indifferent or not indtffe- rem in it felf, becaufe the Church judgcth fo of it, or elfe becaufe the Church prcveth un- to tks by an evident Reafinthat itisfo. If the latter ^ we have what we would : If the fir" mer, we are pifi where we were, the Argumera isfttll fet a Foot, ifhen we ?nufi receive everything, be jt r.ever fo lad, as indifferent, if mly the Church hapjpen fo to fudge of it. For, Qiiod competit alicui qua tali, competit omni tali. And there he pro- veth from DfUh 4. 2, and 12, ^2, Pr$y. 30. 6. Th^^ the Church may not lawi^ 1 S6 . The Church's Tyranny in Goverpmciif,'' CHAP. IV, latxffuUy p'efaihe any thmg in thejVurhofT)rjine IVorjhip, if it he not a meer Ctr- cumftciKce bekvgivg to that Kind of Things-^ xuhich vjere not determinable ^y Scripture. But all Men , that own foand Chriflianity, know, That publick Scandal is determined by Scripture, and To is the. Liberty ot Men*s Confeiences put out of the reach of the Commandments of Men in -Matters of Fafch and Worfliip, as I 1 have proven from the Word.of GOD, and our ConfelTion of Faith already. ,1 And I have fufficiently proven. That fwearing that Oath of Abjuration, is a i grievous and notour Scandal, and by that Ad of Aflembly, judging it to be no Scandal at all, and commanding all . Nonjurant Minifters and Profellbrs, to join with Jurants in the LORD's Supper, without Exception, on Account df fwearing that Oath,. as being any publick Scandal; thereby the National Church of A^tW^?/^ hath fixed fucha Defence of that grievous and notour Scandal, that ^ it cannot be gotten removed in a regular Way, To as to reach the great End of Edification; and therefore according to Jurants fixth Ground of Separation, all Minifters and Chriffian Profeffors, who adhere to the Covenanted Reformation: of the Church of Sc0f/rt>7^, in her pureft Times, above faid,* have, juft Ground of Separation from the prefent National Church of 6cM//?«ri. - ' ''^' - I {hall conclude what I have* to fay on this Head, of the Church her eftablifh- ing Tyranny in Qovernnient, with two Teft'imonies, %>iz.. firil:, that of Terttillian, in ApoIagetico,iiiz,.a.s cktd and eiig/iJhedby'Mv.Gilkfpie, No Law owes to it fe If alone the •; Confcience of its Equity y hut to tbofefmn whom it expeSis Obedience, moreover it is a JufpeBedLaWy which will not have it felf to he proved, hut a wicked Law y which not heingproved, yet beareth Rule. The fecond Teftimbny is a Decree, even o^ the Roman Canon Lawitfelf, vizj. Qauf H' Qj 3. ^c-p' 10 1. Is qui, &c. He who is an Overfeer, if he hold any thmgy or command any thing hefides the Will of GOD , or hefide that which is evidently command- ed in Scripture, let htm he efiecmed afacriJegious Perfon, orfalfe JVitncfs of GOD. An APPENDIX to the IV CHAPTEEi, Concerning the National Church her Tyranny in Government, it's being Juf^ Groutfd of Separation both Negative and Pofitive, 1 N order to make the Tyrannical. Government of the prefent National Church of Scotland, yet further evident, I fliall beg the Reader's Patience, to infcrt •here the I'^th Aft of their General Afleijibly, Anno 171$, Seffion 12. Intituled, ^/z ASi for Profecutingfome, who Prof effing to be Presbyterians jdofeparate from the Church, and an Appointment concerning Papijis and Epfcopal Intruders, Viz. The General A ffemhly, taking to Conjideration, the R^prefentations made to them, con- cerning the Irregularities of Mr. John M'millaiT,. late Minijier at Balmaghie, Mr. John Taylor, late Minifter at Wamphvcy, both riew depofed ; Mr. John M'Rd\,and Mr. John Adamfon, pretended Preachers ; Mr. John Hepburn, Minijier at Orr, Mr* ]vxi'Z^Qi\Qhxi% Minijier at D\xnkoi^ I They do refer it to thetr Coitmijjlon, at ■^ ■ their CHAP. IV* Is'JuJlQroundofSepArattDn. 87 their fir ft Meeting, to take the Irregularities of the forefaid ?erfons tinder their Confide^ ration; and if the [aid Commijjicn think fit, the General Affemhlj does impov^er them to fu7m?mid the /aid Mr. joimM'inilUn, Mr. John Taylor, Mr. JohnM'neil, and Mr. Jolin Aclamion before them, and to proceed to further Cenfure, or apply to the Civil Magi fir ate again fi them, as jimll be thought mo ft fit : And as to the . f aid Mr. John Hepburn and Mr. James Gilchriit,-jt/;6' Ajj'embly appoints the l^resbytrie of Dumfries forthwith to canfe cite them 'before them, to Anfvjer for their Irregular FraBices ; and ififeed be, to fummonlVitneffes, and take Depofitions in that Matter ; and thereafter either to proceed to Sentence, o.r refer the Affair to the f aid Commiffion, as they jhall find caufe ; A?id they Impo-wer the Commiffion to proceed to cenfure as they Jhall think fit. And the General A (Jembly im eh declares, T'hat the faid Mr. John Hcpbaniy a^d the FarifjofOn, are under the Infpetiion of the Fresby trie of Dumfries ; an^ the /Jffembly wakes njcid all Ac}, s made formerly to tl:e contrary. And the Affembly InflruBs ^heiv Commiffion, [ i. e. Their Commi0ioriers ] if need be, to apply to the Civil Govern- ment, for fupprefpng the D/firders of the fiid Mr. John M'millan, Mr. John Taylor, Mr. John M'ncil, Mr. John Adamlon, Mr. John Hepburn, and Mr. James Gilchrift, and alfo for tunijhing fuchas are Guilty of Solemniung Marriages clandefiinly and contrary to LaTjo ; And appoints .Presbytries to fend in timeoufly full Information to the Commijfion, that the fame may be laid Jbefore the Government. 1 he General Affembly appoints Presbyteries, and the fever al Brethren in thofe Countries xcher e 'Po^cxy abounds,cr 'where Epileopal Pr^-r/r/'frj do intrude into Parijhes,ChHrches, Manfes,or Glibes, to find upio the Lord Juflice Clerk, and His Majefifs Advocat and Solicitor, pa,ttcular Informutins, containing the Facts, Parties Names, the Circumflances of the 7^, ahfgy ef/ion, fuch as Time Place, &;c. with Ufls of IVitneffes, their Names and Defign^.tions, that can p,ove the FaBs. Beibre I enter upon the Demonftration- of the Tyranny of* that Part of the Ad, relating to the Presbyterian Miniilers, I fhall give fome Remarks upon thelattec Part of it. And ifi. I remark the- General Allembly appomts the Minifters in the Bounds where Popery abounds, to Ad the Part of Informers to the Civil Magiftrate, without any Ecclefiaftick, Procedure againft Papills as Hereticks, in palling Judicial Sentences 01 Excommunication againft them, as the Church of Scotland did. An. 1593 againft \ht: E-dr\s-o[ Huntly,Errol Sc Angus. Set Cald.Hifi. P. 291. Andl think it is mdifputably clear from Scnpture,ree our Confeftion of Faith, Chap. ^o.Seci. 4. Tit. 3. 10. Matth. 18. 17. that the Church ought firft to rejed He u ticks Judicially by Excommunication,andthen give them up to the Civil Ma- giftrate : And this is plainly imported in the King's Oath of Coronation, con- tained in cur National Covenant, wherein he fwears to Root cut Hereticks ivho Jball be conVHted by the true Kirk of God. And the Covenant tells what Way they ftallbeConv!(^cd, Viz.. By mamfddEcclefiadictil Pains, that is, by Infliding the Cenlures ot the Church ; But on the contrary, this* National Church will in* flid no Sentences 01 Ecclefiaftick Cenfures on them, but only Ad the Part of Inibrmcrs and Witnefles againft them, before the Civil Magiftrate^ which • any n 88 The Churches Ty'df^ny in Government^ CHAP. FV. private Man may do. But altho' the Church fhould tliink the National Cove- nant, and our Solemn Leagueand Covenant,to be wornold'and weak now,and fo not able. to bind the Church to pertorm the Duties they are fworn to by thefe Na- tional Oaths ; yet furely it looks ftrange that they will not inflid thefe Cenfures on Hereticks, that the Word of God commands ; But inftead of that, they will, contrary to the Word of God, cenfure Faithful Presbyterian Minifters for their Faithfulnefs. Vat veniam corvis, vexat cenftira columhas. ^dfyt The Aflembly, by ap^inting Informations to be given of PaPifisj where Popery ABOUNDS, feems to fay, if there be not a great deal of Popery in a Placre, they will tolerat it. • ^ 3^/y, They 2i^^o'mt Informations to he given to the Magiflrates of Juch "E^ifcopal Vreachersyas intrude into Par i/his, Manfes^or Ghbes: But what the Aflembly means by that Intrufion, they leave to the VVorld to guefs. For either they muil mean all Prelatick Minifters, who are allowed by the Ad of Toleration to exercife ■ their Miniftry, either in Town, or Country Parifh, where Prelatick Hearers give them a Call ,' and if that be the Affembly's* Meaning, they fhould have made it plainly intelligible, that all People might have underllood, that notwithftanding of the Ad of Toleration, all Prelatick Miniiters, their Exerdfing their Miniflry within Scotland, is plain Intrufion that ought to be puniflied by the Civil Ma- giftrate ; And therefore the Aflembly orders this to be reprefented to. the Magi- ftrate for that effed. But their Pradice abundantly proves, that is not their ^ Meaning. Or idly,, which. I think is very plain, their meaning is. That all Pre- ' latick Minifters, who cpntrary to the Tenor, and without the Conditions of tlie Ad of Toleration, exercife their Miniftry in Scotland ; in doing of which, they intrude into Pari(hes,^Man(es or Glibes,contrary to the Civil Law, ought to be informed againftj and only on that Account, the Aflembly would have Mmi- ilets to inform the Civil Magiftrate tO' get them punifhed ; And fo it is only for Tranfgreffing the Conditions of that Ad of , Toleration, of Prelatick Mini- fters fetting up," and Teaching 'E.nglifj ?opifi CEREMONIES in Scotland.' But.it isnot upon the Account of Prelatick Minifters their Teaching Erroneous Dodrine, for Defence of Prelacy and Superftition, and Pradifing Idolatrous Ce- remonies, that the Aflembly would have the Magiftrate to punifti thefe Prela- tick Minifters ; otherwife they behoved to require the Magiftrate to puhifli thefe that are allowed by the Ad of Toleration, which the Aflembly is far from doing, as is notourly known. Hence we may fee, the Aflembly refolvcs to Tolerat all Prelatick Minifters, and their Superftitious CEREMONIES in Scotland, tho* •there fliould be one in every Parifih, if they perform the Conditions of the Ad of Toleration, fo as not to offend the Prelatick Parliament oi Great Britain: But theGenerd Affembly of the Church of Scotland, Anm x5^8, that Excommunf- cated the Prelates oi Scotland, ^2^.^ of another Mind. ". I CHAP IV. h '^uH Ground of Sepdrdtton. %g I come now to confidcr the Ailembly's Aik concerning the Reverend Mrs. 'John M'millan, John 'taykr, John Hepburn and James Gikh-ifl, Miaifters, and ^hs. JohnNlneill and John ddamfon Preachers. As for Mr. John Adam fon^ I am neither acquaint with hiin, nor the State of his Controvcrfy againft the Chinch* and therefore Ihall fay nothing about him : Bat the Refl I know, and the Teftimony they hold. In Advancing a Jiift Defence of thefc Reverend Minifters, . I fhall firft fpeak^ fomething for Vindication of each of them particularly, as they are placed in order, m the abovefaid Ad of the pretended General Aflembly of the Church oi Scotland, Anno 1715, Sef. 12. And firft, as to Mr. M'millan, it is notour, that the Ground upon which the Church did pafs the Sentence of Depofition againft him,was,bccaule of his Pleading for Rcdrefsof real and acknowledged Grievances & upon refufalthereof,did proted; & withdraw from Communion with the National Church, upon Account of her many grofs and notour Defedions, which were as great and greater, than the Defedions of thepublick Refolutioners, Anno 1551, as will evidently appear to any Judicious Impartial Perfon, who owns and ad- heres to the Covenanted Reformation, by comparing Mr. M'miUans Protefla- tion with the Proteflers PrOteftation Anno 165 1. And as to Mr, 2^y/ar, it is alfo notour. That his withdrawing from Communion with the Church, qn Ac- count of Miniflers their fwearingthe Oath of Abjuration, and other Defeaions, was the Caufe why he was depofed. And it is too notour, to need any Ar- gumentative Defence here from me. That Mr. Taylor was fufficiently vindicat afterward, from the unjuft Caiumnies, wherewith the Jurant Minifters of the Presbytery oi Lochmabane falfly charged him • from all which he was hilly and fufficiently vindicated, by a Judicial Sentence of a Presbytery of Protefling Mi- nifters and Elders, who made a moft narrow Enquiry into all Points of Accu- fationlaid to his Charge by Jurant Minifters, and found the fe Accufations to be falic and malicious Calumnies, as was Judicially ^ proven before the faid Presby- tery of Protefting Minifters ,and Elders at IVamphray Kirk, the 8th Day o£ June 171 > J before fome Hundreds of People. . " idly, It's plain, that neither Mr. M'millan nor Mr. Taylor, was Depofed for Scandal, Infufficiency or fupine Negligence ; for it can be proven upon O.uh of famous Witn dies, that fome Minifters of the Presbyteries of Kiriadb ight and oi' hoc hmabane, did, before thefe Minifters were fentenced, offer to pafs fro.nall Actufations and Procefles, and receive them into the refpedive Presbyteries, if they would be content to pafs from feeking Redrefs of Grievances, and JQin ill Communion with the Church J and that this 'can be proven^ as abov^ • faid, is undcnyable, ' And as for Mr. Hepburn, there is no Lybel raifed againft him, only the Church ' complains of his Irregularities, as they call Preaching without the Bounds of his own Parilh, and the hkc • of which more anon. As for Mr. (9/7c/(;>7y?, itis notour, that he was Judicially Trycd, and fiilfici- ■ entry Vindicated, from the Jarants of the Presbytery oiDumfriss^ x.[\a: Calum- M " ' nies 90 The Churches Tyranny in Government^ CHAP. IV. nies, from all which he was judicially, fully and fufficiendy Vindicated, by Sen- tence of a Presbytery of Protefting Minifters and Elders^ held at Dunfc or e Kivk, before the Body of the People of Dufifcore PariHi being prefent, in Summer laft, .^vix,.,Anno 1715. And in evidence that the pretended Presbytery of D«;«/>/>/, did* not Procefs him as being one. that in Coitfcience they judged Scandalous, Jnfufficienti ox jupinly Negligent, Mr. Paton, Minifter of Dumfries, at their Synod ', held in April, 171 5, being Moderator, did, at the Defire of that Synod, defire and invite Mr. GikhrtH to fit down as a Member of their Synod, and join with them as a Brother, without fo much as an Innuendo of Accufation againfl Mr. Gilchrtft, or my Rebuke at all to be given him. This is too notour to be de- nyed, it being done pnblickly in the Kirk of Dumfries, in Time when their pre- tended Synod was Sitting; for Mr. " (Jz/f/j/i/? had gone into the Kirk to Proteft againfl that Synod, on Account of many Defections of the faid Synodj as the Proteftation plainly bears. _ As for Mr. M'neil, Preacher, it's Nottour, that the caufe why the Church did pafs Sentence againft him to liop him from Preaching, was neither on Account o( Scandal, nov yet Jafufficiemy ; but onlybecaufe he did withdraw from Com- munion with the Church, on Account ofher grofs Defeftions,and, in conjunftiotV yrith Mr. M'^millan,did proteft againft her, as by their Printed Proteftation appears. But feing the great Defign of that Ad ot Aflembly Anno iji$ above faid, is to ^enfure thefc Four Reverend Minifters,and Mi-.ATneil Prcacher,for Irregularities,as the Aflembly fays; Firji, I (hall here plainly prqfent to the Reader's View,thofe (Things which the pretended General Aftembly in their Ad above faid, call Ir- regularities. And idly. Shall prove that the AiVembly's making Ads for Inflid- ing the Cenfurcsofthe Kirk,Excoramunicationincluded,forthefe Things; is plain .Tyranny in Government : And therefore juft Ground of Separation, both Ne- gatiije and ^ofitive from the prefent National Church of Scotland. . As to the firft of thefe Things propofed,'z;/2:,. /;r^^?*/^m/>j,theAirembly An. 1714, ^ASi 8. Seffi.f. give a Defcription of thefe Things which they charge thefe Presby- terian Minifters above faid with, as Irregularities. The Aflembly's Words are thefe. Viz... "That Reprefentations have beenfeyit to them, from Judicatures of the Bounds '#/0amtries, concerning the PraElic^s of fome Brethren of that Synod, who are faid to have feparat from their Synod and Presbytery, and to have Baptiz,ed and Married Ir- vegularly, and a'dmitted Perfons to the Lord's Supper, without Csrtificats from their own Miniflers i and to have gone out of their own Parifie.f'and Preached and B apt iz>ed, with- §ut the Appointment of any Judicatory, and that both in vacant and planted Congregattonsy 4ird thefe Pra^ices, if true, are Diforderly. * , ^ I'l the fecond place, feing I have made it evident in the fecond and third Chapters, there vfas juft Ground for Minifters, Elders and. other Chriftian Pro- feffors, adhering to the covenanted Reform ition or' the Church, oi Scotland mh^r Pureft Times above faid, to fcparate both Negatively and Pojttively from the pre- fent N^cioiial Ciiucch om accoant ot her gomg intQ the Legal Eftabliflimeat of -■■ - . the m CHAP,IV. h '^uft Groufid of Sepdrdtiori] <)t the Incorporating Union, with the Prelatick Conftitiition of the Kingdom and Church of England, whereby Eraftian SUPREMACY, PRELACY, and Eng-- lijh Popijh CEREMONIES are eflabhflied to ftand to all Generations; And the moft part ot Minifters of the National Church of Scotland their fwearing the Oath of Abjuration, which in its proper literal knCc obliges all Jmants to Maintain Erastianism, Prelacy, and fuperftitious Cekemonies of the Church of England, and Nonjurants Joining with Jurants their Judicial Approbation of fwearing that Oath to be free of publick Scandal : From all thefe it plain- ly follows by evident nccefiary confequence, that thcfe Reverend Minifters ad- hering to the covenanted Reformation of the Church o^ Scotland in herPurefl Times above faid, have juft Ground of Separation both Negative and Pojitive from the prefent National Church : And fo their exercifing their Miniflry both within and without their Panfhes in a way agreeable to Gofpel Rule, is far from being irregular ; for it is aorour that they do not exercife their Miniflry without the Bounds of their own Pariflies ; but when called by a confiderable Body of People, who in Adherence to our -covenanted Reformation do J-idge in their Confciences, they are obliged to^^vithdraw from Communion with the prefent National Church : And the fupplying the clamant Neceflity of fuck People is no Irregularity ; feeing it's fufficiently proven they have juit Ground of Separation from the Church. And feing the Church pafled the Sentence of Depoiition againft iie Reverend Mrs. M'millany and Taylor, only beca^fe they adhered to covenanted Reformation, and would not Join in Communion with the Church, whenfhe was Guilty of greater Defedions than the publick Refolu- tioners anno i6$i, were, or than thefe that went info the Unlawful Engage- ment anno 1648. and refufed to give publick fatisfaftion, were : Hence it is plain, thefe Sentences of D-pofition were unjuft and Tyrannical, and thefe Two Reverend Minifters their Power of their Office, Relation and Right to their Parilhes remain firm ; But of that more atcerwardj ^dly. As to thefe tour Minillers, their baptizing Children without the Boiinds of their Congregations, it*s notour they baptized none, but the Children of ho- neft People, who in Adherence to Covenanted Reformation, cannot in Confcigice joyn in Communion with the National Church, and upon fuch reitimonials as arc allowed by the Gofpel Rule, and Afts of the General Alfembly of the Church of Scotland in-her pureft Time. ' ^ ' ' ^thly. As to their marrying Perfons without their Congregations, they do not marry any without publick Proclamation of Bans, and upon Teftimonials allowed* by the Word of GOD, and A(^s of Aflembly in pureft Times of the Church of Scotland. . - ^Jy. As to their admitting Perfons to the I^ORD's Table, they admit none, but fuch as are allowed by the Word of GOD., and fufficiently atreited to be free of publick Scandal, and. tho' thefe People cannot in Confiftancy with the Word of GOD, our Covenants, and Ads of General Aflembly, Ann. i<^4». 1649- M 2 own k± The Church* sTyrdnny in Governrnpnt CHAP. IV. own Jurants, and Nonjtirants joyning in Communion with Jurants, to be their lawful Minifters, and take Teftimonials from tliem as their "lawful Paflors ; yet they are fufficiently atteft'ed for, by Elders and other Chriflian Prof-eflb>-s, who '^thdraw from Communion with the National Church ; and fuch Teftimonials ffi a declining and broken State of the Church, are no way difa^^eeablc to the Gofpel; and have ferved for Admiffion to Baptifm, and the LORD 's Supper, itid for Marriages ; and have been allowed oF ( in former Times of the Church's Defedions ) by Minifters of as much Lcarninj?/ and more Integrity than any Minifter now in all the General Ailembly of the National Church : which istoo notour to be denyed.. And (emg I have made it evident by Ads of Afiembly Anno 1^48. and i6^c). founded upon Scripture, in fpeaking upon the Incorporating UNION, that it is jpdfitively the Duty of Minifters, Elders, and^other Chriftiun Profcftbrs: to make Separation both Negative and Pofuive from this National Church cf Scotland; litnce it plainly follows by neceflary Confequence, that thefe Minifters exer* cifing their Miniftry without the Bounds of their own Parifties, in the Cafes, and Manner above faid, is their Duty, agreeable to the Word of GOD, and Ads of Aflcmblics of the Church of Scotland in pureft Times of Reformation, idly. It is hence alfb evident, That the Ailembly of the prefent Church,, by making Adsfor debarring Minifters, Elders and other Chriftian Profeflbrs, from, that Vrhith is their Duty, required by the Word of GOD, andlAds of the General Alieiribly Anno 1(548 and 1649. She thereby eltablifliech Tyranny in Govern- jiient. But the General Aflfembly of the prefent National Church ftill holds theie Points, i;/^. l. That the General AiVsmbly declares all Presbyterians in 'Scotland tobeSchifmaticks, who will not joynin Communion with the National 'Church, without any Redrefs of Grievances, idly. Tlie Afljmbly hath declared, I'he fwearing the Oath of Ahjuration, to be no Jufi Ground of Separation from JurantSy iven in the Sacrament of the LORD's Supper, idly. The Aflcmaly commands and Vequii'e^ all Presby'terian Mmiftcrs and Profeilbrs in Scotland., to judge the fwearing 'ifjkt Oath i)f Abjiiratimy to be no -puhlick Scandal, to hinder Minifters or Profeffors t9 joyn inComniuhion in the LORD*s Supper with Jurant Minifters. ^thfy. Tiie Ailem- %ly -gives no other Ground and Warrant for thefe Declarations and Commands, but meerly the Authority of the General Aif^mbly, without any Warrant from the Word of GOD. <)thly. The Afl'embly requires Minifters and Chriftian Profeflbrs, to obey their Command for judging the fwearing the Oath of Abjura- tion to be no Scandal, and joyning in Communion with Jurant'Minifters .in the LORD*s Supper, and that under the Pam of all the Cenfures of the Church, Excommunication included. All thefe plainly appear from the Ad 8. ^.s. of Afi[embly>4//«o 1714.111 which the Aflembly doth fcxprefl-y and authoritatively command and injoyn all Mmifters ^4 Members <^tbis €hai:ch,to live ia Love and ChrifU*a Communion tc^c- ' — '■ — '- --- -^ - - " ^^^ iMli CHAP: IV. h'juJlGrowjd of SEPARATION. 9^ thcr, notwithftanding the clitferent Sentiments and Praftices about the Oath olf . Abji-iration : The exprefs V/ords of the Aft are thefe, viz,. It is STRICTLY and fcYioitJly INjOYNED, T'hat all Miniflers and Members of thi^ Natmal Church liz'e in Love and ChrifiJnnCommumon together., noivjithjlandtng of different Sentiments ar.d^ra[lices about the Oath af Abjuration. Compare this Aft with the 15 A 3)> s^y 37j 38. The Apodles w;re commanded once and again by * .the Coimcil of yjrufalem, not to fpeal^, nor teach any more in the Name of *. Jesus; but they told them. That they ought to^obey GOD rather than 5 Men. . - * 3^/y. ' This Submiflion dethroneth Jefus Chrift, who only hath Pow-er over , * the Confciences of Men. Page 103. Shall the fole Will and meer Pleafure-of * Men loofe a Man from the Obligation he oweth to the Commandments of ' * GOD? Iffo, let us no more blame the Po/? for Difpcnfrng with Divine * Laws. * ^thly. This Siibmiffion concludslth a Man under a NecefTity of finning againfl * GOD by omitting thofe neceiiiiry Duties that arc commanded him by GOD, * upon a Non-Re/evant Reafon, to wit. The meer will and pleafure of Men, to « whom God hath given no Power againfl; the Truth, but for the Truth, no * Power to Deflrudtion, but to Edification.' ^thly- Page 105. * But upon fuppofal that tjiis SubmifTion were not dne to the * Decrees of the Church in Matters of Doftrine, Worfhip, ^d External Or- * derby Vertue of the Dogmatick and Diataftick Power^ in themfelves ; Yet ^ the Aflerting of it in Matters of Difcipjine fhall alfo neceiVarly infer theAflerting * ofitinMattersof Dodrine and Worfhip, and Exterrfftl Order. The Commif- . * lioners of the General Allembly i6$o did declare; That a great Company and * FaSiion of wicked Men y Sons of BtMdX, being Subjects , may and ought yin the cafe of * Neceffnyy to he imployed in a Chrifiian Army and Covenanted Hifaj^iony for the De- *. fenc( of Religion and the Countrey. And the Aflembly at St.^ Andrews and J^nn- * dee anno 165 1. Do by Vertue of their Dogmatick Power approve of, and * Ratify this Dodrine and Declaration j And do withal by their Critick Power, * Appoint and Ordain ; That whoever will not fubmit to this Determinuion, but * Jhall Oppofe by Profejfmg or Preaching otherwife Jhall be proceeded againR with the Cen- * fures of the Kirk. We ask whether thefe Cenfurcs, being put in Execution, by * Sufpeniion from the Sacrament againfl thefe who Profels otherwife, or by Suf- * peniion or Depofition from the Minifl:ry againfl thofe who Preach otherwife: * If this fubmilfion which is required ( being given to thefe Cenfurcs ) wiHnot * ncceflarly infer that they mufl: not continue to Profefsor Preach any more fo ? ' And if this by neceflary confequence be not an Abfoiute fubmiffion to the Dog-^ *,matick?owcXy as well as to the Cn>/c^? And in Pages io5, 107. in the cafe of «; 9, Perfon Sufpended from the Sacrament,or Depofed irom the Miniffry, becaufe ,« of their profeffing and Preaching againfl: Kneeling at theCommunion j Will not « fubmiffion to thefe Sentences which c;xclude all counterading, unlefs it be to * Appeal,, neceflarly infer fubmiffion to the Decrees themfelves fo as the Per- * fon Cenfured mufl: be filenced, and not Profefs; nor Preach nor Plead any more * for the one Truth nor againfl the other Error ? And fo we fee that fubmit- ting to unjufl: Cenfurc, in the mean Time, tho' we Appeal, is a fubmiffion to the unjufi Decree. That the Vulgac People may the better undcrftand it. Dog- matick CHAP. IV. h'Juli Ground of SepintioH. ^ 97 Tfiatick Power, is that Power, by which the Church doth Determine Points of Dodrine, Controverftes of Faith and cafes of Confcience, as in conipofing Confefi- fions of Faith, in doing of which, the Church ought to give Proof- and Warrant from Scripture for what fhe Eftabliflieth of that kind, as is evident by our Cotv- fefTion of Faith. Chap. i. SeB. 10. Matth. 22.29. 31. Eph. 2. 20. JBs 28. 25* And in oar Confeffion ofFaith c^.n;?. 31. Se^.^.A^s 15. 15. 16. 24. 27." to ^i.JSJs 16. 4. Matthew 18. 17. to lo.the DiataEiick and cr/>/c^Power, is the Power of DiC' ciphne and Government in Governing the Church of Chrift, by making Ads, and Mifting Cenfures agreeable to the Word of GOD ,- as is evident by our Confe^on of Faith C/;.^/'/?r 30. throughout, confirmed hy Matth. 16. 19. and 18. 1^18. 2 Cor: 6. 7, 8. i Cor: 11.' 2y. to the end. 3^//^^ Verfe 23. 1 T%ejf, 5. 12. 2 I'hejlf. 3. 6. 14. 15. I'Cor,. 3". 4. 5. 15. Tit. 3. 10. John 20. 21. 22, 23. and other Scriptures. And here I muft (hew the parallel between the publick Refblutioners, and the prefentNational Church ofScotland, For as the publick Refolutioners did by their Dogmatick Pouer, approve ofthat Doclrine, 'viz.. That it is lawful to ajfociat with, and imploy 'a grCAt Company of wicked iMen,Sons 0/ Belial, in a Chrijlian Army and Co' 'venamed Nation, for Defence of Religion and the Country, in a Cafe of Neceffity, prO' vidingthefe MaJigiian:s L-e SubjeSls of that Nation :^So this National Church, by her Dogmatick Power, hath approven that Dodnne, viz.- That it is /awful for the 'Covenanted Nation and C.hirch o/Scotlahd," fo go into the legal EiJabliJhment of an Incorporating Union with the Prelatick Conflitution of the Kingdom^ and Church ofRng" land ; and by that Union to eflablijh Erafiian SUPREMACY, PRELACY, and Englifh Popifc CEKEMOmi s, to /land to allGeuerations ; Andthat it is alfo lawful for Minijlers and Magi/lrates of Scoihnd, tofwear to 7naintain and Defend the whole Confiituti^yt above faid^ ejiablijhed by thefaid UNION. And as the puLlick Refolutioners, by their Critick Power of Difcipline and Government, did command and require the Protefters, under the Pain of all the Cenfures of the Church, including Ex- communication, to fubmit to theAuthority of the Aflembly, which by evident neccllary Confequence, commanded the^^onfciences of the Protefters to approve of that Doclrine, viz.. That it was lawful for Covenanters to make A ffcciations with r.vtour Malignant s. So in like manner, the prefent National Church, by meec Will and Pleafure of Men, wntho.ut warrant of God's Word, commands the pre- fent PROTESTERS, both Minifters and other Chriftians, under the Pain of all the Cenfures of the Church, Excommunication included, to approve that Dodrine of the Church, whereby they hold it lawful for the Covenanted Nati- on and Church of Scotland, to go into the legal Eftabhfhment of Erastianism, PRELACY and EngUjh Popijh •CE.KEUO], and fwear to maintain the fame. This Parallel is clearly manifeft, from what hath been faid upon the Union, tlie Oath, and the Ads oif Aifembly 17 14 and 171 5. But now I return to cite fome more Arguments advanced againft the pub- lick Refolutioners, in the Book above cited, in Page 108, it's faid, * What N is ^8 The Churches Tyramy in Government, CHAP. IV. * is denyed JURE, to General Councils, and To lawfully called, . Prophets and * Minifters of the Gofpel, to Nathan^ to David, to Paul, to an Angel from Hea- fvtnyGal. I. 8. cannot warrantably be given to General Aflembiies. B'lt H * General Councils, lawfully caikd Mini^rs, it Nathan, David, or Paul, or an "• Angel, Teach or Decree, what is not according to the Word of God, we are « tocounterad and contradid the (2^mz,Gal i .^.Ergo, &c'. * What is proper to the Scriptures of Truth, quarto modo, thzt is, proper to the * Nature ofthe Scriptures alone, it cannot warrantably bs given to the Jadica- * tures of the Kirk ; But not to be counterafted -nor contradided, is proper * alone to the Scriptures of Truth, thefe being the only Infallible Rule irt^Mat- « ters of Dodrine, Worfhlp, Difcipline and Government, 7/}?. 8. 20. ^0im 3. * j6, 17. Therefore it cannot warrantably be given to the Judicatures of the « Kirk; and to give it, inferreth their Infallability, and exgofeth our Govern- * menttothe Calumnie ofSedaries, who fay, wc make Synods as Infallible as « the Word of God. . ' Page lop, ' Thisabfolute Submiffion doth, infer,- That 'if a Genera! Allembly, * lawfully conyeen'd, ftiould enaft the Mafsand all the Herefies of th« Council * o( Trent, we may not Preach nor Write the contrary ; but the laft of thefe is * abfurd, and therefore alio the firft. . . . Page 1 1 a* * This Submiffion is Prelatical, and introduceth a Lordly and Ab- * folute Power and Domination in the Church of God, over the Flock and Mi- ' nifters of jefus Chriil; and is the very Image and Likehefs of that Subjeaion * and Submiffion that was required by the Prelates. See Bifliop Spotifwood's * Sermon at Perth Aflembly, and Bifhop Lindfay, Bifhop oi Edinburgh, in his * Epiftle to the Paflors oi Scotland, prefixed to his Book called the Proceedings of * Perth Aflembly. . " Page III, 112, * This Submiffion is fo far from being 'any Part of the Ca- * tholick Truth, much lefs ofthe ElVence and Being of Presbyterian Government, * that it feems to be a Tenet purely Popifli and Antichrifhan -, As Andreas Du- * valius proves in 22 Far.Queft.S. Thefe are the Arguments of theProteiters agamft publick Refolutioners ; and thefe Protelters were undcnyably known to be as Eminent Minifters for Orthodoxy, Piety and Learning, as ever were in Scotland. ^ / -r^- . <- 1 • t t 1 ^ Now I fhall add a few Teftimonies of other Divmes upon this Head. Jo- hannes Hoornheek, Profeflbr of Divinity at Leyden, in his Injlitutions of Theology, Page 542,Tays, * The Church has no Autocratorick or Lordly Power of Dil- « cipline, the Lordly Power of it belongs only to Chnft, Mattk 18. 18. John f 17. 1. the Church hath only a minifterial,fubor4inat, limited Power, i Cor. 5. 4. 2 Cor. 10. 8. And in Page 542 following, Ame/ius his Judgment, he fays, « Holy Difcipline is only a Perfonal Application of the Will of God by Cen- « fures, for Guarding againft, and Removing Scandals out of the Church of * GOD ^ " mekhior CHAP. IV. 7/ 'y^y? Grou?jd »f SEPARATION. '99 Melchior Leydecker^ Profeflbr of 'Divinity .at Utrecht, in hi^ Synopjis Theolog. Pag 445. fays, ' The Church's Power of Government, is not a Lordly Imperial * Power, which belongs on]y to Chrift the Head and King ; but it is a Mini- * fterial Power of Acting according to the Rule of the Word of God. Henricus Ahing, Profeflbr of' Divinity at HeideWerg, Loc. Commun. Part. 2. Pag 502. fays, * We are not commanded to hear the Church abfolutely (forChriS: * alone is to be heard in that Senfe, Matth. 17. j. ) but we are only to heai; ' the'Church when fhe teaches what Chrift hath commanded, Matth. 28. 20,' * That, That Saying may be valid, viz,. He that hearmh you he^reth me : So the * Church has neither Power of Abfolute nor Ultimat JtKlgment in Scandals and « Hercfies ; For other ways, by Delivering the Keys, Chrift fhould have made ^ thofe that are but Stewards,7kfrt«/?: 18; 18: i Cor'. 4. i. to be Lords of his ' Houfe, which is exprefly deny'd, Matth: 20; -25: i Peter 5. 3. Fram: 'turrettiriy Profelfor oi Divinity at Geneva, De Necejfar: Seceff: m&ra aB Ecclef: Rom: Page 113. fays, * All the Power of Government that the Church * hath, is only llich as belongs to Servants, not to Lords ^ leil the Glory which * belongs only to Chrifl, and which he ( not admitting of a Rival ) will noD * fuffer to be given to another, fhould be impioufly transferred to finful Man. And Page 132. ' Itis intolerable Tyranny, when the Church of Rome takes a * Legiflative Power to herfelt, iTi making Laws to bind Mens Confciences, and * Cenfureth the Breach of her Laws, more Rigoroufly than fhe doth known * Breaches ot God's Laws. • Petrus Van Mai7rkhtj.?rok{Cor of Divinity at Utrecht, Theolog- 7%ioreticc-PraS{», Tom. 2. Page 851. fays, * The Power of the Keys that belongs to the Church; * is only Minifterial, the Keys belong not to Minifters as Lords; becaufe thq * Mediator is fole Legiflator to his Church, Jafnes 4. 12. And ip Page 85 7^ he fays, / All the Statutes of the Church ate to be directed by Scripture, Eph^ f 4: 7:8; II. compared with i Cor. 11. • 28. Hermamus IVhfius, Profeflbr of Divinity at Utrecht, De OEconom: Fader: Lib: 4: Cap: 15; Page 862; faith, * God alone^ath Power, as Lord over the Confci- 'encesolMen, James ^'.12: And therAre the Children of God, who being * perfwaded they are bought with a Price, it is unlawful for them to be the ' Servants of Men, i Cor: 7: 23: Matth: 1$: 9:' Col: 2: 18; 22; 24; And air * tho* of Old the Scribes and Pharifees ^te in Mofis Seat,- neverthelefs GOD * never gave them a Power to Prefcribe any new Inftitutions befide the Law 'of GOD. Johannes 5'/?r7r/>, Profeflbr of Divinity at St. Andrews; in the Reign of King James V J: .( this was not the Prelate viz,. James Sharp ) this Johannes Sharp in his Cm ftis Th^hg: Part 2: Page 115: faith • " thefe that Prefcribe Laws to ' the Confcience muft be Lords of the Confcience ; but neither Minifters no * Magillrates are Lords of the Confcience i Pet: 5; 3. 2 Cor: j.- 24: andin^^^^ . *. 116' he fays, a New Law which the Church makes, is either conform to the . N 2 « Word |00 The ChurcJj^s Tyranny, in Government,' CHAP IV. « Word of GOD or not : It" it b,e conform to the Word of GOD, ir is neither < New, nor yet from Men; But if it be not conform to the Word of GOD j « then Chriilians ought not to receive it. Gal: i: 8; And Juflin: Martyr in Dialog-. « Cam Tri^ho: and Bema^dus Lib: i; de conjideratione hold the fame. Cahin and Bez^a, .Interpret that Scripture i Cor. y: ly.Be not yefervants ofMen, That is, fay they, * Donot Tubjed your«Confcienccs to Men,^ that they may in- 5 tangle you into Bondage by Superftitious and falfe Opinions. Next, let ushea4:the Teil:imony offome oi the mofl Learned Popijh Writers; Efiiusy and Memchiusy folWwing Gregory and Aquinasy upon that Scripture, i//^: 'iCor: ly. 8: IVe can do nothing againji the Truth Uut jcr the Truth; give this to be lihe Senfe; ' Minifters have Power to cenfure Traufgrelfors, but not the Juft .- * neithet have they anyiife for their Authority againd Perfon's, as loiig as they i keep the way of Righteoufnefs. And Tnnius Me;20cbmsy and E/lius on i Pet: *v5;,3'.- Dofayj Tiiat when Minii'lers prolibinty -make tlieir will the Rule of * Government, and fo Govern I mperioufly^ that is the Dommation or Tyranny 5- called Lording over God's Heritage. - : And Brugenfis onAIattJj: i6: ip: lfh.it ye bind en Earth flmll he bound in Hea- furty fays, ' That4S only when the Power Is Lawfully ufed, without hatred, or *. favour,. in Judging juftly according to the Laws of GOD and Chrift : - For if « the Innocent be bound onE^rth, that will not beRatitycd in Heaven, and there- *ifore that Authority given to Peter y '^s no way Injurious to GOD's RIGHT, * asif GOD were a Pedary J'ldge and bound to Subicribe whatever Sentence f is paffed by.Men. But laftly, I Ihall conclude what I dcfign on 'this Head, with a Citation- out of the Old Confejjion ' of Faith oi' th^ Church of Scotlandy preftnted to the Parliament, and Ratified by them in tlie Year 15(57. Article 2iy?. concerning^ the Pov/er and Authority of Councils Lawfully gathered ; The words are thefe * S© far as the Council provcth the Determination and Commandment it < giveth, by the plain Word of GOD, fo foon we do Reverence and Embrace « the fame ; But if Men, under the Name of a Council, pretend to Forge an- « to us New Articles of our Faith, or tpinake Conllitutions Repugning to the « Word of GOD, then utterly we muft Refufe the fame as the Doftrine ofDe- « vils, which draweth our Souls from the Voice of onr only GOD, to follow « the Dodrine and Conftitutions of Men. Tnus the Confeffion of Faith. And i hope none will be fo Blafphemous as to deny the Truth of it, or call it Er- '^°"^°"'- " CHAP. CHA^, V. Retnxrks on theConceffto^isofJurAnts mJ, Nmjurmts , loi I . ■ • . ' C H A P. V. Coiitaming Remarks on the CONCESSIONS, ^r^vfffi 'by "Jurant and Nonjuram Minijlers of the pefent National Church, to be J ift Ground of Separation. - HAving now made it evident, That the Protesters, have Juft Ground to with- dr;iw from Communion with the prefent National Church of Scotland.^ and to fct up diflinft Judicatures fcparate from her : The next Point that I pro- mifed to handle, was, To anfwer all the mod weighty Argiunenrs that are ad- vanced by the keenefl: Oppofites, even Jirant Miniiteus ( againfl: the Proti- STVRS ) in D>;rence of the Oath of Abjuration : but I have already incidently an- fwetcd fevcrals of theii* chief Arguments' on that Head ; but that the Reader may not h'.y, I flee from encountering them in, any of their tlrongeft Holds of Defence,! iljall by GOD's Affifla'nce, freely venture a Coiifli^ with them m their greateft •Strengths of Defence, that are not yet attacked : ' And fcing their Pamphlet, inti- tuled, T'he Oath of Abjuyation no Ground of Separationy hath the chief Place of Honour, not only upon Ac.couiit of its fiio wing moll: GwUerofity in • Conceffions, •and being recommended by Subfcription of, Nohjiirants, which -their other Pampiileis wanted ; but alio becaufe ithaS the Gre4tell Appearance of Strength cf Argument from holy Scripture in Defence of jurants fwearing the Oath of Abjuration ; and therefore I fliall endeavour to anfwer the Arguments contained in that Pamphlet firft : But before I enter on the Arguments, I fhallgive fome Remarks on thelntroduftion and Conceffions. SECT. I. Comainjji Remarks on the Introduliion of that Pamphlet, intittihd, The Oath of- Abjdimon no Ground of Separation. ]N the IntroduaioHj Pag: i. The Author faith, IVloatthelVorfiipof One GOD ■» was to the Jews, that Peace, Lonje and Unity /i, /;; fome Refpeds to Chrifians, a Prirxipal Law oj their Religion, and the *?mfi dffti}iguijJjing Mark and Charathr of their Profjjhn, whereby they are known to be the Difiples of Chrifi. By wa/ of Remarks on his Words, I (■^Y,firfl, It is a very unfoundWayof -Reaioning, to ai^irm, that Peace, Love and Unity, without any other Qiialificar tion or Limitation, is a principal Law of the Chnilian Religion^ for many Here- ticks, who have a Kind of Profeffion of Chriftian Religion, have many times more Peace, Love and Unity among themfelves, as to Harmony in Communion of Woifliip, than fome times true Churches have i this is evident amon/? PafRfts, Qiiakers, Armmians, &c. o r > -'^b- T^e Principal Law of Religion under the Gofpel, is, That great and awful Command of beUe'Ving m the LORD Jefus Chrifi, which is the only principal Law to be obeyed, aud without Obedience to it, Obedience to all other Commands I. will 102 Remarks on the Comefftons of the '^uYAn^ and Nonjurint C H A P. V . will come fhort of Salvation, i Joh : ?. n^^QCth third Warrant or fpecial Motive to believe in Chrijl, in the Sum offaving Knowledge. And it is ftrange to hear a Pro- teftant Minifter make Love to Man, eith'er fuperior, or equal to Believing in Chrifl Jefus, . ' ^ o . ' 3^/^. Love to the Brethren is But the Dutj^ of the recond Table of the Law under the Gofpel as well as under the Law; for Love to GOD is the fir ft Com- mand ftill: SttMatth- 22. 37. 38. AndChrift his faying to his DifcipleSj/^/'^ff you a ne-j} Command, only imports this, viz.. That tho* he redeems Believers trom the Curfe of the Law, yet not from Obedience to the Law, as a Rule of Holi- nefs ; and therefore he of new commands them under the GbfTil .0 obey the Law, and promifeth' new Strength to obey : For this fee the thfrd IParrant to h- lieve in Chrifi, in the Sum of faving Knowledge. 4ly. He that loves not cur LORD Jefus Chrifi in Sincerity., let him te Anathema . Maranatha, i. e Lei' him be accurfed, or excommunifated until the fecond coming of our LORD Jefus Chrifl; and fo for eVer : See Calvin^ Martyr, B.entiusy Btilinger. Me- yer, 2ind many others upon the Plxe. And there is not the like faid in all the Nem Tejflamenty againft him that loves not the Brethren in Sincerity, tho* Love to the Brethren be Jews, that Peace, Love andUmty is to ChrifHian.^, a principal Law of their Rg" figton infome Refpetis: But he fhows not in what Refpeds it is as properly a prin- cipal Law of Religion ; nor can I conceive how he will prove. That it is zs prin- cipal a Part of Religion, to love Men, and keep Peace and Unity with them, as it was to worfhip one GOD according to the Legal Difpenfation, given to the Jewi, for obtaining Eternal Salvation through Faith in the Meffiah ; for that was the Way the Jews were commanded to worfhip one GOD. ^ly If Peace, Love and Unity be the mofl dijlinguifiing Mark a/ffjCharacter ef Chrifi' s Di/fz/'^J", without other Qualifications (for he adds none) then Peace, Love and Unity of themfelves fhould be the Marks otthe true Church;,but that is contra- ry to the Judgment of all found Divines, and in particular, it is contrary to the Old ConfeffionofFaith of the Church of Scotlind : See Chap; 18. in Kr.ox Hift. jthly. No Orthodox Divine denies it to be a Duty to keep up Peiice, Love and Unity in the Church of Chrift : But as H/laritis contra Auxeyitiumy faith. Pence and Unity have fpetious Names ; but they Jljould be of Chrifi^ according to his Will and Rule. For we are commanded in Scripture to be one in the LORD, to be one in true Faith and Holinefs, according to the Rule of GOD's Word, as joh : 17. 19, 21, 22. compared with iio;« .- 6. 4. i Joh: i. 3. S'^(5tives for the nwft Part, ai^ unjuft Reflexi- ons call on all Presbyterians in this Nation, that will not joyn in Communion with them without any Redrefs of Grievances ; For the Jurant Author of this Pamphlet, throughithe moil Part of it, cafls unjuft Refieftionson all the Protefters, calling them Schifmaticks, the D^viVs Muficians, the Devil in Samuerj- Mantle ; worfe than thefe that killed Chrifi's Natural Body ; and the like. And fo I may fay of their Pamphlets, which^hey fay, they publifh for the Church's Peace, as the Protefters of Oldfaid, ofthePublickRefblutioners Pamphlets, in the Book intituled Pro- 'tejiers no SuhverterSj Pag. 5. IVhileJl fo7ne of their Words are [oft as Oyl, ytt mo ft of them are like drawn Swords: or if theraxvere any real Inclinations to Peace upon the Spirits of the Authors of thefe Papers ; we may fitly compare them to the fir fl Painters in fome Countries of Old, whofe Draughts werefo rude, that unlefs they had written ahove tlie Head thereof this is a Horfe, ihis is an Ox, &c. the Beholders would never have dfcovered their Aim therein: Or, we may fay of them rtJ^ Georgius ■ Major writeth of the Fathers of ^tr^'e J who were Auth^s of the Book, 'called. Formula Concordis Bergenfis. ' . Am Mens V\x\c2inM-m, ant Forceps indoct a fefellit, "'Ei^nvm voluit cudere, cudit tfU: . ' ~ 'fht Smithes unskilful Mind or Tongs Have fur e deceived him far, M'4i>en as he would have forgd a Peace, He hammered out a War. S E .C T. II. Containing Remarks on the frfl Conceffion, nnent that Herefie in . Doctrine, which the Church grants to be Juft Ground ot Separation. PAG. 8,p,io. the Author grants,Tjjere are fix warrantable Grc^unds of Separation : Bat he hath erred from the Rule,that is held by Orthodox Divines, who af- fixm^hat Tyranny in Government is Juft Groundof Separation. It's not eafily con- ceive how ci.c Author could be ignorant of this, and ii it was not out of Ig- norance, furely it flowed from a very wicked Principle, that he would not grant 1 yranny in Government to be a Juft Ground of Separation : For, tho' he has Sr4ntcd [omg Parts of Tyranny in Government to be Juft Ground of Separation ; ■ •" " "'" " . yet jo4 Rem irk f on the ConceffJof^sofihe ^Jurdnt and Ncn']urarjt CHAP: V. yet hath he not granted Tyranny in general to be To, tho' it be granted, not only by the common Con feat ot the Ortlv>dox, but even by fome others. The firil Jiift and Warrantable Groand of Separation that he granteth, is in. the 8th Page, viz.. HERESY IN DOCTRINE, by -which ( faith the Author )" / undevfiand Errors contrary tOy and Deflruciive of the Ftindametualx of Faith and Religiofiy "when Errors are Taught and Maintain dy that are Inconjijlent with Sahatioh ; then and in thai Cafe, there ought to he Separation ', thus the Jews denyed Jefus of Na- zareth fo be the Mefjiah ; T'he Socinians denying the God-head of Chrift ; thefe andfuJ) like are to be feparated from, becaufe thefe Errors are altogether Inconffient with Salvation. % . On this! Remark, That as his Defcription of HERESY is dark, foit is like- wife unfound. /^Vy?, it is dark, becaufe he makes no Detern^ination how many of the Articles of our • Confeffion of Faith he allows to I be Fundamental. ^dly. Unfound, for I find the Learned Turretine T'heoh EhnSi: Part i. Page 5p.- holds all thefe lollowing Articles* to be Fundamental, viz^, if}:*ConcerniKg one God in Effence and 'Three Peyfons.' Jeh: ij: .3; I Johf^ 2: 23: zdly. Concerning Sin. I John i: 10; Eph: 2: .1, sdly. Chrifl .as to his Perfon, Natures and Officej. iCon 3: 11: ARs ^: 12; ijohn'-y. 3: Ephef: 2: ii, 12. 4thly. Concerning the Gofpel. Rom: i: l<5, 17; Gah i: 8: 9; ^thly. Paith, .Hebrews 11: 6: Mark 16:' 16: 6th\y. yuflification without the Merit of U^orks, Rom: 3: 27.- Gak 2 and 3~ Ch^^p- ters. ythly. SanBification and the JVorjhip of God, Ephef: 2: 10. Heb: 12: 1^4. 8thly. RefurreBion and Life Eternaly i Cor: 15; .14.- 2 Tim: 2: 8; Rem: 10 19. And all the Twelve Articles tf our Creed. Tiiis Defcription goes beyond what the Author kcms to allow for Fundamentals; For there are many of thefe Ar- ticles, not fo great Articles as the Authors Examples inxport, (bould be accounted Fundamentals. ^ ' Butfeing the Author Defcends not below the Denying Jefis (f Nazareth to be the MejftahyOMd Denying his God-head, and fuch like j it is plam, 1 hat by fuch like, all Men muft underltand as great Articles as thefe : And every Jadrcicus Chri- ftian knows, there are not many fo great. And then he muli. allow, that Main- taining Errors contrary to Articles of Faith that are not fo grciir, is no Hercfy, nor deftroyeth Salvation ; but that is faHe.for he that brealeth'the leaf Ccmmandh mnt, and Teacheth Men fit do, Jhall he called the lea B in the Kingdom of Heave:?. The Meaning of that is, they are declared to be falfe Teachers, unworthy of being in the Church of Chrilt, and whom our Lord Jclus will extcrjninat put of the JCingdom of God, who break the fmallcll: of God's Commands,and teach' Men fo to do; Thus it. is Interpreted by Calvin, Bmer, Su.'inger, ^nd^eljcnmfs mth whom Mufculus agtees. And thus we iee, that Maintainmg. and Teaching Errors far lefs than denying JESUS of Naz.areth to be the Meffinh, or Wny- ing His GOb-HEAD, is Dellruarivc to Salvation : And thus the Author's Pefcription of Errors that are Peflrijaive to Salvation is not found. And hi the Sum of Saving Know/edge in the i72.Evidsnc€.ofmie Faith, SeBionj. Itsfaid, CHAP: V. Minifiers of the prefect Church of SCOTLJND: 105 'The breaking the Moral Law, and defending the TraYifgYe(fton' thereof to be nofinidotfj €x-clud€ Men froTK Heaven^ and juflly alfo jrom the Fellowjhip of Ihe true Kirk. 2ctly., I find the moft Learned Orthodox Divines hold, That there arc fubRsn- rial Articles of" Faith, that are not (o great Articles, as the Author's Funda- mentals ; And yet the maintaining and teaching Errors contrary toany of thefe •■ fubfiantial Articles, is HBRESY,and bringsDamnation,as the.Learned Mr. Ruther- ■ ford in his Examen.Arminianifmt Page 12, fays 7ho' an Artick of Faith be ^w^fupra-' fundamental, that is, by evident necejjary Confequence Deduced from the Fundamental, as a DoBrine from a Text, an Error that is maintained and taught contrary to this con- fequential Artick of Faith ; is Daynnable. i. e. brings Dumnation ;" becaufe -whoever de^ nyeth the evidoit necejfary Confequent, by the fame Reafon he , deny s the Antecedent, which is a Fundamental Article beyond all Controvsrfte. And Turrefin holds ' the • ..■SxmCy in T/.ieolog. Elen^. Part i. P^^^ 5 <5; in arguing againil Papiils. . J ^ Mr. GUlefpie in his Mtfcellaay Queflions Chap. 9. Page.- iii, 112. faith, Htrefy is not fo far to be taken at large, as to be extended to every Error whicb n^ay be Con- futed by Scripture ; altho" happily fuch an Error to be too tenacioufly maintained : Nor yet is it to be fo far re/iritied, as that no Error fiall be accounted Heretical ; but that: which is DeflruBive tofome Fundamental Article of the Chrifiian Faith; If by Funda- jnental Anicle you under fiand a T'ruth, without the Knowledge and Fait h^ whereof 'tis impoffihJe to get Salvation : But if you underjland by Fundamental Truths, all the ■chief SiibfJantial Truths. I mean not, faith he, the A. B. C. of a Catechifm which we firfl of all put to New Beginners ; but I mean all fuch Truths as are commonly put in tie Conffpons of Faith, and in the jnore full and large Catechifms of the Reformed Churches, or all fuch Truths as all and every one who live in a true Chrifiian Reformed Chnrch, are commanded and required to learn and know, as they expect in the ordinary •Difpenfation of GOD to befaved, in thisfenfe Imay yiild, fays he, that Hevefie is al- ways contrary to feme Fundamental Truth : And in the 112 Page he Cites V/^llaeus Tom. I. Page 57. Calvin: Inftitut: Lib. 4. cap. 2. Sed; 5; aW Peter Martyr^ ,J^qc. commiin; Clafs 2. cap. 4. Sect. 60. who all hold the fame. ' And Auguflin and Cmian did thus underlland Her efy, as Calvin in his /«- jlitutiom Lib. 4. cap. 2. Obferves. And LtSLxntdRavanelin his Biblmhecafacra, Part I. Page 702. Saith, An Heretick is one who having been inflruSled in tlje Principles of Faith, not only erreth in fome Article or Head of true Faith, but alfo per tmacioujly ' infifis in Hs Error, breaks the Peace of the Church, and produceth Scandals againfl . the Dofl-.ine we have learned, and is to ^be avoided, Rom; 16. 17. Thus he. By all which it is plain, both by Scripture and the Judgment of Orthodox Divines ; That Men wlio teach and pertinacioiifly mainuain an Error,concrary to any Subllantial Article of true Faith, are Hereticks to be avoided, and fhunned as Wolves among ChriiFs Sheep. And thus it appears, that the Author's De- fcriptionof Herefy is very unlpund. • " 9 SECT. II iod Remarks on the Concefftons of the "Jurant and Nonjarant CHAP; V. SECTION III. Contaimng Remarks upon the fecond Jujl Ground of Separation granted by the Miniflers of the National Church. PAge 8. The Author granteth the fecond Jufl and W^irrantable Ground of Separation ; Is Idolatry in IVorfiip ; Ai in Popery their JVorfliipping of Saints and AagelSi their Bowing to Images, and their Idolatrous Mafs; Thefe things, make Commumnjtmply Unlawfuh as is clear from a Cor. 6: 17, Rev.- 18: 4, 5. On this I Remark, That his Defcription ol Iclolati-y in Worfhip, that he makes a Juft Ground of Separation, comes fhort of Idolatry forbidden in the fecond Commandment, which is not only the Worfliipping of GOD by Images ; But alio any other way than He has appointed in His Word: But it is not impro- bable that his Reafon has been, becaufe the National Church ot Scotland allows her Members, Fiz, Ruling Elders and other Chriftian Profeflbrs tJiat arc Members of the Britijb Parliament, to Join in Communion with Englij'b Prelates and Curats at Londsn, during the Time they are at Parliament ; But if this be' his Reafon, as it is the bell he can give for it, it is none of the beft ; For in Joining in Communion \yith the Prelatick Church of England in EngliJh-'PnpiJh Ceremoj^ies, as the moft part oi Sects Memberroi Parliament do ^ Theymuft neceflarly be Guilty of Idolatry ^n Worihipping GOD by Idols. As Mr. Cal- derwood in his Ahare Damafcenum, and Mr. Gillefpte in his Difpute againft Eng- iiJb-PiypiJh Cerejmonhs have moil folidly proven ; Except Scots Jurant Miniflers be able to Refute Mrs. Calderwood 2nd Gillefpte ; And if they think to do more for defending Englijh-Popiih CEREMONIES than all the Prelatick Clergy of 5rz- taitt, or elfe where were ever able to do ; They may try their Hand. For Mr. Gillefpie in his Difpute againft Enghjh-Popiih CEREMONIES, Part 5. Chapter 4. folidly proves that thefe Exglifb Ceremonies are Idols, and that the Prelatick Clergy fuch as i7(?o)t^r,Po/if: Ecclef Lib: y.SeBi 6^, ee.T^heBiJbopofEdin' burgh, in the Proceedings ofV^nh-AJfemhly, Part 2d. Page 22. And the- Bijhop of St. Andrews in hif Sermon at ?txth-AJfembly ; DoBor Mortoun, of the Invfukefs of Kneeling, Chap: 10: Page 17. V^yhody Jfokg-. Part 3; chap; 3: %t&.. t6 . DoBor Burgefs, of the Lawfulnefs of Kneeling at the Sacrament, chap: 22; Page S$. and chap: 23. The Bijhop of Winch^HQr m his Sermon on Luke i: 74. Page 99. All mihich Bijhops and DoBors, that are the great Interpreters of the Ufe and End of theje Ceremjoniesy d» Unanlmoujly afcribe the fame Jtfohnefs and Efficacy to the Engli/h Cert- monies that the greateft Popijh U^ritersdoto Popijb Ceremonies i Such as Bellarmine dc Sacrament: Eucharift: Lib: 4; cap: 29. Francifcus a Sanda Clara, expofit: Articul; Confeif- Anglican. Art: 28. The Rhemids Annot.- in Heb: ii: 21. Cor- nelius a Lapide Commentar: in Mai: cap: 2. Archbijhop of Spoleto de Rep.- EccleG Lib: 7: cap 12: Num: 42. Suarez Com: i: Dlip^t; 54; Se2 proves this alfo by Pradice of the Apoilolick- Church, as in ABs 8. 4. They that were Scattered abroad went e- ' very where Preaching the Word : And by comparing this with the firft Verfe of the fame Chapter, it plainly appears, the whole Multitude of the Difciples were fcat- tered ; And its no way probable they were all ordained Minifters. And in Adfs'ii. 20, 21. the C)'^K/^;zj and C/r^^z/^/zx Preached the Gofpel. And in Acls 18. 2'5, 2C>. Apollos, who was Taught by Aquila zndPrifciUay and Preached the Gofpel wiihoutOrdination byMinifters.Thefe are the Inftances given hyTurrettirr. and ^o-zj^mcn Lib. i. cap. 15. informs us, that JEdefiui and Frumentiusy Two Yoiuig Men. that were caft in amongft the /«^w/.f, did, without Ordination by ^Minifters preach the Gofpel, whereby,through Grace affifting, aKingund Queen '.and a whole Kin gdorti of the Indians were Converted to the Chriftian Faith, ' And Ruffinus, VI: lo; Cap: 11. doth Atteft the Truth of the fame. And7/;M- .doretuSf Lt; 4.; Cap: 14. tells us, that the Samofatenfes being Deferred by theii* 'P^linifters■ under Perfecution, the Chriftian People did Conftitute fome of theic ^Ninnbe^ to^t^torm the Office of the Miniftry. •' " - "^ K^yi.U^nrJLUf Miiigius Pyohlem: Theolog: Part 2; Page ^i6. holds the fame to •*be priiffic^bW iji jiich Ncceffity as Mr. Turretin haph fuppofed ; But it Teems the ^«Kj;/t AwUor^s, ill acquaint with tlie Judgment of Orthodox Divines on thi^ ,Jlcad, tho' be, fpf a^s in Nan^^eof "^urants zsA N^njiirantf of the National .CiJwr.ch,,;" .'•,.'. , , . . /•, ^ \. . . ,- , . , ■ • But.at;er^I,.X.fqJdy grant, .tliat,:as.thefe is not fuch a Necetfity ai.fhts Dayj 'foxh^ hiith npi(^ecn fuch a ^eceffit^ in JSc^i^wt^ finite Refprmationfrom Popery, ;^sj(;oi^d^\VaXi^tpc^i^^ Inveftin^.aMa;j:with "the Office of the Miniftry mt^ out Ordination by IvCuiJllers, becaufe in Xin;e ot Prelacy.Minifters ^t. Ordingj. ■^^^^iW ^"^^^ ^'^^ ''^"^^ ^^^^^ ^^^ Minifters, fit to do k in Scotland. Page 9. The Third kind of Iiftrufion, fays the Author ; is wj^in a Pirfofpha^ (iiyiimnony hm takes the Charge of a partuuhr Flock vji)otly without their tfi^nt, ank Pa againfi ij6 Remarks on the Cortcefftons of the ^urunt a»d Nonjumnt CHAP. VI. againfl their iVtll ; emering it maj he (fays he) meerly by the ?refentation of a Pa^ tron And Collation of a Bijhof. This was our cafe , fsLyshZy in the late Prelacy^ and was af^fficiem Ground of Separation : JVhen a People have their own faithful Mi- niflers violently and for their faithfulnefi rhurft out, and others Intruded in their Place ; In this cafe there is Jufi Ground, yea its Pofitive Duty to adhere to our Faithful Mi- nifiers luhofuffer for Righteoufuefs, and defert thefe Intruders. Qn this Intrufion, thus defcribed by the Author, I Remark firft. That he is very lax aiid unfound/ in defcribing a Minifter's Intrufion into a particu- lar Charge to be fuch, as is wholly -without the Confent of the Flock, md againfl their Will What ? will not the half of the Flock, nor two Parts of Three, nor Three Parts of Four, of the Number of the Flock, Protcfling againft (uch a Man's being admitted to be their Minifter, make it evident, that his being admitted, contrary to that Proteftation, is Intrufion ? Anfwer. Not at all, according to 5«M»^- Judgment J Publifhed by their Spokes-Man, the Learned; Author. Yea, tho' there were but one or two of the Flock that Confented,. it would not be wholly without the Confent of the Flock; And therefore it would not be In- trufion, according to^t^is Defcription : And I am fare if he can prove that from Scripture, his Bible has fomething that my Bible wants ; nor is it in the Origi- nal, that is the Standard. zdly. Seing he fays. This Intrufion is wholly without the Confent of the Flock and a- gainji their Willy entering it may be, MEERLT by the Prefentation of a Patron, and C%lUtion of a Bijhop, And fo, according to him, if it be not meerly by the Pre- fentation of a Patron ; that is, only by the Patron's Prefentation, without the Concurrence of any of the Flock,- for fo the word MEERLY is underftood. And then if one or two of the Flock confent with the Patron, there is no Intrufion ; And if that make a Lawful CalJ, I am fure Gurats may get Lawful Calls in Hundreds of Parifhes in Scotland. But then, for fear the Author fhould offend Patrons, or Condemn the prefent Prafticc of the National Church o^Scotlmdhtt allowing of, and going into Patronage* which ''is a Part of Romijh Corruption that was purged out of Scotland, and all Ranks of. Perfons, by Covenant fworn to keep it out. I fay, lefl the Author fiiould ofiend Patrons, or Condemn the >Jational Church for trampling upon our Covenants, in going into Patronage, which is a Part pf Popifli Corruption Abjured by our Covenants : For fear of Ihaming the Church, he takes in the Collation of a Mijbop along with the Pre- fentation of a Patron, to make up a Defcription of Intrufion into a Congregati- \ on.- And fo he by that little falfe Quirk, would perfwade People, rA/7? ^ Pa- trm's Prefentation is a very harmlefs Thing, if it want that black Companion qf the Collation of a Bijhop -, As if Patronage were confident with the Word of 0,OD,and Presbyterian Governme,nt,or at moft, were but fome Venial Corrupti- on> which Presbyterian Ordination, or Admiffion, wipeth off. ^dly. Patronage is Tyranny in Government, which I dall prove : And for WQvin§ it, I ofe thefe Arguments, ^fc, I GH AP. Vr." Mhiflers of the prefent Church of SCOTLAND. ^117 Firfiy As the Learned Mr. Calderwood in altare Damafienum Page 8. faith. Pa- tronage deprives People of their Chriffian Liberty in chooftng their oiun Minijlers, and fait is contrary to the IVord of GOD : Ads i. 23. and 6. 5. and 14. 23. And Xurretin Theolo^: Elenct: Part 4.- de necejf: Secejf: Nofir: ah Ecckf: Rom: Page no: III, Saith, 'That Tyranny in Govermnent conJiRs in bringing us into Bondage to ally or fomething from which Chrift hath made us free \ And c(fmmanding our Con- fciences by a Latu to obey that Pewer which deprives either of the whole ^ or at lea/2 of f^me part of cur Chrijlian Lil^erty. And its plain, that Patronage deprives Peo- ple of fomc Part of their Chriftian Liberty, viz.: of choofing their own Mini- |f Hers according toChrift^s Rule j and therefore Patronage is Tyranny in Go- vernment. zdly. I fhall adduce the Teftimony of fome Churches; And firft I find in Caldei wood's Hiflory Page 114. It is Recorded, that the Church oi Scotland Anno 1581, by their A(a and Declaration, Publifhed their Judgment, faying. Patronage is a Popijl) Order, inconjijlent with that Order that GOD' s JVard craves. And idly. Patronage is contrary to the Canons of the Primitive Church, as plainly appears by Cyprians Epiftks, Lib: 1 : Epifl: 4: 8p. And its alfo evident by Naz.ian: Oration: Vofl Reditwn in urhem. And by Athanafus h:s EpiR: to thefe that lead a folitary Life. And Augufline in his Book concerning Baptif?n, writ- ten againft the DonattHs, Lib: 4: cap: 24; He calls, the depriving People of the Liberty of Eleding their own Minifters, plain TJt/j/^k), and proves there was no fuch thing in the Church as Patronage, for the firfi Three Hundred Years after Chrift. And Eufebius faith the fame, Lib:^: cap: 28. Ca/fanam Lib: 3 cap: -3. Decreta/iujn, a.i)d J u/iinianus Novel: 57; cap: uh: do prove, that there was no iuch thing in* the Church, as a Power of Patronage, until the Canon ofFelagius, under Ju/hnian m the fifth Hundred Years after Chrift's Incarnation ; But at the Time, of making, that Canon ofPelagius, as thefe Two iaft Authors above faid, do (ay, Vatrvnage was Confiitutey as Heathen Noble Meny er Citizens •who Irjjiituted "Publick Games and afforded the necejjary Conveniencies, fuch its- ^lace. Stage, and the like, were to be Law-givers and Rulers of thefe Games : So like- uife thefe that Bui 'dedy or be/lowed Benefices on Churches did become^ and were alloW' ed by the Clergy to be Difpofers of thefe Churches to fuch as they thought fit. Thus we fee the Rule by which Patronage wasConftitute, was not the Word of GOD, Jwt Heathen Games. And It is Demonltrated in the Book Intituled, The Inquiry into the Ccnflitw tiony &c. of the Primitive Church, c^^/j: 3: Fage 63. And in Append. Catalog: Tefiium Veritatis; I fay, in thefe Books it is clearly demonftratc that the Pri- mitive Church never owned a Paftoral Relation that any Man had to a People if he was thrufl upon them without their Confent j Or by any Power that was not properly Ecclefiaflick according to CHRIST'S Inftitution By all this it plainly appears, that, the Primitive Church abhorred that Tyranny of Patronage that deflroys Chriftian Liberty, of People's calling their own Minifters according to Chrift's Appointment. - - - ^^^^ i 1. 1 8 Remarks on the C.cnccffmis of the 'Juranl And Ni^njurdfit CH APV Vj. Bet^a in his little Boole concerning the Notes of" the true Church, he fays ; Patronage is a Broth hoyled in the Devil's Kihimy and pven to all Ranks of Veo^e .that are to he made Mad. "' ' , ..," ' And for a further and plain Refutation of Patronage, as 'being contrary to the Word of GODj^and Judgment of found Divines ; And hkewift for the de- mpnftrating, that the proper Right of Elcdlio.nof Miniders, is eftablifiieM by the Gofpel Rule, to belong \o the Chriftian People that are the Flock : I fliall add the Judgment of the Learned Mr: George Gillef pie. Recorded inWis Mi fel- lany Queflions Chap.- 2: where he handles the Point of Eiedion of Pailoss with the Congregations confent; and proves, that the Eledion of Minift^rs be- , longs to the People ; For coniirming o^' which, he advances the Authority df Scripture and Judgment of many Learned Divines, and of the beft Reforme.d Churches; A few of which I fh all only'Tranfcnbc for Brevity's fake. And'firft, he provesit from Ac^s 6.2, 3, 5, 6. and Chap. 14. 2^.' And when they -had Ordained tbem Elders in every Churchy and had prayed with Fafiingy they commended the?n to the Lord on who-H they believed' That which in our Tranflation is they [ Ordain d, ] m the Original it is ^s/poToi'« ' makes appear in the Place above- .cited, by the Judgment of the beft liexicographers, Criticks and Interpreters, ; i'?z,. 'Julius Pollux y GuaheruSy Wolfieberusy Btidau^^ StephanuSy 'Jnjline Martyr yCe~ drenuSy Pilandery Scapula, Arias Montaw-Sy Dem(}flheneSyCicerOy£.iias CretenJis,JEf' .chinesy Ducusy the Tigurine Veriiqn, CalvJn'e, B iil linger y Bda Siud ErAusy Who' all 'Jnjerpret it in the Scnfe forefaid. J'" . ' ^ *"-" _ '; ' ^'^dly. Mr. Gil/cfpie proves this Point from.^Hi-'i. ij artd' J^.'^^; i^nd'^i^ iz. '4''6or. 16. 3: and 2 Cor: 8: 19: i 7/;k: 3.- 7> '" ';', ' -^ '._ '' .' •' '" "^ '., '' 3^/y. He confirms this Truth by the judgment of the greateft Proteftant ©i- ^yincs, fuch as the:A/rcny Order 3 7hatthe PetplehaiTe their free-P'owercf Elecjw^^j ^fe'' pjumMni' • ■ • ^ •'..•• - *•''■ pert CHAP: VI. Mwiftets of the prefect Church '(f SCOTL AND. ■ 119 y?fyx, which accotcingJy we find generally obferved in the Ekfti on of all iheic Paftors. ,, * 'jthly: The D«/c/^Confeflion fays, l^e beluve, that tha Mmijhics, EId«rs^ and Deacons ought to be called tc thefs' their FuuEiicm, and that by the Lawful Ek^ion of the C/.vrch to be advanced into ihefe Rooms. ■: Sthly: The -Helvetian Confe/Hon oF Faith tells us • That the Right choofing of Mini f ers i isT if^ the cofifent, of phe Church. pt/j/y, The GcnerarAikmbly.oMhe Qhurcho^ Scotland, held at EdinhuYgh May i.5 8<5.' Sejf: 5: rcquircth tht confeiit of the whole Panfii to a Minifler's Elcdion. T^he Woixls dLXcX-WkyViz,'. ^4yient the Doubt ?mvedy Ij it be l.iwful to any Town or Cftyywi.'ere theie is an Univerfity^and a P^rf of tle'Pari/b cfthtfime Town to the Land' •warty without their coufent andVttes^ to 9leH a Mmifler to the xuhok Parijh and Uni" ^eifity^ pretendmg the Frivi/edge of an old Uje and Cujlcm ? The Kirk hath voted therm in the Negatiie, that it is not lawful fo to do. " . • fothlyj The Ecclefiaitiek Difcipline of the Proteftant Church of France, Cap: I., faith, The Silence of the People, none contradiSiing^ jhall be taken, for an exprefs Confent; but in caf there arife a>:y. Contention, and he that is named jljould b? liked by theConJifiloryorPresbjtjry, and dijliked by the People, or by the mofi Part of them, his Eleclionis then to be' delayed, and Report of all to be made unto the. Conference or Fr^- vincial Sjmd, to confidcr the'JufiificatiQnof him that is named, as well as his Rejetlion: And alt ho' he that js named jhould be 'Jujlrfied, )"jt is he not to be made or given as a Pa/lor to the Feop.'e againR their Will, nor to the Diflike, Difpleafure or LTifiontent oj the mo A of them. iithly. The Ao»M« Canon Law, Decret. i.Dii?. 52. faith, Eleclio Ckficorum eft pit it io plebis^ that is, The Eleciion of the Cle/gy-men, is- the Petitioa of the comnton ^pie. .: , vithly. Mr. Grllefpie in the 24 Page of the fame 2 Chap, faith, As to the Power tf deafive Votes and Suffrages in Eleciion s, we give the Vote mly to the Elderfiip or Church Reprefe}itafive,fo that they carry along wjth them the Confent of the Major or Better Part of the Congregation. : iithl). Bifliop Bilfon grants this to be the proper Way, in his Book De Gtiber.n, Eidef. Cap. 15. Fag. 417. and fo doth Dr. F/e/J,that great Prelatift,in his Book of the Church, Lzb. j. Cap. 54. i4?/;/y. This is Defended by Be:La, Mufculus, ZanchiuSy Luther, Ofiander, Stuj tonius, Fazjus, Morney^ Baldwin, Smeclymnus, fVhittakery Feflus Hunaiusj, Cahitty Zuinglius, and OEcolampadius, as Mr. Gillefpie demonftrats. But tho' many of the Minnifters of this Church, will not ftand to allow, That Tatronage and Depriving the People of their Right of Vote, in the Choice of theiR^aiiors, is contrary to the Word, of GOD, the Coni'effions of our own and (flier Reformed Churches, and the Judgment of many On;hodox Divines, as hath n abovCv Demonflrated ; yet they think they can falve all fufficiently in the itnt Cafe, with this Pretence, That notwithflanding the- Law Relloring.the Fovye]: I20 Remarks on the ComeffLas of the Jurant and Nonjurant CHAP:VI. r^^/ Power of ]^ll<)i^; yet the Presbyteries do allow the People of the Parifh to give their Confe'nt to the Patron's Prefencation j and that they do not ordinarly or- dain any to a Parifli, without the Coafent of the whole, or fome coniiderable Number of that Parifh. But to fhow that this Pretence, however fair it appear, is altogether In- fufficient, and a pitiful Shift, which no Way proves their Point, I fiiall give a clear Parallel Inftance out of Mr. Jamefon his Cypriams Ifoiimus, Cap. i. Page lo, following the Learned Dr. Rule m his Cypriankk. Bijhopj Sett. 6. Both thefc learned Divines do prove,That by the Book of Canons, thefole Power of Or- dination belonged to Scoti Biihops^altho' in the yth Canon of the fecond Chapter, Presbytrers have as much and more Power allowed them in Ordination, than the Patrons allow the People now in Electing and Prefenting a Probationer to be ordained. That 7th Canon faith ' AH Ordination fhall be made by Impofi- ' tion of Hands, and with folemn Prayers, openly in the Church, after Morn- ' ing Service end^d, and before Communion, in the Form and very Words' pre- * fcrivedin the Book of Ordination, and in Prefence of Two or Three Presby- * ters oftheDiocefSjWho fhall lay on Hands together with the Arch-Biftiop- * or Bifliop. Concerning which Ordination, Mr. Jamefon, in the Place above cited, faith, * Where it is indifputably clear. That there was to be no Conveen- ' ing of a Presbytery for any Ordination, Presbyteries had nothing to do with ' that Work, it was only the Work of the Bifhop alone, the Prefence only of * two or three Presbyters, as Witiiellesof the A(Sion, was to be required, who * to add fome Solemnity thereto, as Z)oui»/?/zw expreflesit, fhould togethef with * the Bifhop impofe Hands on him whom their Lord Prelate had added to their * Number, and defigned to make on^ of his Curates. From which parallel Inftance, and the Judgment of thefe Learned Divines thereupon, it is evident. That the Allent the Presbytery allows the People to the Patron's Prefentation is truly as good as none, and that notwithftanding thereof, the Patron hath the Sole and only Power ofelefting th^ Minifter, as the Bifliop had the fole Power of Ordination,notwjthilanding the Confent of thefe two or three Presbyters there- in. And whereas there was fome Appearance of a Law in that Confent of the Prebyt-ers, there is none, in that Shadow of Confent granted to tlie-P^ople in th< Ele(5tion of Minifters ; but diredly oppofite to the Law which is owned and re- cieved by the Presbyteries and Patrons, as the Rule of their Proceedings in fuch Eleftions. For what Aflent the People give, is only by the Patron's Permiffion and contrary to the Law eftablifhing Patronage. And hence it h plain. That all that tlic Patron and Presbytery do in feeking lor the Confent of the People to the Patron's Choice of the Paftor, is only to involve them in an Approbation of the Power of Patrons, and tlieir Right of Patronage, which is a raanifeft Vio;^ lationof the Rules of Chrift, and of our Solemn Covenants. O! how dreadful- ly finful and fcandalous is it, for Presbyteries protefTing to allow People theii Chriftian Liberty, ac-cocding to the Gofpel, in calling their own Miiiifters, whil^ CHAP. VI. Mifjiffers of the Nationd Church of SCOTLAND, 121 in the mean Time they are only deluding them into that Popifh Corruption, of approving the Patron's Power of Prefentation, which \s contrary to the Word of GOD, and a perjurious Breach of our Covenants! And here I fhall conchide what I defign on this Head, with two Citations, .' oneout ot theForw 0/ £/(?<^;«? Mimfiers, ratified by an Adl of the Secret Coun- cil Anno 1560. j-ecorded in Mr. Rnox his H;lT:ory of the Reforination of Religion in Scotland, Book 3. Pag. 292. viz,. The Qiiejiion mufl be ashed again of tie Mul- titude^ to wit. Require yvu any further of this your Overfeer and Mimfler ? If no Man ayijwer, let the Minifier proceed : And fay , IV ill ye not ackmwkdge this your Brother^ for the Minifler of Chrifl Jefus, your Overfeer and Paflor ? Will ye not reverence the Word of GOD, that p'ocec-deth from his Mouth ? Will ye not receive of him the Ser- mon of Exhortation with Patience; not refujing the wholefome Medicine of your Souls although it he bitter and unpleaftng to the Flejh ? Will ye not finally ^ maintain and com^ fort him in his Miniflryandioatching over pu, againfi all fuch as wickedly would rebel ^againftGODy andhis holy Ordinances. ■ The People' s Answer is to -be this y viz. We will, as we will' anfvoey to the LORD yefus, who hath commanded his Minijiers to be had in Reverence, as his Ambajfadors, and as Men that carefully watch for the Sa'vation of our Souls. And Qiieen Mary at her Return from France in Augufl 25. 1^61. did approve the above faid Order of the Policy of tlie Kirk, and by iier Authority and Ad of ; the Secret Council, publifhed a Proclamation, m which it's faid. That none of them, viz. the Subjects, Jhould take in Hand privately or openly y any Alteration, in the State of Re'igion, or attempt any thing againfi the fame, which her Majejiy found publickly end uni- verfilly flanding at her Majejlyfs Arrival tn this her Realm, under the Paiu 9f Death. But indeed /he put an ill Siing in the Tail of that Proclamation, to ^\x, fhe proclaimed a Liberty to her Dcmeflicks to ufe the Romifh Mafs. But the Earl of kxxznprotefied againB the Ufe of the Mafs : See Mr. Knox his Hiflory, Book 4. pag. 311, :5I2. The other Citation is an exprefs Article of the Book of Difcipline, recorded in Mr. Cakterwodd's Hiftory, pag: 114. which Difcipline was fworn to, by the National Covenant, which binds all Generations of this Nation to ipaintain the fame. The Words I cite, are in the 12 Chap.- of the Book of Dtfciplme, where fpeakingof Patronage, *tis faid. And becaufe this Order, which GOD's Word craves, cannot f and with Patronage, and Prefentation to Benefices, ufed in the Pope'f Kirk' And they ej'o-e whofoever will imbraceGOD's Word, and dejtre the Kingdom of his Son ChrtJI JefiS to be advanced, they will alfo imbrace that Policy and Order ; which the -Word of GOD and upright Efiate of his Kirk crave, otherwife it is tn vain that thef hanteprofejfedthefime. . • There is only one Objcftion, which feemsto have any Force for allo'ving, or at lead tolerating Patronage J and it is this, viz.. The Church oi' Scotia; J did tole- rate Patronage, not wit hflanding of that Book of DilcipUne, for manyYears; ana therctotc (o may we. Q. ■ I 122 Rewnrhs on the Co»ce(fion$- of the Ji4rxnt mi Non]urmt CH AP; VI. I anfwer i/?. APraxi ad Jus non 'vakt Confequemia. i, e. The meer Pra<5ticeo£ a Thing in a Church doth not prove the Lawtahiefs of it : Elfe Idolatry pradifed, in Ifrael was lawful, 2dly. It is the Word of GOD, and Statutes of the Church agreeable to holy Scripture, that*s the Rule, and andno^the Pradice of many in the Church. Elfe Pop£RY and Premcy fhould be. lawful, becaufe they are, and have beea pra^ifed hy the niofl: Part of People, of Chriftian Nations, and nay,e been fo i\\ Scotland* '^' Mr. X«ox. in the 4//j Book of his. Hiitory, makes^ it very evident. That the Seat Reafon why Patronage ^ot foating in Scotland after the Reformation, was, ecaufe the Queen being Popifh, and an Enemy to Reformation, and many Lords, and Gentlemen her Favourites being covetous, flie defigning to opprefs andruine the Reformation, beftowed two Parts of Minifters Stipend on Noblemen and Gentlemen, and allowed Minifters but the third Part; and that was fo ill paid, that Minifters for the mod Part were forced to live on the Benevolence of the People : And many Minifters in that Extremity, finfully yielded to the Power of Patronage for the fake of a Livelihood, aiid thus the mod: Part of Minifters IJfa-\ thar-WVt couched under the Popifli Yoke oi' Patronage, contrary to the Word of] GOD, and Difcipline of the Church oi Scotland. But the moft faithful Mmifters| being opprefled by the Court on the one Hatxl, and a Multitude of declining Bre- thren on the other Hand, ftill cried out and complained of that intolerable Cor- ruption. SECT. ir. Contamiiig Remarks on the Bfth CONCESSION ofjurams andNon^ jurants. PAg. 10. The Author lays down the fifth Juft Ground of Separation, viz* Int tolerable Perjecutionyhys he, is reckoned ajufi Ground of Separathn : Our Bkffe^ LORD hids us, ivhen thruji out of one Cityjiee to another : And under this Heady fays hcJr.eckon unjuji and Jinful Excommunication, Joh:p.34. and i6. 2 i But this coinciding fme voay with the fourth^ IJhall not enlarge upon it, faith the- Author. As the firft Part of this Ground 9^ Separation gives a^ very dai^nd unfopn^ Pefcription otPerfecution, its being a Caufe of Separation j fo likewife our Sa- viour's Words are not applicable to the Purpofe in Hand, as the Cafe is propefecl and ftated by the Jurant in Name of the Church. Firft his Defcription of Perfecution is dark, becaufe he doth not.determinci what he means by intolerable Perfecution, nor who is the Party perfecutingj i£ by intolerable Perfecution he means, the hindring Men by Tyranny from performi/<3f^imderthe the Popijh Perfecution. Allthefe Great Divines above faid hold the flight of'a true Gofpel Paftor Lawful only in thefe cafes above faid. * But feing the Af^rao«/>j condemned the flight of Gofpel Paflors altogether, in any cafe, under Perfecution, as Clemem Alexandrinusy Ltk 4. Stromat: tells us. And it was alfp held to be altogether Unlawiul in any circumfbnce what- foever by the Momanifi^y with whom TeHullian Joyned in t.iis, as appears from his Book Intituled, Lth- de Fuga^ cap. 12. 13. * Thefe who condemn the flight ot Gofpel Paftors as Unlawful in any cafe, do advance fix Arguments for their Opinion which are thefe, viz,. I. ' That Command concerning- flight given mMatth: 10:23; was Temporary andPerfonal, and therefore is not to be made an Example to be Imitated. It is Tempory ( fay they ) becaufe it was Abrogated no lefsthan that Command, »jix..^Tejhall not go in the Wiiy of the Gentiles, which was Abrogated Matth: 28: 19: 20. Hence the Apoftles gave no command concerning flight. It was alfo Per- fonal, becaufe it was only given to the Apoflles. < Thefe Divines above faid who hold 'flight Lawful only in the cafes aforefaid, do anfwer this Objedion thus, Viz.y They deny that it was a Temporary Com- mand ; but hold it to be a perpetual Command ; becaufe it is no wlure Abro- gated as thefe Commands of going in the way of the Gentiles, and entering in- to the Cities oith^ Samaritans were, Matth 28. and Mark 16. Or i( it was Abrogated becauie it was Joyned with thefe Commands; Then th*e refl of the Things which preceed, and follow in the Contexts were alfo Abrogated, whidi the Adverfaries will not, nor dare Profefs: And the Obfervation of this Com- mand after Chrifl's Afcenfion, and that among the Gentiles, fhows its perpetu- al Vigor and f landing; Nor does it hinder the Handing of .that Command, that the Apoflles commanded nothirrg concemiiTg flight under Per/wcution, be- caufe that was not neceflary, Chrifl having commanded it before ; And the A- poflles were content with the general Command. And, it is falie to Affert thit that Command was given only to the Apoftles ; becaufe our Saviour gave h As 2L common Command to -others' as %dl as to thc/Apoftles M««A: ^4; i who fends it on the Church.- And it's alfo good in regard of it's End, %'ix,. For Trying and Humbling the Church ; and therefore Chriflians ought *f nor to flee from any Perfecution at all, Anfwer. ' It's only Goid accidentally, but not per fe^ i. e. Simply of it felf; And Wars, Famine, and Peftilence, are fent by GOD, and are prepared for Advantage to Believers, i^cw. 8. 28. and yet it's abfurd to alferp, That it's unlawful to fhan thefe in any Cafe at all. '{th ObjeHion, Flight in Time of Perfecutions, is unlav/ful ; becaufe it is Foolilh and Impious. It's Foolifh, becaufe Men 'Canno: efcape the Hand of GOD, if he pleafe to apprehend them, Pfal.139. 1,2, 7. It's alfo Impious, becaufe it feems to be an Infulting the LORD, as if Men by the Power of their own free Will, would refolve to efcape out of GOD's Hands a^aiiiCt His Will. Anf-wer. ' That fome Kind of Flight is Foolifh and Impious, is granted, vm:,. When Meii know for certain, That the Mind of- GOD has determined, they fball not flee, but fufferinfuch a Tin:^^ and Place, whether they know GOD's Mind by certain verbal Prophecy^ as Paul was informed by Agabus^ ASis 21. 1 1 . or whetlier they come to know it by Internal Infpiranon of the « Spirit of GOD, giving them infallible Certainty of GOD's Mind in that Mat- 1 28 Remarks on the Concefs'tons of^umnt and Nonjunnt CHAP. VI. * Matter, as our Saviour had of his Sufferings, yohn 13. i. in any of thefe Cafes, * it were Fooli.fh and Impious to flee, when G(JD thus certainly calls them to ' * fuft'erfor the Truth. Which Sin, Jonah infome Refped was guilty of, Chap.'i < g, 4. but all that doth not prove it to be finful to flee*, in the Cafes that were ' * defcribed to be lawful. 6th ObjeBion. Men flee either becaufe they diflruft OOD, or hate the Crofs ; « but both thefe are finful; for in Dangers Men flv)uld truft moft in GOD, and . * call upon him in Faith, Pfal.91 15 ; and as for the Crofs, GOD hath com- « manded Chriftians to rake it up and bear it patiently, Matth: _ 16. 24. Anfvier. That Argument is falfe, becaufe it gives not a full Enumeration of * the Caufes of Flight j for pious Chriftians, and Eminent Paflors, flee \x\ « TimeofPerfecution, neither on Account of Diilrufting GOD, nor hating the « Cro{s, bijt Diftrufting their own Strength ,• fortho' the Spirit be willing the < Flefh is weak, Matth. 26. 41. and like wife becaufe they Reverence GOD, < that they may not tempt Providence, when he gives them a fair Opportunity < offafe eicape; and alfo, becaufe they defign the Glory of GOD, and Salva- ^ tion of others, yea of the whole Church, in their Dehgning to remain in the * Body, for the Glory of GOD and Edification of the Church, according to ' the Will otGOD. And it. was made evident that oar Saviour and the A-' poftles did flee, that they might remain longer in the Body,for the Giory of God, \ and Edification of the Church according to the Will of GOD. 5 f/;/y. The Author reckons unjuft Excommunication, juft Ground of Separati- on. And according to that Reckoning,the prefeht National Church,in making an Ad Jnno iji$y for Cenfuring the Reverend Mrs. M^millan and T'ayldr with Ex- communication, for their Faithfulnefs in Adhering to the Covenanted Refor- mation, as was made evident above, fhe gives true Adherents to the Covenants and Work of Reformation, juft Ground of Separation frofti her,. But I fliall more fully handle that Point, when I come to vindicate the Protefting Miniftersand Elders, their Power and Authority oi" Acting Judicially in Seflions and Presby- tries, ( in Ordering the Affairs of the Houle of GOD, according to the Gofpel Rule, ) which the prefent National Church makes one of the great Irregularities, for w'hich they make Acts t^ cenfure PROTESTERS, with all the Cenfuresof I the Kirk, Excommunication included. But why the Jurant Author did not grant, that unjuft Sufpenfion and Depo- fition from the Office of the Miniftry; and when the Church Ratifys that unjuft Sentence, fo as no Rcdrefs can be obLajn'd, as this National Church hath done, in the cafe ot Mr. Mmillan and Mr. I'ayhr^ I fay, why he will not grant fuch un- juft Sentences, fo ratify 'd,- cobcjuit Ground of Separation, I cannot conceive,, feing fuch Cenfurcs and Sentences, are plain I yranny in Government, which is.. juft Ground of Separation. Bat perhaps, and .it is not improbable,^ that .he would not grant Tyranny in Governmcni, in a general Senfe, being eftablifh-. ed by a Law,to be jult Ground of Scparacion,but only in that particular Senfe of Ex. CHAP: VI. Miniprs of 'the pre[efit Church of SCOTLAND: ,2^ | Excommunication, that fo he might leave Room for the Church o^ Scotland' to f Tyrannize over Frotciting' IS^rqiuer?, b% unjufl Sentences ofSufpeniion and f Depo/ition. i SECT. III. Contawing Remarks on the 6th Conceffion granted by Jurant and Non" ■ jurant Mwifers of theprefent National Church of ^QQXHsXid... • ■ ^ . PAg. lo, the Author gives the <5th Jufl Ground of Separatf on, /5^'»;/ H'^itbdr awing fr 0771 Ordinances is juft, when Offences and Scandals ' are Grievous and Notour^ as alp all Accefs towards Removingthem in a regular Way^ is rendred int' pjfibley infuch a Manner as the great End of Edification cannot be reached; this, fays «, he, is no H'ays to be underflood concerning Matters which may remain under Debate^ a^ I mong thefe who fimerely fear the Lkd, and own the received Doiirine and Difciplim of I the Church. ' ^ ' Now feing I have clearly proven that Aflbciation with Mah'gnant Prelatifts, in the unla^vful Engagement , was contrary to all the Articles of our Solema League, and that the Incorporating UNION wholly overthrows our Solemn League , and that the Oath of Abjuration obliges to maintain Eraftiati SUPREMACY, PRELACY, and Englijh-popijh CEREMONIES, which are pftabliCied by that UNION ; and after all, the prefent National Church of Scotland obdinatly refufeth to give publick Satisfaftion for thefe Scandals and grofs Defcftions llieis guilty of, by the whole Church her going into that Union, and the moft Part of the Minifters their Swearing that Oath of Abjuration j but on the contrary, both Jurants and Nonjurants, who join together. Judicially Maintain, that Swearing that Oath is no publick Scandal .- Hence it is evi- dent, the prefent National Church is Guilty of Grievous and Notour Scandals, and no Redrefs can be obtained in a regular W"ay, to reach the great End of Edi- fication ; and therefore there is juft Ground of Separation from the prefent Na- tional Church. And I have clearly proven above, in fpeaking to the UNION and the OATH, that it cannot be faid to be a Matter under Debate, among » thefe that truly fear the LORD, and own the JKceived Dodrine and Dif^ ciplineofthe Church oi Scotland in htt pureft Times.- For it, was clearly de* temiinedby Ads ofAllembiies Anno 1^48 and 1^49, that all Members of the National Church of Scotland^ who did aflbciat, and therefore much more all thefe who do Incorporat with Malignant Prelats and Prelatifts , and re- fofed to give Satisfaftion for that Scandal, (hould be feparated from, both 11 Negatively and Pofmvely. CHAP! J JO The Arguments advanced for Defence of CHAP: Vll. C H A P. VI I. Containing Anfviers to the ARGUMENTS advanced by JurantSy for Defence of the Lav^ukefs of Swearing the Oath of Abjuration. P Ag. II. the Author in his 5rth Propo(iticm,iays, It is evident from -what hmk beenfaidy T'hat the Oath of Abjuration can be no Ground of Separation : but; this heing the main Defgn of this Paper^ ijhally faith he, endeavmr to fet it in its tjtar Light. » To that I anfwer, Pirji\ It isetrident by what I have remarked on his Pre- face, and Six juft Grounds of Separation, that what he affirms here is falie. 2e lawful, till they ha^ with Importunity w^illed long at tlie Throne oi Grace. Buc feing Scots Jurants would nox. reft fatisd.d with u\^ Light they had AmoAjo6; ijofj,. 1708, ijja^. ^W which Time the Aibin^ly ' and Commifficttviaw.thei'Oatjhto) include thcCowiitions of £»^///>& Goverumeuf, * ior prcferving and maintairung Prelacy and Englijh Ceremonies ; it feems the JurantsliMie.gioi:ttn fuck-a new Light as Baioiim^ox xo infiure Ifrael, Nnvtb : 3Jt. 16. R a P^S- 1^2 The Arguments AcivAmed, for Defence CHAP. VIL Pag^ 15. The, Author bol dry affirms. That Peoples being offended at their Mini- fters on Account offwearing the Oath of Abjuration is an Offence taken atd not giveit^ andis alenarly'the People's Fault. ^ ■ '"- -. > v; In anAvering the Author on this Head, I fhall firft fhov/ what Scandal is ; Mr.- Gillefpie in his Diipute againft EngU(h Ceremonies,- Part ^ Ghap. 8. fdllowihg 'Je- roniy Amandus Polanus, Thomas Aquinas, ^nd Marcus Anton de Dom: tells us, that Offence or Scandal differs trom Anger : ^¥or, faith he, Scandal or Oftence is not * grieving or difpleafing my Brother • for perad venture when I grieve him, or- *' difpleaie him, I do edifie him. Now, /zyj he, Edification and Scandal are in-- '■ confiftant. But Scandal is, A Word or Deed proceeding from me, ichich is or * may be the Occafion of another Mans Halting, ^r fvjetvingjrom the jhaight Way of * Righteoufnefs. .. And Mr. Gillefpie, ibid, following Amefius, faith, * That whidrispaflive Scan-" - dal or an Offence taken without the Fault of the Doer of the Adion; in that * Cafe it is not onlyrequired, that he intend not his Brother's Fall, but alfo that. * the Deed be not evil in itfel0, nor yet^dorie i^ai-di«atdy aiid-with Appearance * ofevil. ■ ■ ■■• ■■- ' "■- '■ ■ - '^-^ ■•'= ■'':}■-■ And Mr. Durham on Scandal, Part i. Pag. 34. faith, ' It may be further- * moved, what is to be done when there feemsto be an Oppolition betVvixt the * Command of a Superior, and the efchewing ot Offence : fo that we muft ei- * ther difobey him, or give Offence in obeying ; as fuppofe ii Magiftrate fliould 5 command to preach upon fome pretended holy Day : Thethmg is lawful upon * the Matter ; but the doing of it is offenfive either by grieving many,orflrength- * ning others in the efteeming fomewhat of that Day? Anfwcr, In that Cafe * the Scandal is ftill a^ive and given -, and therefore no Command or Authority * can warrant one in Inch a Deed; zsAmes de Confiien: Lib: $.Cap: 11. and Mr. * Gillefpie in his Difpute of Ceremonies, Part i. Chap: 8. SeBi 9. ob&ryes. No ' Man can command either our Charity, or our Confciencesj and therefore none - * can command us to hurt the Spiritual Good of our Neighbour j or make up the i Hazard of given Offeree. - ^ . And further he faith, 7W; ^ An indifferent Aflion involved with Offence is fin- * fui inpractifing it, and cannbt be the Object of the Magiftrate's Power more * than that which is linful in it felf On this. Ground, fiys he, many of the Saints. ■ in the lail Ferfecucion did choofe rather to fufer Martyrdom, than to be con- ■ ilruded to have ceded, or delivered' the Bjble; and therefore they would not * redeem their Life by giving of any Piece of Paper at the Command' ' of the Officers, left thereby they fhonld have been by others interpreted • * to have given up their Bible. And in Pag: 55. he fays, * If it were not fo, ^ the three Children, £)a«. 3. might have- efcapcd the Furnace; for to fall down * at the King's Command was not limply finful (and had. they done that, fays • ' he, no more would have been called for) but to fall down at fuch a Time, and - [ in fuch a Place, Uc. had atleail the Appearance of Evil:. And therefore there- . was 1 CHAP. VIL Of the Oith of Migration aufwered. . i^^ c was no Room left for Obedience. But what'is the Oftence that we oiif^ht not ' ^o regard ? '-' • . . • - b Mr. Gilkfpie in his Difpiite of Ceremonies, Part r. Chap: 8. Seft: n. fays' * It is only in neceflary Things/Tnch as hearing of the Word, Prayer,' e^c* from * which we in^y nor abflain tho' all the World fiiould be offended at 119. In thefe ' only, fays he, we are not to regard the Offence of others.: But tho' things be ' lawful, if they be not necefTary as above faid, wc ought to regard Offence. And Cainero holds the fame, Pra/eB: in Matt h: 1%. 7. dc Scandal: And in the 8^/j Se- dionofthefamc Chapter Mr. Gillefpe following Cajetan and Dominkus BanneSy %s,- iVe 'jlmild- kbHain from Spiritual Tinngs, if they be not neceffary, rather than give Offence. . . ' From all which it plainly appears, That tho* the fwearing of.the Oath had bur the Appearance of evil, it was a Scandal given : And that it had furely feveral Ways^ as when aboiit .the half of.the M'mi^.txs.oi Scotland would lofs all worldly rntercll, and fuffer Imprifonmtnt-or Banifhment rather than take it ; efpecially fciiig'm-at^ NoHJurant^i were known to be the mofl l«^rned and pious Minifters in this Church: And many other W-j^ys it had the Appearance of Evil. But fe- ihg I have proven, That it obliges Jurants to maintain Erastianism and Pre- lacy, 'it is a SCANDAL given, of a deep Dy indeed. And thus the Author's bold A.ftertron is falfe. In the fame i3/-/»Pag: the Author gives a fecond Anfwer, after he had {aid the taking of the Oath was no Scahdal given..- He fiith, 2dly. Hozuever it heiuith People now, yet MimHers, who believed it to be laiofuly were obliged to keep themfehe^ in a Capacity of heing ufefidto them) when they come to a fiber Mind. ■ To that I anIwer/,7?, It is plain by what I have faid upon' the Oath it's be- ing SLjii/i Ground of Separation^ that Minifters had no juft Ground for believing it to be lawful," except they believe it lawful to fwear to maintain Erastianism Prelacy and Englijh-popijh Ceremonies ,• and if they" believe that lawful let theni ' fpcak out. zdly. He plainly holds by necelfary Confequence, That People who withdraw from Communion with Jurant Minifters, on Account of fwearin^* the Oath, are mad ; for he fays, Jurants camiot be ufejul to them, till they come to a fiber Mind. But ieing I have clearly proven, That all who firmly adhere to the Cove- nanted Reformation of the Church o^ Scotland m pureft Times, arc by the fame Scripture- warrants and Ads of Aflemblies obliged tp- withdraw from Jurants, as the General Aflemblies 1548 and 1649, were obliged to excommunicate all that went into the unUwiul Engagement, and obftinately defended their fo doing : And therefore it plainly follows according to the Author's Argument, that the General Aflemblies 1648 and 1649. were all mad Men. Pag. iq. Tiie Author gives his third Confideratfon or Motive (for Page 12 he calls the Confiderations, Motives ) that moved Minifters to take the Oath, and the third is, faith hQ, Minifiers byrefuJtngit,expofedthemfelves to the greateff Sufer^ iPSth ^'^^^ ^^* J^^/^ ^/^^^ ff^fif ^^^ ^^^ ^^ ^^^^ '« f^^ IVoridi not only the ruining of their m. \ 1 Families 1^4- *^^^ Arguments advanced for Defence of CHAP. V I/.. PamilkSy hut the Lcfs of their Liberty , andthepeaceah/e Exercife of their Mimjiry, and luhrch, fays he, I da) e fay fluck mojlmth many the Conjiitution of our famous Churcf{ and beautiful Refor?Kation. By the Author's Words it is plain. That he makes the penal Sandion of the Law impofing that Oath, to be a lawful Motive and Reafon obliging Presbyte- rian Minifters to fwear the Oath. And it is evident by the A6t ot Toleration o£ Curates, and Englijh-popifi Ceremonies in Scotlandy that the penal Sandion of the. Law irapofing the Oath, is Deprivation of OfEce and Benefice, if Miniilers re- fufed to take that Oath : For by that Ad of Toleration th^ Oath was impofed on all Presbyterian Minifters, and alfo Curates in ^co//i7»rf both alike, and under the fame Penalty, Now the Queftion is, iVhether or not the Authority of that Law, including fuch a penal SanElion, xiw a lavjful Authority of a Law obliging Presbyterian Minifters to Obedience ? The Author has already given his Anfwer in Name of all Jurant Minifters of Scotland, who affirm it to bca Lawful Authority i and therefore a Crong Motive and Reafon that obliged Miniikrs to fwear the Oath. ' But on the contrary, I deny what they Affirm in Anfwer to the Queftioni and to make it evident that the Authority of that Law Impoiing the Oath under that _ Penalty, is Unlawful : I offer thcfe Reafons, 'viic. Firfi, Becaufe it is a Maxim and' chief Fundamental Principle of the Laws of Chriflian Nations, Vix.: No Humane Law is binding which is contra»'y to Scripture. For this fee the Judgment of whole King- doms andNaticiUi Page 9- And I have made it clearly evident, that the OATH obliges to mamtainERASTiANiSMjPRELACYand EngUJh-poptjh CEREMONiES,which are all contrary to Scripture j and for that Reafon, the Law commanding to take that OATH cannot have a Lawful Authority. And zdly. Its clear from Dent: 17; T'hat Magi flr ate s arc obliged to Rule according to the Law of GOD: And there- fore whatever Law commands to do any thing contrary to the Law 01 GOD,hath n9 Lawful Authority, ^dly. As the Sinews are an Eflential Part ot the Humane Body, fo the Pen?l Sandion, is an Eflential Part ot the Penal Law, which gives binding and obliging Power to that Law, as Sinews give ilrength to the Body ; For this fee Ttirrettin T'heolog: Elencl: Part 3; Page 300. And therefore altho' a Penal Law doth command to do a thing that wereLaw- fuljif there be an Unlawful Penal Sandion in that Law, then it is an Unlawful and Unjufl Law ; becaufe the very Elfence oi the Law is made Unlawful by the Ualawful Penal Sandion which is Eflential to the Law. ^thly. But I have heard fome 'Jurant Miniflers affirm, that a Law IsXawfiil and Jufl to be obeyed tho' it have an Unlaw iki Penalty/. As if a liing fliould command liis Subjed^ to pay fame fmall. Trifcwte that js Lawful in,' it fSf i But the Law requiring it, has this Penalty, diatali^ubjeds that fail in the pay meat fh^ll have their Throats cut for a PuniHunent. This is fuch a hoiirible Abfur- dityas will be abiiorrtd by all Goveriiinaits iii the Woild, eiwept wfeeire Bloody Tyranny CHAP. Vir. The OJTH of Jhjuration Jnjmred, ijj Tyranny Domineers ; For the Law of GOO has not made every Tranrgreffion of the Law,to be a Capital Crime inforo humano, to be punifhed with l>eath by the Civil Magiftrate, tho* every fin defcrves Eternal Wrath at the Hand of God: And when Men make Tranfgre/fions to beCapital Crimes that GOD's Law made not I thefe Men Ufnrp the Power of GOD in adding to his Law, and make themfelves Guilty of Murder in taking away Men's Lives without a Warrant from the Law of GOD .- And hence it is clear, that a Law which hath an Unlawful Penalty, the Efiential Authority of it is Unlawful and Unjuft, the Penal Sanction being Eflential to the Penal Law ; For Men have no Power to make more fins in Number, or greater fins in Crime than the Law of GOD has made ; From what hath been faid it is evident, that the Penal Sanfiionof the Law impofinj? the Oath is Unjuft and Unlawful. //V/2, Bscaufe it appoints Deprivation of OfKce and Benefice, if Minifiers fwearnot the Oath, that is contrary to the Word ot' GOD. idly. Becaufe tho* the Oath had been Lawful in it (elf, yet the MagiHrate had no Power to punifh Minifters refufing it diredly with Deprivation o:" Office .and Be- nefice, ^dly. Nor could he punifti their refufing it indircdly, and by confequence with Deprivat.on ot Office and Benefice, except it could be made evident, that the Refufing it were a Capital Crime : For in tlie cafeora Capital Crime evi- rj^ently proven, tho' the Magiftrate cannot directly Deprive a Minilkr of his Of- 'fice, 'yet he can, upon evident Conviftion of the Minifier, put the Maiilter to Death or Banifhment .• And thus by confequence in the cafe of a Capital Crime, tht Magiftrate can Deprive a Minificr of his Office : This is clearly Dw^monllra- ted by Mr. Gilltfpie'm Aarons Rod, Page 137, and 138. upon the cafe of Abia- tharxhc High Pncfi:, and the fame was approvcn by tUe Venerable Aflembly at Wejhninfler : But if tlie Jurants be able to prove from rhe Word of GOD, that ^.tfuiing to (wear the OATH of Abjuration is a Capital Crime, they ought to l)ebar all Non^urnnts from Communion until they give fatisfa(5tion for fuch a grofs Tublick Scandal : But indeed if Juram.^ can prove Refufing the OATH to be a Capital Crime ; then m firid Jaftice the Civil Magiftrate will be obliged, upon jurants Probation, to put all Nonjurants in Scotland to Death, and that will make a dreadful Havock in the Church. . , 5f/?/y. As to the Author's faying, That Minifters by Refufing it, expofed theffi^ (elves to the Lofs of all that was Dear to them in the World, uix,' The Ruin of their Families and Liberty and Exercife of their Miniftry, and Beautiful Reforma- tion, that ftuck moft with many he dare fay. To that I An(wer in a word, his Af- tcttion is falfe and abfurd : For the Lofs of Lii-e is a greater fuffcnng than a ^Fine ; Not is the taking that OATH a preHrvation of Reformation, and Lt^ bcny of the Office oi the Miniftry ; but on the contrary a fwearing to maintaift Erastianism and Prelacy j and to enflave thePower and Ejcercifeofthe Office of the Midiftry to Eraftian Power, for he grants, yea affirms the Law Impoiing the "OATH can deprive Mimfters of the Liberty, as well as the Exercife of their Oi- •IkeoftheMioiftry; And Ravanel, BihUotlr, Sacr: Part i. Pa^ep^o, Delcribes 5 Liberty. 13 6. The Argmnents advanced for Defence CHAP. VII. :;] hibevty to be^ Imrfmnity fro?n co-actioMy and the Jus & Poteftas, i: e: the Right and \'\ Power; And this Liberty is either Corporal, or Politick. And therefore the. Law that hath Power to deprive Minifters or" the Liberty of their Office as the Author .holds ; it has Power to depriv^c them of the Jus & Poteflas, by the meer Power of the Magiftratc, which is high Erastianism. And ks a fad matter that the Author who, profefles to know all the Jurants Motives, fays, that he dare fay thelofsof the famous Conftitution of the Church and beautiful Reformation ftuek mod with many; but it feems he dare not fay all, nor the mod part, nor half nor third, that is fad indeed. ._ But the Jurants Objed, That the Magiflrates by that Law do not deprive Mi- nifters ofthe Power; but of the Exercife of their OiHce. I Anfwer, Firjlj I have proven the contrary juft now, from their own Words. ^dly: DeprivingMinifters of thcExercife of their Office except it be by confequencc of Death, or Banifhment in cafe a Miniikr bejuftiy Convided of a capital Crimes I fay, except in 'that cafe only, the Magiitrates depriving Minifters ofthe Exer- cife of their Minillry,is a Robbing our Lord Jefus Chrift of his Kingly Power, and fetting up a new Popedom ; For this fee the exprefs Words or the General Af- fembly ofthe Church o^ Scotland iw their Grievances prefented to King jf^w^j, and Convention of States at ?trth Anno 158a, Recorded in Mr. Calderwood's Hiftory^ Page 1 27, 128. Aiid there it is Recorded, that Mr.- Andrew Mehm and his Ere-* thren Commiffioners that prefented the Paper, told the King and Nobles,- They would yeild theirLives rather than yeild to fuch Intrufion on Chrift 's Prerogatives. And Mr; Fergtifftn in erastianism refuted. And Calderwood in Altare 'Va?nafcenufn Page 2 5 .-.and Mr; IVel/h in his Letter, from his Prifon in Blacknefs Anno 1606 fent to the LMy P/eemingy ^nd Recorded in the Preface of Aaron s Rod Blcjfoming. And 'Mr.-'fiirrettinT'hedlog: EknB'.Part y- Page 168; do all very Learn- edly defend this Truth; But Mr.-Caldeyzvood in A/tare Damafcen: Page 2 5;mofi Pointedly handleth that Controverfy againft Mticket the Prelatift who maintain- ed that fame Error that the Jurants\\o\(Xm. this Point, which Cfl/^£'riuoo^ Learned- ly Refutes. But in the next place, I fhall here cut off the very Foundation of the Jurants Argmnents, by which they endeavour to defend the Law Impoiing the OATH of Abjuration ; As fbme of them did publickly in the Conference held by the Synod of (?//2;^oxu in the High-Kirk of Glafgow in June i8th. Anno i-jii. \vi which Conference thefc that fpoke in Name oit\\Q Jurants did alledge, yea con-; fidently aflert ; That the Penal Sanftion ofthe Law Jmpofing the OATH of Ab-i juration, i^ not intended, in the Senfe ofthe Legiflature, to deprive Minifters of' the Office ofthe Miniftry ; but only to deprive them ofthe Exercife ofthe Office; But tho' that were true,it i^ already anfvvcred ; But to put theMatter out: ofDif- pute among all that have notRefolved Impudently to deny plainTruth; I fliall prove by the exprefs Letter ofthe Law, that theLegiflature intends, by thePenalSanfti- pn of' tjhat Law to deprive Miniflers not only ofthe Exercife of tiieir Office; "" ■ "■■' - - • '• • ■ . ■ - jj^j. A CHAP. V IT. ' The Oath of Ahjarathn dnfwered. Ijy ! but alfo of the very BEING of the OFFICE of the MINISTRY ; This is indifpLitably evident by King George's A<5t Impofing the Oaths of Allegiance and Abjaration, for in Page 8th of the faid Ad, it is exprefly faid; Beitfurthtr Enacted by the Authority aforefaid^ that all and every the Perfon and Perfons afove- faidy that do or ihall neglect or refufe to take the faid Oaths and Subfcribe thereto^ as aforefaid, in the faul Courts and Places ; and at the Reflective Times aferefaidjjhall be IPSO FACTO Adjudged incapabJe and d'fabled in Lain to all Intents and Purpofes whatfoever, to HAVE, OCGUPr or ENJOY the faid OFFICE, or OFFICES, Ejtf ployment or Employments or ANT ?ART OF THE M^ or any Matter or Thing aforf* faid, 0^ any Profit or Advantage appertaining to them, or any of them, and every fitch office or Place, Employment or Employments Jhall be void, and is hereby Adjudged Void*. Thus it is plainly undenyable, that the Legiflature exprefly puts the Office of the Minillry, in one and the fame Clafs with Offices Civil and Military, which have their very BEING from the Civil Magiftrate. idly. The Legiflature ex-» prefly appoints to deprive Minifters and Officers Civil and Military equally; and that not only of the Exercife or OCCUPATION of their Office; But alfo of HAVING THE AFORESAID OFFICES or ANY PART OF THEM i which indifputably is a Deprivation of the very BEING of their Office, which in the exprefs Words of the Ad, is Adjudged VOID, -^dly: The Aft puts not the lead Diflinftion between the Deprivationof the Office of the Mini- fl:ry, and Deprivation of Offices Civil and Military which bold their BEING of the Civil Magiftrate ; And no Man in the' Exercife of Reafon can deny, that this Ad appoints the Deprivation of the very Being of Offices Civil and Military, o£ all Officers Civil and Military within King George*s Dominions of Britain, and Territories thereto belonging, if they refufe to fwear the Oaths above (aid; And by the fame Law Minifters being put in the fame Clafs with Officers Civil and Military without the leaft Diftindion ; It is hence indifputably plain, the Legi- flature by the fame Ad intends to deprive Minifters of the very BEING of theic Office; And if that be not High ERASTIANISM, I leave it to all Judicious faith- ful Presbyterians to Judge. : The firft King in Britain who required an Oath of Allegiance, or that Oath caU- led the Oath of Supremacy, to be a neceffary Qualification to make a Lawful Mi- nifter within the Realm, was King Henry the 8ui of England after he aflbmed to himfelfthe Head-fhip ot the Church, by a Statute he appointed all Minifters to fwear the Oath of Supremacy as a necelfary Qualification of their Office without which no Man was to Exercife the Office of a Minifter within the Realm of Eng" land : And by the lirft Statute of Queen Eliz>abeth the fame was required of all Minifters for the fame End, and under the fame Penalty .♦ And King James the Vlth after hisAcceffion to theThrone of £;/g/rt/i/^, required by Law that all Mini- fters Ihould fwear the Oath of Allegiance, as a Qiialification without which no Man was to Exercife the Office of the Miniil:ry within the Realm. And Mucket x,\i2ii great Defender of Prelacy, in his Book De forma Confecrandi ^ j8 The Jrgumefits advanved in Defence CHAP. VIT. Archiepis: Eptfiop: Pre'sbyt: & DiacoKi he plainly declares, that the Church of Ett^ iand tha.t did fwear thefe Oaths as neceffary Qiialifications of the Office of theMi- niftry, they did freely own and acknowledge that thefe Oaths were a part of their Ordination. And this making Oaths of Allegiance, or of Supremacy, a part of Miniflers Or- (difiatioHi is Refuted as a grofs EfTO}tjbyMv.C/iWf"'jjoodinAltare Damaf: Page 584. \ And for my part, I fee no Oaths of Allegiance ihat Minilkrs are obliged ta Swear except thefe that'ard contained' it) our Covenants ; Nor can I fee how o- ther Oaths of Allegiance tail conduce? to Psace and Harmony in the Churchy for tfieCoVeinants contain the IJeft Oaths of AU^^giance that ever were, or will be irt ■Britain, fitted for all Snbjefts .- And twifh the Lord would Determine the N-ations, ;both Magiftrates and Subjefts, to allow none elie but the Covenants. ■-^'•nh all conclude this Head concerning the Eraftian Penalty or the LawTmpofing the Oath, with the exprefs Words of the OldScotsConkfRon of Faith Chapter 11 ■fpeaking of Chrift they fay i Whom vje co^^tfs and, avow to be the Mef/tas pi omifedf the Head of hh Khkour jufi Luw-givei' ; High Pfiefl, Advocat and Mediatory ixzuhich. Honours andOffices^ if any Man or Angel pvefume to intrude themfelves^ we u terly ^Ds-f tefl and Ahhart them, ax Blafphemous to our Sovsrcjgn and Supreme SoiJernouy Chrifi yefus. \ Page 15, The Author gives another Con fi deration, that he calls the ji, but ^le ihould have called it the ^th, for he had given Three before ; but I fhall not fall out with him about Number, if his Reasons had Weights He fays, ^dy. Lei it be confideredi that tho* it fiould be granted that thefe Minijlers -who took the Oath^ . naere mifiakenas to the Senfe of the Words ^ yet it will not fo'lo-o that they finned in taking of it, or that theyfilore to ?naintain the Hierarchy and Ceremonies of the Church «f ■ "^w^XsLi^dy providing Mtnifiers tifcd ad dtie Deliberation in the Matter, and fought ■ GOD^s DireSiion thereanent i If Miniflers have been at all Pains by Readings Medi^ tation, and'iearneft Prayer to GOD, to fedrch into the Meaning of that Oath, and after the iitmoB Search, are peyfwaded the Oath has no fuch Stnfe: B-it in the fame Page he fayeih, Suppofing they did Mifiake the Senfe, it mould be an Error. The Author advanceth nothing here, but firft a petitio princtpii, a begging us .to take for granted what he had to prove, Namely, That Minifters followed: GOD*S Diredion in taking that Oath, which is falfe ; For GOD has given; his Word for a compleat Rule of Faith and Manners for Diredion -, by which Rule it plainly appears, from Gem 24: 2,^, 6. 6, 8, 9. That Oaths are only, to be underftood in the Senfe of the Impofers, for whofe Behoof or Securityi they are fworn. And I have made it clearly evident, That the Legiflacors ex- prefly determined by the Law impofing the Oath, That it Ihould as direaiy and firmly obligejurants to maintain the^Kg/^/^HIERARCHY and CEREMONIES, as it binds to defend the King's Per (on and Regal Government. And it is a Maxim of the Law of Nations, yea, of all Laws, Divine and Human, viz..Cuus eft (ondere, ejtaefi Jnterpretari, u e. The Power of Interpreting Laws belongs' en^f ' ti CHAP. VII. TheO<^thofAhjumion,AnfwereL 139 to Lav)' Makers. And how Minifters got the Confidence to fwear an Oath upon their own Interpretation, contrary to the Senfe deteim rxd by the Law impo- fing it ; which Law plainly fixeth the Senfe to maintain the HIERARCHY and CEREMONIES as above faid .• I fay, how Miniflers got the Confidence to affirm, That GOD diteded them to Twear fo, I cannot underfland: For he aflerts, after all due Deliberation, and- feeking GOD's Diredion, they were perfwaded. Now for to fay they were perfwaded to believe it to be agfeeableto the Word of GOD, without GOD's Diredion, is abfurd : Aud to fay they had GOD's Dircaion to fwear to maintain the HIERARCHY and CERE- MONIES of the Prelatkk Chvixchy is aUo abfurd, being coiurary to the.Word of GOD. But then idly. He tells us, if Minifters did not know that the Oath obliged Jurants to maintain the HIERARCHY and CEREMONIES, then they neither iinned in takmgir, nor fwore to maintain that HIERARCHY and CEREMO'^ NIES, tho' they miftook the Senfe of the Oath inSweariug it, ii Mmiftersufed all due Deliberation, and fought GOD's Diredion. Here he plainly, holds^ That Men may fwear Oaths that are (o dark, that after all Deliberation 'aud Direftion that GOD has allowed, they cannot underftand the true Sehle of them, and yet may fwear them. That is dreadfully abfurd, being contrary to our Confeffion of Faith, Chap. ii. SeEi. 5. 4. And then the Author holds. That when Men do not know the Senfe, they do not fwear to what the true Senfe im- ports, which the Swearer miftooL Then ^ephtha did not finfully fwear to fa- crifice his own Daughter, And Papifts that fwear upon implicite Faith, do not fin in fwearing what they know not ; And it is odd to hold that Men fwear not to that which is the true Senfe of the Oath ; for then Oaths may be fworn in a falfe Senfe. But aftec all, he fays, Tho' that be an Error, it's no Sin ,• that is very Pop fh like indeed, to hold that fwearing an Oath in a Senfe that is not the true Senfe, ^d con- fequently muft be a falfe Senfe, yet is no fin,- For Papifi^ allow to fwekr with Equivocation in fome Cafes. * ^ ^''-V'-'*'-^- '^ But the Author his holding, that v/hen Men through ■ Igiiorance f^llintp, and defend an Error, it is no Sin,- in that he plainly holds the Aiminian Error con-- caning Herefy: For Arminiam in their Apology, Chap. 24. fay. Crimen culpa i/l et voluritaria,' Harefis plat?e Inioluntaria, et prcprie diHa imiocentia efi. Enar eji Inmcens et Culpa expers, baud efi nocens quicmq; mn eft fpbnte mcens, quis mmeit fceldis unquqm Errori dedjt, ipfifeduShres abfq; fua Culj[>a jeducUnt. That is, yf Crime IS a voluntary Fnuh.lmt He- efy is plainly IniQkntary, aud prcperly fp^aking.h is iauo- cence. Error is Innocent and fre^ of Fault, he is fear Qel^' Guilty that is not- f^dmamufy Cuikj. Who ever gave the Nafiie of mckednefs 1 9 Error f- Seducers tl^mfelves' do Je- duce viithoutany Fault. Tci'which great Mr. BaiW, Oper' Ch,(mkg. Lib. i. Pag. 1 02. arifweretb,' '7 hen all Hertticks.in the IVorld, are to be efteemed fine ere Mmhers of Urnp^andtYue Brethren: Arid fo Ue Gates oj the Church aretohefu open to receive S * Turks, 14© Ttie Argametits ddvanced in Defet7ce of CHAP, VII. Turks, Jews /2»i Pagans ; For what are Judailm, Tvixc\[m^and Paganifm, ^«^ mintal Errors ? Thus Mr. Baillie. And it is certain, That Hcreticks do ftill aflert with boldnefs. That they have ufed all due Deliberation, and after their utmoft Diligence in Reading, Meditating, CT'c. their Light informs them that fiich Things are Truths, which we call Errors; and neverthelefs of our Con- demning them, their own Confciences do not condemn them for Diffimulation in holding thefe Things to be Truths, which wc condemn ; for their Confciences ftill Judge them to be Truths. For this fee Mr. 5^/7//> de Aut-catacnji. . But the Author would have nothing to Ik: fin, except it be Voluntarium qua- if/ius efi iUiusy qui fciens et volens aliquid agit. i. e. It inujlhe "joluntary, as it is oj hint wh9 knoiaingly and willingly doth the Deed. But that is a Popijh^ and Socinian Error, which Turrettnie refuteth,7'/)fo/o^. El$n^. Part. i. Pag. (^53. for according to that Error, Original Sm fliould be no Sin, nor yet would Sins of Ignorance be Sins at all, contrary to A7«w^. 15. 2 7- Page 16, the Author faith. If MiniRers have done ill in taking the Oathy they have done it in their Simplicity i yet Stmplicity and Ignorance of Matter of FaEi, may very well confijl with Integrity J as 2 Sam; i). 11. where thcfe who accompany^ d a Traitor md Paricide^ are faid in the Original, to have gone in their Integrity. The Author mufl own, that a folemn and judicial Oath, is a Part of Divine Worfhip i and truly it is ftrange how he pleads fo much for Ignorance being the Mother of their Devotion in Swearing^ the Oath. But zdly. Tho' he has fled from Light to Darknefs of Ignorance, for a Defence of the Oath, it will not do his turn J ' ift. Becaufe it is contrary to our Confef. of Faith, Chap. 22. .S^^. 3 and 4. that Men fiiould fwear any Thing Ignorantly. idly. He falfly fuppofes, yea, ailerts, That Miniftcrs Ignorance in doing wrong in fwiearing the Oath, was only Ignorance in Fad, and fo they were Blamelefs. I anfwer him with Turrettin^, 7%eolog> ElenB. Part. 1. Pag. Ignorantia, Scc.7*hat Ignorance which it no Sin, is not properly Ignorance, hut a Nefcience, when a Man is Ignorant of that which he is no Way obliged to know: But all privative Ignorance is finfulMaufe it removers the Knowledge that ought to he in a Man. Again, invincible Ignorance is when a Man is ^norant of that which he could not know, tho he was never fo willing -, hecaufe the Ob- uk was not revealed to him : But vincible Ignorance is, when Men might know if they would know. Again, Ignorance of FaSl, or Perfon, is, when, E. G. A Man Jhould kill a Man, thinking it was a wild B.^afi in a Bujh. Ignorantia Juris, i. e. ignorance, 0f Jus, Right or Law, is when a Man is ignorant of that Right or Law, that by his office he ought to know. Thus lurrettine. Now, tho it had been Ignorance of fad, it is Sin that Jurants are guilty of: But we fee th^y mufl be Guilty of hnorantia Juris, i. e. ^norance of Right, if they plead Ignorance at allj For no ManofSenfecandeny, that Minillers, by their Office, were obliged to know what Right ot Conftitution of Government, as intended and determined byLawj they would fwear to maintain; or elfe Minifters may fwear to mamtain any Conftitution of Right of Government, without knowing wiut it is, which is ab- • furd CHAP. VIII. TheOith of Ahjuration unfwered. 141 furd. And T'urrettin; Tloeohg. ElenSi. Part. i. Pag. 6$-^. very agreeably to Scrip- ture^ holds; T'hat Jgmratite of Matter ofFaSi; excufeth mtfyom the whole; hut only a Part of the Guilt : But Ignorantia Juris; i. e. Ignorance oj the Right; excufeth not from any ^art of the Guilt at all. And thus Turrettine has refuted the y«- rant's Cavil. I cannot enough wonder how the Author compares the fwearing the Oath to the two hundred Men, their going with Abfalom from "^e.ufalem to Hebron 2 Sam: 15. there being Aich manifeft Difparity : Vov,firfl, the very Objed of the Oath is a Matter ot Right,i//2:,.- thcQueens Right ja.nd Hisprefent Afajejly's Right, 3.^ fettled by the Fundamental Laws oi England, and the Incorporating UNION; and thefe are expreOy aflerted in the Oath ; and therefore ought to have been under- flood before fwearing to them : Whereas tho' Abfalom was going to Hebron with a Delign of Rebellion ; yet in the 7 Verfehe declared he was only going to pay his Vovj at Hebron : And fo his Defign and Intention of claiming a Right to the Crown was notdifcovered to the two hundred Men at all: For the Object of their Confideration was not Matter oi Right, but meer Matter oiFaBy viz,. Abf^^- lo7ns going to Htbron to pay his Vow. And this very plainly appears by the Hebrevi Text, 2 Sam: i^.iu the Words are, "^^V^^ '^^?'r ^^^F^.^?^'^} VEHOLECHIM LETHUMMAM VELO 'JADEGNU COL DABAR. For the negative Particle VELO being joyned to COL in the fame Claufe, it fignifies nee- quicquam and DABAR fignifies Negotii, as Buxtorf in his Hebrew Lexicon obferve^; and fo the Senfe of the Verfe is. They, viz: the two hundred Men, knew nothing at all of the Affair, viz. Abfalom's Intrigue of wicked Rebellion againft his Father. And the Hebrew Word that we have in our Bible tranflated Simplicity, in the Hebrew it fignifies Integrity, but only improperly there ;. for Integrity properly fignifies Innocence ; but there it fignifies finfulfimple Ignorance, as Ravanel in Biblioth: Sacra, Part: i: Pag: 811. underftands it : For Ignorance of Fad frees but in ^art from Guilt, as was proven already. Mr. Gillefpie in the Preface to his Difpute againft Englifh CEREMONIES calls them Abfalom' s Idiots, that in their Simplicity went after their per verfe Leaders. And the Author himlelf fays, T'hey accompanyeda Traitor and Paricide : And thus the Author holds out the Jarants to have aded in fwearing the' Oath, like to a Number of ftupid Idiots, going along with thefe that are running on in a finful wicked Courfe againil the Law of GOD, as Abfalom's Idiots did. And if he advanceth Jurants Credit by that, let them thank him for it. , As for the Author's faying in Pag: 15; 7%af Interpreters difir in interpreting Scrip- ture, feme holding. That the Ptifons of the Trinity are contained in fuch a Text, ether learned Men deny it. That fays nothing to the Purpofe : For he founds his Argy- • ment on a.falfe Suppofirion, -viz.. That all Orthodox Criticks and Commentators t^a't^ That whatever they deliver as their Opinion upon all dark and hard Texts ought to be ma^e the Principles of Faith, to be fwam to at Baptifm : But this is contrary to our Confef- fion ot Faith C/>rtf i.^^a.- 6.wiiichfaithj The whole Cotmfel of GOD, concerning alt things 14*^ The Arguments Actvamed m Defence of CHAP. Vill. things veceffnryfer his tim Gkry^ and Mans Snhtition, Faith and Life^ is either exprefly fetJown in Scripmrey or by good and necefjary Confequence m^ be deduced from Scripture^ jA,ncl thisis maintain'd by all Orthodox Divines: Whence we fee plainly, That E^aith is to be founded either upon exprefs Texts, or elfe upon Dodrinal Confe- quences, that areevidexit and undenyable neceilary Confequences of Texts: And io aitho- Orthodox Interpreters dift'eron Myflecious Texts, feme affirming and o- thers denying, that fuch a Text contains the Perfons of the Trinity, that makes nothing for the Jurant^s Purpofe -, becaufe thefe Interpreters firmly believe the Ar- ticle concerning the Trinity, and all other Articles to be founded on clear, and =not on myllcrious Te'xts^ - C h"a P. VIII, 'Containing A NS IVE RSto Ten ARG UME NfS advanced by the Jurams in ~- ■ Vrfence of the OA tH. PAg. ry. The Author hys, Great Condefcendencies and Forbearance is required even as .^ ^ . to Errors in Principle tuhere they are not capital and findamental. Hete the Author advanceth a Step higher than before : For after he had plead- ed for Allowance or Toleration of Sins in Matters of Faft/ which I proved to be ^ Sin not of Ignorance, of Fad, but of Right : Yet here he pleads tor Toleration of Errors in Principle, if they be not fundamental : I have demonilrated his Er- ror concerning fundamental Principle's in fpeaking on Herefie ,- and according to his Notion of Herefie, Men may deny the moft Part of the Subftantial Principles that are contained in our Confeffion of Faith, Larger and Shorter Catechifms, and teach the contrary Errors^ and yet not be guilty of Herefie, or teaching or main- taining fundamental Error according to the Author's Defcription : For thegreateft Number of Articles in our Confeflion of Faith and Catechifms are not fundamental in the Author's judgment ; which I Iiave refuted already. . ' /■ nily. But feiflg the Author would have Chriftians-to tolerate Errors in Principle" ' that are not Capital : I muft ask, i/. If he holds all and every one of the Articles ^ofourConfeifion of Faith and Catechifms to be contained in the Word of GOD,^ as Articles of the Gofpel Difpenfation ot our LORD Jefus Chrilf? zdly. If Chrift has fealed all and every one of the Articles of the Gofpel Difpenfation with 'his own Blood ? zdly. If Chrid hath givtn Power to add to, or take away any Article of bis laft Will and Teftament fealed with his Blood, and to whom of Menor Angels has he given this Pow-er, and where is the Wari^ant for it in Scnp- XXiitl Mhh. What are thefe Articles of our LORD's Teflament that he hath civcn Power to alter and throw by, that are not to bemaimamed? 5 f A//. Whether or not he holds, tiiat Presbyterians at Baptiim are fworn to maintain in Faith and Pradice allalid every oneofthe Articles of ourConieffion of Faith iand Catechifms larger aiid'Shorter? d*/?/)'. If Presbyterians thus baptized can qaiite or yield anjr CHAP. VIII. The OAth of AijuYAtion avfn^ered. J4^ of thefc Articles to pleafe Men, without Perjury of their Baptirmaf Vow, and trampling upon the Blood of Chrill that fealed their Solemn Oath ofBaptifm.? -jthly. By what Scriptures -and Articles of oar Confedion of Faith .and Catechifms will he prove^ that we might to tolerate Errors contrary to all the Articles of our Confeflion of Faith and Catechifms, except a few Capital Fundaf- mcntal Articles, and joyn m Communion with thsfe that teach and maintain thefe Errors, and how that is confiftent witii Presbyterians Solemn Oath in Baptifm ? Let him fpcak out and anfwer thefe Qjefiionsj if he be able. Butperha*ps fome will objcdt;^ That Paul condefcended to be all 7bwgs to all Men', I Coy: 9. 20: -21: 22. To that I anfwer; Paid only condefcended to things indiftercnt that were with- in the Bounds of Chriftian Liberty; but not to tolerate Error ia any Snbflantial .Principle of Chriftian Faith ; For he lays exprcHy; That h vjas zirJer the Law to tkr/'fi. And thus thefe Texts arc explained by Angtijt'm: Ch,rifoBom; Cahin; Bui- linger and Peter Mavtr,- : kndTurrettin Theolog. Elen:h Part, 2. tag: 178. obferves; That the Cerejtionia^ Law was abrogate as to its Jas; or obliging Power at the Time; ay:dhy theVerttie ojChrifCs Death. 2ly. Quoad Factum.- i: e'. as to its aBual Ufe when Chfi^ ■ftian Liberty was fully manifefled and the ]Q.\Vi{h Chriflians were confirmed in the Faith in Chriji according to te Gofpel Dif^enfation : So that Chrifi's Death did fulfil and take ''away the Ceremonial Law ; and then there being no Obligation to perform the Ceremonies they were not neceffary : And until the J-C\vi{h Chrifiians were confirmed in the Faith ac' > tor ding to the. G of pel;, the LORD tolerated the Ceremonies as things indifferent ; there- fore Paul circumcijed Timothy; AB 16: 3; But after the Jewifli ChriHians were confirm wed in the Gcfpel Faith; they ceafed to be indifferent and were difchargedas Jinful to be ob* ferved ; Gal: ^: 2:3; ^. Co/:2.- 20; 21; And fo ?au I only condefcended to Cere- monies as indifferent things and only for the Time they were allowed as indiffe- rent; until the Confirmation of the Jewi/b Chriftians in the Faith which Time of PermifTion laltedtill the Temple ,was deilroyed which was the Place of performing ceremonial Worfhip; as Turrettin obferves in the Place above cited : And the fame • is dcmondrated by the Learned Doftor Owen in his Theologoumena Pag; 448. 4457. • . Page 17. The Author fays. It's a known and Remarkable Infiauce of the Learned '■^nd Holy Mr. Samuel Rutherfoord, who maintain d that GOD's vindiBive Jufiice ■ is not Effential to him ; but his ExaBing ^atisfaflionjor Sinners, in order to their Sal' ■jqjation, proceeded- meerlyfrQ?n h's Will and Pleafure ; fit oat it was all one to GOD, to hme fazed tJoem without Satisfatlion. Whether it be from Ignorance or Malice, that the Author falfly accufes Mr. Rutherfoord in this Point, I fhall not determine ; but ioit is, that he moll falfly accukih him, in affirming that he maintained, it was all one for GOD to have faved Sinners without Satisfadion ; For no Man can prove that Mr. Ruther- foord did hold that abfurd Error ; and it is moft unacco antable in the Authot to accufe any Man, and efpecially fuch an Eminent D.vme, with being Guilty r^i Maintaining fuch a grofs Error, without Citing Book and Page, and the Man's •. own 144 T)^^ Arguments ddvumed, in Defence of CHAP VIl. own Words in full, without Clipping the Sentences ; which is a neceflary Rule v, in Difpute, allowed by all Men of ingenuous Honefty, that underftand Difpute, But it's the lefs Wonder to hear the Author difpute, by guefs, without Rule,' feing he counts it i-awfui for Men to fwear, tho* they know not the true Senfe of their Oath. Great Mr. Gillefpie.m 'The Ark of the Covenant tpened up. Chap. 2. Pag. 37. con- xlefcends upon the Place where Mr. Rutherford handleth that Point, vix,. Concerning GOD's Vindidive Juftice, Namely, in Mr. Rutherford's Trcatife on the Cove- nant of Grace, Part. i. Chap. 7. I know Mr. Rutherford de gratia, writen in La- tin, treats of the fame, and to the fame Purpofe, as in the Englijh ; but feing Mr. Gillefpe has pitched upon the Place cited in the Englijh Treatiie, as fully exprcf- fing Mr. Rutherford* s Mind in this Matter, therefore I (hall hold by his Choice. Part. I. Chap. 7. Page 21. The Principle that Mr. Rutherford holds, is this, *vtz.. * There is an Intrinfical and Internal Juftice in GOD, Natural and Ef- * fentialin GOD, but To as the Out-goings of his Juftice, the EgrefTions are * moft free. And in Pag. 24 and 25, he fays, * They fee m with Eyes of Flefh 5 to look upon GOD, who fay that GOD by- necellity of Juftice muft punifii * Sin ; yea, that the Moil High cannot be GOD except he punifii Sin, and ; that he iliould not be GOD, if all his Laws impofed upon Man were only * promifibry and void of Threatnings. And (fays he ) fhow me in all i the Old and New Teftament, any penal Law of adive Obedience as penal, « impofed upon the Man Chrift, or where it is written, if the Man Chrift fm « he Ihall eternally die ? I tremble (fayx he ) at fuch Exprefliohs. But leii the Author fliould Hill hold this Error, I Ihall Ihow him that turret- tine, tho' aftrong Aflerter of Vindidive Juftice being Eflential to GODj yet neverthelefs ftrongly affirms, ThatGOD's Inftituting of penal Laws under the true Form of a Covenant, viz,. The Covenant of Works flows from GOD's free Will. And idly. That the Man Chrift was not under the Subjedion to a penal Law as a Rule of his own Obedience; Tor he was no Way fubjed to a penal Law, but only as he freely fubjeded himfelf as Surety for Ele6t Sinners. For this fee Turrettin T'heolog. ElenEl. Part'. 2: Pag. 488, 489. Where he fays. Sup- tommus triplicem fubjeElionem legi Naturalem, Fader alem,et Panalem. Prima funda- tur in Jure Dei Effentiali in Creaturam, etldependentia ejus mturali ab ipfo. Secunda in jure Itberofeu voluntaria Djpenfatione, per quam libuit ipjt cum Creatmafadusconr trahere et njitam pollicerifub hac velilla conditione. And as he fays in the fame Pa<^e, in qua, fadus cum ilia (fcih Creatura) inivit et officium illi pra/cripjjtf.b promiffione pramii velpana-, tenia fundatur in yu e judiciali et ju/iitia vindicatrice, qua Creatura peccatum ulcifcitur. Omnes Creatura rationales Angeli et Homines primo modo legi fub^ jeSia funt, Adamus integer fubjelbltis fuitfecundo^ Diaboli etrepr obi tertio. Justa tri- flicem iftam fchejin facile capi poteji quomodo Chnjius Legi (uhjeflus fuerit, an profe aii fro nobis} Nam qua Homo dubium mn ejl, quin fubjeSius fuerit pro fe legi^ ut m-ma fan^itMis fubjeflione (ommuni et naturali, cui obntxii funt ipji Jngeli et Beati inCoelis, qui ChAP- VIII. The Oath of Ahjuratiotj..atj fevered. 14^ qui Deumatnare et cohve tenemur. Sed non contmuofubjeSiusilUfyity ut impemmi conditionem BfatitudrKisfi^bjeBioneoscommicattfaderaliyUprVJtam^ operONdo meya-etr^, cumillam ex vi Unionis Hyfojlatic^ jam obtineret, muho minus fubjeBiOKe :pcenali, ' ut' pote quum jujhjjimus et omnispeccati expers. That is^ 'We fuppole tlicre is a Threefold « Sabjeftion to the Law, Natural, Federal, and Penal ; the firll is founded upon f GOD's Efllntial Right over the Creature, and its Natural Dependence upon ^ < him. The fccond is founded upon COD's free Rjght or voluntary Difpen- '{ fation, by which it was free for him to make a Covenant with his own Crea- ' f ture, and that Life fhould be promifed under this or. the other Condition, * in which he entered into a Covenant with his Creature, and prefcribed to- it I that which was its Duty, under the Promife of Reward or Punilhment. The ' Third Kind of Subjection to the Law, is founded upon GOD's Judicial Right, * and Vindidive Juftice, whereby GOD punijfheth the Sai ot the Creature. All f Rational Creatures, Angels and Men, arc fubjed the firfl: way. Adam in* t Innocence the fecond Way. And Devils and Reprobates the Third. According ■ to this Threefold Diftindion, it is eafily conceived how Chrift was fubjed to I the Law, whether it was for himfelf or for us ? For as Man, no doubt he t was for himfelf fubjeded to the Law, as a Rule of Holinefs, by a common « natural Subjedion, to which the very Angels and Saints in Heaven are lyable, * who are obliged to love and wor (hip GOD.- But it doth not necefiarly fol- * low, that he was fubjeded to it, to wit the Law, as commanding the Ptrfor- ' mance of the Condition of Happinefs, by an OEconomical and Federal Sub- ^ jedion, that he fiiould purchafe Life by Working, feing he would certainly ' obtain that, by vertue of the perfonal Union of the Human Nature to the Di- 5 vine, and far lefs by a penal Subjedion^ k'mghQ was raoll Juft and firee of « Sin. Thus 'furYettiu. " Now let us hear the mofl that the Author can objed againfl; Mr. Rutherford on this Head, which is briefly contain'd in two Paragraphs of that -jth Chap- ter of the firft Part of his Treatjfc on the Covenant of Grace, and 1 fhall fet down Mr. Rutherford's expr/efs Words, viz.. in Page 3 2,- he fays, ' The Lord « punifhed Ch nit tor us, to declare the Glory of his Juflice, in punifhing Sin in his * own Son, who was the Sinner by Imputation ; for out of the Depth of In- i finite Wifdom, the Lord freely impofes a Law upon the Creatures, he might * have impofed no fuch Law under fuch a Punifiiment. By r»o neceflity of Na- * ture did the Lord threaten Death for the Eating the Fruit of that Tree; And in Page 33d he fays, ' So the.Queilion (hall not be,whether GOD inJalHce 1 punillied CHRIST, and made him a Propitiation to declare his Juftice, but. •what the relative Juftice ad extra is, by which GOD puniflieth Sin ? and * whether GOD fiiould leave off to be GOD ( hallowed be his Name) jf '. J he (hould not make firft penal Laws to Threaten all Sin with Puni/h men c ? - And in Page 34, there is an Objedion brought iw, viz,. * It is in vam 10 (how ; the Glocy of Juftice, when GOD can take away Sin out of free Plcuiiirc; and 146 The Af'gu^hU 'Mlxrkekin r^^^^^^ ChAP. Vllit. * Why ifh6uld He eipbfe his Son to Sfiame, Death and k Cdrfe, whereas hfe ■/ feight talce aWajr Sitl freely, beciiife' it 1'S his Pleaf ure ? 1*0 tTjis Objeciion Mri^ * JlUtherFoVd ahfiv^sthus, ViV. TlTrs;rs"^He""veiy Thing that SdcimansfsLy, t\i€tQ • IS no need of Bipod, and Satisfad^ioh Vy Bibod, if GOD out of his abfolute So- • Veraighit^ can t^ke Sin kway without Bibod, and fo there was no need o^ ? real Sitis^ald ion .- This, fays he, is againft the Holy Giioft, and we may hear « it J kil the Scriptures cry that ont SfVi^ee Grace the Lorcl ferit his Son and • delii^ered liim to Death; b^tlfe Grace cyf GOD he tailed Death for eveVy f Man, ':^^. 4". ftallwelnfer there wasth'ei'i no lieceffirv that he fiioald die?' » Itisfafcftto faythe'bnl'y Wife GOO decrcaid^at Smfhouldbs. i. Thirthe • Glory of his Juftice fiioald 'appear in taking a\Vay Sin, not in oirWay, but in f the VVay of 'GOD, to wft in a Way oi- J litice, of Mercy, of free G^lc^, in • incpmpirable Love, ofmfghty bovver; and in all thefe fo Afts the LORD,^ •' as He fhould notlwe-of to be the LORD, bat Si&s rtioft freely, thoitgh he' ? had hot taken that Gbiiffe. Now what will the J irant make of all this. ^ For i/?. Ml Ruth^>ford firmly maintains, that GOD has a Property of fi- ftice. Eternal, NaturaL and Eflchtial to him. idly. But that the EgrefTroa be Oiitgoing of GOD*s Eflential J irtice, is Virididive Jaflice, or the relative Jiiilice tid extra, by which he pnnifheth Sm, and that this Egreffi6!i of GOD's Eifential Jallice is tree, and not a NataralEflential Property of GOD, but only the out- tvard Exercife.of an Efleiitial and Natural Propercy. ^dfy, That it-appears that the Egreffion or Outgoing of GOD^s Eflential Jailice is free ; becaufe the Con- ilitutrng a penal Law, which is one of the Egrcdions of GOO's Eflential Juflice, is moil; free, and not necefl'ary ; tor God did moft freely mfiitute penal Laws, whereas he might have Ireely decreed that Men and Angels Ciould never have (alien at all; and fo he might have conftituced only remunerative Laws, with- out any Penalty at al : And then in Executing tnat Decree, have preferved ail Men and Angels in Innocence to all Eternity; and fo there could ne\'er have been any adual Punifhing of Sin, which isthe ocher Egreffion, or tne otlterPar't df Vindiftivc J.iftice,- for then there would have been no Sin to have p.ini/h'.d, arid fono Vindiitive .uftice. For Turrett/n himfcif holds. That Vindictive Juftice has two Parts, viz>. Firji, The Conftitutmg a Penal Law. idly. The Ex- ecutir^g that Penalty in adual Punifhing Sin. But by what hath been faid al- ready, it is'clear, That T'umttin holds that God's IniVituting a Penal Law, flowed froiti, and was founded upon God^s free Will : zd^y. That the M^n ChrifttOr himfeft, and alfo Angels and Saints in Glory, are not under Subjedi- on to a Penal Law ; and fo according to his Dodrine and Principles HbovQ ex- preft, God tttight freely have decreed to preferve all Angels and Men in Li- fiocencc to all Eternity, and accordingly never given a Penal Law, bur only re- munerative Laws .• and fb there n«ver could , have been S;n nor Punilhment, and fo no Egrefs of God's Natural Juftice, in Inftituting Penal Laws, and pimifh- ing SiQ. And this is ail that Mr. Rutherford holds ; and that is the other Courfc 6HAP. VIIL Of the QAth of, Ahjaratson Arjfn-'ired, 147 that GOD might have taken: VViiich is very pUin, to any tf^atis not wll- h\^y Blind. • " .. 'Now let us hejaf Wjhap tl>e Learned ^*.' Xurrettin fays, concerning Vin- ■ 4i<^ive Jiillice, for he in his Zeal againfl: Socinianifmy holds Vindidivc J-iftice to be Eifential to GOD ; Yet in handling that Point in T'heolog: E'e-ai: Part i. Pag. ^.63., 261. his Words are, Jujlitia Divinn poteft confiderari, vel abfolute & infe, quo pjitio nihil nliud efi.cj.uam natura Di-viym rectitudo cir perfectio qua dicta efi a nohis Ju- jiitui Uhiver lairs, CT ab aliis Jujiit'a Deiy qua. compeiit ip/t qua Deus efl. Vel Relflte B-eJpectu Egiejfm ^ exercitu quod habet per voluntatem Divinam Seamdunj Regulam Juris fui Supremiy az fapientia ALterna. Pofita Creatura rationali <^ ejus dependen- tia morali a Deo^ Primus Egrejfus hujus yuflitia ejl in Conflitutioue kgis pmiaHS) tion fimpiiciter qua lex eft^ hoc enim proprie pendet a Jufiitia Regiminis, fid qua Pamirs : J^ecu/idus. EgreJJus efi m ipfa poena inflictwne. That is, Divine Jullice may be con- sidered efther absolutely in it relf,in which Refpedit is noticing elfe but theRigh- teoufiiefs andPertcc-tion of.theDivineNature,which' I(/]zj/j he) calMJiuverfalJallice, and by others it is called the Jailice of GOD, which belongs to Him as He is GOD. idly. The JufticeofGOD maybe confidered Relatively' in refpcd of tiie Egrefs and Exercife which it hath by the Divine V/ill, according to the Rule of" His Supreme Right and Eternal Wilxionfi. Suppofing a Rational Creature to have a Being, and a Moral , Dependence on GOD : The firll Egrefs or Outgo- ing. 0£ this Juflice is in Conftituting a Penal Law, not fimply as it is a Law, for that properly depends upon the Governing Juflice, but as it is Penal. • The fecond Egrefs is in the Inflia:ion of the P'lnifliment. Thus we plainly fee, that Turret^ tin holds, that the Jullice of GOD confidered in an abfolute Senfe, as it is in it felf Naturally in GOD,and belongs to HimasGOD,itisonly His Ellential Righ- teoufnefs andPertetftionoi His Nature which is Eternal and Unchangeable ^and tho* there had never been a World, it ftill was and Is the fame. idly. He holds Relative Juitice Exercifed upon Rational Creatures to be the Egrefs, or Exercife of his Natural Jufiice, and that Natural Juflice hath ics Oatgomg arid Exercife by QOD's Free-Will, according to His Supreme Right and Eternal \Vifdom by which He Rules the Creatures, -^dly. That Vindiftive Jafhce confi.fls in Two E- grelles or ExercifesofGOD's Natural Juflice, /T'/z,. Firit, In Conflituting a Peiial Law. idly. In Inflifting Puniihment of fin. And it is clcur from w!ut was faid above, that Turrettin holds that Penal Laws are founded upon GOD*s free Vo- luntary Difpenfation, whereby GOD freely entered into a Legal Covenant with His Creature under Promife of Reward upon Obedience,and Thrcatnitig of Death y.pon Difobedience. And he fays here that the Conflitution of a Law, as a Law/ depends upon thejaflicc ofGovcrnment, which' in the famePagc hecallsDominical; 3«ftice which belongs to GOD as Suprerrie LORD and Ruler, who can do with his own what He will, in Ruling the Creature according to His Supreme Right and Holinefs,and this Don)inical Jaflice is contradiflina from VindiftiVeJaitice ; And by oecellaryConfequenccGod could have conilitute a Law without Penal San- laion. And fo according to Junettins Words, Vindfaive Jufticc 'iJ not an Ei- ^ X 2 lential f4^ The Arguments Advanced for Defence of CHAP. VTtT, fential Property of GODjbnt only the Egreflion or outward ExerciTe thereof.F/V^, Becaufe Vindictive J jftice is 0:1^ y., Relative Jiiftice, which hp calls the Outgoing or Exercife ofGOD's Natural Jailice, and this Outgoing is by GOD^s Free-Will. idlj. Becaufe this Vindidivejuftice confilis in two Outgoings, *uiz.. ly?. InCon- flituting a Penal Law which is founded upon the free Voluntary Difpenfation of GOD, and To might.have been otherwife; if GOD had Decreed to preferveMen' and Angels in Innocence. to all Eternity, and fo might have freely Constitute Re-- munerativc Laws without Penalty. The fecond Outgoing is in the InfliftingPur. nifhmeht of fin; but that is neceflary, becaufe GOD freely decreed the Permiilion of fin for the Manifeftation of his own Glory, and having freely Decreed to permit fin, he alfo decreed to conftitute Penal Laws, and puhifli fin according to hi«' Decree and Law. And laftly becaufe it is manifeftly falfe to afitrt, That Exeyci- tium ad extra Proprietalis DEI ejl ipfa E/Jemiafis PraprietaSf i. c. That the outward' Exercife of a Property of GOD, is the very Ejfevtial Propertywf GOD y it felf: For, then the Works of Creation and Providence done in Time,' were all Eternal Un--' changeable Properties of GOD. Bat it it be objected, Tliat GOD's Holy Na- ture cannot but hate Sin, andfohe muft nec^flkny Punifh Sin ; and therefore the outward Exercife of GOD's Intemai Property qf J utice is neceflary, clfe GOD might pardon Sin without Satisfadion. AnfvoeYy ijl. BylikeNeceflity GOD mifl give Salvation to the Eied, fc/ng; Chrift hasperfedly purcha(ed it at GOD's H md, andfo GOD is obliged in }u- fticeto manifeft the outward Exercife of free Love andMbrcy. idly. That Ne- ceflity of punifhihg Sin is bat Hypothetical, upon Siipporuion that GOD has de- creed to permit Sin to be : His Holmefs and ] iftice then oblige him topunifli Sin : And he is as neceflarily obliged to love his own Image of R.ighteoufnefsandHolinefs in Eleh'i AngeUy as he is neceflarily obliged to hate Sin in Devifs, that is the Op- pofite of his Image ; and thus the outward Exerciie of GOD's free Love is as ne- ceflary as the outward Exercife of JufUce, in hating and punilhing Sin : But both^ of them are neceflary, upon Suppoiition, That GOD has freely by Decree prede- termined the Obje(SfiUy qualified for the Execifc of his Properties of Love, and Mercy or Juftice. I Ihall conclude this Head with two Citations, the firfl owt ol thc^ Ark of the Ci>^- 'venant opened w/'jwritten by great Mr.P that it, vjillnot filkw, that ifjuflice be natural to GOOy then- hf mujl punijhSin . by Neceffity of Nature, idly. If we fiall place Ju^ice among • thefa ■ Properties III GQPitheObjects wlmeofmay befaid to be nece/ary ( which muji be.undsr^ fiood: CHAP.-VIIL . The OAfh of Mjurathfj, a^ffwered, ,40 fioodyfzys he, in refpect of the Exercife of Acts about thefe Objects ; otherwife n6 Proper-^ fymGODneceffarily requires any Object 2id extra) Yet the Objects fuppofed, the Acts are mt, even then necejfary by any abflute Necejfny of Nature ; but onl) by Hypothetical Neceffity ; fuppofmg the Decree of GOD that gave thefe Objects a Being, and ordered their being qualified Objects for exercijing Juftice or Mercy upon, according to his Pleafurey tvhich ivorketh all things according to the Counfel of his Will] and if fo, here is nopunijiing 'Sin by Neceffty of Nature, jdly. Suppojing Jujlice to be natural to GOD, in fhat'Senfe 'f'at Mr. Burgeft ajferts it, viz.Under/iandingthe Word Natural for that which Jlowetb from Nature; yet by the Help of the Free Will, and that GOD's punijhing of Sin is not mcerly from his M^lll, becaufe the Script rjres hold forth Sin, as not only contrary to GOD's holytaiv; but alfj contrary to his holy Nature, viz. Morally, not PhyJicaUy contrary, as "Hab:. I. 13. Andfuppofag the Objects to have a Being ; yet fwe he doth not punijh Sin ■by Necejfitj of Nature, as the Fire burns, Jince the Exercife ofJuHice, yea, the choice of dl'jctsarefubjectedto his Free Will, Rom: 9. 21, 22, Rev: 18 4. Thus Mr. Gillefpie. 'And flirely 'Iurrettin,\vho held the Sublapfarian OpLnion,coa]d with no Shadow of 'R<:aron deny this ; feing he fuppofed fallen Man to be the Objeft ot* Predeflination, to be Elcded or Reprobated' : And this flops his Moath ; For as Mr. GiUefpie ihath faid above, the whole Qualifications of the Object, fuch as the Fall of Adam, &c. were determined in and by the Decree for manifeff ing G O D's J ('ice or Mercy, and that according to the Counfel of G O D's tree Will. • . . . The fecond and laff Citation isout oiTurrettin The(y'cg: Ehnct: Part: i-pag. 261'. yu/iitia ijia ( m?n: Vind catrix ) fpectatur velper m.dum danameos, feu Facukatis, quo Self it ejl ipfa Voluntas Det averfans et punire volens Peccatores ', vel ut Eaergeia ipfi et Aitus Jiidiciifen Punitionis, quo Judicta fua in 'Peccatores exequitur. That is, "That 'Jujlice, viz. Vindictive Jujiice is to be looked upon to have its Being either by Way of ^ Boxver er Faculty, in which Senfe it is the very Will of GOD tt felf c.yi/tdered as HAT'" JNG and WILLING to punijh Sinners : Or fecondly as it is the Energy or Strength it p/f, and All of the Judgment Or Pumjhmenti by which he esecuteth his Judgment on Sin^ ,ntrs. And thus it is pUm, That 'Turrettin holds the very B^ing of Vindidtive Juflice to be fb clearly founded in the Will of GOD, that it is only an Actuafe Exercitium Voluntatis, I e. An actual Exercife of the WilL i. In the actual H A IING and WILLING to punifh Smners. idly. In an adual exerting or puting forth the Energy or Strength of his Will in executing his Jjdgmenrs on Sinners. From which it is clearly evident, That T/^nm/w himfelt oorh hold Viiididive Jiftice to be only an Egreffon, or Outgoing^or Exercife of GOD'b Natural JuRiceand Righteoufnefs. idly. That this Outgoing or Exercife is founded in, and proper^ \y fk)ws from tht Will of GOD; yea-^ thatthevery Blmg out is a twofold Exer- cife of the infinitly Holy and Juit Will of GOD, in hating and punifhing Sm; i^nd this is all that Mr. Rutherford did hold : Only-Mr. Rutherford did more diil^n^ly hold for;h the ^ay and Manner of it, to be by thv DvCice of GOD; flowing 1^0 V^e Jr^umeffts advatsced fgtr Defence fif QUAfiVlll, flowing from his meer good Pleafure, wherebv he foreordained to fiiffer Sin, to be, and upon Confideration of tha^t De^rep QOD inftitut^d Penal |-aw^ ; and i^ eajecuting tIiaiDecr€c,and thcfeLaws^Q^^I), manifefte4 infinit Jiiftice and Mtrcy in punifhingSin in his own Son,in* Room and Plapepfthe Eket,znd infimt Jaftice in punifiiing Reprobates in their own Perfons : And yet GOD a^ed not by Necef- (ity of Native, in haming his Decrees thuSj for he might have fretly decreed. That all Men and Angels fhould firmly ftand in Innocence to all Eternity .- And Given-Laws having only Promifes of Rewards, without any Penalty annexv dtp thefe Laws, and in executing that Decree and thefe Laws, the LORD wcjulc) hav^ preferred and confirmed all Men and Angels InHolinefs for ever; apd fo there wouldhavebeen.no outgoing ofGOD's Natural Juflice in makipg Penal Laws, and ina&ualpunifiiingof Sin ; and To there would have been no Vmdidive Ja- il ice : Becaufe Vindictive Jufticeis only the outward E^fercife ofGOD's Hatu- ral Juftice in making Penal Laws, and .execiitine them in puniftinff Sin; and therefore it clearly follows. That Vindidiye Jimice of GOD is not an Eficntial, Eternaljand Uncli^ngeable Property oi GOD.Npr doth this any thing favour .0- cinians) becaufe it includes a hypothetical NeceilJty of punifliingSm : For upon Suppofition ofGOD's Decreeing to preferve and confirm E!ea Angels in perfect •Righteoufnefs and HoHnefs, the Rigjitequfnefs, Juflice and Holipeis ofGOD's Nature, oblige him neceflanly to Igye hxs pwn Image in Efed ' A.n^els : So like- wife upon Suppofition, that GOD by a Decree did fore-ordain other Angels to be left to the Freedom of their Wills, to iall into Sm ; then t|ieRigh eoufnef^jjiifl ce, and Holinefs ot GOD's Nature oblige him neceflarily to .hate and punifh Sin in and upon Reprobate Angels, feing put of hi? meer good Pleafure, he decreed not to give his Son to redeem them; and no other ^atisfac!^ Ion to/Diyine J iftice could redeem Sinners from Infinit Wrath due for Sin." And thus Mr. R^uhrford is vin- dicated by Mrs. GUlefpiey Owen cLndTurrettiny from' the Jurants moft un/uil Afper- fion, whereby he would have impofed on iignorant People to believe, that Mr." Rutherford dcny&d one of the Eflential Attribiitesof GOD, and fc» would have madeMr. /J«/^er/o)'^ anHeretick. • But fome perhaps will object and fay. If the outward Eyerafe of GOD* s Natural and Ejfemial yufike in conftituting Penal Laws, and pumjhing Sin flow ft cm GOD's Free iVill : "then GOD» by Vertue of the Freedom of his WjU, might have' confiitute a contrary Laiv to the Moral Law y and thereby made/iU thefe things to be Duty, i^hich now areSin^ and required Men to do all that h^ has forbidden, and have forbidden all that he has required in the ten Commandments : And fo there wo}ild have keen nft Need of Chrift's SatisfaElion for thefe things, that /ire the Siiff of the Elffl : Butfhatis not ccn- f'ftent with the Holinefs and juflice of GQDy t^e Merits of Chrifiyjmd'fr^th of thp Scriptures, - - To thatlanfwer, I. As TurrettJt hath well faid, de prima Re^ula Jufliti a, the Moral Law -of the Ten Commands, as to their Preceptive Part, as far as they arc Moral-Natural, they are" founded upon the Natural Juftice, Holinefs and Sovereig- nity CHAP.VIIL Of the Oath of Abjuration anfrvered. t<\ liity of GOD i and therefore it were altogether incon/iftent with thefe Attributes to have inftiture a Law contrary to the Preceptive Part of the Moral Natural Law : For then GOD fhould have cocifimanded Men to hate GOD,with all their Heart, Soul, Strength and Mind, and to hate their Neighbour, and themfelves^ which is blafphemous, andinconfiflcnt with the Nature of GOD^ and Rational Creatures. 2^{y. The WILL of GOD, is GOD Himfelf WILLING, and'fo his WILL con- ^^ins the Eftcntial Properties ot GOD ; and therefore GOD by Vertue of the Freedom of his Will could nor ad contradiaory to his KoKners, Juflice, Sove- reignity, t/€. inconftitutingaLaw : For ther. the Will of GOD fhould have aded contradidory to Holincfs, Juflice and Sovereignty, which are Eflcntial to 'hisV/ill ' -i^dly. Butaltlio' GOD by Vertue ofthe Freedom f^f his Will cannot conftitute a Law contrary to the Preceptive Part of the Moral Natural Law : Yetheeoul^ "by Vertue of his Free Will have decreed tOprefervc all Angels, and Mtn in In- nocence to ail Eternity, and ha\^e conilftitute the Preceptive Part oi the Moral >Jataral Law,with Promife of Reward without any Threatning of Djadi, and o- ther Puuilhments, as was cleared above : Bjt upon Suppoiition. That GOD in tis Unfcarchable Wifdom, fawfit to decree the Periniffion of Siii, for the Maiu- Teftation of his own Glory of Wifdom, Power, Mercy, Juftice, e^ i not either ^ i. Her ejte in Doctrine i thire is no Difference in Principle among us. To this I anfwer. That the Author here plainly holds, That tho* Miniftcrs liad not thro^Ignorance-midaken'theSenfe of theOathjin noi; feeing, that the Oath i-i it's trtie literal Senfe obliges J.. rants to maintain ErigJifi Eraitian Supremacy^ pRLLACY and Enghfi-popijh Ceremonies, but thro* meer Unfaithfulnefs, kiowing it did oblige them tothele thmgs above laid, and wittingly and willingly did fwear it in that Senfe, yet that is no Ground of Separation. And for this he gives fix Reafons. The firft Reafon is, fays he, i/?. It^s not Herefte in Doctrine. Ihere is, JaySlie, m Difference in Principle among us. I fhall pais this with a few Remarks, and firft the Author in faying, There is no Difference in Principle a?nongfif us, feems to hold, That at leaft all in Scotland who took, and likewifc thofe who refufed that Oath, have no DiHereucc in Principle, and fo all the Miniflers of the National Church, who*]oyn in their Aflciubly, and thefe who in Adherence to oar Cove- nanted 1^2 Tioe Arguments asLvAftced. for Defence of CHAP. VIII, nanted Rerormation, are obliged in Confcience to proteft againft, and withdraw from Communion with the above faid National Church, on Account of her many and grofs Steps of DeFtdion trom our ancient Covenanted Reformation ; yet there is no Diflerence in Principle amongfl: all thtTe, according to the Author ; .but how he will prove that, I leave him to confider. 2dfy. But fcing Curates. in Scot la^id did refufe the Oath, will he prove, that they have aU the fame Princi- ples with Jurants, and Nonjurants oFthe National Church .? gti/v. I greatly dbpbt iFever he will prove, That all Nonjurants that joyn in Aflembly maintain -that Principle, That tho' Miniffers thro'- meer Unfaithfidnefs y wittingly and willingly, fwear to maintain ERAStlANISM, P RELACl and'En^Mih-^o^i^h CEREMONlES.yet their doing fois no Ground of Separation : Fori know none ofthemjthat exprefly proFelleth any Fuch Principle .• And I think he will beftraitned to find them i tho* inconfi- ftantly with themFelves, they joyn in Communion with Jurants. '^thly. IF Mini- iters thro' meer UnFaithFulneFs willingly and wittingly their Fwearing to maintain^ ■Eraftian SUPREMACY, PRELACY, znd Engltjh-popijh CEKYMOm^SM no Juft Ground oF Separation, what fhould hinder joyning in Communion with Mi- nifters, tho* they deliberatly Fwear the Old Oath of Sup-emacy, or the T'^fly pro- viding they keep lip a Profeflion oF Presbyterian. Minifters ? For Eraftian Supret MACvand Prelacy were the principal Evils in that Oath oF SUPREMACY and 'the TEST. '^thly. Sting the Author holds that Principle, "That tho* Miniilers wit^ tingly and willmgly [wear to maintain EraRian Supremacy y which is another Head- fhip over the Church than Chrifl's Headfhip, and Fo is contrary to our ConFeffioiv of Faith, Chap; 25. Sed. g have had hit Prefence owning andhlejfmg our Labours, and hope to have fe ftill :^ iVebddour O^ fays, he, of no Mortal hut of our Lord Jefus^ Cbrift, the only KtKg and Head 0^ Church, But were not Presbyterian Minifters in Scotland Inveftcd in the OfHce in the \rajf .ff Cikift*s AppointBtuiti who ^terwards turned Curati ^ siad (wore the tefii, U-a " %i^i 1^6 The JrgumfJts advmcedforQefmce of CHAP.VI/l. idly. Its not enough forMinifters to be. once rightly lavcfted in the ^Office ; but they ought alfo..^tmly ■ to ,hol,4' their Inv eft itiirc: "For as Mr. i^/^;^/;^;^ on thei^f- njelation, Cha^: i. Page i\h'n} Qtiarto^ ^^s,:ByipdpMeM^fmfiomthe Tnnhy and Commtjpon given theinm that Call, they /Mv^ Forfeited the hi Mom-mi ffion.mdfim more are to be accounted Ainhajj'ad^'s of Chrifl,. or M'^atch-Menofhis Flock, than a ii/atch-Man of a City is. to be accountsd.an'Obfer'uer •thereof ^^^^^^ Riihhkly mad.^ DefeBionto the Eneinyy'/and taken ^on'wtJhhifn.,y..[;^ ;^. ^/' .^.''^/j '^ ,. ^. . '. , An4tho* we dp not;fa,y, * that .O^r/z^j- > wef<^ dj5ii no^eiife to be, accounted, the Jiliniftcrs of Cbrift,. beqauie th^y hejd ma.uj^' JLmdinie.m of Chriftian Religion, fo that we did not deci^A.D'rdina^ces AamlnjKjfe^^^^ and Void i . For none of the Miuifters vfho,rufFei;e'd Mar't^^ Re- baptize any Perfon once Baptized by,, ,a C«r^/- - ¥et,.^;^mi!;i A^^ho^. held .'their Of- ^^SP of the Prelates, and the Kj^g..5:.qw;d;nef b^ repl^^^ pFtheXp- vcnaated; Presbyterian Chmxh-of i%V^^^.7f.^nd' X Teave^u tO:aii;_fob'er iv7i6ys Jlh di^ious Presijyterians to Jufee, 'il it, be'lioc\inconfiR|i}t3y^^^^ Lord Jefus Cferift's Commiilion given to his MiiiiHers,. that after vv,ard.Vgi'?'y Cioiijd wittingly and willingly fjivrear to maintain EraftianSUPREMACj, PR'ELACYand£«g7/;'Sr Popijh CEREMONIES, and how^- fuch j(3'/r/^«?/fliouId be accounted :Watch- Men of ^he Co venan^ted. Church of Scotland, 1ft all ;jiidicious Covenant^FS Judge, and compare theft Minivers Prinejplej.^nd Pr.a(aicej^\Yitb'the'\Vdrd ofGOP,'ou^ . eonfeflion'of i^aith, •and.Cp.\jnan^^^ Acls.of Ailenibly frbiii;.i'd3S, ;tb 16^0. for I am fure if ,any Man iri jtiie:. N^^^ r^^n^le 't]ie/e,; tirey ^Hft,«i^ke. oijr Covenant^ leJfcontradiaorj^' ':;'',, ;u^' ".., ''.''.^i ',;••"'<" r.^'- "■■h'^o'^^' /« ^ti Page 19, The Author on the fame' Suppofition,. fays, Nor.'^'tBy,-., is tt' imkrahle Perjecutlon. .iothsitl aiif^^rer,' Seiiig "^'fch^'-irants declare they loplced upon the fwearing <^it to'^be lawfuj".' and free; ofpubjiclv Sca.n,da);ahd' refolvcd. to toimm^hd all Ptesbyterians in Scotfand to joyn jn. Cpmmuriio'iV' wltiijchemev^ in. the L'otdjs Supper; without making any Exception 'oh acco'ufit^off\^ear}ng 'that Oathj^ /and the Natjional Churcb hath.c^m^ianded fo j that iVilferEdutinp^^^ in Lotdif\gover theConfciences of many,' as wasiT^dd: eild^fif bfefote;: ^'And Caufa 'caufaefi caufa 'xm0i. In 'fihr.dtnatis ; Vpf^JuraMs thtfeMves: did. ;fix the Sul?drdinaiipn, that fiirfl they ■ftii6|ild fwura& path";aj;d f 1^^^^^ ^1 'Presbyterians in 4Vot//2«i tb'joyn.with them in the LprdySufefe; is ^ * Authoritatively ^done'fihce. ' ^dly,,Jurants by-tAk'[n||:t(mYpktft ha\r^ 'encouraged ^ and ftrengthened xh^^Handspf aPrelatical Pirliamenj;'':;ta^ •: terian Mi^ifters and 'Magiftrates;: wh'6 could 'ttor^ ivi'tmtl^Kt f\year ii!^ '' ^dlj. ■ Its Qdd t6' fay, that Minifters -wlfttin^ly and wilJMgly ^e^ting to .'riiainmn Er^- ftia^.SupR^NMek PRELAct and ^t^^/r^' CtREr^b^^sTa'iV^ 'dei^hdirig th^t'tobe JLawful, aiid'yet is i^ot a produdlv^ c^Vvfeof^Wb^er^Ble •p^rftcylidns ; (ot at-th^t rate the Oath of^uprem^cy-^d the'?^y?^^ete"»'^^-V (Jaufis? ctf^Jh- ..tplerabe Perfecutions. , .... , ., ^ ^ >. . . ^ ,,, .. ',\'a d CHAP. IX. The Oath ofAhjuratiotJ, Af^fwereA. 157 he fald in afiy Rational Cer.pruBkYf, to he a Scandal fo grievouJ and notour as to render Edification impojjihle. That is wondefilil Ixhat when Miniflers of the Profeft Presbyterian Church of Scotland^ Twear a Jadicial Oath for maintaining £rastianism and prelacy, aiid, Englijli-Popijly Cremonies which are contrary to the Word of GOD, and' our Covenants, and by Acts of Ailembly approve their fo doing to be free of Scandal it ihould not hinder joyning in Communion ; fothat the giofs Scandal cannot be gotten removed, for then according to him, th« Aflejnblics 1648 anc^.j^^.werq Erroneous. : C:mninin^ a plaiii Reiutaiionof the ^ur ants great Argmnent for Defence of Swearing 'c OAtHof ABJURAtiON, 'from ih P-alhce of Eli's Sons, 1 Sam. 2. 17. j^ P^^t 2i\^*^T'he.Aiit^or (icpyeth'^tTic- (wearing, the- Oath to be any fuch Corrup-' tioiij'^s can be jnft Grbiini^ oficparation ; And the Reafon is,becaLife faith he, its evident, ^bat in moft of the Churches j both in the Old and New T'efiament, Scandals a}id Ccrrttppicns ivere far more grofs than this can he prei ended to he ; yet Communion in _HorJIji£ was aJlov:ed and pratiifedy and Separation reproved arid for hidden. T'his is plain, .faith'.hc, /row many Injiances ; hut faith he, I fhall confvise my felf to thefe three. T'he firfi.is in the Old. Tfefiatneiit, //rEli's titne, the CorruptiQns yea Abominations of his iSt/us ihe^Priefls were arriz'cd ata great Height as you may fie i Sam; 2. 12. ij.Ne^ .'OhiJiekJsthe'PuhlicklVorff^tp'Ujasduly ohferved, and GOD was pleafed Graciou/ly t9 Comtenance His own VVorfoip and Ordinances at that time ; as is evident in the Inflance [cf Hannah, i Sam; i. 9. If any fay that the Scandals of the Priefis made the Offer,' Am of the LORD to be abhorred; I afifwer l6o The Jrgtir)ients advanced in Defence of CHAP. IX, * fore, and that with a rtrong emphatick Signification ; and fp the King fpoken of ' in this Place, viz,' Dan: ii. ^6. having this "Article prtfi\edymaft -be -the fame * Ring treated of before, to wnt AntiochinsEli^hanes. Andthereisfomething of an emphatick Import in the Word ANASHlMj^om ENOSH, wWich. makes it agree to thefe miferably wretched Priells : Vox Biixtorf m his Hebrew Lexicon^ Robertfen m his Key to the Hebrevj B/ble, as likeways in his large Concordance ^ and Pagnin in his Epitomi Thefaur. Ling: SanEi. obferve the Word ENOSH, fignifies a ntjferable Man in an inairable State of Mifery on Account of Sin. And fiirely Eli's 6'ons were moft miferable incorrigible Wretches, like Mcii under an Incurable Diftemper, which ends in Death, and fo did they run on in their Incorrigible Diftemper of abominable Wickedncfs, till GOD i\\ his Holy Juftice, fweeped them off the Earth. ^thly. To prove that it was the Prieftsthe 5ons6f£!//i tha^ did exceedingly contemn, abhor or defpife the Lord's OiFering, I find that the Lord exprefly charges thefe Priefts ( but not the People ) . with the heinous Guilt of Kick- ing at the Sacrifices and Offerings cj the LORD, in the '19th Verfe of this fiftie Chap- ter, the meaning of that is. Why have yefiownthe highejl Contemp of my Sacrifices y Itke lafci'vioiis fed Beafls kicking and trampling their. Food-, thus it is interpreted by Malvenday Qiiidam in Vatabalimijunim^ Pifcatory Drufliii^ Mendoz,a and Cornelius aLapide. -■.:.'./ ; i.- •." , K fifth Reafon to prove, that it was thefe Priefts who were charged with ab- horring, or exceedingly defpifmg the lord's Offerings, is, bscauie in the 12 Verfe they are called. Sons of Belial that knew not the LORD : the meaning of that is, 7 ho* by a Kind of Prof ejfion they acknowledged GOD^yet in M>orks they denied him j in corrupting the Worfhip of GOD, and openly and profanely rejetling GOD's Inftitu- tions and Laws, and t r amp Hyig 'on Div ins Authority, ar,d dijhnouring the Hoy One of Ifrael lefore all People : Thus the Text. is interpreted by Pifcator, ^jimiusy Mahen- da J Cornelius a Lapide, Drufius and J/atablus. ■' ■• Sons ot Belial fignifies Men that had cafi off the Yoke, broken the Bands j and cafl the Cords of god's Law from the-n^ that were openly profligate and utterly improfitahk : Thus Befial is tranflated by Buxtorf in his Hebrew Lexicon pag: 558. and for con- firming his Interpretation he citeth Deiit: 13. 13. i Kingr 21. 13. and the Sanhedr. Fol.lll. 2. where the ^^tu//j Rabhies tell us, they underftood the Word Belial to be properly derived from BELI GNOL, abfque Jugo, Men that had caft off the Yoke ofHolinefs and the Law of GOD. A fixth Reafon is, bccaufe theie Priefts did corrupt the- Worfhip of GOD as plainly appears, for m Verfe 14. they not contented withihe Breaft and Shoul- der which were Allotted them by GQD, Exod: 29. ?,-/, zS. Levlt. 7. 31. did ^' befide that violently take part of the Offa'crs fliare, and moreover thy fnatched^* their part before it was Heaved and Wcaved, contrary to Levit. 7. 34.. Af;d-^ further in Verfe 15. they Violated the Law, in taking the.ir Part before the Fat/f and other Pieces with it wcie Burned, contrary to lewf. 3. 3, 4, p. Andj the Re|- '^ ^^ CHAP: IX. The Oath of Abjuration dnftverei. %$% fpn was, as Vool uppn the Place obferves, that they might take what part they likti hfiy and on Verfe 17. Poo/ faith, the Iniquity of the Young Men-wasiieyy great, «^« caufe they 'violently took away both GOD's and Man s Dues, and this before their timet, ^nd that with manifefi Contempt of GOD and Man, and all this meerly for gratifying their Senfual Appetit. And Peter Martyr on the Place obferves, that 'their taking .andEating before the Burning of the Far, and fprinkling of the Blood contrary ta Levit. 7. 2, 3> 4> 5> <^- "^^^ Eating the Flejb before it was holy, and fo was ndi the Priefts Portion. AikI Cornelius a Lapide on the Place, obferves, that among the Heathens ( who,in many things Imitated the yewifi Sacrifices J haudimrhok- ta Sacra fxpe devoraty was a Proverbial Speech to exprefs a Belly-God, fitch /wEliTs ^ Sons were. Thus they corrupted the Worfliip, and with Violent Tyranny Rob- bed GOD and Man of their Dues, and that with manifeft Contempt both of i30D and Man : And fo it is plain that it was the Pciefls that abhorred or ex- xeedingly contemned the Offerings of the Lord. ^ ^ A -jth Reafon was, becaufe they trampled both on the Moral and Cere- jnonial Law, in lying Adulteroufly with the Women'at the Door of the Taber- nacle, and contrary to levit. 22. 3. They facrificed at the Altar of GOD, tho* they were abominably defiled witii their Uucleannefs, and thereby (howed moft Heinous Contempt to the Offerings of the Lord; concerning which, the Lo^d had exprefly forbidden any Prieft fo much as to touch his OSerings, or any Holjr thing under his Uncleannefs tho* it had been but Ceremonial Uncleannefs; And that under thePain of being cut off byExcommunication,Z:tfx;/>. 2 2; 5 : as Mv.GiJU^ie in his Aarons Rod Blojfomingy Book i. Chap: $ Page 5j, underrfands cutting 9^ from the Pre fence of the Lord. And thefe Reafons do pcrfwade me that it was £A's Sons the Priefls that did abhore or exceedingly dejpife and Contemn the Offerings af the LORD. But here perhaps the JurantsvriW Objed, That, in the 24th Verfeoithis fame Chapter^ it isiaid by £/ito his Sons, Nay my Sons, for it is no good Report that' / hear ; Ye make the Lord^s People to Tranfgrefs. From this the Jurant concludes that the People did Tranfgrefs infeparating from Communion with thefe wicked PriiSs Upon account of the Grols Scandals whereof the Priefts were guilty. But I find the Text cannot allow fuch an Interpretation, becaufe it would be contrary to the Analogy of Faith, as I (hall Ihow anon .• And to make the Matter clear, I -Ihall (how whatSenfe iht Hebrew Text will plainly afford that will agree with the Analogy of Faith. I find the Words of the ^^^r^ Text are thefe. Vi%, np-Dp D';nnpo yot& ;3jn -«;« ni)ct!;.i nD^trNi*? ^3 ^j3 Vn^ i^f^^y, my Sons, for it is no good Fame I hear^which the People of the Lord Cryes out. The pnly jmreat Poipt ^ Controverfie here is this, viz. Whether the Hebrew Wo|fd f4AGNABIRlM in this Text properly fignifies, to make go Abroadyor cry out i oc yii it fignifies to make to Tranfgrefs. I find ift the Dutch Tranflation of the Bible, which is acknowledged by all yj^hodox Divines, to be the raoft e^aftly agreeable to the Original ^d Analogy 1 t62 The Arguments advanced in Defence of CHAP. IX of Faith, of any Tranflation in Europe^ it is Tranflated, to cry out: That is, to firead Ahead, idly: ThtL^zmcd Pagnin in his Epitom\ 7%efaur: ling: SanSl:Page 252: Thus Tranflates, MAGNABIRIM^GNAM JEHOVAHy Popilus Domini ytranjtre facit, i.' e. Spargit ( inquit Pagnin ) vocem fuper vos quod peccetis & ch" \wam cmtra vos. That is, the People of the LORD makes to go Abroad, oc fpreads the Report and cryes out agaitift you becaufe ye fin. And this is a clear Reafon why the Dutch render the Word ( to cry out ) which is a making of Fame .or Report to go Abroad, ^dly. The Learned Pifcator Tranflates the Word, Mag- nabirim, tranjire facit ^i. €. makes go abroad. And it is to be obferved, That Bux^ -j^orf inliis Heheiv Lexicon y and Pagnin in his T/jsfaurus Ling: San^: and others of •the beft i/(?^r£Tu Lexicographers do affirm, That Gnabar in AW, properly fig- nifies tranjire e loco in locum ut itenerando, i. e. To go abroad from one Place to another, SLsitiRuthi: 2. Jer: 1$^ 15. Gen. 47. 21. and generally through the Bible where that Word is made ufe of: And that the Word but improperly fignifies a Tranjr -greflion or Sin, by a Metaphor, ^thly. In the Margin of the £«^///^ Bibles, the Word is tranflated TO CRY OUT, to wit, as has been faid above ; and Sa Englijh Interpreters and Commentators, allow it that Signification. I having now cleared the Meaning of thcfe Texts, fo far as to make it evident. That it was the Pricfts that exceedingly contemned and defpijed the Offerings of the LORD ; as alfo that the Priefts were guilty of Corrupting the Worfhip of GOD, ■■ and tyrannical Robbing both GOD and Man of their Dues, and that with ma* - nifeft Contempt of GOD and Man. Now the Qtieftion is. Whether the Law of God required the People of i/r^^/ to join in Communion in all Ordinances of Divine Worfhip, with thefe Preifts that . were fuch incorrigible profligat De- bauchees ? Jurant Miniflers fay, the Law of God did require the People to adhere to them as their Priefts, and Join in Communion with them in all ■ Ordinances. But that I deny, and I offer the following Reafonsfor it. iB. The . Jurants themfelves grant, It is jufl Ground of Separation, when Scandals are grievous and notour y and when no Redrefs can be had in a regular Wa), fo as to reach the great End of Edification. And all thefe were manifeft in the Cafeof£//'s Sons; and therefore the People had Jufl: Ground of Separation from them,even accord- ing to the Jurants own Conceffion. Mly. I find that the great Mr. George Gillefpie, in his Aaron s Rod Bloffoming, Book I . Chap. 9. proves, That by the Law of God, all prophane fcandalous no- ; , torious Sinners, were prohibited to Partake in publick Ordinances, with the ; reft, of the Children of /T/^^/ in the Temple, until the Scandal was removed. And for proving that Point, belides other Scriptures, he cites thefe, vi?^. Firfl^ Deut: 53. 18. which forbiddeth to bring the Hire of an Harlot into the Houfe of the i LORD; and therefore how much more was it contrary to the Will of God, ' that the Whore her lelf, ii known to be fuch, fhould. be brought into the Ht>ule of God. 2dly. He proves it from J'^r. 7. p, 10, 11. compared with Matth: 21. 12, 13. Lev^io. 10, E;cek: 2.2: 26: and 44. 23. and from Pfali 118: rp: 20. there CHAP.IX, Of the OAth of .Abjuration anfrvered. i6j there the Gates of tihe Lord's Sanftiiary, are called 'fhe Gates of Righteoufnefs, be- caufe only the Juft and Clean might enter into them, fays Mr. G/7/^>, following Ainfwo.rth, Diodntiy Vatablusy and the Chaldee Paraphrafl. and he proves the fame Thing from the i ith Pfalm and iji ^r-Nor did Mr. Gillefiie want a Cloud of Te- ftimonies for this, which he there citcth, viz,. Philoy 'Jofephy Scaliger, Conflnntinus L ' Ewperoui-i Grot: Camer' Dionyjtus Vojfusy Selden, Bertraniy Goodwiny Chaldee P-araprafi , T'z.machy David and Maimomdes. This plainly proves, That the Peo- ple ought not to join in Communion in publick Worfhip with thefe Priefts, be- caufe they were incorrigible fcandalous notorious Sinners ; for the Law excluded all fcaiidalous Perfons without Exception : And it were a monflcuous Contra- didion to the Word of God, for any to fay, That tho' the Law excluded all notorious fcandalous Perfons from publick Ordinances, yet it allowed the Prielts to officiat in publick Worfhip, tho* they were notorious fcandalous Debauchees. , gdly. Mx.Gillefpie in Aaron s Rod Blojfomingy^ook i. Chap: lo. Pag: 97. faith,/ conclude all unclean Perfom vjhatfoever were excluded from the 'Tal>ernacle, Lev.- 15. 31. jmdfrom eating of the FJejlj of the Sacrifice Sy Lev. 7; 20. 21. neither might any of the Sons of Aaron having his Unckannefs on him eat of the holy things, tho* it was his Food, Lev: 22. 2, 3, 4, J, 5, 7. in which Place cutting off is appointed to be the Punifmentj not for unclean Perfons their being in the Campy but for thsir coming to the Tabernacky or for their eating of the holy 'things. This lets us fee beyond Controverfie, the LORD exprtfly debarred all Priefts under Unckannefs either Ceremonial or Mor ral," fiom the Tabernacle, and all publick Ordinances: And feing Priefts un- der Uncleannels might not eat of holy Things that were their. Food, far leis might they come into the Tabernacle to ofter Sacrifices to GOD. 4thly. G^/Z/^j^/Vin wth. Chap, of the fame Book, Pag. 105. advanceth this Ar- gument, i^/sl. Tie Ceremonial Unckannefs was a Caufe of Exchifan from the Satt^uary, and from holy things : therefore much more Moral Unckannefs : It was morefinful in it felf and more abominable in GOD's Sight ; for thofe who did fiealy murder, commit Adultery, fwear fal/ly, and burn Incerfe t>o Baal, to come and tread in the Courts of the Houfe of the LORD, and to offer Sacrifices there, as if GOD's Houfehad been a Den of Robbers y Ifai. i. 11, 12, 13, 14. Jer. 7. 9, 10, 11. this, faith ht, was more abominabk to GODy than if he that had touched a dead Bodyy or had tome into the Tent where a Man diedyjhould have come into the tabernacle in his Legal Unckannefs : therefore whenChrifl caflethout the Buyers and Sellers out of the temple y it ■is not fiir Ceremonial, but for Moral Unckannefs, and he applieth to them the Words of Jeremiah, ye have made it a Den of thieves y Matth: 21. 13. with Jer» ,7. n: And as it was ynorefinful to the Perfon, and more hateful to GODyfo it was more hurtful td the Souls of otheis, who were in greater Danger of Infection from Moral than Ceremonial Unckannefs. Surely it's plain frOm this Argument founded upon Scripture, that the People ought not to have ioyned in Communion with thefe Adulterous 6^ob- X 2 berS t6\ The Argument i advanced for Defence 0f CHAP.* TX". bcrs thie Priells, who adiilteroufly debauched the Women, and robbed both GO^ atid Man of their Dues of Offerings. ^Wly: The People could not joyn in Communion with thefe notorious fcanda- Icrn^ Sons of £//, as their Priefts ; for then the People would have made themfelVcs guilty of corrupting the Sacrifices, and profaning the Covenant of Grace ; bc- caufe thefe Prions corrupted the Worlhip in robbing GOD of a great Parr of the Gfferings,and ialfo becaufe thefe Priefts did profane the Covenant of Grace ift profa- nitigthe Se^l, k/iz,. thePaflbver, in partaking of that Sacrament, while they were li^ltov^ing in all their abominable Unclcannefs, in moft contumacious Impenitencfe ; tjhe Reafon why People would have been guilty of the Priefts Sin, is, Becaufe, as Mr. Gillefpte in Aaron's Rcdy Book 3. Chap: 15. Pag: 542. MxhyT^he Doer and Con* firrter fall under the -fame Breach of the Law ; yea^ fo far do they Jin by confentingy as ihat. thei-eby they acknowledge the Children of the Devil to be the Children of GOD y and the Enemies of GOD to be in Covenant y and to have Fellowjhip with him : Fur none htght to conieyViz. to the Sacrament y except thofe who truly believe and repent : None ought to be admitted J except fuch as are fuppofed to be Believers and penitent y there being tmhing knoiimtothe contrary. If any impenitent Sinner take the Sacrament , he profanes the Covenant ofGOD: If the Church admit to the Sacrament any known to live in IViC" kedneff without Repentanceythe Church prof aneth the Covenant of GOD. And Mr.Gillefpie bx Aaron's Rody Book i. Chap: 12. proves by fourteen Arguments, That all fcandalous prefumptuous Offenders againft the Moral Law were excluded from thcPaflbver. And in the third Book, and j$th Chap, in proving, that all Perfons guilty of publick Scandal ought to be excluded from the LORD's Sup- |»er, iahis eight Argument, he proves from Hag: 2. 11, 12, 13, 14. ThatPerfons ^ho were unclean could not offer Sacrifices, becaufe they defiled all the Sacrifices that they tjfered: and fo the LORD reckoned all Sacrifices of the PeopUy offered by unclean PrieBs^ nbe unclean Offerings, 6thly. The LORD exprcfly commanded the Church of Ifraely Lev: 12. 2. 3; Vocut off 'every one of the Priefts who profaned the holy things, by miniflringinholy things Ifiavifi^theirVncleamefs onthem ; and that cutting^jff was Excommunication,as N&. Qillefpie. proves ia Aaron's Rody Bodk i. Chap; 4. and 5. And in the fifth Chapter lie. faith, GOD did: not cutoff MenjOr Families inlftud by extraordinary Judgments y but ^hen Ifrael negleBed the Law for cutting them of as he had commanded. And thus it's 31 ©tain that the Church of Ifrael fliould have cut off Eli's Sons by Excomihtinica- fl 6on, andbecaufe the Church ncgleSed the Law, GOD cut them offbyaviiible Judgment: By which it is evident,. That it was fo far from being the Duty of the Church of /^/»?/ to joyn ia Communion with £/z-s Sons, that on *he contrary jthe Duty was to excommunicate, them. '^rhlj. r findjThatMr. Gilbert Rule in his Rational Defence of Nencmformity^Vsig. hloJ^ithy^PeffohallVtckednefs of Minifiers may affe'Bthe Ordinances, as is exemplified m'EM's Sons the- Priefts of the LORD, their Intemperance and Cevmufnefs made Non^ mr^mifisin^k^^ that were m dnfabkfor their withdrawing. Thii^MtrRuk; ^~~" tho^ CHAP. X' Of the Oath of Ahjuratioff anfmred, l^rf tho* a Man of fupcrlative Moderation : Ahd king the Church of Scotfand had «ti high Efteem of him before, if Jurants will obftiimtly re/ea this Ttftimorty of thetf own Deat RULEy lome Folk perhaps will faythey are become UNRULt * ^thly. The Jurants grant. That impofing finful Terms of Communion, \s m(| Ground of Separation,and Eli s Sons impofed finful Terms of Communioii,by tyi^ nizing over the People in commanding them to break the Law ofGOD JA giving away both GOD's and Man's Dues of the Oiferings, to pleafe the fcrtfual Appetit of thefe Bclly-god Priefts. t .; . And thus I hav« proven. That it was Duty for the People oflfiael to feparate from Communion with Elt's Sons the Priefts; And refuted the Jurants great At- , gumcnt, which they found upon a falfe Affertion, viz,. That it was Duty for ^I thePeopleof/jTra^/tojoynin Communion with £//'s Sons, asPriefts, while they were lying under moft grievous Scandals, aiidgrosly corrupting the Worftip b£ GOD, and tyrannizing over the People. ^^^ C H A P. X. Contaimrig a plain Refutation of the Jurant*s great Argument for Defence of their fv^^ ingthe Oathy its Idng no Ground of Separation, which they endeavour to prove fiwt their Suppojttiony That the Corruptions efthe Scribes and Pharifees were not JuJi Ground (^ Separation. "^ '- THE fecond Inflance ofgrofs Corruptions and Defeafons that the Church of the y^tutfi was guilty of, which the Author ftrongly denies, that i^ wis |uft Ground of Separation, hementioneth in Pag. 21. The fecond Injiance, fays he, is from the State cf the Church in the Da^s of Chrifl's Humiliation ; the Church oj^ the Jews at thatTtme was moH corrupt, the Sadducees denied the RefurreHionythe Phari- fees were wholly ignorant of the Gofpel, violent Efiablijhers of their own RigbteoufmSy Jhamelefsly fmd of Sufeifiition and humane Traditionsygrofs Perverters cf GOD's /.^siy, intter Perfecutors ofChriR andhis. FolkwerSy great Opprejforsy the Priefthood was kept J>y Moyen, and Bribery ; yet Chrifi both by PraBice and- Precepty forbade tt fepairate from this Church : I need not ( faith the Author ) give particular lujiances of this, it's ob- vious to any that read the Scripturey that our LORD condefcended in ev'ery thing to Jh^ memii Obfervanceof GOD's Infiitutionsy futableto that Adminiflration andtis State i he gave exprefs Command to acknowledge and imploythe Priejis of that 'time in things k' 4ongtng to their Office,. Mmh^ 8. ^: and the Followers of our LORD imitated his Eic* ample hereiKy /li Zacharias, Simeon /j«i Anna, Lukei^jW 2 Chapters, and the j^" files afChriJl Jiill fequented the ]cwi{h Synagogues after their LORD' s Afcemim.aui ctill forced went not offy as you may fee^ Ads 13. 14, 15. and 17. i, 2. V/liat the Author alledgeth to make for his Cau{e in this Inftance, mav be t$^ diiccd to four Heads, viz..frft. That notwithftanding of the Corruptions of the g€wi&. Churchy our SaviwChriit commanded tojoyawiti^ it, and keep Com* F %&6 The Arguments Advanced in Defence df CHAP. X. munion with tht Scribes 2^r\d Pharifees, iiid he:Jnfinuates with th^ Sadducees alfo. ^dly. T.ha^di^ LORD did pradically joyn himfelf, to fhow an exaia Obfervance of 60D*s Inftitutions futeable to that Adminiftration and his State, ^dly. That jb^ttic,ularly he commanded to acknowledge the Prieib in things belonging to their tJffic^. ^thly. That his Followers, 2^f/?^>'f^j, *S/w?ow, y^««^, and the Apoftles did imitate his Example in j'oyning in Communion with the Scriks and Pharifees. As to the/r/? ofthefe I remark, That he tells not where our Saviour command- ed his Difciples to joyn in Communion with the Ar/i^j and Phanfees; butPapifts and Proteftant Prelates, and all who hold what he affirms, do give for their Groand, -•that. which we have in Matth: 23. i, 2, 3. Tc7« lh(jovi khdhmi riii ox'^o'ir^ toT? ,it/c otTAO.vi.t'nruffn' vu-iv']iif>ei.'iliip^li ^C^nrotS!]** K:a]« J^e '»?>'■* dvl'^v iJ.>i a^-ot^Jz hi-yovai yAf>,}C/ ou ■j»Brotav«^ And/; /ilin general, D odor iJ^ww/OKi doth obferve, That the Scribes and Pharifees cbuld mt f/o^eHy heSucceffois to IVfofes ; becaufe he ivas the Mediator of the OidT'eJiafnenty VIZ. McdmothytcvnunciUSy thai if, fuch a Mediator, as de/ivered froni-the LORD the Commands of GOD to the People y and returned to the LORD the Pedpl^s Promife of Obedience, in the making a Covenant between the LORD and Ifrael : And fo as he was Mediator, the Scribes and Pharifees .could not be his Succeflbrs. But then cpnfidermg A/o/fj was a Prophet and an Interpreter of the Law of GOD, ind alfo a ruling Governor m Ifrael, he^might.have Succeflbrs in the Office ot the MiniftryTor expounding the VVord of GOD, and miniftring ih holy thmgs, and 'alfo Succeflbrs in Magiftracy for Civil Government. And hence arifeth the Con- trovciiie among Interpreters about the Pharifees Office in fucceeding Mofesy viz. Whether as Minifters of the Church, o^ as Magiftrates of the State. * -."1 tind th-dt Brugenfs,GrhpUf- and Lightfooton this Scripture, and Sir James '5Su/'m'^following them, in ^ his fourth Dialogue againll Tir. Burnet I do take -Mofes .SVa^'heipe to fignifie the Office of Mqgifiracyi becaufe tht Pharifees having grafped in- to their Hands all the t'ow'er of 'CiW Government that the Romans permitted the ^£"tuy to exercife,' I fay, Grafped,becaufe^thcy did not allow the >SW^/ ■• idly. In the 8 Verfe our LORD forbids his Difciples in teaching the People to imitate the Vharifees ; for the Pharifees did arrogate a Power to teach for Dodrinfe wliatfoever they pleafed, and would have all to believe whatever they .taughb was true and found, meerly becaufe of their Authority of Dodoriliip,' as the Church oiRome now arrogates InfallabiJity ; and the Dodors wereoDiftators and Lorded over the Reft : But on the contrary our Saviour charged .1 and com-> manded his Difciples not to be Authoritative Matters and Didators of. Faith^ but to carry as Difciples to him who is the true Mafter and Author oi Faith^and: to carry aU as Condifciples having Parity of Power, and none Lording over .the Reft,in Oppofition to the Pharifaick Clergy, thus it is underftood by Augujliny Be^ %ai Memchius, Tirinns, Efiius, Mun/ierus, and Br ugenjjs ; a^ndihus it is plain ouc Saviour did fpeak of the Scribes and Pharifees as Minifters of the Church. ^dly. It is plain from the 11 Verfe,That our LORD commands his:L)ifcipIes as Minifters, to keep within the Bounds of Parity of Power, in Oppofition to the Pharifaick Clergy, who fetup a Lordly Mafterfhip fpoken of in the 10 Verfe. i. ;.' ^thljy In the i^th Verfe, the Lord Jefus Chrift pronounces a IVo, that is^- .the heavy Curfe of God, upon thefe Scribes and Pharifees, becaufe they jhut the Ki'ng^ dom of Heaven i for they would neither enter in themfelves y nor fuffer others to-, entrr ; For the People being to feek the Lazu at the Prieft's Mouthy thfe PharifaJck-'PrJejis fhut the Kingdom of Heaven, by Inculcating upon the People a falfe Interpretation 'of J be Places of Scripture concerning the Mejfiahydnd . by.. Impojing humane I'raditionlicand by Condemning the Miracles and DoSirine of Chifiy and Perfecuting him and gll that followed him. Thus it is explained by Menochiufy Tirinns, Bez^a, Geyardus-y Cqfau-' bonusr l^atablus, Maldonatus and Bulinger. So Calvin and Mujculusy . upon this Tcxf Obferve, 7'hat feing the Minifen of the Church are the Porters . that open ■andjhut the Gates of Heaven, our Saviour fpeaks of the Scribes and Pharifees as Mimfiers eft/jf Church, who by falfe Doctrihe and tyrannical Sentences and Poficution, hindered t hi People from receiving the Gofpel, yea and perfecuted Chrijl himfelf, ^thly. In Verfe 15, our Lord pronounces a fVeto thefe Pharifees and Scribes tlutt coftifajfcd Sea and Land to make one Profelyte, and when he was .made, the) made Im twofold more the Child of Hell than ihemjelves. The Ethiopick Tranflation fays,, Tf tompaf Sea and Land t9 Baptizes one Profelyte; becaufe the Ethiopick Interpreters ob- ferved 't<58 The Arguments divinced for Defence of CHAP. X. fctred irom the Talmud y That the Jews made their Frofelytes t>y Cir£fim(ifiony^aptiffH, and aipropitiatory Sacrijice. And when they Profeiyud poor HeathenSjf^^-^ made thefe irofelytes twice as fu^erflitious af themfehes, and fo twice more worthy bfHdl, as Vifc{itvry Beza^ Vatablm^ Brugenfis Camero, jfuftinus, Mufculus, Calvin and ffmius cxplai^i it, and Gmius on the Place obferves.That ^ufiinus \^ his Time obferyed. That the Profelytes ok the yewsymx. only did not believe, but did twice as j^mch blafpheme the Name of Chriil, as the Jevis themfelves did. And feing it was the Office of the Priefts to make Pro(elyt$ by Circumcifion, Baptifm, and a propitiatory Sacrifice ; therefore it is plain that our Saviour fpakc of thefe Pha- rifees as wicked fuperftitious Priefts, who made Profelytes more Supcrftitious than themfelves; By allwhich.it is clearly evident. That thefe Scribes and Pharifees did fit in Mofes Seat of Miniftry, and not of Magiilracy. And feing they were the chief Sed of the Jevjijh Church, as yofephus fays, Amiq: Lib. 13. Cap' ly.itwas they who kept up the Face of the National Church,an4 therefore behoved to have their Priefts, as is clear from John i. ip. 24. and the Pharifees cxercifed Civil Government, in keeping up a Civil Sanhedrin, as well as an Ecclefiaftick Sanhedrin, the one as a Council of States, aad the other as a Ge- neral Affembly; for the Jews had thefe two Kinds of Sanhedrins, as Mr. Gil/efpie proves in Aarms Rod. Book 1. Chap. 2. And as a National Church hath both a Reprefentative Church of Minifters, and dje Nobility and Gentry ot the fame Church make up a Council of States, and exercife Civil Magiftracy; fo likewife the Nobles and great Men of the Pha- rifees, might very well exercife the Magiftracy as far as the Romans permittcdi and at the fame Time the Pharifees alfo had their Ecclefiaftick Sanhedrin of Priefts, of whom our Saviour fpeaks in this Chapter: For by what is laid above, it is plain, that our Saviour fpeaks of thefe Scribes and Pharifees, as the Miniftry of the Church of the ^ewsy who by falfe Dodrine, and the Authority of their Sanhedrin or Aflcmbly, fhut the Gates of the Kingdom of Heaven. And ^ofephus, who Uved among them, and being a Man of fo great Learning, certainly knew why th^y were called Pharifees, he in his Antiquities of the JcwSj ijh: 17. Cap. 3. tells us they were called Phatifees from ^heruljhny i. e. /jo»* fretersi becaufe, as Calvin on Mat th: J.- 7. obferves, Thefprojeffed to give hidden Sen^s of the Scriptures, that all other Men were Ignorant of: And by that crafty Dclufion, they perfwaded the People to believe ail their Traditions and falfe Glolfcs that they put upon the Law of GOD,- And hence they had tjieirlt.jsn«i from their Minifterial Office of Exponing the Scriptures, tho* the Nobles and •rreat Men. among them were Civil Magjilrats, as in every National Church, ^nd fomuch for Clearing the firftPoinr, Namely, That the Pharifees Office liV fitting ih v*/e^/s Seat, of which our Saviour fpeaM, was the Office of the Miniftry in Holy Things, in being Priefts, Levitt, aorfDoaors Of interpreters CHAP. X. The Oath of Ahjuratiofj anfvered. j^q The fecond Thing to be cleared, was to fhow, Uhether it nppMrs from foM Gr- icrand 33d Vcrfc^ and -thus thefeScriptares are explained, as 1 have faid^jufl Y im- lyo The Arguments ddvdnced for Defence of CHAP. X. immediatly before the Citation ; I fay thefe Scriptures arc thus explained by Calvin, Parausy Martyr, Hofman, BuUinger, Bez^a, Memchms, Ptfcnt&r, EfiiuSt Tekttis and Grotiusy following Augufiine and Chryfofloin. And Turrettifz lloeolog: Eknt'i: Part: 4. de necejfaria fecejf: noRra ah Ecckf: Rowan: Pag: 23. proves:- 7%at the Pharifees taught and maintain A the fame DoEirineofthe' Merit of Works, that Papifts hold, viz. That Men l^y the Merit oj their own Works obtain eternal Happinefs. And this is further evident by what we have in theSumof faving Knowledge in the id Evidence of true Faith,5>H; 8. the Words are thefe,'!//!,. That the Righteoufnefs of every true Chriflian, muft be more than the Righteoufnefs of the Scribes and Pharifees; fir the Scribes and Pharifees, albeit they took great Pains to difcharge fundry Duties of the Law ; yet they cutjhort the Expojition thereof, that it might the lefs condemn their PraBice; they fludyed the outward Part of the Duty, but negleEled the inward and [pi- ritual Pan, they difcharged fome Manner of Duties carefully, but negleUed Judgment; Mercy and the Love of God ; in a Word, they went about to eftablijh their own Righteouf- nefss and rejeSied the Righteoufnefs of God by Faith in Jefus. And thus we plainly: fee, they turned the legal Difpenfation into a Covenant of Works, and rejedled the Covenant of Grace altogether ; and furely that is damnable Herefy. And to make it further evident, that thefe Scribes and Pharifees were not the : true Church of GOD, but Blafphemous Hereticksi confider what we have in the ' Old Confeffion of Faith of the Church of Scotland, Chapter 18: concerning the Notes of the true Kirk, as it is Recorded in Knox his Hiltory Page 272; for Difiinguijh- ing the true Kirk from Sathans peflilent Synagogue, as there exprefl;, where it is faid ; The Notes and affured Tokens whereby the Immaculat Spoufe is known from the horrible Harlot, we affirm ; are neither Antiquity, Title Ufurped, Lineal Defcent, Place appoint- ed, nor Multitude of Men approving any Error ; for Cain in Title and Age was prefer- red to AbelWSethj and the greater multitude followed the Scribes and Pharifees, than unfeignedly Believed and Approved Chrifl Jejus and his DoBrine; and yet as wefuppofe no Man of found Judgment will fay that any of the forena?ned was the Church of GOD. Thus we fee by the Confeffion of Faith of our Renowned Anceftors^ The Scribes and Pharifees and their Difciples are declared not to be the Church of God, but the horrible Harlot Sathans filthy Synagogue; And that Confeffion of Faith is fworn unto by our National Covenant ; And fo by Vertue of our National Co- venant, all Ranks ofc Perfons in this Nation are fworn to defend that Confeffion of Faith as Orthodox. And if Jurants be able to Refute that Confeffion of Faith and our Covenant, they may try it ; And let us fee how they will free themfel- vesfrom the ObHgation ofit. The Fourth great Error that the Scribes and Pharifees maintained, was their Denying Jefus o^ l\^i:^areth tobc tht Meffiah, as is clear from Matth: 12 and 2^. Chapters. ^ . ^ The Fifth great Error that the Scribes and Pharifees did teach and mamtain, was their Heaven-daring Blafphemous Doflrine, that our Lord Jefus Chrifl didcaB om Devils bj Beelzebub the Prince of Devils M^^^^^Y they were guilty of the dreadfuti fmi CHAP; X. The Oath of Abjardtiorjy anfwered, 171 fin againft the Holy Ghoft, for which our Lord Condemned them j as is clear koraMatth'. 12: 32: 33: 34. And thus the Place is explained by Augufiiity Hi- larius, ' Chryfofiont) Calvin^ Bullinger, Brentiusy Mufculus, Melancthon, Pifcator, ChemnitiuSy Sarceriufy T'heodoretus^ Maldonatusy Menochiusy TheodotWy Gomarusy Gro- tiusy Brugenfay Vatablus, Glafjtus, Camerarius, Hammondy Munflery and James Chappel. Having given thefe fire chief Errors and Corruptions of Dodrine taught and maintained by tiie Scribes and Pharifees; For Brevity's fake I (hall Name no more but fhall proceed to the Fourth Point I promifed to clear. Namely ; Whether our Lord Jefus Chrift gave a plain pofitive Command obliging to join in Communion with thefe Sm^^jand Pharifees ? Or idly. If he only upbraided his Difciples for Joyning in Communion with thefe Scribes and Vharifees} Or, idlh I^ he gave an Ironical Command to Joyn in Communion with them ? In Anfwer to the firft of thefe, I deny that our Blcfled LORD gave a plain po- fitive Command to his Difciples obliging to Joyn in Communion with thefe S/rn^fx - and Pharifees as the true Church of GOD. My firfl Reafon is, becaufe they were not the true Church of GOD, but Blafphemous Hereticks, as I have clearly proven. iMy. Becaufe it was inconfiftant with his own Office of the Miniiky to command his Difciples to go and leave him and cleave to the Scribes and Pharifees as their proper Lawful Miniflers. \ As to the fecond of thefe ; lalfo deny that our LORD's Words in that place can be truly Interpreted Indicatively, to upbraid the Difciples for Joyning in ■ Communion with xhtkScribes and Pharifees; tho' a Learned Divine of the pre- fent National Church of Scotland explains the Words ' fo, making the Text run thus ; Whatfoever they bid you obfervey that ye obferve and do ; but ye do not after their . Works, for they fay and do not. As if our Lord had faid, ye are fo filly and ignorant that "whatever they bid you obferve and d* ; that ye obferve and do, &:c. The Reafons why I cannot agree with that Interpretation are : Firft becaufe, by that Interpretation our Saviour upbraided his Difciples that they did not as the Scribes and Pharifees didyHnd furely that is plainly inconfiftant with the many Woes he Pronounced againft thefe Scribes and Pharifees both for their Doftrine and wicked Pradices, as is clear from the following part of the fame Chapter, idly. Becaufe that Diviner's Interpretation, is contrary to all Tranflations of the Bible that are . extant ; Nor doth he fo much as cite any Critick that hath Written on the Scrip- ture, who Interpret^it fo ; nor could I ever fee any fuch : And to Interpret con- trary to all Tranflatlons, Criticks and Commentators, is no fmallmeafure oFbold- . nefs tho' he fhould but Interpret the firft Claufe of the Verfe fo ; for thereby he Opens a Door for Adverfaries, to retort his Interpretation, with the Abfurdities that will follow upon Interpreting the latter Claufe of that Verfe indicatively j he likewife opens a Door for Sophiftical Adverfaries to Interpret Imperatives Indi- catively in all other Places that ferve their Turn, contrary to all Tranflations of Y 2 . th'- ^ 172 The Argamtnts Advanced for Defance of CHAP. X. the Bible ; and contrary to all Criticks and Commentators on the Scripture and Confeflions oF Faith of the Reformed Churches. As to the gi. of thefe> I Anfwer Affirmatively ; That our Lord Jcfiis ChrHk eave an Ironical Command to his Difciples to Joyu in Communion with thcfe SrW^x ^tui-Vhayifees. An IroKtcal Cmmiand isy when GOD or Man, pecceiveth a Maa or Party of Men, doing or endeavouring to do fomething that he hath an averfuMt unto, thea in a way of Derifion. and Deteftation of tliat thing he bids them do itj and tiwis the LORD ia Holy Decifion and Dstellation frequently in Scripture, commands Men tado things that he hates. As in Ames ^: 4: Co?ne to Betlielrwfrf iranjgrefi nt Gilgal, muh't^ly TrmffgngiDm, anA kiugymr Sacrifices every Mmiing and jtuY Tirhes after three iLmn. Ifdiah 2^. r. z. iVa u Ariel the City "whereDivid dwelt: Myeti^r ul^a^^ lettkem krUSmrifices ; yet 1 "mU Dsfirefs Ariel, md tkere Jhall he h^minefs Sfidfiyraxiy, audita Jhall ie t$ me as Ariel i Kings 22.- 15. Go and ifperfor the Lordfidl d^lrvr/ it ima the Hand cfthe King : Whereas in the 17th . erfe, be tlweatens Deftrot^ion from the LORI), which came to pafs. And Alaf: ^6'. 45. OurSaticmrin a Holy DerificHi and Deteilation of his Difcipks their finful fecurity, he commands them, t&fleep m miv, and take their reB ; in the meafj Time when the cruel Enemy wascoinaig tc^ taketheir LORD the great Shepherd, and to fcatter the fheep. The Reafons why I take our Saviour's Words in Matth 23 . 2, 3 . to be an Ironical CommandyUtt ^rft; fiecaufe this is- agrceabkto the Rule tar Interpreting Scripture whicih is taught and maintained by Orthodox Diviiiss, 'viz^- Augufiin lih: 3 . de t)(0rin: Chrift: nap: 16: artd T*urrmin: Tked&g: Elen'd: part i: page i6p, ijo: the Rule is this, lix,. T'kat when there is afentence of Scripture which is preceptive a?id com- mavdinX, ^/>W hytvay ^f requiring or forbidSng; if that Scripture command and require to do a ti-ing that is good and profitable and, agreeable to the Law of GOD. Or if that ScriptuYt forbid any Vice, fin or TOickednefs, that is contrary to the Law of GOD; then that Scripture thus commanding, is to be under flood to be a plain pofitive Cormnand in its literal fenfe 3 wid no Figurative Precept. But if a Scripture command us to do any thing that is ivicked, to wit, my thing that ii contrary to the Lazu of GOD, and imonfifient mth any of the fub/iantial Priniciples tf true Religion j then that Scripture tJtus cofwnmding mufli he under flood to be a figura- tive Scripture, and not a plain pofitive command : Or if a Scripture forbid us to do any thing ivhtth the Law of GOD, and true Principles of Religion require us to de, then tfidt Scripture is alfo figurative, and not a pi ctin pofitive Command. idly. And the Reafon is, becaufe no Part of Scripture can bear any true Senfe contradiftory to the Law ofGOD, oranj^ fubftantial Principle of true Religi- on that the Lotd hath Inftitute, for Obtaining eternal Salvation trough a Redeemer the Lord Jefus Chrift. I^or the true Analogy of Faith, is to make Scripture interpret Scripture, (o as no Part of Scripture fhall be taken in a Senfe contrary to, or inconfiftent with the Attributes of God, the Law of God, or any fundamental or fubftantial Prin- : ■ ' ' ' " cxple CHAP. X. The 04th of Jbjurdtion anfrvered. 1*^ ciple of true Religion. Aird that Scrijrture mufl he thus Interpreted By ^eriftitr* is aflerted by all Orthodox Divines ; and this is plainly agreeable to our Cortftf- fion of Faith, Chap: i: SeSl: 9. ^dfy. It's pkin, that if true Chriilians join in Communion with Hereticks •then they break the Second and Third Commands, and many Times the Firft and Fourth alfo .- For Joining with Hereticks, is contrary to the Receiving, Ob- ftruing^ kfiepffig pme and intire aJlfuch IVorfirip md Ordinames, as Gad hath appointed in his Pf^wrd. And Joining with Hereticks brings Men to worjhip God another vMy than heh^it appwKtid in his f^ordj in Hearing and Learning /br DoSirine, Command- ments of A^, corrupt Principles, and fuperftitioiis Worfhlp; all which are plain- ly contrary to the fecond Command. And joining with Hereticks, is contrary to the Hfffy and Reverend Ufi of GOD's Names, Titles, Atributes, Ordinances, Werds and Pf^orks ', for Hereticks profanely flight, undervalue and trample upon GOD's Attributes of Wifdom, Sovereignity, Holinefa, ^e. when they rejeft GOfii's in- ftitutcd Ordinances and Laws j for by Adding to, and taking away from GOD's Laws and Ordinances, and making up a Religion to themielves, they trample upon GOD's Wifdom, Sovereignity, Holinefs, &c. and (o the Hereticks make themfelves their own GOD. And thus it is plain, Tiiat no Place of Scripture can bear a plain pofrtive Command, obliging Ghriftians to join m Com.munion with Hereticks; but where there is any Command for Joining in Communion with Hereticks, it mufi be figurative, /\ihly. And where GOD commands any Thing contrary to the Moral Lav^, or Jubitantial Principles of Religion, and then adds Threatening?, or contrary Commands,! find, then thefeCommandSjto which Thrcatenings or contrary Com- mands are added, are Ironical Commands, as is plainly evident by the Examples that I have adduced in A?n«s 4: 4: compared with the 12 Verfe, where the LORD threatens to meet Jfrael in a Judgment not named, to denote as great Judgment as that exprefled before, by which fome were overthrown as Sodom; as ^ogI and Others obferve : And in Amos 5. 5. the LORD gives a Command cort- trar)' to the Command in the 4th Chapter, and 4th Verfe, and adds a heavy Threatening. And the Command in JfaiaJj 19; i. hath a Threatening added in the id Verfe. And the like we liave in i Kings 22: 15; compared with Verfe 17 o! the f^mc Chapter, which lets us fee the Comiiflands to which the Threatenings are added, are Ironical Commands, which required to do Things not confiftant with the Law of GOD., and Principles of true 'Religion ; becaufe the LORD thrcatned to pour Judgment^-OBj/Ivw/-if they did what he bade.fhcm by theJe Ironical Commands : foin Matth: i6: 45; our Saviour commanded his Dis- ciples to/leep 677 and take their Refi, contrary to the Law of GOD and Duties of Religion, that required them to watch with their LORD, and guard their own Lives, when the cruel Enemies were coming upon their LORD and them ; and then Chrift adds a contrary Command,and bids them [ rife] which fhovvs rhathis Command to deep on, was an Ironical Command. And 174 The Arguments advumed for Defence of CHAP. X And in like manner our Blefled LORD, in Manh- 23; 2, y. only Ironically commands hisDiCciples to join in Communion with theScribes and Pharifees, which were grofly blafphemous Hereticks, as is clearly evident by what is faid above ; And to command his Difciples to join in Communion with Hereticks, was . con- trary to the fecond and third Commandments, as was made evident .- And then our Lord Jefus, in the fame 23d Chapter, denounces Eight Times Woy that is, the heavy Curfe of GOD upon thefe Scribes and Pharifees ; and in the 33 Ver. he calls them a Generation of Vipers, that could not Efcape theDamnation vfHell; and by Calling them Serpents and a Generation of Vipers, our LORD declares them to be the ^eed of the Serpem,Satans peftilmt Synagogue, (as the old Scots Con^ feffion of Faith, Chap. 18. calls them) whom he Threatens, t\ot only with tem- poral Judgments, but alfo with Eternal Damnation in' Hell : And Jience it is plain, from the Analogy of Faith and parallel Texts, That our LORD gave only an Iro- nical Command to his Difciples, to join in Communion with the Scribes and Pharifees. But for further Clearing this Point, fomc perhaps will ask, whether fuch an I- ronical Command did oblige to Obedience, (o as that it was neceflary Duty for ( the Difciples to do what was Commanded ? To that I anfwer. It was not Duty for the Difciples to do what was requi- red by that Ironical Command. ^ . I And my firft Reafon is, becaufe it is evident by the Examples given; that an i Ironical Command is but juft as if GOD would lay ^ J fee ye do or dejtgn to d$ fuch a 'thing that is contrary to my Law, go on and dofo; if you uiuld have Plagues and 'judgments poured out upon you for obfiinat wiljulT'ranfgrejfbn of 7ny Law, and per- fideous Apofiacy from the Divine Inflitution of Ordinances ; and ajfure your f elves of heavy Judgments for your Ke-ward. My fecond Reafon is, Becaufe thefe Scribes and Flnrikes denied the Verfons of the 'Trinity, the Divine Nature ojChrifl, and that Jefus of Nazareth xu^i the Meffiahjasi was made evident; and fo they were moft grofly blafphemous Hereticks, from whom it wasneceflfary Duty to feparate, according to all Orthodox Divines; ye^j the Jurants in their firft Juft Ground of Separation do grant, that Herepe in Do- Brine, and particularly denying the Divine Nature of Chrifi, or denying Jefus of Nuzg' teth ^0 Ifethe Mefliah, makesit aneceffary Duty to feparate from fuch grofs Hereticks. Sdly. It's plain that the greateflPart of the.Scn^rjand Pharifees, efpecially their Sanhedrin, or Allemblythat condemned Chrift, were guilty of the Sm againft tke^ Holy Ghoft in condemning Chrifi as a Blafphemerfor cal'ing himfelfthe Son of GOD ; for they inculcate on the People he was a Deceiver, that caft out Devils by Beelze- bub, and fo they were guilty of the Sin againft the Holy Ghoft; and thus they were the vileft of Apoftates : and the Pharifaick Clergy were guilty of that fearful Heaven-daring Apoftacy long before Pilat and they condemned and crucifid the LORD Jefus, as appears bytheii Ckapter of the Gofpel according to Matthew: Aadfurely it were a dreadful thing to affirm thatChriftians ought to joyn inCom-J munton' CHAP. X. The OATH of Ahjamion anfwered. 1^^ munion with thefe that Chrift had publickly and judicially condemned for being guilty of the Sin againll the Holy Ghoft. 4thlyi T^f Scribes and ?ha.nkes denied the Covenant of Grace altogether ^ and taught and maintained that damnable Error, that Men obtain Eternal Happinefs by the Me- rit of their own Works ; and fo they by their Dotftrine deftroyed the Way or Man's Salvation through a Redeemer ; and furcly it isneceflary Duty to feparate from fuch blafpemous Hereticks. I m.ight add many other Rcafons, but thefe make it clear- ly evident, T'hat thefe Scribes and Pharifees "were damnable Hereticks ; and that it was Jimply unlawful to keep Communion with them: And here I fliall conclude this Point with the Teftimony of fome learned Men, not only Proteftant, but alfofomePa- pifls *, declaring. That thefe Scribes and Pharifees were called a Generation ofFipers, as being the Children and Synagogue of Satan the Serpent , in OppcJItion to the true Church the Children of the IVeman ; and on Account of making the JVorks of the Law the meritc riousCaufeofMans Salvation, Scribes and Phznkts cmldnot efcape the Damnation of; I Hell. See Bez,a, Fifcator, Lightfoot, Hammond, Grotim, Camero, Maldonatus, Schmt^_ dms, &nd Brugenfis on Matth. 7, 7, And thefe cVov/^n' and P/:;^r//^^x taught, that Bo- dily Pennance fatisfied GOD for fome Sins, and natural Death fatisfied for other (ins ; for this fee Babylon: Jo7na: Fol: S6. 1. and before the Incarnation of Chrift they offered Sacrifices for lins of high Contempt of GOD, after the Men were dead that committed them ; fee Epitom: Jafonis Cyrenai de Ohlationibus: & Hierofok \ Sanhedrin fol. 37. 3. And that was equivalent to Popifii Mafs to bring Souls ouc • ^ of Purgatory. jl S E, C Ti II. Comaii-iing a Refutation of the [fur ant s Affertion that our Saviotir him' felf did aElually jyn in Communion with the Scribes and Pharilecs. HAvingin the laft Sediori proven, Xh^t our Saviour gave only an Ironical Command, v/hich was a Warning with Certification to his Difciples not to joyn in Communion with thefe blafphemous Hereticks the Scribes and Pharifees ; as indeed generally all Ironical Commands are V/arnings to forbear Sin, with Cer- tification of Judgment if the Party forbear not : I come now to anfwer the fecond Head of thc'jurant's Inflance, which he aflerteth j namdy. That our LORD did prr/chcally jOyn tn Communion with thefe Scribes and Pharifees, tojhow an exaEi Obfer- var:Ci of god's Inflitutions fuitable to that Adminiflr ation and his State. But the Jurant citeth no Scripture to prove that bold Aficrtion. To which Aflertion I anfwer, firfi. It is clearly evident. That thefe Scribes and Pharifees denied the Divine Nature of Chrifl, and likewife denied that Jefus of Naz.dnth was the Meffiah > and therefore they were Hereticks from whom it was neceflary Duty to feparate, even according to the Jurant's firft Jult Ground of Separation : And if the Jurants can prove, That it was incumbent on our Saviour as he was Man, to joyn in Communion with damnable Hereticks, even thefe that were guilty of the fearful BlafpJiemy againft the Holy Ghoft, as the Pharifaick Clergy were, Icrthcm try it, and let us fee by what Scriptures they will prove the Ppinr. ^'^J' f^6 1 he Jr^uffierttsadvamed for Defence of CHAP. X. iSy. The Author falfly aflerts, T'hnt it wasfuhable to GOD^s hfiituiwns and our Saviour's State, that our LORD fliould joyn in Communion with damnable Here- tidfsthat defaied th« Divine Nature of Chrift, and that Jefiis o£ Nax,areth was tkeMsffi^'; y5a, and wholly rejeded the Covenant of Grace, andfet up a Cove- nant of Works, and were guilty of Blafphemy againft the Holy Ghoft : Is it not dreadful to affirm, Yhat GOD's Inflitutions required our LORD as Man, and as an Ex- ample4o his Followers, to joyn inComimnion -with fuch, they being monftruoufly blaf- phemous Hcreticks ? ^dfy. We have not the leaft Mention of our Saviour his joyning in Communion with thefe Scrihes and Pharifees, nor fo much as appearing publickly in the Temple before he entredon his Publick Miniftry, except at twelve Years of Age he difputed luHh the DoEior sin the Temple, Luke 2. ^6. But that was no joyning in Worfhip \ And who would be fo unreafonable as to affirm that Mr:. Knox his difputing with the Sub-prior, and the Friar Arbugkil at St. A}jdrews,wa.s joyning in Worfhip with the Papifts? See ^;zox'sHiftory Book i. Pag; yp, 8o, 8i, ^2,83. ^thfy. Our Saviour had no perfonal fin, and theretore needed neither Legal Purifications, nor Offerings to be offered to GOD for his own Perfon, who was GOD-MAN, the Second Perfon of the Blefled Trinity, nor was there any Law requiring any Man, to offer Sacrifice to GOD, but upon the Account of Sin ; and ' fo our Saviour was not obliged by any Law to offer Sacrifice according to the , Ceremonial Law, for his own Perfon, being the Perfon of GOD himfelf and free of Sin : The only Offering that he was obliged to offer to GOD, was himfelf foe the Sins of the Eleft, which Offering he offered once, HeL 5?. 26. As for the Of- fering which his Mother Mary offered, Luke 2. 24. it was for het- own Purifica- tion, not for Chrift, as Lightfoot following Pifcator and Brugenfis well obferves on * that Text : And as for the Dedication, it was his Parents and not the Pharifaick Priefts that prefented him to the LORD ; And as for Circumcifion, the Text fays not that the Prieits adminiftred it; and Turret. & Sharp deBaptifmo obrerve,That by , the Law, Parents might circumcife their Children,there being no Command given to the Priefis, to adminifler it as a Part of their Office ; and Brugenjisy Lightfoot and ^ Grotius on Luke i. 59. do fay. That Parents or Friends might, ^d did circum- cife for ordinary. But when the Jurants perceive themfelves blockt up by their own Conceffions, and other Arguments, perhaps they may turn defperate, and without any Shadow of a rational Anfwer to what Arguments I have advanced on this Head ; in this defperate Cafe, I fay, they may unreafonably trample upon their own Conceffions and other Arguments, and borrow two or three Arguments from Prelatifis and Papifts to help them here in their Strait : And tho' I am not obliged to anfwer a- ny of their Givils till they refute their own Conceffions, and prove, that damnable r. Herefie, and the Sii>againft the Holy Ghoft, is free of any fuch grofs Defedion as can be juft Ground of Separation; I fay, till they prove that, JTam not obliged to anfwer tiieir Cavils about our Saviour's joynmg in Comjnunion with Saiks and wm CHAP. X. The OATH of Ahjaration anfwered. 177 and Pharifees '. Yet lefl the Jiirants banter, and impofe upon weak well meaning People, by Popifli and Prelatick Arguments on this Head : I (hall anfwer the flrongell ArgLiments, that Prelatilts and Papifts advance on this Head. . The firft Argument is, I'hat our Saviour went into the Synagogues and taught^ dif- putedy and wrought Miracles^ as in Matth. 4. 23. and 12. 9. Mark i. 21, Joh: 18. 2O0 In anfwer to that, I fay /?r//. There is no Mention in thefc Texts that our LORD joyned in Communion of VVorfhip with the Scribes and Phavifees. adly. Calvin, Bucer, Bullinger, Muf cuius jMar lor at and others of the beft Com- mentators on thefe Texts, tell us, That oijr Saviour did not make Ufe of the Sy- nagogues and Temple for joyning in Communion with Scribes and Vharifees ; but for thefe Ends, to v/it, ifl. That he might have the fittefl V lace f6r publick pre aching the Go/pel J where all the Congregations were nffembled, especially feing proud malicious l^havikcs would not readily have come to hear it, if he had not preached before their Facest , adly. T'hat he might let his Adverfaries fee he was a faithful Mini/iery that would not forbear to execute his Office for Fear of the Faces of Men; and to give a Fatern to Gofpel Mini/iers to do the like. ^dly.Thathe might publickly vindicate his DoEirine againjlhis mo/i learned Adverfa- ries the Pharifees and Dollars of the Law. 4thly. That he might confute his Adverfaries publickly before alltheVeople, and leave theminexcufable, and condemn their obfiinate Infidelity, that would not believe in him as the true Meffiah, who per formed all the miraculous Works, that the Frophets foretold Jhouli be done by the Meffiah. %th\y.To vindicate himfelf from fcandalous Reproaches, which they unjuflly laid upon him, alledging he d/d break the Sabbath, and the like: For tho' he did not regard their Authority, nor appear before thefn upon their Demand or Summons, yet he went into the Synagogue when he thought fit, and vindicate him felf from their AJperfions,arid wrought a Miracle before their Eyes, Matth: 12. 10, 11, But he joyned not in Communion with the Pharifees : Yea not only Proteflant, but even feveral Popifti Commentators, do not fo much as alledge upon this Place, that our Saviour did here, joyn in Com- munion of Worfhip with Scribes and Pharifees -, for this fee Beza, Pifcator, Grotius, Ludovicus de Dm, J a: Capellus, Ader, Menochius, Camerarius, Maldonatus, Theodotio, znd Brugenfis. The fecond Argument advanced by fome Papifls and Prelatifts, viz.: Brugenfis and Lightfoot on Luke 4. 16. On which Place they alledge our Saviour joynod in Communion with the Pharifees : And that he read and expounded the Lawaccor- rf^d according to their Rubrick, and gave him Commiffion and Power to read^ and explain. And this was the Order of their Synagogue- Worfliip, as appears by ':vhat wc find record«ecl by Maimonides inSanhedr: Cap: i. and Hierofol: Peak: Ft I: zi. 2tnd HierofohBuccirm Foh 6f, and Babyh Beracvth Foh 28. And from thq Text it is p^ain, that our Saviour was not called by the Minifler of the Synagogue, to ftand up and read, nor got he the Place of the Book given him by Diredion of the Minifleri nor got he Commiffion and Power to read and explain the Pro- phecy, as was the Order of thefe that joynedin Communion in their Synagogue with their Mmifter, Prieft, Levite and other Dodors and Ledurers^ - 3f//y. By confidering the iJ{th and i^th Verl'es it plainly appears. That what is faid in this i6th Verie holds out to us, that our Saviour was performing his or- dinary Courfe of his publick Miniflry, and io went into that Synagogue, as he did into. other Synagogues, to preach the Gofpel, and took that Place ot the Pro- phecies odfaiah to be his Text : This is moll clearly evident by confidering the 18 and IP Verfes of this Chapter, fo that he did not perform that Exercife, as a yewjjb Le(^reri but as the MfjJ/^Miimfelf, fulfilling that Prophecy in preaching the QjdfpQl: And in 21 Verle he plainly tells them, 7'his Day^ this Scripture is fulfill: i iiiyouY Ears : So that our LORD wajs unconteflably performing his Gofpel Mini- ^ iiry there,, as he did in Gallileey fpoken of in Verf: 14. 15. and in Capernaujn Ver ; ll ag. Fortius fee Lightfoot and Brugenfis on Ver: 16: 2i\vi Savcerinsy Brent ins ^ Biit»~f hiigevy Camn.Bmer, Sind.Zmnglius, on Luke 4. 14, 15, i^, 17, 1-8, 19, 21, 23: And that" which makes it likev/ife very clearly raanifeft is. That it was not upon the Call oftheMinifterof the Synagogue that he preached; but by the Authori- ty and Diredion of the Spirit of GOD, as the Learned Sarcerius obfcrvcs on the ^ * 14 Ver: and Cahin, Pifcator and Brugenfis obferve on the lyf^ Verfe,That by .Virtue of his Miniflerial O/Ece, he choofed the Place of Scripture on which he preached, and fo it was not chofen to him by the Minifter of the Synagogue, ac- . (CCrdingto the Order of their Synagogue. And Bremius, by comparing, the 21 , anda3Verfes,.obferves, That our LORD preached here in Na^reth as he did |, in Caper mimi and other Places; the (s^q is aflerted by Brugenfis, And as for ouc | Saviour his making Ufe of a Book belonging to the Synagogue, it no more proves J that he joy ned in Communion with the »S'cr?^£'j and P^rtr/j^i-j, than a Minifler that | Ihadan extraordiaary Call from GOD to go and preach the Gofpel to th« yews CHAP. X. The 0.ifh of AhjtirAthfi m fiver ed, ,-g, .' their Synagogues, that he might -the more clearly convince them, his mhkii'^ ' Ufe of the //f/^mu Bible that they keep in their Synagogues ; wouid prove that the MiniilerthattookhisTextoutofthe Hebrm Bible did joyn in cSmmmiio'i [ And it is remarkable, that Pap ifls and Prelatifts obferv^ bnthe 48 Verlc; 7^^^ our Lord had compared that Synagogue in the precee ding Ferfes,to Ifrael in theirmojl cor- rupted Idolatrous State; and therefore he declared the7n to be as unworthy of Miracles j as Idolatrous Ut^dinthe DaysofE\hs : Thus the Place is explained by Brugenjis^ M«?- nochjusy Lir^hif'xt and Grctitis. And ilirely it were abfiird ro fay, That our i5'aviouc could joyn in Communion with thefethat were as abominably wicked as Idola- trous //rrtf/ in the Days of jE/w ; for £//<7j himfelf feparated from Comrauhioti with T/r^?/, as Learned Turrettin de Secejf. no fir a ab Ecclef. Rom. pdg. 37, well obferves. The Third great Argument advanced by fome Papifts and PrelariAs-ifor proving that our Lord Jefus Joyned in Communion with th^ Scril;es_ and Pharifee^, h, that our Saviour xvent up to Jerufalem and f?ajed therfat the time of ih( Fedjljy viz. 'Tlje feaft of Tabernacksj Pdffover, Dedication and Penteccfi -^ hr Bifhop" Lindfay ioWow ing the Popllh Divines at Rheims, holds and confidently afl'ertS: Thit, i[}hen cur Lordivi^nt to Jerufalem to aFeaR^ he did approve of, and Joyn mith tl/e PhsidktS in. keeping that Feaji. ^ , , ^ • ^u '\ ' ^- To which Mr. GilUfpie AnTwers in Kis Dlfpute againft'&|///j-^^/;i CfeREM(5- MIES, Part 3; chapt &. Pagg lo^.^fpeaking cf the Feaft of Dedication, Mr. Gillefpie iblkwmg Ftilliy Cartioright, yuijnus, and Hofpiniany anfwereth ; that our Saviour his being prefent atthe-Feafi of Dedication, John 10. 22. doth not prove thap he did approve of that Feafiy or Jcyn with the Pharifees in keeping it: But the Rea- fon why our Saviour d:d take that and the liU Occafans to, be at Jerufalem v;<«/, //^^ he ^fg^^ ^^^^^ fitly Jiw the Seed of the Goffely in preaching to the multitude, , ' " But feing our Lord did keep the Pafibver at y^Kz^/j/^^/, the Jurant Author will hence conclude ourSaviour joyned with ih^Scribes and Pharifees in that Ordinance. In Anfwer to this, Firfl I mufl mind the Author of his fii/l jua Ground of Se- paration ; according to which it is plain, that feing the Scribes 2nd Fharifees WQrc moll grofs Blafphemous Hereticks, fcparation from them was neceffary Duty. ^dly, Tho' it be plainly evident from Scripture that there were (bur, and iuch ground irom the Word of GOD, that it needs not be doubtecL there .was a fifth Paflbvcr between the Time of our Lord's Baptifm, and his Crucifiaioii; yet I , find no Proof from the Scripture, that at any of them, he did joyn in Commu- • nion v^ith the^ Scribes and Vharifees in the Celebration of that Solemn Ordinance. Thefirft of th'^e Pailbvers I find Recorded in John 2. 13, 14, ij, i^.'Vhere E>.politors ; For this fcePamons Mr.Baillte Oper: Qhrom lib\ z-rpage^w^i: follow Z 2 mg J So The Arguments advanced for Defence of "^1=?- ClH'^F?frX- Jng Jrejiafii, EpiphattifUy Lyranmy AlfuIenJiSfPererimy Maldoftatm, 'Petavimy Cahin, and Mufcuius ; See alfo Chryfoftomy Lightfoot, Buce/y Brentiusy Gr otitis y fVaferus, Zegerusy DrufiuSy Erafmsy Brugenfis and Camerarius on thefe Texts. The fecond PaHbver is Recorded ^oJm 5. i. but being fomewhat darkly ex- ptcfky Mr. BaUlie Oper. Chron: lib: 2: Obferves,- T'hat fome alledge this Feafi ]ohn 5: j^tuas not the P-nffover hut Pentecofi y becaufe it appears to follow imrKediately upon the Vajfover in the fecond Chapter y 13: T'^erfe: to which Mr. Baillie Au{wGVSi that is plainly faJfe; for after that Faff over y. Chapter 2: Verfe ly. Our Lord Chrijl exprefly jtmrmfy Chap: 4: in Verfe 3 5: there are yet_ Four'Vlpneths to the Harvefi : '-i hereas the M/heat Harveji ivas near at an end at the Feafi of ?entecofl y at which Feafi the Har^ vefl leing at an endy there was an Offering of Unleavened Cakes to be Offered to the ' Lord. For as Mr; Baillie lib: 2: Page y6: Obferves out of Ainfmrth on Levit: 2 3; following Maimonides i^nd Chemnitius on Luke 6: 1: and comparing Exod: 9: 31; 32: with Levit: 23: i-i; 1$: he obferves, Jfayy that th Jews had two Jiar-' vefis i thefirfl was the Barley Harvefi at the time of the Vaffover -, and on the fecond day after the Paffover was the ;Sheafto be offeredy viz. A Sheaf of Barley y and Fifty days after was Fentecojiy which was' the eyid of the JVheat Harvefi called the fecond Harvefi'y Becaufe the Barley was Reaped before the Wheat vjas Ripe for the fickle : And at this Feafi of ?entecofl the Offering (f Unleavened Cakes was to be Offered at the md of the fecond Harvefi : And fo it could not be Pentecof? which was not Four Moneths before y but in the very end of the fecond Harvefi ,. and the Paffover in the time of the pft Harvefiy and but fifty days before Pentecofi the^ end of thefecqnd Harvefi. ks thefe jDivines on £xo^.- 9: 31.- 32: and Levit: 2 y. obferve. Nor could it be the Feafi of labernacles that is fpoken of ]ohi\/;« conneds that Part of our Lord's Difcourfe in the Exercife of his Miniftry afterwards, to the Defcription of the Paflbver going before;, altho*^ this Difcourfe of faying, it is four Months to the Harveft could not be fpoken at thePafTover, or Pentecoft for both of them were in Harvefi: viz: The Paflbver in the Barley, and Pentecofl in the Wheat Har- vefi and but fifty Days between : Nor could thefe Words be faid at the Feaft of Tabernacles which was feven Moneths before the firfl, and nine before' the fecond Harveft: So that ^o/;;? having given a Defcription of the Paflbver chap: 2: 13: inchati 4- Ver- 35; tells us, a faying that Chrift fpoke m Preachmg at fo long DilUflCe of Time after that Paflbver, that it was but four Moneths to the Harveft ©fth^ next Year: And there being but fifty Days between the Paflbver and Pen- tcGoft • This Feafi >A/? 5: i-* could not be the Feaft of Pentecoft next after ' , . .^ the !ir? .CH'A^. X, The OAth of -jihymiton axifxverecl.' ' igi the Paljbwer, 'John i: 13/ nor the Feaft of Tabernacles for Reafons above faid : And thel^fore it mud be the Paflbver. Mr.- Baillie followed Chemnitiusy Bez.a, Jw nius^ Rolkcus, Grotius, the Dutch Annotations and other Proteftant Divines, as alfothe^oftLearnedof thePapifts. vix.. Baroniusy Janfeniusy a Lapide, Henri- cus F/:ilippiy Emanuel Say 7oJetus and Ferus, all whom he citeth Page 92; who all hold Johns.' '• to fignify the Paflbver; And befide all thefe, the fame thing is aflcrted by henausy Chryfofiom Theodotio, Camerariusy BrugenJtSy Lightfoot, and Gro- ft«y;Who befide other Reafons,give this for one, viz.: That tho' theld/ordl?aJJover ] be not added John -5.- i; to the l^^ord (Feafl ) yet by way of E?mnence the Feafly there doth Jigni fie the Pajf over y ^j Mark 15; i5: Luke 23; 17; in which Places the Word ^Pajfoier is not 'added : But after all ; neither in the Text doth it at all appear, that our Lord at that Paflbver jpyned in Communion with Scribes and Pharifees i Nor do thefe Expofitors on the Place affirm that he did. The Third Paflbver is mentioned Jshn 6: 4: Bat I find not any evident ground at all in that chapter ; for making it appear that our Lord did go up to Jeru- fjem to that Paflbver .- Nor do the mofl Learned Expofitors aflert that he went up to Jerufalem to it; Nor could I ever fee any Critick or Commentator who affirms that there is any folid Ground at all in the whole Chapter, or elfe-where in Scripture to believe that he either went, or yet commanded his Difciples to go up to Jerufalem to that PaflTover ; .Tlio' I have Confulted a good many Cti- ticks and Commentators on the Place, viz>. AuguBiny Chyfofivnty Calvin, Bcza, Fjfcatory Bucer, Bullingerj Mufculus, Marlorat, BrentiuSy Chemmtiusy Hammond, •Lightfooty Ludovicus de DieUy Grotius, Theodotio, Menochiiis, Efiius, Maldonatus, 'foletusy Brugenfisy Beday Vatablusy and Zegerus. The Learned Mufculus and others 017 thePlace, give a Reafon why o^irLORD did not go up to Jerufalem to that Paflbver ,• Viz,. For fear he fiould irritate the malicious Rage of his cruel Enemies the ]cws againft hi?};, before his lime: Which is the fame Reafon th&t Scaligery Baillie and others following Scal/ger; viz.: CahJ/iusy Caufabonusy Deckerus and Suarez, ; I fay, its the fame Reafon that they give why Chrift did not go up to Jerufale?n to another Paflbver. Sure tiiis was plain Separation from Communion with Scribes and Fharifees in keeping their Paflbver zt Jerufalem, when our Lord did not fo much as go to thePlace;. nor command his Difciples to go. There is a Fourth Paflover imported by v/hat we find in Luke 6: i: And it came to pafs on thefecond Sabbath after the frfl, that he went through the Corn Fields ; and his Difciples plucked the Ears of Corn, and did eat rubbing them in their Hands. Mr; Baillie Oper: Chrouj Lib: 2; Page 92: 93; following Mt'rr<2/or, Scaliger, Cal- vifius, Cafaubonusy Deckerus, Su/irez.2Li)d HenricusFhilippiy takes this Place of I,«yi^^ to import a fourth Paflbver,' his firft Reafon is taken from the Greek Words S ABB AtO^ DEVTERO PROTON i: e. Sabbato fecundo primoy as' he interprets them, following Junius: That is flridly fpeaking, the fecond firjl Sabbath : The meaning of that is, the firfl ordinary Sabbath after the fir fi day of Unleavened Bread, it'j. •|g2 Tbs Ar^umsnts ndvincsd for Defence of CHaIP. X. us cabled the fecotid, becaufi it ■v:as fecond in Order of T'lmSf and afterward called th^ frft ; IciWife tho it was fecond in Timey it wa/ fi'fl in Dignity, the Moral SoUath lelii% v: ore Holy than any Ceremonial i^efiival Sabbnth^f^ich aithejirfl Day of Vnleaven- ■ ed Bread, 'mhich was M Ceremonial Sabbath of Sokmu Convocation: Thus Ml*. Baillie interprets it, Lib: 2.- Open Chron-.Page 'jj. In which he follows the Judgment of EpiphaniuSyCafattbcnusy^nd Pttavius. And ihusLuke 6. i.muft import that the fecond Sabbath atterthe firit was the fiiilordinarySabbath afterthe firftDay ofUnleaveii- ed Bread,and at the end of tbePailbver immediately preceeding: And further,Mr, Baillie Page P3. above cited, proves this Sabbath was not at the firfl Paflbver 'jo ,2. 14. Nor at the fecond in John 5. i. It was not at the frfi, becaufe after the fir fl\ for a long time, ]o\\nthe Baptifl was not pit in Prifon ; as is dear from ]o\m 3.24^ But before the Difcipks plucked the Ears of Corn, John was put in Prifon, as is evi' dent from ^^^th: 12. i, 2. and 11. 2. Neither was it at the fecond in John 5. L 'For our Lord remained at Jerufalcmi. at that time, and healed the Impotent Man at the Pool of Bethefda, John 5. 2. ^ . Nor could our Lord leave the City before all t hi Days of Unleavened Bread wer-e ended ; And feing that fecond Sabbath after the firfl did fall always within the [even days, or on the eight day of the Feaft of the Paffovei he could not leave the City till the Solemnity was firdlhed : And therefore that which appears to he mefi true, is, that upcn that Sabbath immediately after the Paffover, and before the Feafl was ended, our- Lord went through the Corn Fields, which was done in Gallilee, when J ef us for fear of the Jews did not go up to Jeriifalem. Thus Mr. Baillie following Scaliger, Mercator, CahiTius, Cafaubonus, Dcckerus, Suarex, and Henricus Philip pi. And this kts us ckarly fee Chrift did not joyn in Communis on with the Scnks ^.vAVhariftes in keeping theirPalfover ujerujakm; feing he was not at Jerufikm at that Time. But feing this Reckoning will make five Paflbver^ between Chrift's Baptifni and Cruoifidion ; and confequently it will be longei^ than Three Years and an half of his Publick Miniftry, which feems not to agree with Daniel 9. 27. Where the Publick Miniftry of the Meffiah, and Confirmatioi of the Covenant is defined by the half of a Week, that is three Years and an half To that Mr. 5 anfwereth Lib: i:Oper:Chron: Page 9$: (3.ymg,it is awroHg Expofaien of D.\n: 9. 27. to fay, that CJrrifi jhuld die in the ?mddle and not ;n the end of the laft of thefventy IVeeLs. .For Mr.- Baillie Lib. i. Oper: Chron: Page 182: following San'dius obkrvts ; T'hat the Hebrew lext doth notfignifie the half, but the middle', viz. A Civil middle, but not a Mathematical middle ; For the Civil 'middle ■is only about the jniddle, tho' fome conjlderable fpace after it. As Junius ^^-^ Calvifius Interpret Dan. 9. 24. ■ .- The Fifth Paflbver is Recorded in '^oJm 13: i: yiatth 26: 16: And this was Chrift's laft Paflbver, v:hich he kept with his Difciples the Night belorc he was CrucifieJ. And , it is certain that our Lord Jefi.is did not joyn in Communion with th^Scribes and ^harifees in keeping that Paflbver, which lihallprove.Andmy ■Reafons are, Ftrfi, Becaufe as Mr. Baillie Oper. chronyLib: 2: Page 83. following Cahin^ 'Scalf CHAP. X. The OATH of Ah]ura!ian A^f^nred. 183 Scaliger, Qalvijiu^y Cafaubouus, Deodatm, Pifcator^ the Dutch Annotators, and many other Protedant Divines, and many oi the moil Learned of the Popifh, %'iz,. Jan- fenius, MaUoKiims, Sa/meron, Petav/us y and ochers who followed ^nu /us Burgenjis a Jew,upon John 18. 28. who obfcrve it to be clearly evident thatChrift did keep that laft Pallovcr the Night before the Jc;ws did keep the Paflbver, Fiz,. Twenty Four Hours fooner than the Jews kept it : For it's undenyably evident from Alatth: 26. and the reftof theEvangelifis,that our Lord kept tjie Pafibver before he was taken : And it is alfo clear from John 18. 28. That on the next Day the 'Jews would not go in to Pilate's 'Judgment-Hall //fV did not' Kill the ^afchal Lambs till the Evening in which they kept t(je?ajjfover; our Lord needed not y nor did Employ them to Kill it; For Philo a Learned Jew who lived in Judea before the lajl Defiru^ion of the Temple affirms; that the Jews held it as a Voint of Faith, that GOD permitted Majlers of Families to Kill the Lamb in their own Hotifes. ^thly. 77;^ Jews that Tear kept the ? a (f over on the Ftfteetifh Day, andfo Iranfgrejfed the Law : The Scribes and Pharifees frequently didfi, as Paulus Burgeufis a Jew demonflratesy and Caufabonus proves the fame by Multitudes of Teftimonies of ]Qwi{h Ksbhks. Thus Mr. Baillie.^ ' And thus it is plainly evident from the\vhole, that our Saviour did not join in Communion with the Scribes and Pharifees. SECT. 11^. Containing a Refutation of tfye Jurants A'^gument for Defence of the Oath, founded on the Command given to the Man that was cleanfed of the Leprofie^ to go andjhow himfelfto the Priefis, Matth; 8. 4. THc third General Head of the Author's Inftance that I had to anfwer was this, viz.. That our LORD gave exprefs Co7nmand to acknowledge^ andimploy the Priefls, of that Time in things belonging to their Office, Matlh: 8.4. Ill Anfwer to this, firfl, left his Memory tail him, J mufl tell him. That feing the Scribes znd Pharifees wttcgrok blafphemous Hereticks, as was made evident; then according to the Author's firft Juft Ground of Separation, it was an indif- penfable liecefl'ary Duty to feparate from Communion with them : And if Ije be able to reconcile that with an exprefs pofitive Command ofClirift obliging his Fol- lowers to joynin Communion with thefe damnable Hereticks, I lay, if he be able to reconcile thefe two, he may try it. , ,. ^ ^dly. Our Saviour was fo far from commanding his followers exprefly to joyn iaCommunioa with thefe heretical Pharifaick Pricfts, that on the contrary, Mattk- 15 €HAP. X. The Oath of AhjurAttofi, Jn/wereJi. ^ I'S^ .15. 14. Hq commands to let them alone, in xhQ Greek it is "A^jsrsyt/ri/f , Relinquite illoSyVtl' dimittitt' ilks, that is, leave theyn, mthdrawfrom themt or dimit them like a devorced IVife : Thus I find it interpreted by Pifcator, Gualterusy and in fevera! Tranfiations of" the Bible, viz,, in the Ethiopick and jlmbicki. and in the Tranfla- tions of Arias Momanus, ^agnin and Cafialio, and yatallus. and Brugenfis inter- ^pretitfo. And it is remarkable, that the Greek Word[''rif^V' ] commonly fig- nifies to luithdrawfrom a Perfon or Party, to feparatey or devorce, and fo it is the . fame Word in the Original Af^^//j; 4. 11. Then the Devil leaVithJmn. And i Cor.j. II. it fignifies the divorcing a Wife, and Mauh. 8. ij. it iignifies the Fever's leaving the Woman, and M/z/?/;. 19. 27. it fignifies, forfaking all : And pur Lord in that Place calls them blind Guides, and %s, If the blind lead the blind both ihall iall into the Ditch, which is the Ditch of Eternal Deftruflion, as Maldona^ ius, Brugenfis and Calvin explain it ; and Calvin on the Place faith. That Text lets us fee that Men are inexcufable, who under the Pretext of Simplicity, or Mode- . ration yield themfelves to falfe Teachers to be led out of the Way of Truth by the infnaring Errors of thefe falfe Teachers. But leing it is plain by what hath been faid. That our LORD did not com- mand his Followers to joyn in Communion with the Scribes and Pharifees, then it ' comes to be cleared what is the Senfe of that Text, which commanded the Man that was cleanfed of the Leprofie, to go and Ihow himfelf to the PrieHs, ' and offer for his cleanfaig according to the Law of Mofcs , for a Teflimony • unto them. In Order to clear this difficult Text I fhall lay down thefe Propofitions, as Rules, ' az/z^-i.That every Textmufl be explained fo as to render theSenfeofit agreeable to ' the Analogy of Faith : But to afKrm that a Text is an exprefs Command of Chcift ■ obliging his Fo'.iowcrs to joyn in Communion with blafphemous Hereticks, fuch as the Scribes and Pliarifces were, is not agreeable to the Analogy of Faith. 2dly. It is undeniably plain from 2 Kings 5, 7. That it was believecf as afirm .. Truth among tlie Jcwsy that none could cure the Leprofy but GOD .- For it was ^' only the Power of GOD that cured Naajnan, and tho' the Prophet was the mo- • .ral Inftrumcnr, yet he could not cure in his own Name and by his own Power, as \ Chrii\ did, before all the People ; and this was a Demonflration that he was God as well as Man, and fo was the true Mtffah. 3 ^/y. It's plain from M^2f/^, 11. 5. That cleanfing the Leprofie is one of the CharaderifticKs, or evident Tokens of the true Mejjiah, to wit, in working thefe Miracles by" his own Power j for tho* Apollles wrought Miracles they wrought them by the Power of Chrill through Faith in Iiim ; and therefore he on- ly was the true Mefpah who wrought Miracles by his own Power. Afthly. Chrill being GOD and Man, he knew for certain that thefe Pricfls would all along deny him :o be the true Mf^/W;, and at lafl would condemn and cruafie him as they adiK.lly did afterward. 5/ii7)'. But notv/ithdi'nding he certainly knew they would deny him to be the -;!i A a ' true ^J5 The Arguments ndvificsd in Defence of CHAP. X„ trtie Mtffmh ; being fent of t^ Father to offer Salvation firft to the Jevjs tlirough Xhc M^ahi he might, yea, was obliged to give evident Teftimonics of it to the - Church ofthej^f, to render the Reprobate Multitude of the blafphemous he- ■rctical Piiarifaick Prieftsincxcu fable. • 6thly^ As the Glory of GOD was the higheft End of all our LORD*s Words and Aftions, fo it is plain from this Text, that to be a Teftiniony unto thefe Priefiswas a fubordinate End offending the Man tofiiow himfeltto them. jibly. I find that the GV^A^ Phrafe thatwt; have Tranflated [untothemj is E- quivalent to the Hehew Word [3AHEM} contra ?7/ojagainft them; And foitis ^'j^ahsLttd by the SeptuagmtyDeut: 32. 46. i Sam.S. 9. i Kings 2. 42. And the very fa,me 6Vf^/^ Words, that in this Verfc are tranflated, for a T'eflimony unto theniy in Mhtth: 10. 18. and Mark 13.9. are tranflatedi for a Tefibnony againflthem. And as Cahin, Marloraty Mufculus and Pifcotor oh'{Q\:vt on thei^ Texts, That Tefiimony ^Ugainft them, Viho condemned Cirri ff s Docirine ojtd DifcipJes for adhering to Chrifi and the Gofpel, ivas a Tejlimony of Condemnation, whereby thefe Perfecutors are rendered in' txcufabk before GOD ; whereupon GOD wiiljuflly condemn them in Judgment. Sthly. I find that when our Saviour had miraculoufly caufed the Man to fee *that was horn blind, the Jews were inraged againft all that confeflfed Chrift ; for in Joh: 9- 22: it.isfaid, Thefe PPordsfpake his Parents, becaufe they feared the *Jeu'S : Fbr the Jews had agreed already, that if any Man did confefs that he was Chrifl, I tejhtuld beptn out of the Synagogue, that Claufe, vio^' He fhould be put out of the \ Synagogue y in the Original it is d-rajwdytoya ykvnTcu i. e. Ejiceretur, tha.t is^e fiould \ he cafi out, as it is in the Syriack, Mthiopick, Illirick and Tigurin Tranflations ; which fignifieth Cafting out by Excommunication, as Bez.a, Pifcator, Lightfooty, Crotius,Ludovicus de dieu,CapeUus and Drujius explain it. Grotius thmks it was that Sentence called in Hebrew NIDDUI, which was the leaft Sentence of Excom- munication in jthe Jewijh Church, by which Men were debarred from Communion in Worjhip in the Synagogues, and from familiar Converfe ; but Capellus and Drujtus take it to fignify the Sentence which the Hebrews called CHEREM, i. e. Anathema, that was a greater Sentence of Excommunication, by which Men were not only debarred from Communion in Worftiip, and familiar Converfe j but alfo had all their Goods confifcated without Redemption, according to that Stature of Ex- communication in Ez>ra 10: 8.- This laft Sentence feems to be moft probably the true Meaning of the Place ; becaufe ofthehellilh Malice that the Scribes and Pharifees, and especially tiieir Sanhedrin, had againft Chrift and his Difciples. idly. \^*^^^^d,thejews had already agreed,in theOriginalit is c-uvcri^n^ToconftitueyTint, that is, they had conjlitute or decreed, or made a Statute. Thus it is interpreted in the Syriack and Illinck Tranflations, and alfo in the Tranflations of Arias Mon- tunus, Bez^a and Pifcator. -^dly. It appears the Jewifi Sanhedrin made that Statute, upon Chrift's having wrought the Miracle in Ctina QiGallilee, and going to Je- rufalem and Purging the Temple, and declaring the Scribes and Pharifees had made the Temple a Den of Thieves, which he did upon the firft Entry on his : Mini-i wmmm CHAP. X- Of the Oath of Ahjurmm anfmredi 187 Miniftry, and before he cured any Lepers, as appears from tJiC fecond and fourth Chapters of Johriy compared with the 8th oi Matthew : For making this dear, let it be confidered, i(i. Thu in John ^: ^ . our Saviour underilandingthac the Pbaiifees knew, and were fo inragtd at his fnaking and baptising Dififles, fie lift Judea, and departed again into Gahlee ; and as the Learned Chemmtius and Pool^ to'jlowing Augupin and lanfenitts on this Scripture have well obfcrved, this feconeir Condemnation. ;^ ^ And waving Groundkfs Coujedures of many Divines, the true Reafon why our Lord in Matth: 8: 4.- forbade the Man that was cleanfed to tell any other be- fore he went to the Priefts, was becaufe our Lord in fulfilling the Prophecy was ' Meek and Lowly, and fliunned all Popular Applaufe, and intended to do Gopd. but not to feek Worldly Commendation, as plamly appears by tli- Darailcl Text Matth: 12; i6y 17, 18, 19, 20. Thus it is explamed by Chyfaftom,. Amhrofe, 7%eodotiOj Calvin, Bucer,Bulhnger, Mufculus, Mar lor at, Junius, Maldonatus, and Bmgenfts ^n Matth 12: i^, 17, 18, ip, 20. S-E C T. IIL Which contains a plain Reflation of the Jurants Afiertion, That the Apo^l^^ joined in Communion with the Scribes and Ph an fees. npHE Fourth andlaft general Head of our Author's Inflance, that I have to -A Anfwer, is, that he faith, Ihe FoUoii)ers oj our LORD imitated his Example herein, ( viz. in Joining in Communion with Scribes and Pharifses ) ^a^Zacha- rias, Simeon and Anna, Luke i and 2 Chapters ; and the Apoflles of Chrififiill fe- qUented the Jewiih Synagogues after their LORD's Afcenfion, and till Jorced went not eff^ Ads 13; 14, i$» and 17. i. 2. It is plainly evident from what hath been faid. That this may be very eafily anlwercd; and therefore I fhall be&ort upon it. And feing I would fain hope the Author's own Words will favour beft with him, I anfwer/ry?. That accord- ing to 'tlie Author's firft juft Ground of Separation, it was unlawful for Chrift's FoUowerSi to join in Communion with grofly Blafphemous Hereticks,- fuch as the Scribes and Pharifees were, as was made evident,: And therefore it was a Sin iot Zachariasy Simeon and Anna, to pin as they did.. But W/y. The Author very inapropefly Numbers Zacharias, Simeon and Anna among Chrift's Followers, to wit, the Apoilles and Giher^Difciples wh^follO^^- ed "him ; for thefe Men and Anna, were very old, at Chriii's Birth j and .there is vio ^r^und from Scriptwe to believe they, lived 30 Tears longer; and, not the l^ft 'Mention oi their ibUOwihghia^ j and wl% they hved, theyilayed in Com- ihuniohMb thePhiri(kiok.TChia:ca,',v(rhieh wa^ tlieir Sm, tho' they acknow- ledged jefus of;Mzxrtr^r^to be theMeffiali; But ^per^i^ps foine will objeifl, That feing Siikem Hxid'ZacImrias were called lyoly, ptfi and^oo^ Mm;, if it had leena Sin t^ imin^Cmmh^n with Scri^is and PMrifees,.theJ^ holy gmd Men wou/d net 'h^'^^ V .*'{- done mm CHAP/ X. The Oath of Jhjur At ion An [were d. lot doneh. TothatIanf^ver;5^y2,Thacfeing Scribes and Pharifees were grols He- Tetkks, It was a Sm to join in Communion with them, -idly, I anfwer with the Learned X^yrmht de Seceffione mflra ab Ecckf: Romana Pag. 37. where fpeakin" on the lame Subjecft, he faith. It is afalfe Way of Reafoning, to argue a praxi ad jus. That is m plain Terms to argue thus, Becaufe hoU good Men did fuch or Juch a Thing, therefore it is lawful and right jor me or any other to do the fame or the like 'Thing; every fober Man may fee that to be very abfurd; for Aaron is cslkdrheSaifitof GOD, Pfah 106. \6. David, A Man after GOD' s o-ucn Heart, I Sam: ly. 14- and P^m- a great Apoftle; yet Aaron mzda a Golden C^lf, and committed abominable Idolatry, and Dauid committed Murder and Adultery, and Peter did fwear a dreadfijl perjurious Oath, in Denying the Lord Jefus with an Oath. And furely it were no lefs than Blafphemy to affirm, that I or any other might lawfully worfliip a golden Calf, commit Murder and Adultery, and deny the Lord Jefus with an Oath, and yet be a true Follower of Chrift m do- ing fo .- Becaufe we fee that Way of Reafoning rejcfts the Word of GOD, and makes Men's Praftice the Rule of Faith andM'annersj yea, and makes the Sins of Godly Men a Law for others to go on in Wickednefs. And this lets us fee how dreadful an Error \x. is for Minifters to perfwade People that there is no Sin in the Oath of Abjuration, becaufe Godly Men did fwear it ; for Pe.ter was as Godly a Man as any of them, and yet denyed the Lord Tefus with an Oath. - As to the Apoflles imitating our Lord in Frequenting the J^av/j Synagogues ; I anfwer /ry?, with the Words of Great Mr. Gillefpie in his Difpute again fl EngltjJi-popijh CEREMONIESj Pan-. 3. Chap. 6,?ag. 105. where following Cz/- 'vin on ABs 18. 21. he fays, Paul choofed to be prefent at certain ]c\v\^\ Fta[ls,nci for any refpefJ to the Feajls thcrnfehes, nor for any Honour he /neant to give the?u ; lutfer the Multitude's Caufe ivho reforted to the fame, among whom he had a moreplen^ tiful Occafon to fpread the Gofpel at thofe Fejlivities, than at other 'Tiims in the Tear- Thus he. And Sarcerius on that Text holds the very fame Dottrine. idly. Seing Scripture is the true Interpreter of Scapture, I find an evident plaiii Dekription of Paul's Manner of A(3:ing in the ^Jewijh Synagogues, and for what End he went into them, as it is recorded in Acls 17. 2, 3. And Paul, as his Manner was, went in unto them, and three Sabbath Days reafoned with them out of the Scriptures', opening andalledging that Chriji mufl needs hays fuffered, and rifen again from the Dead ; and that this ^efiis whom I Preach unto you is ChriJl. This plainly lets usfce, Th2it.Paul went in to Preach the Gofpel, and for Con- vincing the Jews ; his Manner was on the Sabbath Days, not only to Preach, I but aifo to Reafon with them in their Synagogues, and to prove out of the Law and the Prophets, that Jefus of Naz,areth, who died and rofc again, is the true Mefliah, Thus it is explained by Schmidins, Vatabhis, Erafmus, BeoLa, Pif- cator, Cornelius a Lapide, Pricaus, Sarcerius, Calvin, Bremius and Bnl/inger. And for Decency and CiviUcie's fake, Paul und Barnabas, that they might not fliow Rwde- 192 The Arguments dchimed for Defence of CHAP.* XL Rudenefs, they fate filentthe Time that the '^ewi were about Wor(hip,till they got a fit Opportunity to Preach and Reafoii with the ^emx^ as the Learned BuUinger faith, Explaining A:h ig: 14: And all that Paul did in that Synagogue, . was to preach the Gofpel, when the Rulers of the Synagogue, out of Curiofity, defired to hear, it being new to them. For this (q^. Brent ius, Marlorat, Calvin, Sarcerius znd Bullmgcr on Acls i^. 15. 16. 17. 18. .C H A P. XL Which contains a Refutation of the '^urants Ajfertiony 'That nil Orthodox and Hereticks, Clean and Unclean, who lived within the Bounds of the Church of Corinth, joined altogether in Communion in all Gofpel Ordinances ; by which Ajfertion they endeavour, to defend the Swearing the Oath of Abjurationt and joining in Communion with Jurants. THE Author gives a Third Inftance of Corruptions in the Church, which he moft boldly allerts, was fo confiftent with Communion, that he affirms Communion was exprefly commanded, notwithflanding of thefe Corrupti- ons. This he advanceth in Page 22. his Words are thefe, tv/z,. The Third is the Church of Corinth : There were many grofs Corruptions in it, they denyed the RefuY' reBiony they did eat in Idols 'temples, having thereby followjhip with Devi Is y they came] . drunk to the LORD's Table ; Jnce/i was toleratedy and fu And another' thing to joyn in Communion with theic Hcreticks ; And' furqly Jurants will noc fay f hat it was all one to join in Communion with t^ie National Ciiurch of Scot^ landy that ever fince the Revolution hath connived at, and not Cenfured Apoft^t . Hcreticks, Qiiakers who deny the Rcrurredion ; andyet liye within the Bounds. of the Church, feducing and deilroying many ; I fay, juyamswiW not fay it*saU one to joyn in Communion with the Church that connives at thefe Hereticks and to joyn in Communion with thefe Hereticks themfelves. idly. Its one thing to joyn in Communion with a Church that connives ac Hereticks to live in feparate Seds within the Bounds of the Church, and another thing to joyn in Communion with a Church that alloweth a great part of her adual Minifters to teach and maintain Herefie. ^My. When the Generality of a Church come to be guilty of grievous Defedi- ons and grofs notour Scandals, tho' a few in that Church cannot Excommuni- cate the Generality of the Church, becaufe the Sentence could not reach the End; As Mr. Gilleffie fzys in Aaron s Rod Page 2 8p. ^oWo'^'m^ Augufiin, Efiius and Ncvarinus : Yet it is Duty for the truly Godly Part to withdraw from the corrupted fcandalous part of that Churcli, in fuch a cafe when thefe Scandals can- not begotten removed in a Regular way fo as to reach the great End of Edifi- cation : And that Godly Part that withdraws ought to keep Communion witjh one another amongf^ themfelves in all Ordinances as much as poffible. Having laid down thefe Diflir.dions, I fhall anfwer the Author's Inftance ; And as to the Firfl General Head of his Inflance ; "jiz,. In charging the Church of Corinth with Corruptions, he fays, they denyed the Refurreclion, had fellowjhip ivith Devils, tolerated Incejly and murdered weak Souls : Here he charges the whole Church o!^ Corinth without Diflindipn, as being Guilty of all thefe Abominations: And*then tells us Communion in that Church was Itriftly commanded: That is fuch odd Divinity, its hard to tell what he would be at : For if he meant, that tho' that whole Church was Guilty of ail thefe Abominations; yet the Apollle commanded them to keep up Communion in all Gpfpei Ordinances, feing none needed to Rejcd another for Scandal ; becaufe they were all a- like ; His Words feem mofl plainly to bear this Senfe : But that is falfc, fi/i becaufe, the Apoflle tells us, there were but fane among them that denied the RefuyreSiion, i Cor: 15. is. and it*s clear from i Cor : 8. 7, 10, 1 1. that there were but fome afnong them that did eat in Idols 'temples and had Fello-ai'hip with Devils. As for the Author's fjieaking in general that the Corinthians came drunk to the lord's Table, that is alfo falfe ; for the Apoflle charges only /o;;/^ of them with Drunkcnntfs as .is clear from i Cr/-. 11. 21. And Mr. Gillefpie in Aaron s Red, Book 5. Chap. 7. Pag. ^26. fays in Anfwer to Prym, He will ne^^erbe able to frove^that thoje dyuiiken Peyfcns, i Cor: 11. 1 1, were drunken when they did refort to the Church, for it was in. the Church and in eating and drinking that they made themfelves B b drunk i6^ The Arguments acivAncedfor Defence of CHAP. XI. iruhk. Pot the Rich did Of the LORD's Table eat and drink to Excefs, andfo turned it fr&m being the LORD*s Supper y to be like their own feafling Suppers at home, and the t'9^t iiiere Hegleiied and dejjtifed, ayid this was the Drunkennefs and Abufe that the Apoflle csji^ainedof, i Cor: fi. 10, 21, 22. For this fee Brentius, MaHoraty Meyer, Cal- ^th ^""^ Martyr upon thefe' Texts. And thus it is plain. That the Author falQy charges the Church oi Corinth without Exception, as being guilty of all thefe Abo- xAmations ; Yea, we f>lainly fee it was not the ereateft Part, but only fome a- xftong them tliat were guilty. And the Author*s Argument is falfe in this Refpe^ alfo, upon Sappofition they had all denied the RefurreSiion, had Fellowjbip lurth 0evUu thurdered weak Souls, &c. That the Apoftle did, or could have command- ed them to keep Church Communion in allGofpcl Ordinances, bccaufe it would have been commanding blafphemous fcandaloiis Hcreticks to profane the Seals of the Covenant of Grace, as is clear from i Cor. 10. 21. 7it. 3 10, 11. But to fpeak particularly in Anfwer to the fecond general Head. viz,. T^hat not- iuithftanding of all thefe Abominations there is m Epiftle wherein Communion is more priBly commanded. Here it is plain. That tho' his Words could, as they cannot fignifie, that the Apoflle commanded the honed Godly Part to keep up Commu- nion with one another in a Party by themfdves, that would do no Service, but a great deal of Hurt to the Author's Caufc; yea, it would mine his Caufe to all Intents and Purpofes for his Behoove. But on the other Hand it is clearly evident, That the Author's Words can bear no other Senfe bat this, namely. That not- withflanding the Generality, or the mofl Part of the Corinthians denied the Refur- reftion, had Fellowfhip with Devils, murdered weak Souls, tolerated Incefl and came drunk to the LORD's Table .- yet the Apoflle mofl flridly commanded all the Corinthians, Hereticks and Orthodox, clean and unclean. Godly and Profane, tokeepupclofe Communion in all Gofpel Ordinances. Truly I think the Author's Divinity isfo dreadfully abfurd,it needs little Aiifwer.' ^Atid therefore I fliall fliortly anfwer him ; only I would have him notice, that as trurrettindeSeceff.no/iraabEcclef.Rtm. Pag. 29; very well fays, Denying the Re fur re- Won is a damnable fundamental Error that defiroys Salvation through a Redeemer altoge- ther : For in denying the RefurreSiion they deny Eternal Rewards of Free Grace in Hea- veHy and Eternal Punijhment in Hell, and make Men to die and perijh like Beajis that fieed no Redemer : And this is clear from the Apoftle's Words, i Cor; 15. 14, 15, 17, 18. See Cahin, JSullinger, Brentius, Martyr, Sarcerius and IheophylaEius on the f lace : And thus it is plain. That thefe who deny the Refurreijtion are damna- ble Hereticks. It is alfo evident, That the Author's Words can afford no Argu- ment to his Piirpofc ; but this, viz.: The Apoflle Paul flridly commanded all the Corinthians XQ keep up clofe Communion in all Gofpel Ordinances, notwithfland- ingthe Generality of them, or the mofl Part of them denied the Refurre(aion, had Fellowfiiip with Devils, murdered weak Souls, tolerated Incefl, and canie drunk to the LORD*s Table : And in like Manner, and by the fame Reafon, all Miniflers and Chriflian Profeflorsiii Smlmd are obliged by the Word of GOP, to joyn m CHAP. Xr. The OATH of AhjurAtion Afjfwered. j 9^ Communion in all Gofpcl Ordinances notwithftanding the mpft, 'Pant of MiniAer? m Scotland have fworn the Oath oFAbjuration : For thus hemuit argue, feingh^s reafons by Example. And thus it is plain. That the Strength of his Argument lyes in this, uix.. That the Apoftle commanded ali the Corinthians, Hereticks and Or- thodox, clean and unclean, to keep clofe Communioa in all Gofpel Ordinances, for the Author makes no Exception even in the LORD'S Supper, To which I 2Ln[wcrfi//ii The Author's. Argument is falfcj.and cont;radidory to himfelf ; for in his firit Juft Ground of Separation he makes -Herefa in Doclrine to he filch a ^ujl Ground, that Separation from Hereticks is a necejjfary Duty.; And in his 6tb Juft Ground of Separation healloweth plainly,- 77;a? lohen Scandals are grie'vous and notour, and no Redrefs can be obtained in n regular lVay,fo as to reach the great End of Edification, that is Jufi Ground of Separation. But here he would have all to joyn, in the LORD'S Supper, clean and unclean, without feeking any Redrefs : It is plainly an Erastian Error, to aflert as the Author doth, that the.Word of GOI) alloweth and requireth clean and unclean, to joyn.inCommunion At the LORD*s Table, as I fh all prove iinon : And the Author may pleafe to read Mr. GiUefpie's Aaron s Rod Book 2. chap. i. where it is clearly proven, 7^;^^ Profanenefs and felf-fn- terejiare the Papi that give Suck to nurfe BRAS'TlANISM, And indeed the Au- thor's Argument makes it evident he is kzd'm^ on foul Milk, and let t>he reft of the Jurlnts who hold the Author's Opinion judge otthcmfelvesby the fanxeRule: Indeed I fear it breed fuch a Diftemper in fome of their Heads, that nothing will give them Eafe till a Lord Bifliop's Mitre be put on. idly. I find that Prynn, that high flying Eraftian in his Vindication, boldly aijerts a^the Author dothjT/;^? Paul excluded none of the njijible AIembeys,i.Q.of all that pro- feffed Chrijiianity, clean andunclean^ in the Church ofCorinth ficm the LORD'sffablei only Prynn hath this Advantage that he offers a pretended Pfoof trom Scripturcj vi::^. iCor. 10. 16: 17. But the Author offers no ProoFat all. And I Ihall give Mr. GiUefpie's Anfwer to Prynn, as it is fetdown in Aaron s Rod Book 3. Chap: 7. Pag, 425. The Words are thefe, viz: When ?:iu\ faith, IJ^e being many are one Bread and one Body, for tjoe are all Partakers $f that one Bread, hejfeaketh of ff)€ Communion of Saints, and the U^ord[_ ALL ] can be of no larger £;>- tent than vijihie Saints^to vchoni theEprftle is directed ( markthat Word of Mr.Gillefpie, that the Epiiile was direiSed to vil-ible Saints, not to all as the Author holds-) that the Epiftlc is dirtded only to vifible Saints Mr. Gtllefpie proves from i Cm: J. 2. and faith he, It cannot be applied to vifihle JVorkers of Iniquity ivho continue irnpenit cut and ohBinate in fo doing, -r^;?//, fays he, I jJ}aIL never be perfwaded ihat tljc Apeft^e Paul would fay cf himjelj and the Samts at Corinth, we are one Body wi(^h known Idolater's, M'tnicators,- Drunkard's 'and the like. A^kI- Pag: 42<5. Mr. Gilkfpie .replies, Thatth cktrary cfPryr.n's Arguinent will foonh proved from i Cor: 10; 2 j. Ti cannot diink of the Cvp of the LORD mdthe Cup of Pevils, ye cannntbe Parti^kfxs of the lord's Table /ind the Table of Devils. Prynn followed Erafus's Ju4gl■^cnt, fc Kra'lus Lib: 3. cap: i.imhyDogsandSwwetoh€de.b/;ifgraceful not to have a Profejfion of Religion^ by which we are expofed to more P&' fonal mixtures J andfo to more corruptions ; bejides thefe Churches were under the im^ mediate InfpeEiien of Lfpired ApoBles. Firfl, How he will prove, that we are Born Members of a Vifible National Church I cannot fee ; For, Infants offuch as are Members of. the Vijible Church are to le Baptized 'j but the Infants, before they be received into the Vifible '-• Church CHAP. XT. • The Oath of Jhjur At ion, an fiver ed. 201 Church at Baptifm, are not Members of ^ the Vifible Church, as all Orthodox Divines hold. 2dly. His Words import very plainly, that the National Church o? Scotland hath no fixed Profeffion of Religion ^ for when he affirms we are Born Members of this National Church, and on that account its dlfgraceful not to have a Pn- fe[fmi of Religion '. He tells not what Profeflion, whether Popifli, Proteftant, Quakerifnty Arminianifm, Englijh Prelacy with Popifi Ceremofiies; or what Perfwa-, {ion: And to make the Uncertainty of the Profeffion of Religion of the Born Members of the National Church of Scotland the more plain ; he adds, by which roe are expofedto more prfonal mixturesyand to more corruptions , fo indefinitely taken: For he doth not Reflri^i thefe corruptions by any Defignation at all : Nor doth he tcU what kind of Perfonal mixtures he means : But he will never be able with- out manitcft contradidion to himfelf, to deny, that the National Church oi Scot- land m his Senfe doth include as great Perfonal mixtures of good and bad, Or- thodox and Heterodox, as he affirmed were in the Church of Corinth and other A* pollolick Churches; yea he plainly faith, fac has more Perfonal mixtures and cor- ruptions; And according to his Rule all thefe Blafphemous Hereticks that denyed the Refurreftion were Members of the Church of Corinth, and all the Orthodox were commanded to joyn in Commimien with thefe Hereticks : And fo by his Arguments, all Hereticks Born in Scotland 3.vq Bom Members of this National Church, and all Orthodox are comgianded to joyn in Communion with Quakers that are Blafphemous Hereticks, who deny the Refurrection, as is plainly evi- dent by Barclay's fifteen Propofitions : And fo according to him, Papifls andPre- latifts are all Born Members of the National Church of Scotland; for he cannot prove them to be excluded, feing he includes the H^retidks in the Apoftolick Churches, fuch as the falfe Apoftles and Hereticks in Galatia, whom the Apo- llle by the Spirit of GOD declares to be accurfed, Galatians i. 8, p. 6thly. As to his faying, he htardfome fay that Mimfiers nov3 have more Light than, the Apoftks. All I fhall fay on that, is, Firjl, If thefe Perfons faid, that the mod Learned and Faithful Miniflers, now have a more Diflind, full, and clear Un- ftanding ot the Difpeniation of the Covenant of Grace under the Gofpel,and what our Lord Jefus, as Mediator was obliged to do and fuffer, than the Apoflles had of thefe things at the Time they were called to, and Employed in the Office of Apoflkfhip, and a good while after, that is true; For the Apoftles had been a confiderable Time Employed in the Office of Apofikfliip before Chrift's Tran{- figuration , Matth 17. and yet they knew not that Chrift behoved tofufJer, and die for Elect linners, till he revealed it to them in the 22^, Verfe oi' that chapter : Nor did they know that his Kingdom was a Spiritual Kingdofti till he informed and' taught them Matth: 20. 22. So that the Apoftles were dark in many things until they got theOut-pouring of the Spirit at P^w/ffo/? after Chrifl'sRefurredion, Acls 2. 2//7)f. But indeed jf any Perfons faid, that Miniflersnow have more Light in the Myftericsof the Gofpcl than ever the Apoftles h^d, even when they had C c got- 202 The Jrgumems advanced for Defetjce of CHAP. XI. gotten the whole Gofpel Difpenfation Revealed to them, that is undoubtedly falfe : Except tliefe Perfons faid fo to the Author in Derifion, by way of Irony, Meaning that the Apojlles did never attain-fuch n Light as Scots Jarant Miniflers,for the Apo files nenjer got a Light to let them fee that tt was Lawful to f wear to maintain Eraflian Supremacyt Prelacy, and EngliftiPopiQi Ceremonies as Scots Jurants /?ai/e gotten. ' -:' And altho' the primitive Apoftolick Churches in the Author s Senfe, to wit, in- cluding all blafphemous Hereticks living within the Bounds of thefe Churches; I fay, in that falfe Senfe, tho' Apoftolick Churches are not to be held out as a Pa- tern to Churches in after Times : Yet taking the ApoftoHck Churches confifting of vilible Saints in the Time they were confirmed in the Faith, and weaned from Jew- ijh Ceremonies, in that Senfe no doubt they were pure, and fo far may be called a Patern only as far as they followed Chrift : But the Apoftle Paul was no further aPaternto be followed than he followed Chrift, iCor: ii. i. Tho' he was as pure a Minifter as was in the Church. Pag: 23. The Author brings in an Objedion of his own framing, and gives four Aniwers to it : The Objedion.is this, vtz.. But fay fomey if Minijlers would c^efs J then Separation would be imlawjul To which he anfwers, /r/?. Neither did thefe Churches confefs their Faults, hut perjifled in thetn. To which I reply, //y?, He tells not v/ hat Churches he means; but the rela- tive {^thefe~\ moft plainly refers to thefe Churches that are fpoken of in the pre- ceeding Paragraph, viz.'. all the Churches he called the primitive Apofiolick Churches, Vihich included the Church under the Law in Eli'j- I'ime, the Church 0/ Scribes and Pharifees, and all the Churches to whom the Apoflle Paul writes-, as was made ap- pear by his Words above; And how falfe this Calculation of. the Apoftolick^: Churches is, I have cleared already. "idly. He boldly affirms that thefe Churches, without Exception, did perftfl in their Faults, and did not confefs them. What ? did none of thefe Churches con- fefs any of their Faults at all ? Surely the Author has a monftruous Faith if he could believe himfelf when he faid that,feing it'sfo plainly contrary to Scripture : For how ridiculous is it to affirm, that the Church oi Jfrael never confefled their Sins committed in Eh's Time ; for Mr. Gillefpie in Aaron's Rod, Book i chap.- 8. proves from Xtfi;; 5. 5. Num: 5. 6, ^.Ez,ra 10. 10, 11. That the l(ra.ditcs confef- fed their Sins publickly , and particularly in the 'Temple at the offering their Trefpafs- offerings. As for the Scribes and Pharifees, as to their Clergy, and the Bulk of the People, they did not confefs and turn^from their moft heinous Abominations ; and there- fore GOD fweeped theni off the Earth at the iaft Deflrudion of Jerufalem : But howeve'r neither the Clnuxh under the Law in Eli's Time, nor the Heretical Church of the Scribes . and Pharifees were Apoftolick Gofpel Churches, tho' the Author improperly reckons them fo : And therefore I go forward. ^dly. As to the Church of Cor/«f/;, and other Churches to whom /'/?«/ direded bis Epifties, they mn the vifibk Saints in thofe Places^ viz. CQmth and Other Places, and CHAP; XT. The Oath of Ahjardtion, Anfivered. 205 and fo they needed not confefs their being guilty of Herefie and rcand:^lous Iinmo- ralities : Tho* indeed the Saints ix\ Corinth were faulty in not executing Difcipline on the Inceituous Perfon, till Paul was obliged to charge them to do it, by his Epiftle: But they did not per/ift in that Fault, j^r they did exmnmumcate that PerfoHyiLS Mr. Gtllefpie following iValfauSy Pifcator and He'mfius^ on 2 Cor. 2. 6. proves ; See Aarms Red Book 2. Chap: p. Pag: 277, 278. And tho' they had negleded Discipline before Paul wrote to them, it doth not appear they joyned with the Inceil;uous Man attheLORD's Table ; And the Godly Party to -whom Paul wrote ^ did not only amend their Failings in Difcipliney which they Jhrmld have executed before, on fcandalous tbRinate Offenders in their Bounds y but ajfo gave Evidence in an eminent De* gree of their publick Repentance for their former Neglects, as plainly appears from 2 Cor; 7. 8, 9, II. For this fee Chryfoflom, Ambrofe, Juflinianusy Calvin, Beza, Hammondy Grotiusy T'heodoretus . Anfelmy TheodotiOy Zegerus, Menochius, ERius, Bu- daus and Camerarius on thefe Verfes. And P^^/ writing to the Chutch oiGalatia, viz,, the Godly Party there, he is fa far from allowing promifcuous Communion of clean and unclean. Orthodox and Hereticks, that by the Spirit of GOD he declares all thcfe falfe Teachers [accurfed'^ to guard the Godly from joyning in Com- munion with them, as much as it' thefe falfe Teachers had been excommunicated, as was made evident above : And he wntld have commanded the Godly Party to have excommrmicated the falfe 'Teachers y if it had not been that they had feducedfa many that the Sentence could not reach the Endy as Mr. GiUefpie obferves : See Aaron s Rod, Book 2. chap. 9. pag. 289. And thus it is plain, the Author's Aflertion is falfe concerning the Church of Corimh, both as to her Faults and alfo her publick Repentance. In the fame Page the Author gives a fecond Anfwer, namely, That Confefpon fuppofes Cenviciion, and the fame Sentiments of thefe Faults : AToxo, fays he^ if Union be fujpended till all be cf the fzme Judgment, as to Sin and Duty, as there never had been Union and Communion in the Church ; fo there never will be ; for Men never were and «f- ler will be in this IVorld of the fame Judgment y as to Sin and Duty. For anfwering the Author the more dilLnftly, to fhow what is ftifEcient Con-' virion of publick Faults and Defedions, I fhall diftinguifii Convidion. There arc two Kinds of Conviftion for this End, viz.. firft, a Legal Convidion ; the Cajnbridge Law-didionary fays, A Man is conviEl in LaWy when he is proven guilty by Verdil. idly. There is an Argumentative Convidion, when a Man's Error is confined by plain D(.monflrationof Truth, in Oppofition to that Error, tho' the Man frould with Obftinacy, or out of Judicial Blindnefs deny the Demonilra- tion of the Truth: In the C^w^n^/^f L^^/w Didionary the Word Cowx;//?/*? Signifies poven guilty y and is derived from convinco, which lignifies, to overcome, confute, or fr^ve guilty. And Ravaiielinhi^ Bibliotheca Sacra, Part: i. pag: 552, explaining Tit: 3". Id, II. fays, U^jen Men rejeEl plain Demonflrations (f Truth , they are couvi^ Eiedyandfclf-coiidemned: And fo lay Bullinger, Pelicanus, Calvin and Fulhchius on thefe Verfes.' And famous Mr. BailUe de Ajnocxttacriji pag: 104. Lib: 2. Opur'. C c 2 chronQk '204 The Jr^uimnts ddvAnced for Defence of CHAP; XI. 'thronol: Tays, 'That a Heretick is convict, proven guilty , or condemned by hi mfelf^ or con- demns himfelf. i. By his own Deed bccaufe he defpifed the Advice of the Church, a.imonijhing Jjint' As a "^^n condemns hi7nfelf by his own Fact and Deed. Rom.- 2. i. 2d\y. He con^ demns himfelf by his own Mouthy becaufethe Her etick in Words at leafiprofejfeth to em" hrcue the Word of GOD, (elfe, [^ysMr.Baillieyhe would be a Heathen and not a Heretick) lut with his Mouth he profeffeth all thefe Divine Truths y out of whjclj.the Faljkod of his Error and Here/ie is evinced: And thus he is condemned out of his own Mouth, as our Lord [aid of the wicked Servant, Luke 19. 21. And the Learned Turrettin Theolog: Elenct: tart: I. p^g-7^^' diftingulftieth Conviftion from Pcrfwafion; For, fays- he, Re- probates who Jin againfl the Holy Ghojl have Conviction, but not the ^erfwajioa of Gofpel Truth. And it is plain from i Cor: 14. 24. 25. That there is ConvictioH when there is not Perfwafion. For it's faid. But if all prophejie, and there come m one that believeth not; or one tinlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all : And thus are the Secrets of his Heart made manifejl, and fo falling down itn his Face he will zvorfiip GOD. and report that GOD is in you of a Truth. Here it is to be noticed, that the. Text fpeaketh of Infidels and unlearned indefinitly, and it's undeniable, that any Infidel whatfoever, that came into the Meetings or Congregations of Chriflians to hear the Gofpel preached, was not converted ; for many heard Chrift preach, that were fo far from being converted, that they denied and crucified him at laft, tho' they heard him preach in the Temple and Synagogues. And therefore let us hear what Commentators fay on thefe Texts j I find the Meaning to be this, viT.. That many Infidels and unlearned are fo far convinced by true preaching of the Gofpel; they are fo far convinced,! f*y,outof the Word of GOD, as that they fee themfelves guilty of Sin, Errors and Ignorance -, and thereupon are forced to acknowledge, that GOD is among you, and ye are the People of GOD: And thuslnfidel-s are convinced of all; viz,, all true Preachers; fo as to fall down and worfliip GOD; that is, they are forced to acknowledge that the Gofpel is of GOD; for it dilcoverstoMenthe fecret Sins of their Hearts ; And fo GOD by the Gofpel is among the Chriftians in their Congregations; and they are the People of GOD : Thus thefe Texts are underftood by Vatablus-, Fifcator; Eflius; Memchius; Bullinger; FelicanusyMartyr; and Calvin : And Grotius on Verf:25. fays, That the Gofpel hath even convinced Infidels to acknowledge that the Won- ders manifefted in the Gofpel Church, do prove that GOD is there ; as the Infidel Magicians in Egypt were convinced by GO D's wondrous Works; fo as to fay; 7^* Finger of GOD is here; Exod; 8. 19. And as Calvin on the Place faith. Every Infidel that hears the Gofpel, is notfp far "convinced as to acknowledge in Words, that which is faid above on thefe Verfes ; for fome have grown worfe. after Hearing the Gofpel; yet it is a great praife given to Prophecy y that isy Preaching the Qofpel, that ithath forced Infidels to confefsythat GOD is prefent with his own Peopky and His Majefly Jhines in the Congregation of them. And thus it js plain. That tho' all that hear the Gofpel are CONVINCED, yet ajl are not CONVERTED, by the Holy Spirit perfwading them to beheve the Gofpel. ' — ~ ■ ■ :" " ■■ "^ " ' "" sot CHAP. XL The OATH of Jbjuration J^fwered. 2o^ For tho' the Gofpel convinceth all the Hearers of it, yet thereby many are only rendred inexcufable .- And all the Orthodox do aflert Conviaion and Peifwafion to be different; for all true Chriflians are convinced be- fore they be perfwadcd to believe. But the Reafon why I brought in this Scripture, was, becaufe it lets us fee that thefe that are Infidels may get Con- viaion by the Gofpcljand yet be Infidels flill,who have not gotten Perfwafion (o as to believe ; and therefore are not come to be one in Judgment with true Believers, as the Author underflands Conviaion. Great Mr. Durham or? Scandal, Pag. 20^, 207, gives us a very plain Dif- cription ot that which is a fufEcient CONVICTION OF GAINSAYERS andlfliall give his exprefs. Words, which are thefe, viz.. If it k a^kedthen-what can be miJerJioodby ConviBion ? and if a Perfon may he accounted convinced, who yet may be Keeping the lajl M^ordy and confidently bragging of the FiSiory ? j^nfxver 'That ConviSiion is not to be bounded uith Acknowledgment, or Silence in the Party con- 'vinced ; yea, thofe that are convinced.may as it were cry the others out of the Company by Multitude of Words and confidence of Expreffonsi as thefe Jews did cry down Paul ^w^ Barnabas^ Aas 13.- 4^; Therefoye we fee in that Precept Tit. 3. 10, 11. that the Heretick which is to be rejsBed, is both faid to refufe Admonition, and alfo to te condemned of himfeJf ; yet it cannot be faid that he was put to filence by thefe AdmonitionSy or did forbear to vent his Errors : This therefore ?nuft be accounted certain, and is con- __ firmed by 2 Tim. 2. 25. where the Recovery of Oppofers, even after fufficient Infirii^i- on J hath a Per ad venture in it, as a Thing mofi rarely to be found; we mufi therefore place Conviction in fome ether Thing than that : And fo in Anfwer to the Qiiefllony What may he accounted Conviclion'?' faith he, we fay ift. It is when a Perfon is Jo far convinced, and the Truth with his Error fo far cleared to be! ruth and Error refpeSiively that his Continuing Ob fin at, cannot be fuppofed to he of Infir-mity, which often zuill evi- dence it felf in fooiijlj, weight lefs and unreafonable Shifts and'^Anfwers ; or when there cannot be weight infuch an Anfwer to fati^y a Mans own Reafon or Confidence, 7/ he were fiber and at himfelf, upon this Account the Heretick ts faid to be condemieed of him- felf^TiX. 3. II. net hecaufilm Confcience does aEiually condemn him for Dijfmulation\ for even then it is fuppofed he?nay be inaDelufion, which kept off fiuch Challenges; and their Corfcienoes are faid to be feared as with an hot Iron, i Tini; 4. 2. which imports they were not capable ofpofitive ConviSiion within themfielves : But it miifi be under flood .thus, they are tkeCaiife of their QwnBlindnefs,as wilfully and malicioufty refufing and re- jeBing Light when :t was offered to them : And fid the Caufie of their own Damnation doth not flow from the NegleB of ethers, in not holding forth to themfiufficient light, but from their cwnOhfiinacy, Prejudice andJsAalicicufiiefis. adly. They may be faid to be convinced, when the Thing is made clear to fioher fierious Men, even as fome ftupid ignorant Perfons are inexcufable in their Jgnorance, when they live under fuch Means as others of ordinary Capacity thrive by, although fuch plain Preachings and Difcourfes be no way underflood by them, or that Gofpel to convince them, feiiig others have been profited by the fame. jdly. They may be faid to be convinced j even when theyfpeak again j when there is no 2o6 The Argumexits advanced for Defence of CHAP. XT.- Jnfwer topurfdfe in their Speaking, but ahfurd denying cr ajferting ay who tranflates 70 iv (p^ov^vra Phil: 2: 2: ejfe fentemiis unum, fentire idem feu itidem, and compares it with 2 Cor 13;^ 11: 12; Philip: 3: 16: and 4; 2; where the Words [jn domina ] are added thefe Phrafes,'y/2:,.7o. think the jame 'Thing, : or to have the fame Sentiments, or he of the fame Mind in the Lord, are Phrafes, fays Ravanel, which /ignifyUnifortnity of the Judgment of the Mind, and of the Corfent of Souls in the DoBrine of Faith and a/fo of Manners; as is evident by comparing the Tests above faid with Rom; 12; 16: and i).- 5. Thus Ravanel. And fo to have the fame Sentiments and Judgment in Religion, is to have the fame Faith, which in- cludes a firm Perfwafion of the fame Dodrine of Faith and Manners. And feihg by the Author's Argu^ent,Convidion is the fame Thing with firm Perfwafion and true Faith ; then according to the Author's Argument, a Church cannot convince a Heretick of being Guilty of Herefy, until the Church gives that Heretick tiie firm Perfwafion and true Faith which the true Church her felf hath ; And that can never be, for that firm Perfwafion is the proper Work ofthe Spirit of GOD, wrought in Men in their Efledual Calling, whereby the Spirit of GOD perfwades and enables Men with their whole Souls, Under/land- ing and Wills, to embrace Jefus Chrift freely offered in the Gofpel ; and fo by what hath been /aid, it*s evident, that the Author's Notion of Convidion of publick Scandals is falfe. But perhaps he will objeft, faying. That tho' one. Man would convince ana ther Man. or one Party of Profeflbrs convince another Party of Profeflbrs to be guilty of lome grofs Step of Defeftion in Doftrine, or of fome grofs Scandal in < Pradice, fays he, tho' the Party guilty fhould be convinced, according to Mrs. i Baillie and iD«)^<2;w, and other Divine's Rules above faid, yet if the Party guilty 1 hath not gotten a clear and firm Conviftion of their own Guilt, they cannot ft eon- » CHAP: XI, The OAth of Jljuration, Anfwered, 207 confefs their Guilt ; lor it would be ading contrary to their own Confci- ences, which do not coademn but ilill aporove what they have done. To that I anfwer, /;-/?, Men's Confciences are but Deputes, and ought to rule in lubordination and conformity to the Law of GOD; for the Law of GOD is over the whole Man Soul and Body, and all their Faculties- and when the Confcience judgeth and ruletli contrary to the Law of GOD, it is afting in Rebellion againil; the Law of GOD, and GOD himfelf; and that's the Reafon why Men are obliged to quit and lay down Errors of Confcience ; and as Mr. Gilhfpe faith in his Difputc againft Er^glijli Ceremonies, Van: i; Vag: ic- Mm Gught to get Confcience rightly informed. 2dly. The Objeaion fuppofeth, yea affirmeth, That notwichftanding the one Party hath according toMrs. Durham and ^^/V/Z/VsRules^taken all Pains to convince the other Party of their Guilt; yet feing the guilty Party's Confcience doth f^ill approve what they have done ; Li that cafe the Anfwer is plain from Scripture and Judgment of Orthodox Divines above faid ; for then if it be one or two or a few, yea, or a great many in a Church that are thus guilty, the Church by her publick Cenfure is to rejcd them from her Communion, until they repent and confefs their Sin, and give publick Satisfadion for their Scandal; as the Ge- neral Aliembly of the Church of »SVo^/«/f^ did with thefe that went iiuo the un- lawful Engagement, Anm 16^8, and afterward jullified and obflinacly dtknded their going into that unlawful Engagement; for tho' thcfe Engagers iiad told the AlVembly that their Confciences ilill approved their going into chat Engage- ment, and therefore they would not confefs it to be a Fault ; that was fo far from faving them from Excommunication, that by Ad of Alfembly 1549. Sef. 19. all fuch were peremptorly to be Excommunicat : And in fo doing, the Aflembly walked clofe by the Scripture Rule; becaufe the. Ailembly 1548'. Sef. 21. had bv very many Scripture Proofs made it clearly evident, that Military Aflbcia- tions with Malignants, fuch as that Engagement was,werc contrary to the Word of GOD, and a manifeft Breach of every one of the Articles of our Solemn League and Covenant ; and thus the Churcii had fufficiently convinced the En- ■gagers ; And therefore when the Engagers did m Oppolition to fufficient Con- yidion given to tl)4:m by the Church, obftinatly rejeft Convidion, the Church ^wr'as obliged to rejtd them from Communion by Excommunication. 2({ly- But when the Party guilty falls to be the Generality, or greate/l Number that thus reject Convididh ( as L marked above out of Aiironf Rod) the fewefl Number, or a fraall Party, cannot expediently Excommunicat the Generality or greateft Number, becaufe the Sentence could not reach the End of Excom- munication : Bat in that cale the leweft Number ought to proteft againil, and withdraw from Communion with the greateft Number, that is obflinat in De- fence of their fcandalous Defedion, as was the Pradice of the PROTESTERS in Scotland Anno 1(552. For the fame Scriptures that Warranted Excommunicating aU that went into the Unlawful Engagement, and Obftinately Defended it, did alfo 2o8 'The Arguments akvAnse A for Defence of CHAP. XI alfo Warrant the PROTESTERS, their Protefting againft, and withdrawing from Communion with the PubHck Refoliitioners, who by the Publick Refoluti- on went into a Military Aflbciation witK Malignants, and defended their fo do- ing .• And that the PuWick Refolution was a Military Aflbciation with Malig- nants, is clearly proven by famous Mr. Binning^ in his Cafe concerning Aflbciati- ens, which was never to this Day anfwered by t?he Refolutioners. And thus it is plain from what hath been faid; that tho' xhtjurants Con- fcicnces fhould all their Days approve the Oath of Abjuration, and their fwear- ing it to be Lawful j Yet feing it is clearly Demonllrated to them to contain an Obligation in the true Literal Senfe of the Words, whereby, it binds the Ju- rants to maintain Englijh Erastian Supremacy, Prelacy and Englifi-pfijh Ce- remonies ; .it is a JLift Ground for thofe, who adhere to the covenanted Refor- mation of the Church of Scotland in her pureft Times, to Proteft againft, and withdraw from Communion with Jurams ; and fo the Juraiit Author's want of Conviftion that be pleads for, doth not help, but on the contrary it ruineth his Caufe. But the fecond part of the Author's Anlwer was this, f;z.. If Union bs Sufpend" ed till iJJe be-all of the fame '[judgment ^ ai to Sin and Duty, as there never had been U- nion and Communion, fo there never will be : For Men never were, and never will be zn this iVorld all of the fame Judgment about Sin arid Duty. Except the Author mean here as he faid before, that m the Church oi Corinth, thefe that denyedthe Refurreftion, had fellow fhip with Devils and the like ; were to be joyned with in Communion by the truly Godly Party there: I fay except he mean fo here, I fee not what Senfe his Words have. And f jrely he cannot but allow as great corruptions now,as he affirmed were in the Apoilolick Churches, and yet hinder- ed not all in thefe Churches better and worfe to joyn in Communion : Btit I have fufficiently anfwered that already, and proven that fuch a joyning in Com- ; munion is a grofs Profaning the Covenant of-' Grace. Page 23. The Author's 3^. Anfwer is,- If known Faults in Minifters,meerly be^ caufe not confejfedj, made Communien in Ordinances Jinfuly then no Communion could be kept with others ; bccaufe all have corruptions and Faults which they do not confefs ? Aiid it will jigni fie nothing to fay, we do not know the corruptions of others^ For if they Defile the PVorjljip, they do it whether J know them or not : For if a Man that has the blague eat with me, he defiles it whether J knuw it j or no. , The Author here fpeaks oi Minifters known Faults ani Corruptions Indefinitely, without Limitation ; but indeed his way ofReafoning on them mufl be by fome | new Logick that I never heard tell of before .- For his Propofition contains on- ly known Faults^ but his Reafon by which he proves it contains known and un- \ known whatfomever, being wholly Indifinite : And he argues upon unknown Faults and corruptions, ai:d fo by his Arguments Minifters are as much obliged to confefs in Publick all their lecret Faults, as they are bound to confefs Publick fcan- fialous Faults : For his Argument runs thus, Vix,. If Minii^ers ought publicklyto con- CHAP. XI. Of the Oath of Abjur/ttiott'^ anfwered, 209 confefs any known Piiblick Faults at all, in order to their joyning in Commu- nion with the true Church of GOD, then they ought Publickly to confefs alfo all their fecret Faults i^t the fame end, but Minifters ought not to confefs Publicklyall their fecretFaultSjin order to joyn inCommunion with the trueChurch of GOD i And therefore they ought not to confefs any Publick faults at all, in order to their joining inCommunion with the trucChurchofGod; But feing noBody of Senfe will believe him, I go forward; For I fliall not trouble the Reader inDif- puting upon his Blunders in Logick. But idly. Tho' the moft Faithful Mini- fters, by Reafon of Humane Frailty have many Failings and Imperfedions in Publick Duties and Ordinances, that do not render them Scandalous, nor yet unapt to Teach ; ( for as the Apollle faith of himfelf, and the reft of the Apo- fties, in many things "we ofendaU,'^a?nei 3. 2.) Such Faults cannot hinder Com- munion, not being Scandals; But furely Minifters ought to confefs known grofs Scandals ; fuch as fwearing contrary to our Covenanted Reformation, to main- tain Eraftian Supemacy^ Prelacyy and Enghjh-popjh Ceremonies, as Scots Jurants have done : And that they ought to connfefs and give fatisfying Evidence of their Repentance for that, is clear from the Word of GOD, and Ads of Aflem- blies 1^48, i'<5457. But what the Author mtms by meer confeffion of Mini /iers known Faults tn order to Coimnuniony he would do well to tell us himfelf; IFor furely no Orthodox Divine will hold, that meer confeffion of Publick faults is fufEcient fatisfadion for removing Publick Scandal : Tho' indeed Jurflnts come not that length it felf. As for his faying, if Minifters corruptions defile the '•( 'orfhip •whether I know them or no, as a Mans eating with me defiles my Meat, if the Man have the Plague, whether I know or not that he has the Plague. To that I an- [wcr,Firft, If that Argument be good, then it will neceflarily follow, that a Mi- nifter that in his Judgment holds the grofseft Error ofPc//>?ry,batPublifheth it not to the World, he as much corrupteth the Ordinances, as he that Preacheth that Error for Dodlrine to the People, idly. His Comparifon is falfly made, for he fliould have faid, As the Plague, which is the mofl DeftruEUve Difeafe, and mofl cor-' ruj^ting, king fo InfeElious, that if a Man that hath h eat with me, whether I know him to have it or not, he defiles my Meat : So the inofl Damnable Heretical Corruption of Minifters will defile and corrupt theOrdinan.es, whet Jjrr I know the Minifters to he fuch damnable Hereticks or not. And indeed that is very true ; For as Mr. Bailie and Mr. D«)'/;«w fay concerning Hereticks, 7he Hereticks themfehes may be under fuch aDeluficn.and their Confciences feared as with a hot Iron, GOD having given them up to ftrmg Dehifions that they fiould believe a Lie. 2 T'heff. 2. if. So that they be- lieve Heretical Damnable Errors,to be found Principles of true Religion accord- ing to the Word of GOD ; and therefore confidently teach and Preach thefe Er- rors to People, and thus breed up Seds of Damnable Hereticks; and yet nei-" ther the People, nor their Heretical Minifters themfelves do know thtk Hereti- cal Corrtiptrons to be Corruptions at all; tho' Ordinances be fo corrupted that they are no more to be accounted the Ordinances of Chrift, as Tuvrettin Tlmlogi D d Elen^h 1 310 Thi Argumtnts $dvMcedfof Defence of CHAP. X£ ElfiM* Part 3. Page 442. following the Judgment of the firft Council of Nice, Camn ip. IVImeby the BaPtifm of the Samofatenians was declared to be Null and f^di And therefore it was Statuted by that Canon , TLat all -who turned from that lUtefe to the true Fatth^ were to be Baptix^ed. And for the fame Reafon by the fame C<»KOi?, it was in like manner Statuted concerning the Baptifm oi Arriansy I (ay, as Tirrfttm following that Council, fays, th^Smman Baptifm is Null; becaufe Socinians Jolkwiug the Arrian £*ror, deny the Trinity of Perfons in Unity of EJfence, and Bnpiz,e according to that Corruption andgrqfs Error in DoElrine. But indeed the Jurant Author's Words plainly hold forth. That Faults and . Corruption of Minifters, when publickly known, do no more hinder Comrau- nio:i with thefe Minifters, than the fame Faults when they are not publickly Igiown. To that I anfwer wic-h Mr. Gillefpie in Aaron's Rod, Book 3. Chap. 15: , p^g. 542. he faith. If the Church admit to the Sacrament, any known to live in Wickednefs, without Repentance, the Church, profaneth the Covenant of GOD. And .thus it is undenyably plain. That if Chriftians give confent to Miniflers, when living impenitently in fcandalous Sins,to adminifter and join in the LORD's Supper, thefe Minifler's Scandals defile the Ordinance to the People, and the People by confenting, profane the Covenant of GOD j and make themfelves guilry of the fcandalous Miniflers evil Deeds. And laftly, the Author himfelf, in his Sixth juft Ground of Separation, freely granteth. That when Scandals are_ Grievous and Notour, and no Redrefs can be had in 0ji orderly J^ay, fo as to reach the great End of Edification, in that Cafe Separation is lawful. And as for the Difterence between Miiiifters Corruptions that are i not known, their not bemg a caufe of Separation, when the fame Corruptions ; being known and continued in without Repentance, are eaufe of Separation; I have cleared that, by an Inftance of a Minifler holding firmly in his Judgment the groffeft Popifh Error, but never publifiieth it. to the World,iia Oppofition to him tJiat preacheth the fame Popifh Error, and defends it. Page 43,- the Author gives a Fourth knCwcr, that he may further (how his A- verfion to that Duty, That Minifters fhould confefs their publick fcandalous Sins. His Anfwer is, JfConfeffton beneceffary, fays he, lam fure Separation is not the Way to attain it, for that imbttters and Exafperafes Mens Spirits, and makes them more Stiff and Tenacious, What ? If ConfefTion be neceffary, is it not neceflary for Miniflers to confefs Sjny known Scandalous Faults and Corruptions at all ? Why the Author quefli- oneth this, is matter of Aftonifhment to all fe.rio.u? Chriflians that hear it, no Doubt. 2dly. The Author denys, that Separation from Communion with Minifters is the. Way to attain Confeffion of any f ublick fins and Faults of Minifters ; But I hope he w:ill allow that the leflcr Excommunication is fome Separation; and yet i% is exprefly the Way f»r gaining offending Brethren, and thereby dlfo preventing Ob-- Rinate Offenders from Profaning the Seals of the Covenant 5 As is clear froiivour Con-*. ~ ~ " kixLOVK CHAP. X\l. The OAth cf Ah jurat ioH, an/wered, 21 feffion of Faith Chap: 30. SeEh 3. But the Author will not allow that; becaufe it would Exafperatc Minifters Spirits, if other Minifters and the People alfo, fiiduld tell JurantSyWC carinot joyn in Communion with you in the LORD's Sup- per j becaufe ye are Guilty of Publick Scandal as we can clearly prove : No, let the Scandal be never fo true and Publickly known, as the Author grants, that Minifters be Guilty of known Corruptions and Faults Indefinitely peaking: Yet no Separation, for fear of angering Minifters. What ? Muft we Profane the Seals of the Covenant of Grace, and trample on the Word of GOD, and our Confeffion of Faith > for fear of imbittering Minifters Spirits ? Muft not wcO% GOD rather than Men ? Thefe Minifters have fad Spirits indeed, that would have us Rebel againft the Spirit of GOD, rather than anger their Spirits. And laftly, when Minifters continue in Publick grofs Scandals, and Obftinately refufe to confcfs and give Publick Satisfadioii; In the fixth juft Ground, the Au- thor himfelf ailoiveth Separation to he Lawful : Let Minifters Spirits be as imbit- tered as they will: And thus he has Refuted himfelf. CHAP. XII. Uljerein the Jurams Defence offevearing the OATH, with Explication and Proteflati- \ orij DeteY7nining the Signification of the OATH, in an other Senfe than Determined by the Legi/lators, is anfwered. , ^■ PAge 23. The Author gives the fixth and laft Confideration upon which 5co/x ^uratit Minifters did take the Oath : His Words are thefe, ytz.. Sixthly, tet it le conftderedy that Miniflers at their taking of the Oath^ did ly their Proteftation 6Y Declaration, plainly fix the Senfe, in which they underHood the Oath, and according to •which they would only take it. And in Page nth. He tells as they underilood the Oath to contain three things, Fiz,. ift. Owning the Queens Right and Authority ^ and Renewing Allegiance to her. 2dly. Renouncing the Popifii Pretender, and alt Allegiance to him. 3dly. Engaging to maintain the ^loto^ik^nt Succejfwn. And indeed Jays l>e, who of Presbyterian Revolution Principles can difown them} As towh.^tis ■ alledged, concerning f/;f Hierarchy and Ceremonies of the Church of England leing invol- ijed in the Oath; and that the Swearers have thereby at leaff approven of them; The Takers, fays he, were under the ful left convi^ ion that the Oath had not any Refpc^ unto thefe. Thus we plainly fee in what Senfe the Scots Jurant Minifters fixed the Signi- fication of the Oath ; whereby they included the three things above faid, and they wholly excluded the Hierarchy and Ceremonies of the Church of England: But I have fufficiently proven in the third Chapter, that Eraftian Supremacy is included in two of ihefe things. Viz,. ly?. and 3^. And that the Oath in its Literal Senfe obliges to maintain P^-elacy and Englijb Ceremonies, which here they vainly deny. D d 2 ^ In n '4212 ' The Arguments Advanced for Defence of CHAP. XII. In order to handle this Debate between Scots Jurant Minifters, and thefe who withdraw from Communion with the prefent National Church oi Scotland ; I IhaU State the C^eftion as plainly as poffibly I can. AndF/>/?, The State of the Queftion is not, Whether it be Lawblfor thefe who take an Oath to Interpret it, fo as to underftand the true meaning of the Words : For it is a commandecf Duty to fwear with Judgment, Jerem. 4. 2. The meaning of that is, I'hou Jbalt fwear with clear Judgment y having duly confider" rdj and clearly under flood what ihou fwear Syandly xuhom^iz. GOD: thatfo thou mayeft mt fwear unwarily, without clear .Judgment of Difcretion, or rajhly, or without neceffity, or for light Mattel- Sy and then Men mud fwear every Oath in Righteoufnefs afo. zsjer. 4. 2. T^at is, 7%ou mufl certainly know, that what thou fweareft be jufl andgoodinit felf, and n9 way mjuflly hurtful to thy Neighbour, thatfo it ?nay not bind thee to any thing that is finfuly i Sam. 25. 22. Matth: 14. 7. And that thou be able and firmly refohed to perform, and do alfo truly perform what thou fwear eft; Thus the Place in Jeremiah is explained by Eftius, Tirinus, Calvin, Grotius, the Englijh Annotations, and Dutch Annotations ; And in the fame Text -Men are comgianded to fwear in Truth, that is, Thou /halt fwear clearly, knowing that what thou fwear s is true, thatfo thou mayeft not fwear any thing that is falfe,or any thing that thou knoweft not for certain to be true, or by any deceitful way. viz. Such as by Equivocation, Mental Refervation^ fr any Evafton. Ifaiah 48. i. Jerem, 5. 2. Thus it is explained by Eftius, Tirinus, ^enochius : And the EngUJJi Annotations,andthe Dutch Annotations on the Place fay : T'hefe three things, contained m that 'Text, comprehend all things that are neceffary t0 a Religious Oath, and the WorjhipofGOD. Tix^,ln RefpeSlof GOD. idXy.InRe- fieSi of our felves. And sdly. In RefpeEl of 9ur Neighbour, in our general, andfpecial location. But the State of the Queftion is this, to wit. Have the takers of an Oath, that •is impofed by Authority, Power to Interpret or explain that Oath, fo as thereby they may Determine and fix whatSenfe theypleafc upon theWords ? Or may the takers by their Power, add to, or take away any part of the Senfe of the Words, or put any other Senfe upon the whole or any part of the Words of an Oath, than what was intended by the Impofer, and fixed by his Law by which helm- pofed that Oath ? To this tht Scots Jurant Minifters anfwer Affirmatively, tho' not very diftinft- ly. But that I deny ; And I offer the following Reafons. Firfl, Becaufe it is plain, that by the Word of GOD, the Impofers of an Oath have the proper Power of Interpreting the meaning, and fixing the Extent of the Senfe of the Oath, according as they intend to oblige the Swearer to performance, oi what the Impofer requires and experts by Vertue of that Oath ; As is unde- nyably evident from G^», 24. 2. 3> 5. 6. 8. 9. in the cafe o( Mraham's impo^ Ong the Oath upon his Servant, and Interpreting and fixing the Senfe of the Qath which he impofed. G.rotius upon the Place obferves, That in Old Times, the Servants, md SubjeBs of very Heathens wmld not fmear an Oath Impofed by Akfthority^ umihhe CHAP XIT. The Oafh of Jljuration] jinfmred. m^ Impofer did Interpret and exprejly f% the Senfe of it, left they Jhould prefane the Name ef their Gods ; As Grotius proves out oi Iphigenia Euriptdis. And furely that con- futes the Pradice of many Chrillians who fwear Unlimited, dark and Ambi- guous Oaths. What a fhame is it for Chriftians not to fliow fo rauchReve- renceand Regard to the dreadful Majefty of the Infinitely Glorious Jehovah, ;^s poor Blind Heathens fhewed to their falfe Gods i 2dly. All that fwear the Oath of Baptifm are undenyably obliged to fwear in the Senfe that GOD, who is the Impofer , hath fixed by his own Word, which is the Law Impofing, Determining and fixing the Senfe of it : And it were Blaf- phemy to affirm, that Men might by Explications or Proteflations, add to, or take away any part of the Senfe of the Words, or put any other Senfe on tlie whole, or any part of the Words of the Oath of Baptifm, than GOD, who is the Impofer intends, and has Determined and fixed by his own Word, which is the Law impofing it. •^dly. It is a Maxim maintained by Lawyers and Scatef-mcn, Viz.- Cujus^ efl 'condere, ejus eft Interpretariyi. e.. The proper Power of Interpreting belongs to them that have the Power to make Laws and Oaths. As is evident from the judgment af Kingdoms and Nations y'?2Lg^ 17. ^thly. I fhall give the Judgment of /ome great Divines on this Head, to make it further evident, that the takers of Oaths have no Power to add to, or tike a- way any part of the Senfe, or alter the fignification of thefe Oaths, or put any o- ther fenfe on the whole or any part of them, than what, was fixed. Determined^ and intended by tfae Impofer and Laws Impofing them. Firfl, Mr. Samriel Rutherford in his Letter from St. Andrews Anno 1540, to Mr. Henry Stewart Prifoncr in Dubliuy lets us fee how finful it was to fwear the Black Oath, with an Explication of the Swearers awn framing, which he calls a private fenfe ,- and that B/ack Oath was of the fame Nature with the Oathot Ab^ juration .- For the Black Oath obliged the Swearers to maintain and defend Eng- lijh FKhiACY and Engljjb'popijh Ci^2uoiins without Alte cation;, zs Rujhworth, a.i\ Great Mr. James Melvin in his Letter from Ber- ivjck, ( he being then in Banifliment for refufing to fubfcribe that Ad ) in that Lett;|r he tels the Si^bfcribers, they had given jnore Fower to the King, thai ever the Tope pi'acc'ably obtained, and had confent ed to the chief Error ofPapi/hy, on which all the refi are founded. For this fee Calderwood's Hiilory, ?ag. i6j. And \n C alder woods Hiftory, Page 324. It's recorded,that before renewing the Covenant by the Synod ot Pife, Mr, James Melvin, the Moderator of thr Synod, did, by allowance of the Synod, defire his Uncle Mr. Andrew Melvin, to give what Diredions and Exhortations he judged moft neceflary for his younger Bre- thren in the Miniftry,in order to the Right Renewing the Covenant; Mr. Andrew did infift on the Fear of Backfliding; and in plain Terms faid, * Many of you « have Ihown Evidence lately of great Weaknefs, who, for fear of want of Sti- "* pendsonly, did in- a fort deny Chrift, by ^bfcribing that Ad of Parliament,' Anno Ji^ The Arguments advanced for Defence of GH AP. XII. « Anno 1584; and all the Brethren did acquiefce in what Mr. Mehin faid. "! But when one of the Protefting Miniftcrs faid in a Preaching, That the Ju^ rants ivhh their Declaration infiuearirg the Oath of Abjuratimyhad betrayed Chrifl nuithaKifs, feing they had in that Oath fworn to maintain £//^///^ Eraftian Sv- premacy. Prelacy, and Englijh-^cpijh CirbmonieS; and fo had betrayed the Caufe and Prerogatives of Chrift ; the Jurants are fo inraged, they deafen the Nation with Outcrys, both with Tongue and Pen againft that Minifter; tho* Mr. Mehin faid as much on lefs Ground, and the Minillers guiky Jcquiefced. And Mr. CaJdervioodtdU us, That the faithful Miniflers met together, and drew up their Animadveriions, and confuted that Error of Subfcribing the kdi with that Limitation, and told the King plainly in a Supplication, That that AB would bear no fuch Limitation without comradiSiion. See Calderwecd's Hiflory from Page 1^7 to 1^3 ; andin the Year 1585. Mr. Robert Vont, Moderator of the General Aifembly, did publickly and Authoritatively as Moderator, exhort all fubfcribing Minifters to repent i to which Exhortation they fubmitted. See Calderivood's Hiflory, Pag. 205. Thus we plainly- fee, by the Judgment of the General Affembly of the Church o'i Scotland, That v/hen Subjetts are required by Civil Authority, to fubfcribe a Law binding them to any finful Obedience to the Magiftrat, tho* the Supreme Magiflrat allow the Subjefts to give their own Limitations and Declarations be- fore Siibfcribing, yet that cannot alter the Senfe of the Law, nor free the Sub- Jefts from finful Complyance; and far lefs can it free Men in fwearing an Oath, becaufe an Oath is the flrideft of all Bonds, it is JlriSiiffimi Juris. Sthly. Learned Turrettin Theolog: Elen- Part: 3. Fag: 457. gives a remarkable Inflance to this Purpofe, in Refuting Bucer and Melaniihcnyt^Ct Lutheran Di- vines, who allowed in a Cafe of Neceffity, whdi Minifters could not be had, that Parents might receive the Sacrament of Baptifm to their Children from Fopijl) Priefts, with a Proteftation againft all the PopiJI) Corruptions ; , But al- lowed them after having protefted, to receive that Sacrament by the Prl^ft's Adminiftration, in the exprefs Words of the Popijh Form, with all the Popijb Idolatrous Ceremonies; and that the Parents might in exprefs Words and com- mon Form and Senfe of the Words, vow to educat thefe Ciiildren, as the Mem- bers of the Church ot Rome vow to educat their Children. Mr. Turrettin con- demns that opinion for Three Reafons. i/?. Becaufe notwithftanding of their Pro- tejlation, feing im7}iediatly after that y they folenmly -vowed i-a expefs Words and com- mon Senfe, as the Papi/ls themfehes do, and received the Sacrament with all the Papifli- cal Ceremonies ; they did thereby, contrary to thetr Proteftation, approve of the fopijh Er- rors in that Ordinance. 2diy. They joined in Commtinton with that Church, of which they vowed the Children to be Me?}?bers. sd]y. By fo doing they approved of Popifh Pne/ls to he lawful Miniflers. Thus he. And b^'the fame Realons, Jurants their making a Declaration or Proteftation, with Limicatioas and Reftriftions of the Oath, CHAF. XfL The OATH of Jljarathn a^wer-id. ^ %ij Oath^ cannot five them, fcing that immediatly afterward they 4id folemply fwe^r that Oath in exprefs Words and common Senfe^f as appointed by Law. for E>iglifi Subj'eds ) of their Oath of Alegiance to defend and maintain '^wg/zj'^ Erafiian Supremacy, Prelacy, and Englilh-popijh Ceremonies^ And laftofaU, I Ihall conclude what I have to fay on this Head> with the. Judgment of the Learned apd Pious Mr. Alexander Shields, recorded in He Re^ lotion of his SufferiijgSi written with his own Hand, and printed Anno 1715 j^ wherein he gives his ingenuousjudgment concerning Abjuring a Paper called 77>^^- pckgetical Declara.tion,pi\hli{h€d by thefe that did, bear publick Teflimony againft the Defe(aions of that Time, Aum i58y. In The Relation of his Suffer ings^ Page 47, he tells us, before he fwore that Oath of Abjuration, he caufed the Clerk of the Jufticiary Court, write down in exprefs Words, declaring in wh^t. Senfehe would fwear that Oath. His Words are thefe, / do abkovy renounce and^- difoivn in the Prefence of God, that pretended Declaration,, IN SO. FAR AS it de- dares War againfl the King, and ajferts that it is lawful to kill all imployed, by him ia Church, State, Army or Country ; then Protefling it might not be coaflruEled in any other Se'nfe, than the genuin Meaning of the Words I had delivered in the ahove written. Minute, I didfubfcribe and fwear it. That which did induce me to it ( fays he } was^ that they gave it in my. own Meaning. In Page ^6 he iays, concerning thefe Words,, IN SO FAR AS, m- IF SO BE, it imports fuch Things, I was fdmled to confound^ thefe very different ExpreJJions by the Ind-ulged ; for that Dscla;ration I waf required to^ abjurey as I took it, does not declare Jd/ar againfi, the King exprefly^^ purpofedly and de- Jignedly. as King, but againfi Charles Stewart, by them declared to be no King, wh§ fet forth the Declaration. And Pag. 48, 49, he fays. If we refietl upon tlie Matter^ upon which thefe Accomodations are to be offered or accepted, they cannot be judged capable oj any Accommodation: For they aie not Things upon liihich we may come and go at our Dtfcretion, as we may do with our own Particulars, or with Problems to be difputed, tr with ambiguous Propojitions, capable of different^ S^fes ; but Matt&rs fo andfoi cir^r cuwflantiat^ as do require the pofitive determined y:Hdgment of tlie Confcience, Concerns of Truth and Faljhood, Duty and Sin, which cannot admit of Accommodation or Djf- penfation, or Refervation, or any other Senfcthan the Impofers, and they that Jlate their Inqtiiftticn about Jiich Things do own, and are obferwdly, known to have- and mdntaity about them ; otherwife all forged Accommodations are but tampering Tricks, Jugling with yugkrs, deceiving the Deceivers. Neither will they be fo eafily deceived ; for they toiU readily yieM to Accommodationt, or. any tolerably Senfe we <:an put upon their Snares ; for they reckon that a yielding irt Part, and are glad to find us fo far Juftifying their ABions and Impofitions, as by our- offer- praBiailly to declare, they, may bear a good Settfe* And in Page $1 lie fays, An Onth cannot be taken ia any- other Smfe contra-. diBorty- t^the hnpofers, eventho'^by them allowed, vjithout an unjuftifiable Equivocntm*.. Thus Mr. Jhieldf. And thefe are the Words of a grqat Divide, both for PieC^- atid Learniig*^ and that m Judging himfelf, which takes away all Sufpicioa of ^artialityj \^fe<>fe impartial Judgmtnt condemns, the Pr4ving the Uni- ty of the Spirit in the Bond of?eace. O how earnefl is the Aptfile in his Defires and Ex- hortations for this, I Cor; I. 10. Now I kfeech you Brethren by the Name of the LORD Jefus Chrift, that yealljpeak the fame thing, and that there be no Divifions among you. if you reverence the Supreme Authority and Sovereignity of Chriji, then fee, as you will anfweritto himat the great Day, that you beperfehlly joymd together in one Mind and "Judgment. Thus the Author. xt . ., r The Author's Words contain three Things, viz.: i. He exhorts all Jurants and, :t^oniurants, Approvers and Condeinners of the Oath ofAbjurauoni to keep the CHAP.'Xni. The Onthof Abjantlon, anfwered. 219 Unity otthe Spirit, idly. That in doing this, all fliould be of one Judgment and keep clofe Union and Communion both Jurants and Non/urants. ^dfy. That he obtpfts, yea, adjutes all thefe to keep Union and Communion, and be of one Judgment, as they will anfwer to Chrift at the Day' of Judgment, under the fain of being judged as Contemners of Chrifl's Soveraignity. As to the Hrfl of thefe, I anfwer /r/?, That it is the undoubted Duty of all who profefs Faith in Jefus Chrift, To keep the Unity of the Spirit in the Bond of Peace y\ firmly hold. But idly. I deny, That it is the Unity of the Spirit, that thp LORD commands to keep, itMinifters and Chriftian Profeflbrs, who are folemn- ly fworn by Covenant, and obliged by the Law of GOD to extirpate Erastia- NisM Prelacy, and Englifi-popijh Ceremonies, (hould joyn in Union and Com- munion with thefe who, contrary to the Law of GOD and our Solemn Covenants, have fworn to maintain Englijh Eraftian Supremacy, Prelacy, and EngUJh-popiJh Ceremonies, and obftinateiy refufe to acknowledge Sin and publick Scandal in their fo doing, as Jurants do. As to the 2^. Lanfwer, i/?. That it is the Duty ofallprofefling the Chriftian- Religion, To be of one judgment in the LORD, is clear from 2 Cor: 13. 11. Philip: 5, 16. and 4. 2. But in the 2^. Place I deny. That thefe Scriptures command Covenanters of the Church oi Scotland to keep Union and Communion with thefe that fwear to maintain Erastianism, Englijh Prelacy, and Ceremonies, and re- fufe to give publick Satisfadion for fuch a grofs publick Scandal. And in the 2^. Place I alio deny. That thefe Scriptures command Covenanters to have the fame Judgment with thefe who judge it lawful to fwear an Oath, which in its true literal Senfe obliges Jurants to maintain Erastianism, Prelacy, and Popijh Ceremonies: For that would not be one Judgment in the LORD; but one ludement in Deledion, to maintain Antichriftianifm. But both Jurants and Nonjurants jpying in the General Aflembly do objed, Thnttho' there be Difference in judgment & Pra^ice amnt the Oath ofAhjUration^yetboth jurants and Nonjurants ought to joy n in clofe Communion in all Ordinances, nctwithjiand- a oj that Difference ' And for proving this, the Commillion of tiie Alicmbly did in aLctter,whith they fent^«;2.i7i4. to Mv.Gilchrifi(onQ of the proteftingMini- fters) give that Scripture for their Proof,which is recorded in Philip;^. i$,j6.Let u£ therefore as vJAny as be perfeB. be thus minded : And if in any thing ye be other zuife mind- ed GODjh^itt reveal e^en this unto you; neverthelefs, whereto vue have already attained^ let us v:alk by the fame Rule, let us mind the fame thing. . For clearingthc true Meaning of this Scripture, ifl. Let us confidcr who they ■' are that the Apoftle csiWs perfetl. idly. What is the Meaning, oH being thus mind- ed ^d:y- What it is^ to be in any thing otherwife minded, ^thly. The Import of that Promiic, that COD ivtll reveal this to you. ^th/y. What is the Import of that Ciaufe "VIZ.: Neierthelefs whereto we have attained. 6thly: What is the Rule here fpoken of. -^thh. What it is, to mind the fame thing. As to the /./2"of thefe, viz.. Whom doth the Apoftle call Prrfetl ? In Anfwer Eel te '^^ T/;* Arguments advdncecifor Defence of . CHAP. XIII. totbrs, tlie t'earnedii«ww/inhis 5,i//ot/?i>crt Sacra, Pan: 2. Pag: 266. interprets this very Cfeule of the Text to /?^»//f^ thefe Chriflians, that 'were arrived to a found JCitoibtedgeand Judgment in the Matters of true Religion, and confirmed m Faith, and the refi of the Gifts of Regeneration ; in Oppofaion to the Catechnmeni, that isy Young Beginners that wererude in Knowledge, only learning the Catechifm, and un- confirmed in the Faith, and in the fame Senfe it is underftood and explained by Zanchius Efhus and Gomarus, and they prove it by comparing this Place with 1 Cpt; 2. 6. and 14. 20. Ephef. 4. 13, 14. Heb: S- 12, i3> i4- ■ 2dly. As to the next Point to be cleared, confider, that the Apoflle faith, Let "VSasmany as beperfeB, be thus minded : By which it is plainly evident, that the A- "tooftle fpeaks of thefe that were of one Judgment with hirafelf, confirmed- in the ^Faith in all Parts of the Gofpel Difpenfation, aad had laid afide all Dependance on their oWn Righteoufnefs, and the Praftice of the Jev^ifi Ceremonies, and were ^joyning with theApoftlc in prefling for obtaining Pertedion of Righteoufnefs of Jefus Chrift, and daily prefling, in the Ufe of all Religious Duties, for the obtain- ing the fame, and all the glorious Benefits thereof, as the rich Prize of the high •Calling, whereby Chriftians are called to receive and reft on Chrift and his Righte- ^oufnefs,' that they may be eftecmed Righteous in the Sight ot* GOD • and thus it 4s explained by Zanchius, Cahin, Efuus, -Memchius and T'irinus on the Place. And ~this plainly appears to be the true Senfe of it, by the whole Strain of the Apoftle's Arguments in thepreceeding Part of the Chapter. The 3^. thing to be cleared, is tofliow what is the Meaning oi being in any thing othermfe minded. Now, our Adverfaries lay the great Weight of their Argu- -ment on this Claufe of the Verfe, alledging tho' there be great Difference in Judg- inent among Minifters ar.d Proieflbrs, in Matters of Religion, yet they may, yea, ought to keep up clofe Communion together ; and therefore we ought to keep Communion with Jurants, who judge the Qath of Abjuration lawful,, which we ^judge very grofly finful. But this Claufe will do them no Service, becaufe the 'Bifterence among thefe Phtlippians fpoken of in this Verfe was only fome Difference ^of Degrees of Faith and Knowledge s But no Difference of Subftantial Parts or "Articles of true Chriflian Faith. As if the Apoftle had faid, Tho' all Chriftians that \'ire confirmed in the true Belief of all the Subfiantial Articles of the Chrijiian Faith, con- tained in the Gofpel Difpenfiition, are peife^ in Regard of Parts of Faith, andfo all thefs ''and litre perfeti in that Refpefl ; yet Ihave toldym, 'That I my felf .am not perfeEi in RefpeB of Degrees ; and therefore I prefs foreward to Chrifl the Priz>e, to get In- creafe of Degrees of the Grace of Faith, and all other Graces, and of Spiritual Saving Knowledge, till at lafi I be made perfeEi in Degrees, nuhenljhall come to the full Enjoy ^ment of GOD in Chrifl, in a State of Glory : and tho^ you may differ from me in Degrees ■'of Faith ^nd Knowledge, what further Degrees of Faith and Saving Knowledge ye want -and defire, GOD will in due 'time -revealall things, net: itih necejfary, but alfo all things ufefulfor yeur Salvation. Thus it is interpreted by Kintfius and Vullichius, who com- fjare this Verfe. with i Theff: 5. j^. And thus itis^nderllood and explained -by PjfcatQt CHAP. XIII. The 04th of Ahjuration Aniwered, m Ptfcator, Vorflius, and Zanchms, foil owing ChryfoRom : Like wife Efiius, Memchius^ Ttrinus and Doftor Owen interpret it fo, and Mr. Hu/e in his Ramnai Defence 6f Non-conformity, Pag: 140. approves and follows this Interpretation. And the Realbns that perfwade me, that this is the true Senfe, are, ifi. Becaufe the A- poflle doth not dired: that Command or Exhortation to Hereticks or falfe Apoftles,' but to thefe that he calls perfed, and puts in theClafs with himfelf in tlic very Words of the Text. 2dt^. Becaufe I have proven, That whoever teacheth and maintaineth an Error contrary to any one fubftantial Article of the true Chriftian Faith received in truly Reformed Churches, is an Heretick ; this I proved in fpcaking on Herefie i« Dodrine, Chap: 5?/?. -^dly. Becaufe the Apoflle was fo far from calling t\\tm ^erfeSi ^ who taught and maintained any Doftrine contrary ro any fabftantial Point or Article of Gofpel Faith, that he pronounceth them acmrfed.Ga^ I. 8, 9. as w^as cleared in fpeaking concerning the Church of Com^y^, Chap: nth. ^thly. Becaufe all the fubftantial Articles of true Faith, contained in the Gofpel Difpenfation, are Articlesofour LORD's Dying Will and Teilament, and fealed with his Blood, and put out of the Power of Angels and Men to alter; fo that no Man can fell one of thefe Articles for the fake of Peace with the greateft Men on Earth, 'y-thly. Becaufe it clearly followeth as a fifth Reafon, That the Apoftle had no Power for Peace-fake to tolerate the teaching and defending any Error con- trary to any fobftantial Point of Gofpel Faith, all the Condefcention for Peace, that he pradifed and avowed, was. Only in things indifferent, that might be either done, or letten alone: But fure that will never be applicable to the Oath of Abju-' ration j for the Jurants hold it to be a Lawful and neceflary Duty; And I have proven it 'grofly finfulandfcandalous. And it is unquellionable. That all Oaths iffipofed by Authority, mufl be either real Duty to be fworn, or clfe finful, and to be refufcd ; and it's abfurd to reckon thefe Oaths Indifferent ; yea, no Oath is indifrerent, but ought to have Weighty and juft Reaibns requiring us to fwcar, elfe we take GOD's Name in vain in fwearing v/ithout Necefl^ty. The4//;. Thing to be cleared was to fhow the Import of that Promife, t-Zz,. GOD HinJhezsalthistoyou. The Meaning of that is. That GOD v/ill give Increafeof Faith and more Degrees of true and faving Knowledge, to thefe tiiat he has once madeperfed in the Parts of Faith and Chriftian Knov/ledge, as wasfpoken ro above. 5 thly. The Meaning of that Claufe,( viz. nevenhslefs that whereto we have attained ) is oiily this, as ii the Apoflle had faid. Let us perfift and be Jledfaft in that Degree of ■Faith, Know/edge and Holinefithat GOD has beJlQix,ed on us, tho' we be not ferfe^ in •Degrees. Thus it is explained by Eflius, Menochius, Tirinus and Zamhius. €thly. The next Point to be cleared, if, H'hat that Rule was tluit tpe A^ojile cur/nnanded them to walk by ? As to this I fay j/?. Tho' the Jurants and Nonjnrants who join together in Communion, have unluckily miffed the -Apoftles Rule, yet they have gripped greedily at .S'f/7/;>7^t'«'s Prelatick Rule : For StilUngfiect in his Book intituUed Unreafon- «^J the Arguments iidvAmed for Defence ^^ CHAP. XIlI- mMonahknefi of Separation, Pag. 171. Taith, The Apo^les Rule, Rhilip: 3'. ^^ Ttfje Rule of mutual Forbearance; and therefore he would havcPresbyterians to join Yn Communion with the Prelacick Church ot England, and torbear to (^larrel IxEndiih CEREMONIES; and (o the Afiembly ot the National Church bf Scotland, would have us join in Communion with Jarants, and forbear to quar- rel at Swearing the black Oath oif Abjuration, which obhges to maintain B- raflianifm. Prelacy and E-^glifh Ceremonies. But the Apoflles Rule here fpoken of is, the Rule of Faith delivered by Chrifl and his Apoftks, in Oppojjtion to the falfe Teachers, who taught to mix the Ceremonial Law with the Gofpel, as £/?/«/, Memchius, tirinus ^xAZamhius explain it. The Reafon for making that falfe and blafphemus Mixture, contrary to the Apoftles Doarine, was, becaufe the iRow^« Government had long before that Time tolerated the 'Jews in the Ufe ot the Ceremonial Law, but they would not _tolerac the Goipel ; and there- fore to keep Favour with the Government,and lave themfdves from Perfecution, the falfe Teachers mixed the Ceremonial Worfhip wiui the Gofpel, that they might call themfelves Teachers of the Law to the Government, but called themfelves Gofpel Minifters to the Chriflian Church, as C^/t;^ on Ver. ip of this Chapter, and Poo/ in his Sympfis on Rorn'. i5: 18: oblurve. And this is the cenuin Senfe of that Claufe ; for it is the w^ord ot OOD that ^s the only true, full and compleut Rule of Faith and Manners, and not Mens falfe Divices ot mutual Forbearance, to cloak fcandalous Defedions, contrary to G O D's ^ nthh The 1^ Thing to be cleared is, Tojhowwhat 7S meant by minding the fame a)fw.gii^g tim ^^xk^x to the gre^teK Satisfa^tiwi of all who are not . ' wil- CHAP. XIV. IhOath of 'Ahjurr.tiofi.AtjIn'ered. 22% wilfully Blind, and Rejcftcrs of our Covenants. I ftall ifl. fhow wherein the true Umcn of the Covenansed Church o( Scotland cor C\{\s. adly. What is Schifm from her. And idly. I fhall freely allow the Author, to apply all that he has faid againll: Schifmaticks, to them that are found guilty by a plain De- monftration. In the fixth Article of our SOLEMN LEAGUE, We have a plain and unconteflable Defcription fliowing what is the true UNION of our Covenanted Church, and alfo what is SCHISM from her, in thefe Words, "jix,. 'fbat we jhaJl affijl and defend all that enter into this League and Covenant^ in the maintaining andpurfuing thereof ^ andjhall not fuffer ourfehes direClly or indireBly by vohatfoever Combination, Perfwajion or 'Terror ^ to be divided orxuithdraiDit fyom this Blejfed UNION, and CONJUNCTION, whether TO MAKE DEFE- CTION To The contrary part, or To give our selves To de- testable INDIFFERENCr AND NEUTRALITY IN THIS CAUSE. By this Defcription it is plain, That the UNION of our Covenanted Church confiitsin this, That the Members thereof firmly and ftedfaftly adhere to, and de- fend one another, in maintaining andpurfuing the Ends of the Covenant ; that is, in Performance of all the Duties to GOD and Man that the Word of GOD, and the truly Reformed Religion require for Prefervation and Propagation of the Covenanted Reformation of rhefe three Kingdoms Scotland, England and Ireland, according to the Tenor and Obligation of our Solemn League, in Opppfition to wh-atfoever Combination, Terror or Perfwafion that may come in the Way thereof. ■ 2^/j:By this Defcription it is alfo clearly cviden-t. That SCHISM from our Co- venanted Church confills in this, njiz,. When the Members of the Church make Defeftion to the contrary Part, that is, in plain Terms, when they aflbciate, or in- corporate with, afliil;, and defend the Parties 1 againll whom the Cove- nant was made and fworn, viz.. Papi/lsj Frelati/ls, Hereticks, &c. and fall from the Duties of preferving and propagatmg the Reformation of the three Kingdoms, and deny to joyn with, aflifl and defend thefe who adhere to the Covenants in the neceffary Work of renewing them; and purfuingthe Errds of them for extirpating Vopery, Frelacy, Eraflianifm, Superflition, Herefa, Error and ^rofanenefs, and whatfo" ever is contrary to found DoSlrine andthe Voiver of Godiinefs, and for Re-eflablifhing, preferving and propagating the Covenanted Reformation once eftablifhed in thefe Lands, and fworn to by our Covenants. Anct likewife SCHISM from our Cove- nanted Church confifls in this, viz.. When her Members give them/elves to deteflable hidiferency and Neutrality in the CaufeofGOD, viz. the preferving and p/opagatingthe Covenanted Reformation of the three Kingdoms ; like fo many Gallioj, if they can get worldI)'Eafe aTd Advantage, Riches and the like,- they are carelefs whether the covenanted Reformation of thefe Lands fink orfwim j fo that they cowardly and perfidioufly, apoftatize from thatexprefs Article of the Covenant, and forfakethc Caufe of GOD, and honcft Adherents to the Covenant, as if they thought Sin and Shame to own and adhere to Chrift and his Caufe, the Work of Reformation of F f thefe 1 •226 The Arguments^ advamed for Defenie of CHAP. XV. thefe three Kingdoms, and his Followers eipecially iri the Day of publick Tefti- mony, and pleading for, and detending Chrift's Caufe and Prerogatives in thefe Lands. AH Members of this National Church, who upon Account of any Com- bination, Perfwafion or Terror, and Fear of worldly Lofs or Sufl-erings whatfoever, are guilty in any of thefe two cafes, are guilty of making SCHISM from the cove- nanted Church, as is clearly manifeft by that fixth Article of our Solemn League. And fcing this National Church is notorioufly and grofly guilty of jnaking De- fection to the contrary Part, by going into the Legal Eftablifhment of the Incorpo- rating Union with England, whtroby EngliJJ) Erallian Sup emacy, Prelacy, and Englijh-popijh CEREMONIES are eftablifhed, and the Jurants by the Oath of Abjuration have folcmnly ratified that Union, as themfeives grant, which I proved from their Printed Papers on the Oath ; then it plainly follows by undenyable Con- fequence. That the National Church of Scotland is guilty of SCHISM; and the Ju- rants are moft heinoufly guilty by their Oath. And feing the National Church is guilty of SCHISM, on Account of Defedi- on above faid, fhe muft be undeniably guilty in Refped of Neutrality in the Caufe ot GOD, as defcribed above. Now according to my Promife, in the third Place, I allow the Author to ap- ply what he advanced as to the heinous Nature, and woful Efteds of SCHISM, to the National Church, and in the higheft Degree to the Jurants and let him take as much of it as any, that he may enjoy the Fruit ot his own Study. And to conclude what I had to fay as to this Point, and give full Satisfaction to . all Perfons, who have not rejeded our Covenants, and defign wilfully to trample on our Covenanted Reformation for the fake ofpurchafing Favour with the Prelatick Court of England, and getting worldly Advantage, I give the Reader that Satisfaction to know, that I am not fingular in explaining the fixth Article of our Solemn League and Covenant, as above faid : For the Reader will find in the Printed Afts of the Venerable Aflemblies of the Church oi Scotland Anno i6^$ Seflion i8. Pag; 283. and Anno 1^47. Seflion 15. Pag: 334. and Anno 1648. Seflion 21. Pag. 391, 392. in their Explanations of that fixth Article of the Solemn League, they give the fame Senfe of it that I have done : And thefe who will deny or condemn thefe Aflemblies their Explanation, they are not worth the Pains of an Anfwer. CHAP. XV. H^eremjoyhiug in Communion "mith jurants y with a Protefifation, Vx refuted^ PAg: 40. The Author oflfers his greateft Condefcention, by allowing Miniflers and Elders to joyn in Communion with Jurants, with a Protefliation againfl: what they think to be Def e, by the Teflimony of all thefe. Learned ?ool on that Verfe proves. That Jofeph of Arimathea was no Member of the Sanhedrin, but only of the Town-council oi Jerufalem io\: Jofeph is calkd in the Original BovKiv7*ii which fignifies only Decurio, a CounfclJor of a Town-council ; and fo he was only a Member of the Town- council oi Jerufilem -, but no Member of the SHukdrin,2k$ Jofephus and the other Authors above cited, demonftrate m the Places F f 2 above r 2t8 The Ar^umHfs^dvjtnced for Defence of CHAP. XV. above cited. And fo he did not joyn in the Sanhedrin ; but if he had joyned, it would have been his great Sin, as was made evident above. j\thly. Nrcodemus who wa,s a Member oithitSanhedr in did neither prbteft, nor give any taithful Teftimony at all, for Detence of Chrifl and his Dodrine, as ap- pears plainly from Job: 7. 51, 52. For all that Nicodemus faid in Favours of Chrift, is in Verfe 5 1. where he faid, Doth our Law judge any Man before it bear bt'm, and know what he doth ? And all that was but a poor faint Qiieftion, very far from a Proteftation, or any poficlve faithful Teftimony in Defence of Chrift's Perfon, Office and Dodlrine. The Learned and Pious Mr. Cahin upon the Place fays, 1'hat in this Verfe^icdditmus faid nothing but what he might have faid for any Mur- derer or T^hief : For the Law alkived all Criminals to be heard in 'Judgment before they were judged: ^«r^ Nicodemus did not pofitiveJy own or defend, either Chrifi's Perfon or his Doctrine : And what Nicodemus did,zuas unworthy of the Name of a Godly Man, cr Bel -ever in Chrift. Thus Mr. .Calvin. And Mufadu s 2ii\d Bucer both on the Place fay, It's manifefijrcm NicodemusV own Words, that he did not fo much as pro- fefs Faith in Chrijl, or defend him and his Doctrine, for Fear of the Pharifees Exco?nmu- nication. And Bullinger on the 52 Vcrfe, makes it clear, thdit Nicodemus did not fo much as profefs to believe in Chrift, or offer to defend his Perfon and Dodrine agamft theP/j^/T/^wfalfe Accufations : And indeed this is evident from the Text, for Nicodemus did not offer one Word to juflifie and defend Ghrift and his Do- drine, as by the 52 and 5:3 Verfes is clearly evident. From all which it is plain. That ifMinifters and Eiders would follow Nicodemus his Pradice, they would fit in Judicatures of blafphemous Hereticks, that condemn Chrift and his .Do- ftrine ; and yet thefe Minifters and Elders fiiould not fo much as profefs to be- lieve in Chrift, or offer to juftifie or defend Chriil: and his Doftrine, againft blaf- phemous Sentences of Condemnation : All true Chrifcians cannot but abhor llich an Abfurdity as that. 5^/?/y. From what hath been faid it*s evident. That Nicodemus was grofly guilty of Sin in his joyning iw the Sanbedrin, anddifowning Chrift before Men ; and the recording of it is not to his Honour, but great Diftioiiour ; and therefore the Ju- rant Author's Aflertion is falfe : And this anlwers the fecond Point I had to ipeak to, on this Head. The 3^ Thing I had to fpeak to, was to anfwer the Author his faying, 7^;^ it will be more for the Honour and Peace of EJders and others, to continue in their Duty, mtwithjlanding of their Apprehenjions of Sinfulnefs thereof, feing they are neither re- quired to juftifie what they thtnk wrong, or not to conde?nn and teRifie againft it. Seing the Author fpeaks of Elders, and others indefinitly, no doubt his De- fign, as well as his Words, will allow Minifters to be included. In anfwer to what the Author advanceth here, ift. I remark. That his Words imply a Contradi- fiion, both to Scripture and himfelf, in aflerting, That it will be for the Ho- nour and Peace of Elders and Minifters to continue in their Duty, that they ap- prehend to be Sin. For by his Argument he would have Minifters and Elders to do CHAP; XV. The Oath of Jhjuration, drtfmrtd, 22^ do things as Duties, which they believe to be Sins; contrary to the Apoftlc's Rule, ^ow 14. '). Let every Man be fully perfxmded tn his Mindy viz. that v^rhat he doth is lawful. And i 'fheff. $ . 22. u^b/iain from all Appearance of Evil: And I wifh he would let the World know how Minifters and Elders fhould continue to do things as their Duties, which they believe to be Sins: For fu rely it is a Contra- didipn for them to believe a thing to be their Duty, and alfo their Sin ; unlefs he would liave Minifters and Elders to believe fuch a thing to be their Duty meer- ly becaufe other Men, or the Church* faith fo, without any fufficient Warrant from GOD's Word to prove it: And irTo, then he would have Presbyterians to berievt by Implicite Faith as Papifts do, to believe a thing to be Duty on the Churches bare Word, tho' in their own Confciences they judge it Sin. idly. How contradidory is it, to aflert, That Minifters and Elders would have both Honour and Peace in continuing to do that which they believe to be their Sin; lurciy he would have thefe Minifters and Elders to have feared Confciences, to have Peace in their continuing in what they believe to be Sin. 3^/y. Seinghe allows Minifters and Elders to condemn and teftifieagavnft what they think wrong andfinful: Then according to his Argument, thefe Minifters and Elders ought to condemn and teftilie againft their doing thefe things that he calls jDuties, becaufe they think thenj wrong and finful ; as for Inftanee, joyning in Communion with Jurants : And ifthey-ought to condemn their joyning asfinful, then it would be contrary to the Author's Argument, that thefe Miruftcrs ^nd Elders ftiould joyn in Communion at all with Jurants .- Tlius he has plainly con- tradided and overthrown his own A^rgumcnt .- For his Argument proves. That they are not to go into what that they think wrong, but to keep free and teftifie againft it; And io Minifters and Elders, that believe it to be finful, to joyn in Communion with Jurants, ought not to joyn, but ro bear Teftimony againii it. But here fome Nonjurants, who joyn in Communion with Jurants bring in an Obje(5tion, faying. If v:e proted againft all the Sinfulnefs find Defeciion, that Jurants :vjere guilty vf in [wearing the Oath of Ah-juratimy tho' the Jurants never con fefs their fiiearing it to be any DefeEiion, Sin or Scandal ; yet upon that Proteftation we may laia^ fully joyn in Cow??!U/iicn in all Gcfpel Ordinances with Jurants. Betorc I enter upon anfwcnng this Objedion, I do freely grant, according to our Coiifcflion of Faith, Chap.- 31. Sect: 4. That all Synods and Cotrncils fince the Days of the Apcflles may err : And therefore the beft Reformed Church may go wrong in fomc thiiigs; and if it be in any thing that is no Subftantial Article of Chriftian Faith contained in the Gofpel Difpenfation, and received and held forth in the Confeftlons of Faith and Catcchiiins of Reformed Churches, and efpecially in that Church, concerning Do6rine, Worftiip, Difcipline, and Government, eftabliilied. by Divine Authority of Chrift'5 Inftitution and Appointment in the Golpel, \^hich is fcaled with his Blood, as bis dying Will and Teftament in whole and every Parr, and fo put our of the Power of Angels and Men to break Or al- • ter : I fay, If a Church go wrong or err in her Adminiftrations in any thing that is '^ JO *The Arguments advanced for Defence of CHAP. XV. p not .Subftantial, as has been faid, then it is lawful for Miniilers and Elders to proteft againft that Wrong, and continue in Communion neverthelefs, with that Chutch. And I grant in a Word, protefting and keeping in Communion, in all the Cafes I laid down in my Conceifions in the firft Chapter of this Book. But now I proceed to anfwer the Objeftion, and ifl. I fay the Jurant has granted in his 6th Juft Ground of Separation, That ii Scandals Be grievous and notour, and no Redrcfs can be had m an orderly Way, (o as to reach the great End of Edification, then it is lawful Duty to feparate; and all this hath been evidently proven in the Cafe of Minifters fwearing the Oath, and Re- fufingto give Sacisfadion ; and confequently Separation is Duty, in Oppofiti- on to Joining with a Proteftation ; and fo thefe Nonjurants grant more Allow- ance of Joining with Toleration of Scandal than Jurants grant. idly. I have proven. That the Oath of Abjuration in its true literal Senfe, and even according to Jurant's Conceffions in their printed Papers, is a folemn Ratification of the Incorporating Union, by which Urtion EnghJJ} Eraflian Su- premacy, Prelacy, and EngUJh-ppiJh Ceremonies, are eftablifhed for aM Time to come ; and therefore Jurants who have fworn it, have fworn to maintain Eraftianifm, Prelacy and Engli/b-popijh CQVcmonkSj which is a gro Is Erring from fubftantial Principles of our Reformed Religion, contained in the Word of God; and held forth in our Confeffion of Faith : And therefore till Jurants recant and give publick Satisfadion for fuch grofs Error and Scandal, a Proteftation againft their Defedion and Scandal in [wearing that Oath, while they continue to defend it to be lawful, can no more warrant us to join in Communion with them, than a Proteftation coul^ warrant Men to join in Communion with Minifters that did fwear the old Oath of Supremacy, and defended it to be lawful ; for both thefe Oaths are of one Nature, only the Oath of Abjura- tion obliges to maintain Enghjh-Popijh Ceremonies, which the old Oath oi Su- premacy in Scotland did not, in King Charles lid's Time. i^dly. Tho' protefting againft a Church her Failings and Faults in wrong Admi- niftrations in fmaller things, and while there is Redrefs to be had, will exoncr Minifters and Profeflbrs ; and fuffice for Exoneration in Order to their keeping Communion with her; yet when ftie errs and makes Defedion from one or more Subftantial Points of the Chriftian Faith of Reformed Churches, contained in the Word of GOD, and which Ihe hath profefled ; and all herMcmbers are folemn- ly fworn to, by Baptifm, and defends her fo doing to be no publick Scandal, as Jurants do, yeaj all the ailembly of the prefent Church of Aor/^W -hath defended the fwearing that Oath : Then furely in that Cafe, a Proteftation againft the Defedion and Scandal in fwearing it, cannot fuffice for Exoneration and Warrant joyning in Communion with Jurants, until they give publick Satisiadion .- Elfe at that Rate a Proteftation fhould warrant us to joyn in Communion with Prelates, and their Curates, who maintain no other Principles or Errors, than thefe that lurants have folemnly fworn to maintain. CHAP. XV, The Odth of Abjuration^ anfwered. 2?i a^thly. The Oath of Abjuration is contrary to, and cverfive of our Solemn League and Covenant, and all that did fwear fuch an Oath, and refufed to give publick Satisfadion were appointed peremptorly to beExcommunicate by the Ac^ of Aflembly of the Church o£ Scotland Anno 16^9. Seffion 19, compared with Aflembly 1^48, Se/Hon 18; Page 378; and Aflembly i6^%: Sefllon 14; Page 375. And it will have a Soul-altonifliing found in the Ears of all Chriflians that own our Covenanted Reformation, to fay, that we may with a Jugling Sham* Proteftation joyn in Communion with thefe,that the ftanding Ads of chcfeFamous Covenanted Aflemblies peremptorly appoint to be Excommunicate. '^thly. Thefe Non-jurmt Minifters who have given in Proteftations to Prcsby- tries againfl: the Grofs Defedion, and Scandal that Jurants are Guilty of, in (wear- ing the Oath of Abjuration, did but Jugle in that Matter, to Delude the Hone ft fimple People who fcrupled to keep Communion with Non-jurants who joyn in Communion with Jurants : For thefe Protefting Non-yurants contradifted them- felves, and Judicially and Dodrinally condemned their Proteftation. In thefe Refpeds, ijl. Becaufe, in the Year 171 2 before the Oath was taken, thele Pro- tefting Nonjurams did at the General Aflembly make a Bargain with thefe that were clear tor fwearing that Oath, that they who Refolved to Refufe to fwear fhould ufe mutual forbearance, and no ways declare the fwearing it to be ground of Separation: And in their Aflembly 1713, there was a Printed Aft of their Aflembly publiflied, Declaring the fwearing that Oath to be no juft Ground of Separation -, and this Ad in cxprefs Words faid, it was an Unanimous Ad of the General Aflembly •, So that it declared all the Nonjurams did in conjundion with ^urants Unanimoufly agree in that Ad; And in the Year 17 14, their Ge- neral Aflembly made another Unanimous Ad, not only declaring the taking the Oath ot Abjuration to be no ground of Separation ; but alfo Authoritatively xc" qu'mng a\] Nvnjurant Presbyterian Minifters, and the Chriftian Profeflfors of Pres- byterian Perfwafion within the Bounds of the National Church of Scot land, to join in Communion with Jurant Minifters in all Gofpel Ordinances, even in the Sa- crament of the Lord's Supper, without any previous fatisfadion had from 7«- rants on account of their fwearing that Oath, and fo both Jurants^ and thefe Protefting Nonjurants did Judicially declare the fwearing that Oath to be no Publick Scandal at all, elfe it would have been juft caufc of not joyning with Ju- rants in the Lord's Supper till the Publick Scandal had been removed ; as is clear from our Confeflion of Faith, Chap: 30. Sect: 3. And a^w 17 15 their Aflembly by an Unanimous Ad appointed Synods and Presbyteries to proceed againft and Inflid the Cenfures of the Kirk upon four Reverend Minifters, Viz,. Mr. Hepburn, Mr: Taylor i Mr.- Gikhrifiy and Mr: M^millan, as Schifmaticks, on account of their declaring the fwearing the Oath of Abjuration,and refufing to give Publick Satisfadion, to be a grofs Defedion and Scandal, and a juft caufe and Ground of Separation ; and all the joyning Nonjurant Minifters approved of, and went in- to that Ad for Ccnfuring thek four Reverend Minifters above faid ; and thereby y^2 The Arguments ndvdmel for Defence of GHAP. XV. rhcy Judicially condemned their Proteftation given in to Presbyteries againft the grofe Defedion and Scandal Juvayns were Guilty of in fwearlng the Oath; Be- - caufeby their Ad of Aflembly 1715, they appointed all thefe MiniHersto becen- fu'i-ed as Schirmaticks(who declared the taking thatOath to be fuch a grofs Detefti- on that it is/ufficient Ground of reparation, from Communion wkh Jurants as above faid ) "and confequently by that Ad declared it to be no. PublickScandal at all, contrary to their Proteflation aforefaid. And with what face could Minifters Troteft againft their Brethren as being Guilty of grofs Defedion, and Publick 'Scandal on account of taking thatOath ; which, formerly they had agreed at Af- femblyin 171 2 to hold, to be nojuft caufe of Separation from Jur/ints in any Ordinance, even the Lord^s Supper ? Unlefs they would contradid our Confel- (ion of Faith, and fay, that grofs Defcdion and Publick Scandal is no juft caufe to hinder joyning in the Lord's Supper. And as thefe Protefling Miniflers before their Proteftarion, declared it to be no Publick Scandal ; (o after their Protefla- tion they maintain and Judicially declare they hold it to be no Publick Scandal at all, as has been proven : And accordingly they joyn in Communion with Jurants. And fnrely all Men of Common Senfe and Reafon know, that ifMini- Ilers Proteft in a Presbytery ( which is an Inferiour Judicature) againft a thing as a grofsDefedion and Publick Scandal ; which in the General Aflembly, (that is the Supreme Judicature ) They by their Unanimous Ads afterward judicially declare to be no Publick Scandal at all ; Their After- Ads of AfTembly quite deftroy, and utterly condemn their former Proteflation as unjufl. idly. As thefe Protefl- ing and Joyriing Nonjarants have judicially condemned their Proteflation, To they have before Sun and Moon, Dodrinally condemned it all along, in Preaching up the keeping clofe Communion with the National Church of Scotland^ Jurants and Nonjurjints together, and on alljOccafions Branded all with the Odious Name of Schifmaticks, who do notkeep Up this CommunicA in all Ordinances ; this is fo notour, that it is undenyable : And this was publickly owned and declared by thefe that are looked upon to be the moflConfcienciousiVb^T/z/r/z;??/ j And by the chief Man of the Protefling and joyning Nonjurants at the Conference held at Pen^' font m 'July 1714. Thefe joyning Norijurafits may perceive their Pradice con- demned by poor Heathens ; For 'theognis faith, i. • c, yuramenta fidelia non amplius funt inter homines- et tamen pro Jti/iis hahentur ; mod deploy at. 7%eognis hoc verjiculo'^ ut Ravenel Bihlioth: facra: Part \: Page 862. In- terpretatm": That is, its Lamentable that Men fkould be efteemed Honeil: whofe Oaths are not Faithful. Yet fome have the Impudence to fay, that thefe Miniflers never approved thefe Ads ofAflembly forlnjoyning Communion with Jurants -.which is contrary to thefe Miniflers own Declaration aforefaid at Fenpont before manyHundreds,and contrary to the Ad in i7i5,forCenfuring the four Mi- niflers as above faid : Which Ad all Nonjurants in Scotland who joyn in Affem- bly ; approve of, and. go into, as is undenyably evident ; For all Men of Com- mon Senfe in this Nation know, that all and every one of the No njurtifitf 'who join CHAP XVr. The OAthof Mjur.ttion,AnfveYed. 2^^ join in the General AfTcmbly, ccndemn all as Scbifmaticks who joyn" not in Com- munion with Jurants and Noi^urants, according to the Appointment of the Ads of Aflembly ^w^o 1713, 1714, 1715. C H A P. X V I. jVhich contains an Anfxver to the J ur ants Argument for Defence of the Oath taken from the Citations of A[is of PreLitick Parliaments Cited in our National Ct^ 'venant ; - And alfo an Anfwer to Jurants Argument, whereby they endeavour to prove it agreeable to our Confeffton of Faith, for Vresbjteriam to giie Confeni to the EJlahliJJment of, and fwear Allegiance to Prelatick and Vopijb Kings 0/ Britain. IT is with a great deal of pains urged by the yurants, in one of their Pamphlets, 'Intituled A Letter to a Friend,which was publiflied at the clofe of the General Aflembly Anno 171 2. In that Pamphlet, I fay, the ^^r^w^j at great length urge that Argument, viz.. The Oath of Abjuration, by its citing and referring to the Englijh Afts of Parliament, viz.. The. Ads of Limitation and further Limitation, it doth not oblige Jurants to approve of, or maintain the Conflitution and Lord- ly Power of Mrehites as Members of that Parliament : And their great Reafon is, B(Xaufe the National Covenant of Scotland citQs Ads of Parliaments in King James the 6th his Time, in which Parliaments Prelates did fit as Conflituent Members : But the National Covenant did not oblige Covenanters to approve of and maintain Prelacy: And therefore neither doch the Oath of Abjuration, Allegiance, &c. Sworn in Obedience, and referring to A<3:s and Authority of the Parliament of Great Britain, oblige Jurants to approve of, and maintain the Lordly Power of Prelates who are Confiitucnt Members'of it. To that I anfwer, 17?. It is very plain,thatArgument is falfe and Sophiftical, a diElo feciindtm quid, ad diElum JimpUciter , as Philofophers fay j Foraltho' fomekind of Citations of Ads, do not obhge the Citers to approve of the Conftitution and Authority of the Judicature that made thefe Ads, as is undenyable in the cafe ofProtellant Divines citing the Ads of the ?opiJh Council of Trent : But its Indifputable, that fome other kinds of Citations do import the Citers Appro- bation of the Authority of the Legiflature that made thefe Ads .• And for con- firming this to the Convidion ofallthatdo not abfurdly deny manifeft Truth, let it be confidered ; That fometimes Scots Presbyterians do cite Ads or Sta- tutes oi xhQ Pcpifo Council oi Trent, or Statutes of a Forreign Civil Govern- xnent ot Rome, France or Germany, upon account oi fuch Ads or Statutes being agreeable to the Word ofGOD,and Moral Law of Nature ; And therefore to be al- lowed as a foundTruth to be maintained,but not upon account of theRuhng Pow- er andAuthority or thefcjudicatures that made thefeStacuteSjas if we were oblig- ed to approve ot theCoullitution,and Obey the Authority of thefe Judicatures as ourLawful Magiilrates : And in thcNationalCovenant there are cited fome Ads of ' ' ^'l.V *..0 ;\ '. , ,: O g-^::z.:j ,: .*\.c.; ^.::.m ...5.u ; ... . ^at: qta Yhe Arguments. ddvAmed for Defence of CHAP: XVI. Parliamettts of King James k\\Q.ifly and of Km^Jamestliz ^th^ in which Parlia- mcnts Poptjh Bifhops fat as Conftituenc Members; And who would be fo ab-, fiird as to aflert, thatour Reformers, in the National Covenant, fwore to main- . tain theAntichriftianConflitution and Power of PopiJJjBi{hops> Becaufe' according to that Ridiculous falfeNotion, theCovenant would be a falfe contradidoryOath: For the Covenant only refers to Statutes in thefe Ads upon account of their being agreeable to the Word of GODy and Moral Law of Nature, and only for far as they were fuch, and as Conccffions of our Po/'/)^ Adverfaries ; whereby we' ftop their Mouths, they having declared fuch parts of our Covenanted Conftittt- tibn to be juft and good ; As the Apoftle Paul cited the faying of the Heathen Poet, ( viz,. Aratus ) ASis 17. 28. But on the other Hand, when Men fwear an Oath which citeth and'reierreth to Ac^s. of Parliament, by which Ads that Oath wa^^appointed, and intended* to oblige the Swearers to maintain Prelacy, |:rastianism,. and Fopifi Cekemonies ; then the Swearers of that Oath are oblig- ed to approve of, and maintain Prelacy, Erajlianifjn and thefe Superflitious Ce- v£moms : And I have in the ^d Chapter lufficicntly proven, that the Oath of Objuration citeth and referreth to Ads of Parliament, Fiz.. The AEls of Li7ni" tiiuon.andfmther Limitation r, by which A6ts that Oath was appointed and intend- ed to'oblige'the Swearers to maintain Prelacy, Erastianism and jfo/;/^ Ceremo- nies; Whence its evident the Jurants are obliged to maintain Prelacy yErafiimnifm^ ^c. ' And thus I jiave Demonftrated the Falfhood of this Argument, by which ■^«r/?»w endeavour to Defend the Oath of Abjuration, idly. Doth the Oath of Abjuration as truly and plainly Abjure Prelacy, as our National Covenant ? 'idly. Howabfurdis it, to aflert, That by fwearing the Covenant our Fore-fa- thers did owni acknowledge and obey ^opijh Prelates , that were Dead a Hun- dred Years beiore, to be their Lawful Magiftrates, as Jmam own EKgliJh Fre- IntBs that are Members of Parliament, requiring Obedience in fwearing the Ab- juration for maintaining the prefent Magiftracy i ot which Prelates are a part ? 'SECT. TL Containing a Vindicatim of Chap. 23. of our Confejfton of Faith. Fis too notour to be denyed, that many, both Minifters and others, who de- fend theOath otAbjuration, and the Confl:itution of Government Eftablifhed by the Union, do advance Arguments Equivalent to that Argument of fome VrelatiftsViZ,. That the 2 3;f, There- ibre all Subjeds in Britain ought to iweat Allegiance, and to Fight for, and lay down their Lives in Defence of the Authority of the Kings of ^ma/w, Eftabli&ed by the Incorporating Union when required by the Government; Notwithftand- ing that by the Fundamental Laws of that Eilablifhmentjall Kings of 5rtfrt/» are obliged to fwear to maintain Erastianism, Prelacy zr\d Englijh PopifiCBK^uO' NiES, and to be only of Communion with that PrelatickChmch , elfe they fliall not be Kings of £m/»». , Jhat Jurants may not, fay I, wrong them in faying, they in Defence of the Oath CHAP. XVI. The OATH of Abjuration, Anfmred. -i^5 Oath hold fuch a Principle as what is mentioned in the Argument above ex- preft ; 1 fliali let the Reader fee, xhat by their exprcfs Words they do maintain the Opinion above faid, in moregrofs Terms than expreft in the above faid Ar- gument. Firfl, In their Ahfvver o( the Oail!h 'of Abjuration Difplayed, Page 24. The Author in Name of the Jurants faith, / ^ry frankly own^ that 1 Jhallnewr fcruple my paying Allegiance to a Lutheran Pr;>zc'tf upon the Throney having AJfUrance from him that he will ProteB and Maintain our Holy Religion and Church ConfUitution to us in Scotland, and that without cbliging him to Renounce his Lutheran £^rror/. "/, fays he, think it not kind to be too hard upon hiin j and what good ScKEvnt^G fuch Matters to too grent a height has dene, I knew not'^ ' ; What the Author means by Aflurarice of the King's maintaining the Church of Scotland ; I have made evident already in the 7, d. Chapter, to be only the fecur- ing by a Declaration of Parliament, and the King's Oath to preferve the Ad of Security, as it is a Fundamental and. Eflential Article of EftabWftment of the In- corporating U-nion, by which Ekas'tianism, Prelacy, and Englijh Popijh Cere- -MONiis areEftablifhed, and the Church ot Scotland is obliged to Own,Dciend, Prav for the Prelervation of, and Obey the Lordly Power of Englijh Prelates : And upon the King's granting that Security, the furants are for fwearing Allegiance, without requiring the King to Renounce his Lutheran Errors. And it was made evident in the 3^ Chapter, that an Oath of Allegiance obliges to maintain the •whole Conftitution,- and fo Jurants are for allowing the Kings of Britain to main- tain all the Lutheran Errors, and Praftife them ; and alfo they will fwear to main- tain the whole Conftitution Eftablifiied by the Union, including Erafliantfm, ?re- lacy, &c. And if the Kings o( Britain be required to Renounce the Lutheran Er- rors, it's Screwing the Reformation too high in the Jurants Senfe ; And confe- quently all the Covenanters from the Year of our LORD 1538, to 1549 hclw- frje, are at once condemned tor fcrewing Reformation too high .• The Lord pity poor People in Scotland, that have fuch pretended Presbyterian Mini/lers / For the very Prelates oi England hsLVC obliged King GEORGE to Renounce all Lutheran Enovs incouCiUzm with the Religion of the Pre/^fa-^ Church of Eng- land ; but Scots Jurants call that, a fcrewing of Reformation too high 1 Famous Henricu^ Altinguis in Problem-. Theolog: in his Preface fo "Difpuf. Harmo- nica Cenfeff: tells us, that Balthafar Mentzerus, a Lutheran Profeflor oi 'Theology at GiiJfen,'Anno i6i'^. pretending to maintain the Articles of the Augufian Couid- (ioa, in his Thsolog: Compend: which he called an Explication of that Confeflion, he preverts thatConfefrion,and excerpts half Sentences ofOrthodoxDivines Writ- ings, which he detorted, and compofcd a Syftem ofErroneous Principles; and at fird Taught it in Private to Nobkmcns Sons, and other Students, till they were corrupted, by which means that. Erroneous Syftera is commonly received and maintained by tVie Lutherans. I fh all cite a few ofthefe Errors Recorded in Al^ ting: Difput: Hermon: And in Maccovius his Proton: pfeudos Luther. * Firjl, The I Luther aMs hold concerning theTrinity, That one Elieuce begets another Eflence. G g 2 2^fy, 23^ The Arguments AlvAmed for Defence of CWAP. XVI * 2dly' That the Efl'ential Properties of the Divine Nature are communicated to < the Humane Nature ofChrift, (o that the Humane Nature is Oranifcient, Omni- ' potent,ancl every where prefent. And concerning the Decrees^ they hold, Firft, « That GOD Ekded all Men to Life Eternal, idly. That the Merits of. Chrift, ^ and Faith werp the Moving and Meritorious Caufes of the Decree ot Eleftion. « 7,dly' That by the Appointment of the Decree, Chrift as Redeemer laid down « His Life a Ranfom for all and everyone of Mankind of the whole World with- « out Exception, ^thly. That the Decree of Eledion is changeable, (o that thefe « who have, becnEleded may beReprobated and Perifli for ever. s^/j/y.Thatfin is « the Meritorious Caufe of the Decree of Reprobation. And concerning Baptifm^ < they hold, VixHy That all that are Baptized with Water, are all and every one * Regenerated by the Holy Ghoft. idly. That in cafe of Neceffity Women may ' Baptize Infants. 3 ^/y. That before Children be Baptized, the Pnefl; or the Wo- « man that is toAdrainifter Baptifm, muft by a Charm oiExorcifm Adjure the De- .* vils out of the Child to be Baptized. Concermng the Lord's Supper they ho!d, * Fhfty That the Real Blood ofChrift is mixed with the Wine, like vVine and \Va- * ter mixedin a Glafs, and that his Real Flefh is likewife mixed wi h the Sab- ' ftance of the Bread ; And that People not only by Faith,bat with the Mouth * corporally Eat and Drink Chrifl^s Flefh and Blood, idly. Thsit Hypocrites and ' fincere Believers Equally partake of Chrift 's Body and Blood in that Sacrament. ,c ^d'y. That the Bread fhould be little Wafers as ufed by thcPaptfis. dth/y.That the < Prieft ftiould put the Bread &Wineinto theCommunicani-sMouths,asr/y. < That it may be Adminiftred to a fingle Perfon. ythly. That the Prieft muft not ' Adminifter, but when cloarhed with a White Surplice. I Jball only Name a few ' more of their Errors. Viz.. They hold Private ConfelTion and Abfolution ot all * fecret fins,(as uled by the ?apijls) to be neceflary. And 2^/)'. That Perfons Re- « generated and Pardoned, and Jaftified, may fall from a State of Grace, and *perifh forever. 3£//y.ThatChrift wasBorn [ C/cz^fo wf^ro, ] i. e. Not as otherChil- * dren areBorn of theirMothers. ^thly. That Perfons ftiould Bow theKnee when * ever they hear the "^ordlfJESUS] expreft inWorftiip. ^thly. That the Images uf- * ed byP^^'i/^jare to be preierved asOrnaments in theChurches.d^/j/y.ThatitsLaw- * fulto haveI^f/«^Hymns fung,& played onOrgans in theChurchcs,asP^/^j ufe.7i^. * They hold it neceflary to have Biftiops, and Arch-Biftiops. Like ihtTukhan Bi^ ihops in King '^ames the 6thy his Time. Now let all Serious Judicious Presby- terians Jiidge, if it is not notorioufly falfe which the yurants Publifli in Print, J/iz,. T*hat Lutherans Differ little or nothing in Governmenty and nothing at all in Doctrincy from Presbyterians, as they fay in the Dialogue betv^ixt a Minifter and two Elders. And further the Jurants in their Pamphlet called, A Dialogue betwixt a Minijler and two Elders, Fag: 40. Th^y fay, M^e only abjure the Pretender for the prefent y but if he come to he Ruler if thefe Kingdoms y either by Conquefi or by the 'Parliaments alpe^ ring the Laws, then we willjwear Allegiance to him :for if it were otherwife, f^y they, vje CHAP: XVT. The Oith of Ahjuntion, anhvered. 237 tve "would mt abjure htwU the 14?/; 0/ France ; becaufe we are not certain, hut fome^ time or other he may conquer thefe Nations ^ and if he did we would Jwear Allegiance to him. From which Inftancesitis indifputable, That tho' the Jarants fay not in ex- prefs Terms in their Papers above cited, the 23 Chap: of our Confeffion of Faith faith, Infidelity or Difference of Religion doth not make iioid the Magifirates Jufl and Legal Authority : And hence therefore it is Duty for us to fwear Alle- giance to, and Jay down our Lives in Defence of the Authority of the King's of jBnt^/«, founded upon, eftablifhed and determined by the Incorporating Un on, when required by Ihe Government ; notwitbftanding that by the Fundamental Laws of that Eftablifhment, all Kings of jB>7>(J7>2 are obliged to fwear to maintain ERASTIANISM, PRELACY and £«5/|/5-/o/»;y^ CEREMONIES, and to be on- ly of the Communion of that Prelatick Church ; elfe they fh all not be Kings of Britain: I fay tho' Jurantsin thelnftances I have cited out of their own Papers, do not in exprefs Terms cite the 23^. Chapter of our Conteflion ot Faith, and draw that Conclufion ; yet it's manifeft by their Words, that they hold that Principle, liz,. That Presbyterians of Scotland may in Confiflancy with Presbyterian Frindples of the Church of Scotland, give their Content unto the Legal Eflablifiment of Prilatick/iw^ Erastian, yea, of Popish Kings of Bcitsiiu, fwear Ai/egiance to,and cm- fequently lay down their very Lives in Defence of the Authority 0/ Erastian, Prela- TiCK, and Popish Kings of Britain ; when ever the Government requires them fo te do^ according to the Tenor of their Oath of Allegiance. This h indifputably evident from the Principle, That they hold of fwearing Allegiance to the Popifii Pretender, if he can but once afcend the Throne, either by Conqueft or Alteration of Laws: And that is plainly equivalent to the Prelatick Argument, vix.. That according to Presbyterian Principles of the Church of Scotland in the 2 7,d. Chapter of their Confef- fionof Faith ^'Presbyterians may lawfully con fent^ to ejlablijh, fvcenr Alltgiance to, and lay down their Lives in Defence of the Authority of ERASTlAN, PRELATlCKj or POPISH Kwgs of Britain. I fhall as briefly as poffible, refute that Argument ofPrelatifls and J irants, and vindicate our Confeffion of Faith from that faife Glofs put upon the 23^. Chapter oi it ; For doing of which, let it be confidered, ifi. That in the firft Section of that 23^ Chapter of our Confeffion, there is a Defcription of the In- Uitution of the Office, Commiflion , Power and Ends of MagiRracy in Ge- neral, zdly. In the 2^. and 3//. Seftions of that Chapter, we have a "Defcription of the Power, Authority, Ules,and Endsotthc Office of the Chriftian Magiftrate in particular. 3r//>'. In the 3^. Sedion it is demondrated. That Eraftianifm in ^fluming the Power of the Keys of Dodrine, Difcipline and Government of the Church, belongs not to the Office of the MagiHrate ; for GOD has prohibited the Civil -Magilirates, to aflume the Adminiftratipn of the Word and Sacraments, and the Power of the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, viz.. the Keys of Di- fcipline and Government : Compare 1 Chron: 26. 18. with Mat th: 18. 17. and I Cpr: 12. ?8, 2p. Ephi II, 12. I Cor: 4. 12. Rom: 10. 15. Heb: 6. 4, 5. ^thly, in 1 ^ig The Argaments advanced' for Defence oj^ CHAP. XVL In the 4;/? Sedion of that 23 Chapi we have a Defefiption 6f the Duties of Sub- jeds, not only to Orthodox Chriftian Magiftrates lawfully conilitute, but alfo to Heathen Magi(lrates,and even to Heretical Magiflratss/uch as the Popifh Kings of Frame :,2ly\& Y.m\)Q^or:soi Germany are. But here it muil; be well marked, that when the Confeflion fpeaks of^^he Juftand Legal Authority of Infidel Mhgi fir ates, and thofe that differ in Religion^ asPapiits, or thefe of the Greek Church : The meaning is on- ly, This viz,: Domimum mnfmdatur jn Gratia -, th^it is^Ciml Authority is not founded on Grace-, ( for true Chrilb'ans may not kill all Heathens and Here ticks, and take their Eftates) as the pious and learned Mr. Shie/dr the Author of the Hind let loofe, faith in the i^jth. Page of that Book. 2dly.lt muft be coniidered,That Magiilracy is not a thing that is a peculiar Property belonging only to Peoples and Nations of Or- thodox Principles; but an Office that GOD has founded on the Law of Nature, and is a proper Part of the fifth Command of the Moral Law, which extends to all Mankind, Ciirillians and Heathens: And feing the Power of Government is Radically in the People, who conflitute fuch a ^//^df j or Kind of Government as they judge moft fit for them, viz,. Kmgly ^Governmsnti or Comjmn-wealthj the People have Power to conftitute fuch a Perfon, or Line of Perfons to be their Magiftrates, upon Conditions agreeable to the Laws of Nature, and alfo to the Revealed Law of GOD, where the Word of GOD is known and acknowledg- ed by the People : Thefe are indifputable Propofitions: D^'wm y.See T'he Judgment of •whole Kingdoms and Nations, from Pag: i. to Pag. 13. 3 J/y. Seing Heathens and Hereticks have Power by the Law of Nature, to conititute Magiftrates, when it falls out,that GOD of his Infinite Goodnefs plants a True Chriftian Church within the Dominion of a Heathen Emperor or King, as the Gofpel Churches were planted in the Days of Chriit's Miniftry on Earth, and in the Time of the Apoftles, thefe of the Subjeds that became Chriftians, were not allowed by Chrift and his Apoftles to deny that Civil Authority ot Magi/lracy,and Obedience to the Heathen Emperors, that was due to them from thefe Subjefts by the Law of Nature and Nations, before thefe Subjects became Chriftians ; And when there hath been a Time of Prevailing Herefy, as in the Time of Popery be- fore Reformation ; the Papifts, tho' they be Hereticks, yet by the Law of Na-- ture, and Moral Law, they had Power to conftitute Civil Magiftrates ; And when Reformation bcgsin in France, Germany, and other Places, the Proteftant Subjeds d-id not deny the Civil Authority of Magifiracy, nor Obedience to their refpedive Emperors and Kings, wiiich were conltitute in Time of Popery. As when a Man and Woman being married together, wlitn both Heathens; when one of them comes to be a Believer, in that Cafe, a Believing Husband is not to put away the unbelieving Wife ; nor is a Believing • Wife to leave the unbe- lieving Husband, I Cor: 7; 12, 13. but tlie Husband and Wife ought to per- form the Duties ot Husband and Wiie to one anotner refpedively .• And fo when Subjeds of Heathen Empeiors became Ciiriitians, or when Subjeds of Popifii Kings became Reformed Pcoteftants, in fuch Caies- in Planting of a Church in Heathen CHAP. XVI. The Oath of Jhjuratiorj, J^ftvered. 239 Heathen Emperors Dominions, or in fettin^ up a Reformed Church, as in France or G'5'>'W/«»>', in PopifliJEmp^rors or Kings Dominions, Infidelity or Difference of Religion doth not void the "Supreme Magi fir ates '\juft and Legal Author it) ^ founded on, and agreeable to the Moral Law ot'Naturej nor free People from due Obedience in Things that are morally lawful Duties, which the Moral Natural Law, and alfo the Revealed Will of God requires ; as the Believing Husband was to own the Relation, and .perform the Duties to the Unbelieving Wife, that the Lawr ofNature,and Revealed Moral Law of God require in the Cafe above faid. And this is the plain and genuine Senfe of that 4th Seftion of the 23d Chapter of our Ccnfeillon of Faith, as is undenyably evident from the Scriptures cited in that Sedion for Proving it, njii.. i Peters: 13: i^:i6:2indRom: 13; i; which Scrip-" tures did indifputably oblige the Chriftians to own, acknowledge and obey the Civil Authority of the Heathen Roman Empeiors and their Deputies ; for there was net then a Chriftian King in the whole World : For the firft Chriftian King that ever was in the World, was the King of Scotland, i/zz,. King Donald the Firft, who not only received the Chriftian Religion, but alfo eftablifhed the National Chriftian Church oi Scotland, Anno Dofn: 203: as Famous Gildas at large defcribes, in Writing the Hiftory of that Time, in his Hiftory o't Scotland; and then Scotland^ qua Scotia, as the Nation oi Soot land, was faid to go into the Chriftian Faith, according to rhefe Verfes in Gildas^ viz,. Poft Chrijiujtt Na'unt, trihus Annis atq: Ducentis, Scotia Catholicam coepit mire Fidem. After the Birth of Jefus Chrifl, Two Hundred Tears and Three, The Scottifh Nation did go into Chriftianitie. And thus Scotland had a Chriftian King about an Hundred and Twenty Years before there was a Chriftian Emperour -, for it was about the Year of our Lord 320, when Conflantine the Great, the firft Chriftian Emperor, was eftablifhed in Imperial Government; as appears from Eufebius Lib: ^•. of his Hiftory, in Treat- ing of the Emperor Cc«/?^«r/>7e, who was the firft Chriftian Emperor. And what ouf Confellion of Faith faith,with refpea to the Civil Authority of Government, and Subjeds Obedience in the Cafes ot" Planting and fetting up true Reformed Chriftian Churches, within the Dominion of Heathen or Popifh Kings, is nothing but what is maintained by other Reformed Churches. In the 40th Article of the CONFESSION of Faith of iheProteftantCh irch of France.ii's faid, fVe affirm, that0iedience is due to Laws and Statutes, Tributes are to be pafd, and the Rejl of Burdens of Sub eSiion are to be born ; and finally, Tliat the Toke is to be born voluntarly, altho' the Magrflrates he Infidels, as long as thefupreme Autho' rity and Command of God remains free of Violation. And in the 16 and i 7 Articles Oi thcWi/GUyiT^iVCONFESSONXs faid, Chrijitans ought to obey the Commands 240 The Arguments Advanced for Defence of CHAP. XVI of their Magijlr^tes, that are the Ordination .of God, except 'vjhen f hey command to Sin. iVe do ( fay they ) condemn the Anabaptifts, u^ho fpread Jewi/li O pinions, fe':gning^ that before the RefurreEiiont the Godly jhall pojfefs all the Kingdoms of the iVorld^having opprejfed and cut off all that are Unholy: For we know that feing the Godly ought to obey Ma- giftrates that now are in the iVorld, they ought not to deprive the?n of their Authority 5 becaufe Paul did command every Soul to be fubjeci to the Magijirate. And in the CON- FESSION of Faith of the Church of EaftL in Article 7th, it's faid^Go^f hath given the Swordj and highefi external Power to the Magifirate^ for Defending thefe that do well, and Punifiing evil Doers ; therefore every Chrifiian Magiflrate ought to dire^i all his Power, that the Name of God he fanBify d, and the Kingdom of God propagated among all the SubjeBs committed to his Truji^ and that the Magiflrate live according to the Will of God, with aferious Extirpation of IVickedmfs : 77;// Office was always injoin- ed to Heathen Magiftrates, and how t?iuch more is it commended to the Chrifiian Ma- giflrate, as God's Vicegerent. And in the CONFESSION of Faith of the Waldenfes and Bohemians, Chz.^ .16: after having declared the Duty of all Magiftrates in the Earth, Chriilian and Heathen, and proven their Judgment from the 2d Pfalmy 10, 11 and 12 Verfes; after which it's faid, The Duty 9f all People is taught by the Word of God, which obliges all and every one of the People to perform Sub jeB ion to the Higher Power, in all ithings that are not contrary to God's Will ; firfl, to the Royal Majefiy, and next to all Inferiour Magiflrates, and to perform andppy all Duties of Honour and Tribute, that are by Right due unto them ; and that not only to thefe THAT ARE TRULY PIOUS, but alfo to others that are not truly godly, according to Chrifi's Command, Render to Cefar thefe Things that belong to Cefar, M-dtth : 2 2 . And the fame is aflcrted in the 35 Article of the D£77t/7Confeflion of Faith. 'And in the 24th Article of the Old CONFESSION of Faith of the Church- of Scotland, Recorded in Mr. A'kox's Hiftory,Pag;277. 'tis faid. We confefs and ac- hnowledge Empires, Kingdo?ns, Dominions and Cities, to be di ft in {led and ordained by God,and thePowers and Authorities in the fame {be it of Emperors in their Empires, of Kings ' in their Realms, Dukes and Princes in their Dominions, or of ether Magiftrates in free Cities ) to be God* s holy Ordinance, ordained for the Manifeftation of his own Glory, and i or the fingular Profit and Commodity of Mankind: So that whofoever goeth about to. take away, or to confound the holy State of the Civil Policies now long eflablijhed ; we af- firm, 1 he fame Men not only to be Enemies to Mankind; but alfo wickedly to fight againfl god's exprefs Will: Rom; 13. i, 2, 7. Tit: 3. i. i Pet; 2. 13. 7hiy are God's Lieutenants, to whom,by GOD,is given the Sword, to the Praife and Defence of good Men, and to revenge and punijh a'lopen Malefactors. To Kings, moreover and Princes, Ru- lers, and Magiflrates ; we affirm. That chiefly and moft principai^, the Reformation and Purgation of Religion appertaineth ; fo that not only are they appointed for Civil Policy y hut alfo for Maintamance of the true Religion, and for fiipprefflng all Idolatry and Super' flit ion whatfo ever: And therefore we confefs and avow, that fuch as refifl the Supreme Powers ( doing that which appertaineth to their Charge ) do reflfl. GOD's Ordinance. Xhus CHAP. XVI- Of the Oath of Abjuration, a^jfivered. ^ 241 Thus we fee it plain. That what is aflrerted in our Confeflion of Faith, Chap: 23. Sed; ^tb. is agreeable, and io^l'iicled on the Law of Nature, and revealed Law and Word of GOD, maintained by the befl Reformed Churches, in the Senfe that I have given ot it, which is the only true and proper Senfe, as by com- paring our's' with oiher Confeflions of Foreign Churches, and tk^QH Scots Con- feflion above cited, is clearly manifeft. ' ^ - < . - / , . But then there remains a Qiieftion to be refolved, which is the grand Debate, upon this Head; and the Q^ieftion is this, i//z.. If the Covenanted Nation ©/Scot- land Jhould make a Law, wherel/y they appoint to tnveB Eraftian-Arminian-Prelatifls, fwcrn to profefs and praBife Idolatrous Englifh-popifh CEREMONIES all their Lives, orprofe/iandpra:iicalPapi/is- obliged to continue (kch^ or known and avowed Infidels, \ fay, If the Covenanted Nation of Scotland Jhowld make a Law, whereby they Statute and Appoint, 'that all and every one of their Kings, for all T'inie to come, jhould be one ofthejs three Perfwajions above faid,efe they 'fiould net be Kings of Scotland, doth the 2^d. Chapter o/(?«r Confeffiono/Faith <«//frt. That fuch an EJiablifiment of Authority qf Regal Government of Scothnd, is Jufl and Legal ? • Let none carp at my fuppofing a Law, appointing Papifts or other Heret^cks^' or Infidels, and none elfe ever to be Kings oi Scotland : For if it be lawful to e- ftabhfn fuch by a Law for one Generation, I fee not what ihould hinder, to make a Law for eflablifliing fuch for all Generations to come. In Anfwer to this (^ueftion, It's very plain from the Jurants Judgment, which they have publiflied in Print, and which I have cited above, That they hold the Affirmative, with rcfped to Eraftian Prelatifls, holduig all the grofs Errors of Lutherafiifm, and alfo Papifts, as they have declared with regard to the Po- pifh Pretender, and the Arbitrary King of France ; which by the Way, I mufi fay' is but a forry Complement to King George. But I anfwer the Qiieflion in the Negative, it being very plain already. That our ConfefTion of Faith, Chap: 23; can bear no fuch Senfe.- For what it fpeaks of tlie jufl and legal Authority of Magiflrats, that are Hereticks or In- fidels, I have abundantly cleared already, that it only imports the Jufl and Lawful Civil Authority of Magiftracy, founded on, and agreeable to the Moral Law of Nature, which in the Cafe of Planting and Setting up a truly reformed Chriftian Church, within the Dominions of thefe Heretical or Infidel Magillracs, is to be acknowledged and obeyed by thefe Chriflians, in all Things morally Lawful in themfelves, agreeable to the Word of GOD; as was made evident from Scripture, and feveral Confeffions ot Faith of Reformed Churches; And as it is lawful for the JBelieving Husband, not to put away the Unbelieying Wife, and for the Believing Wife to abide and cohabit with the Unbelieving Husband, and obey his Authority as her -Husband, in all Things agreeable to the -Word of. GOD, feing they were both Infidels when they were married. But on the other Hand, as it is unlawful for a truly Reformed Chrillian Woman, to marry an .lo&ddj that toeing forbidden as an unequal Yoking of Believe rj H ^ with 1 242 The Ariumenii advariced for Defence of CHAP XVI with Unbelievers, neither may they marry with Pcipifls or other Idolaters,orfuch as are notorioufly wicked in their Life, or maintain damnable H^^refies ; as is evident from our Confeffion of Faith, Chap 24: Seth 3; Gen:^^: i^: Exod: 54: 16: Deut: "j: 3,3; 4: i Kings 2:4.- Neh: 13; 25; 2d: i Cor: 7: 3p- Mai i: II: 12: ^ Cor: 6: 14: So in like manner it is unlawful for a truly Reformed Chriftian Nation, and efpecially, when by .their Fundamental Laws their Kings ought to be of that true Reformed Religion ; Lfay, it's unlawful for that Nation tb choofe and fet up Infidels, Hereticks, Idolaters, or notorioufly wicked Per- fons in their Lives, and who eftablifh and defend damnable Herefies, to be Kings of that Nation. ai/y. Becaufe to eftablifh Infidels or Hereticks to be the Kings o^ this Re- formed covenanted Kingdom, is contrary to the Ends and Ufes of the Office of the Civil Magiilrate, which are exprefly fct down' in the 3d Sedion of that 23d Chapter oFonr Confession of Faith, viz.. The Civil Magiflrate hath Antho- tity, and it is his Duty to take order that Unity and Peace be preferved in the Church, that the Truth of GOD be kept pure and intire, that all Blafphemies and Herefies be fupprefied, all Corruptions and Abiifes in Worfliip and Dif- cipline prevented or reformed j and all Ordinances ot GOD duly fettled, admi- niftred and obferved. For the better effeding thereof, he hatii Power to call Synods, to be prefent at them, and to provide that whatfoever is tranfaded in them, be according to the Mind of GOD, And all thefe are confirmed by the Scriptures cited immediatly above, and many more. Let it be marked here by the Way, That the General Aflembly, Anno i6^j, Sef. 23. in their k&. of'Ap- probation of the Confession of Fairh,the Aflembly declares. That although Kirks not fettled or conftitute in point of Government y a Synod of Mini flers and other fit Perfoas^ way le called by the Magifirates Authority and Nomination, ivithout any other Call, to confult andadvife -with, about Matters of Religion- TEi IN A KIRK CON- SflfutE AND SET'TLED, THAT OUGHT NOT tO BE DON^. * And thus we fee that the PriiKipal Duties and Ends of the Office of Magi- ftracy in a Reformed Chriftian Nation, are the Settling and Efl:ablifliing the true Reformation of Religion in all parts of Dodrine, Worfhip, Difcipline and Government according to GOD's Word: And Rooting out all Herefie^ Idola- try, Superfl;ition and Impiety, according to our Confession of Faith, Chap: 23. Se^: 3. And therefore People Profeflfing that Faith, cannot without contradi- ^ion to it, choofe, fet up and Eilablifh Impious, Idolatrous Infidels, or Here- ticks to be Kings of that Nation.- For if Hereticks, or Infidels be made Kings, they are not capable to Execute their Office, in fettling and preferving true Re- formation of Religion in the Nation ; Nor can they Execute their Office in Rooting out Superftition, Herefie and" Idolatry out of the Nation, elfethey be- hoved to Root thcmfelves out of the Nation, and out of their Office. ^dly. Becaufe to let up Infidels, Vapifis, or any other Idolaters, fuch as ^rela^ icfs Livii>g in the Profeffion,and fworn to the Pradice of Idolatrous £»^///7j Cere- ■ ^ MONIES, CHAP. XVr. Ve Otth of Ah]urtitiorJ, infmred. 245 moiiies to be Kings of SmLvrd, is contrary ro the Fundamental Laws, and Co** ronation Oath of the Kings of ^Scof/^w^, ^s wa.s made evident in the 3^ Chap- ter of this Book. , , /^tb'y. Becaufe that by our Covenants, National and Solemn League, both People and Kings ot ycotland, as alfo by theSolemnLeagacbochKing andPeople of England ajid Ireland in all Generations, are bound to preferve the Covenanted Rtfor^ ntation of Religion^ in Do^rine^ JVorjhip, Dkipline and Government y and to Extirpate Infidelity^ Popery^ Pre^acy^ Era/iianif/n, Herefay Error and Profanenefs, and whatfo-^ ezer is contrary to found DoEirine and the Power of Godlinefs ; and that loithout RefpeB of Perfns, And therefore to fet up and Eftublifh Infidels, Papijlsy Prek" tifisj Erafiians, &c. Abjured in thefe Covenants to be Kings, is Unlawful; be- caufe its contrary to Fundamental Laws, and thefe Solemn Oaths, that bind all Generations in thefe Nations. ^thly. The General Aflemblyofthe Church oi Scotland y who had in the Year 1647. Approven the Confeffion of Faith, and certainly underflood the true Senfe of it,( TheirCommiifion having handled every Paragraph of it in the Time it wa» compofedjtheParagraphs being fent down from Londm Weekly,to have their Judg- ment before they Eftablifhed any Article.) I fay, the General Aflembly that had approven and well underftood the Senfe of our Confeffion of Faith, did in the Year 1548, by Ad of that Aflembly, Self. 21. declare. That it was contrary to the Word of GOD, and a manifeft Violation of the Second Article of our Solemn League, to tolerate Popery in the Queen's Pradice, and Superftition in the King's Pratticcjin his uiing the Englijh Common Prayer Book in his Family .- And in that fame 21. Scflion, the Allembly declared, It finful and unlawful, to allow the Kini^ the Exercife of Regal Government before he had given fatisfying folemn Sccirrity, that he would abolifii POPERY, PRELACY, and SUPREMACY out of the Kingdoms; and particularly out of his own Family .- And therefore it's maiiifeiUy contrary to Covenanted Principles of Religion maintained by the Church of Scotland in her pureft Times, to eftablifh Infidels, Papifts, Prclatifls, or any o- ther Sttt abjured by our Covenants to be Kings of thefe Lands. etbly.'Qy the Lzws of England itfelf, Infidels and Papifts are excluded fr6m be- ing Kings o( England: For all their Kings muft be of Communion of the Pre- latick Church of England, clfe they fhall not be Kings of England^ And tho' thefe Englijb Laws have an ungodly Sting in their Mouth, by whidvtlicy prohibite all Presbyterians to be King?, in appointing the Kings to be only of Prelatick Communion; yet they declare it unlawful for the Englijh Prote- flaniNation to fet up Infidcl,orPapift Kings. And how much more inconiiftant is it with the Principles of Covenanted Reformation, to fet up fuch to be Kings ? And thus I have vindicated the 2 3^ChapterofourCONFESSION from the faifeGlofs that was put upon it : And I have refuted the Error maintained by the Turants. " H h 2 CHAP. 1 i?'44 A VindicAtiofj of the Froteping Presbyter tan CHAP. XVII. C H A P. XV 1 1. 7 • _ *. •lf%^h^on{ains a 'Vindication of the Prate fiing Presbyterian Mmflers their P$wer of [., Difcifline. ^rt*emWy^//;?o 1715, Ad 14. ^ifcharge Prelatical Preachers, and Presby- ha»^€ tnke-'i upon them to conveen Afr .Colin M'kenzie of Rofend three 'T)mes\hefo)e th^m lafi fVeek, and have given hi?n an Oath *f Purgation, luhicbwas read in the Meeting-^ fyjcfe of i^amtifl4nd ; intimating, T'hat the faidMr. Colin M'kenzie is tofwear that Oath in t/je fn/d- Meeting houfe next LORD's Day, jor removing the Scandal fviz. of JjM^Jeanucfs )^ And con/idering, T'hat this is an illegal Encroachment upon ^ the Di'fcipJrne if the] Church; the Affemhly orders the Presbytery of 'Kirkaidie, to proceed agamft th^ faidMr. Colin M'kenzie of Rofend, according to the Rules of this Church; notwithr fiand.'ng of; am thing thofe Prelatick Preachers have done, or may do tn that Afair. And further, the'^ General Affemhly difcharges thefe Prelatick Preachers to proceed any further in that Matter, as they will be anfwerable. And the Affemhly appoints this Method to he obfrved in the Cafe of Scandal, when any others either .Epifcofal Preacher, orfuch as pretend to be Presbyterian Minifiers -, but do feparate from this Church, take upon them to exercife Difiplme' As to tne Prelatical Preachers, all I fliall fay is, That it feems the Aflembly doth not condemn their Power of Difcipline, on Account of it*s being inconfi- ftant with, or without Warrant from the Word of GOD, but only becaufe they fay, It's Illegal ; that is, contrary to Civil Laws: It feems the Aflembly has no- thing to keep out Prelacy, but the Partition Wall of Civil Laws, otherwife they would not condemn the Power of Prelatick Minifters ; but the Aflembly of the Church^of ^cot/^^^. Anno 1^38, condemned Prelacy on a far ftronger Ground. . But how the Aflembly, by meet arbitrary Government, made that Ad, where- by they deny Presbyterian Minifters, ( who feparate from the National Church, to have, any Power of Difcipline) I fee not: Becaufe by that Ad the Reverend Mr. John Hepburn and the Reverend Mr. James Gilchrifl^ who are neither fentenced with Depofition or Sufpenfion, may not exercife Difcipline, fo much as in their own Parifhes. And feing the National Church by the Ad of Af- lembly 171^ v/fc. That i^th Ad, acknowledges Mr. John Hepburn to be Mini- fter at Orr, and Mr. Jamej GikhriB to be Minifter at Dunfcore. sVhat bareface4 Contradidions are thele eftabliftied by the Ads of that Aflembly > In the 14^^. Ad the Aflembly difcharges thefe Minifters to exercife Difcipline,- and' yet in the i%th Ad immediatly following, declares to be Minifters of thefe Parifhes; So that according to the Judgment of Uiat Aflembly, there are Pre5b)[teriaii Minifters or- dained CHAP. XVIT. Mimften their Pomr of DifcJpUtie. 24* dained and according to the Gofpel Riile'rawfuJly eftabliftied in federal Parifhds in Scotland j and fince their Eftabh^fhmdhtin their Charges of tlieir Parifhes, are neither depofed nor under Procefs, and whom the Aflembly by their ftatuted Aft declares to be the prefentMinifters of thefe ParifJies, and yet they have no Pow^rof Difciphne at all. That 14^/?. Aft of Aflbmbly is plainly cohtracy to oiu^Conreffion oi Faith Chapter 30. Seft: 2, 5, 4. confirmed by Matth: 16. 19. ana-rS. 17, i^.Joh: 20. 21, 22, 23. 2Cor:6. 7, 8. i Cor 11. 27.totheEna, '^urie Verfe 13. irhef: J. 12. 2 rhef: 3. 6. 14, 15. Th.-^. 10. The Dutch Confession of Faith Article 3 1. fays,^// the Miniflers oftheWbrdnf GOD !mve eqnal Vower md Authority, and are equally Miniflers oftheChmh of Cl.nifl, i^jlo is the Alone Head of hisown Church: And m Article 30. T'he Miniflers bf the Gofpel are to preach the Gofpel, admin'fier the Sacraments, and in ConjunBion vjtih Elders y thcyare toconRitnte EcclefmBick Judicatures ; that true DoHrine may be frt- feriedy and that vitious Perfons rriny he corteBedy rejlrained aitd amended by the 'Bridle i>f Dijcipltne. And in Art. r. No Councils, nor Degrees of Men are to be compared v:ihh the M%^d' And therefore iuith our luHoleSoulwe rejeB -whatever Statute is not agr^mbfe to .that mojl fure Rule. In the Augustan Confession of Faith, Art: -jth 'tis faid, The Power of Bi/ljopSy ' according to the Gofpel, is QOD's Command of preaching the Gofpel, re?nitting and re^ taiwng Sins, and admniflrating the Sacraments. But xvhen they either teach, or JlattAe any thing contrary to the Gcfpeffhe Churches,!, e. Flocks, have a Command of GOD, u^hich' forbids the?ntogive Obedience,'M3.tth: j. 15. Gal: i. 8. 2 Cor: 1^3. 8'. In the French Confession of Faith,Art. 25?/;. 'tis faid,r/j^ Burden ofpreachmg tJje Gofpel, and adminiflratiiig the Sacraments, is incumbent on thePa/iors. And in Artide 29. 'tis faid, The true Church ought to be governed by that Policy, or Difcipline, which oilr LORD JESUS CHRIST has e/labl^/bed. And in the Article so.AllPaftors have equhl Power uiJer Chrijl the Alone Head. And in Article 5 . ^ris faid, Neither is it lawful thht any Council, EdiB, Decree or Judgment , fiould be oppofed to the Scriptures; but all o'u'ght to be examined by the Rule of the Word. In the Confession of Faith of the T^aldenfes, and Bohemians Art: p.'tis faid, The Miniflry of the Word and Sacraments is by ChriB intrujied to the Pafiors. And'in Art: 14. The Keys of Difcipline is committedto the Pa/Iors. He that heareth you hearelh me. Hence Payors are taught, that they muji not ufe thefe Keys otherwife, thanexpreJfM and declared by the Mind and WUlofChriR in his Word: Thy mujlnot abufe the Keys, in aBing according to their own arbitrary Will and Luji. " .In the Helvetian Confession of Faith, chap: 18. 'tis faid, There is an equhl Vower, "or FunBion, given to all the Miniflers of the Church ; which is comprehended in . this, that they teach the DoBrine of the Gofpel of Chrifl ; and lawfully adminifier the Sk" oaments accoiding to the Divme Law. And the Power of the Keyt w committed to Pa-- flors, as to Stewurdf, according to Matth; 16. ip. And in Chap: 2, "tis faid, /» Controverfies of Rehgon, and the Caufe of Faith, we will not fufer our felves to be urged 'with the tare O^inmis of Fathers, or naked Deterrmnatiom of Councils : Lor in the Caufe 2^6 A VindtcAtion of Frotefihg Presbyterhn CHAP. XVII caufe of Faith, ijjevjill fufiain no other Judge but GOD himfelf arJ the Holy Scrip- tures pronounciKgwhat is true, and what is falfe , what is to i>e followed, and what is t9 iejhunned. In the /fVV/*;»^fr^CONFESSION,CA«/>:23.it's (zid^After that the DoSkine of the Prophets andApofiles had Divine Confirmation, no Sentence of any AIan,or Congregation of Men,isto be received for an Oracle of T'ruth, without Examination by the Judgment of Difcretiou^andit nitifi be exa&ly laid to the Rule of the DoBrine of the Prophets and A- poftles, that whatever agrees with it, may be acknowledged and received, and what is re- pugnant to it, may be refuted. In the Old Confession of Faith of the Church of Jfof/^^^/, which was Ratif/d by Ad of Parliament, Anno 1^60, in the 20th Article, which is concerning Councils, their Power and Authority. In that Article it's faid. So far, then as the Council 'proveth the Determination and Commandment that it giveth by the plain PP'ord ofGOD,fo far we Reverence and Imbrace the fame : But if Men under the Name of a Council pretend to forge unto us new Articles of our Faith, or to make Confiitutions Repugning to the Word of GOD, then utterly we mufl refufe the fame as the DoSirine of Devils, which draweth our Souls from j he Voice of our only GOD, to follow the DoBrines and Conflttutions of Men. And 'by the National Covenant, all Perfons of this Nation are obliged to own and Defend that" ConfeiBon to be Orthodox. And what is faid in that 20th Article of the old Scots Confession, is plainly agreeable to our new Confession, Chap: ^i: SeSi: 3, 4. Thus I have made it evident from the Word of GOD, the Confcffions of Faith of our own and other Reformed Churches, i/i. That Gofpel Mmifters have all equal Power of Doftrine ^nd Difcipline. 2dly. That Synods Aflemblies or Councils, have only a limited Powers fo that whatever Dodrine or Ad they forge, or Statute that is not warranted by, but contrary to the Word of GOD, is of no Force nor Authority -, and is to be rejeded by all that adhere to found Principles of Religion agreeable to the Word of GOD. From all which it is plainly evident, That the Ads of Aflemblies, Synods, or Presbyteries, whereby they do unjuftly and contrary the Rule of GOD's Word fufpend or depofe Minifters, or Excommunicat either Mmiflers or o- ther Perfons, on Account of Separating from Communion with this National Church ( they being obliged in Confcience fo to feparate, in Adherence to the Reformation of the Church 0^ Scotland m her pureft Times ) I fay, all fuch Sen- tences are null and void, and to be rejeded, as evidently appears from v^hat hath been faid on this flcad ; coniidenng that before I have fiifficiently demon- ftrated. That true Adherents to the Covenants, have jull Ground of Separati- on from the prefent National Church, -id^y. Hence it is alfo evident. That the Reverend Mrs. Hepburn, Taylor, Gihhrift and M'millan, have and retain their full Power, Office and Function of the Miniilry,both as to Dodrine and Discip- line, notwithftanding of the Ads and Sentences of the Church, in Sufpending " ^ • •■ . . _' • . ^j^g CHAP.XVII. Uhr.jlevs their Power of Difciflwe 'i&^-j and Depofing Mrs. T'nyhY and M'millan ; and the Acts in Difcharging them, and alfo yixs. Hepburn and Gikhrifi to exercife Dircipline among their Flocks, which in Adherence to Covenanted Reformation^ adhere to them as their proper Law- ful Pallors, feing thefe Ads were \J\V]i\{i and Tyrannical,' and fo were contrary to the Word of GOD; as hath been clearly demonftrated in Chapter 4th, compared with this Chapter, ^dly. The Aflcmbly Anno 17 15, in their Ads 14th and 15th, are feli-ccntradiflory, in regard they declare Mr. Hejjiurn and Mr. Gilch.ifi to be Minifters, butdilcharge them toexercife Difcipline, or to examine upon O^th in Matters of Scandal, and ifthefc Miniflers examine upon Oath Ju- dicially in Difcipline, the Aflembly has 'declared that Oath null and void, and appointed Presbyteries to proceed and Re-examine upon Oath the Parties fworn. I ask that Aflembly, i/?. Seing they declare thefe two Minifters above faid, to be Gofpel Minifters in Office and Charge eftablifhcd, by what Text or Warrant in the Word of GOD,willrhe Aflembly prove that Gofpel Mi- niflers eflabliflied in Office have' fto Power of Dfcipline ? idly. If the Allembly's Declaring them to be Gofpel Minifters in Office,but taking horn them the whole Power of E)ifciplinci be not Prelatick Government cxcrcifed by that Aflembly? ^d/y- I ask if the Aflembly will make null and void all the Oaths of Baptifm and M;5rriage, adminillrcd by thefe two Reverend Minifliers, and Re-baptize and Re-marry all Perfons baptized or married .by the faid two Mi'niiiers ? ^thly. I ask the AflTembly by -what Warrant in ail the Word of GOD, will they prove that a Gofpel Minifler, who has Power to Adminifter the Sacra- ment of Baptifm, that fliall flanu valid, but has no Power to Adminiiler a Judicial Oath in Difcipline. that can ftand^ valid j and where the Aflembly found oM Oaths in Difiipline that are more facred than the folemn Oaths of the-Sa- craments of the New Tcllament <' O but 'it's Lamentable to behold Ads of Aflembly, fo inconfiClent both with the Word of GOD, and*the Conftfijons of Faith ol all Orthodox Churches ! . But fome Perfons do objcd. That thefe Protefling Minifters conftitute un- lawifflf Judicatures; in regard they fometimes have not a competent Number, accordmg to Gofpel Rules,for Conftituting a Presbytery ; becaufe the Prottfting Minifters fometimes, when but two in Number, in Conjundion with Ruling- Elders, have conftitute a Presbytery. 1 fhall anfwer that Objedion with the exprefs Words of Great Mr. Cilkfple, in Aaron's Rod BlcJfo7mug, Book ^.Chap. 6. Pag. 4i<5. which was approven by the Venerable Aflembly at /'f''^y?w//(/?e>, which compofed our Confeffion of Faith. In the Place above cited Mr. Gil/efpie faith, Second!}', The Apoftles, andthofe who fucceeded them in the IJ'ork of the Minifln', have the Jame Power of the Keys committed from Ch,t/ito th^em Mim/ierial/y, zjjjch Chrifi hath com7tutted from the Father to him ( as Mediator ) Authorttatively. Ftrr in the parallel P/acCy Joh. 20; 21, 23. where he gives them Pozuer of Remitting arid Retain^ ifig Sins, he Jaithj As my Father hath lent tnc, even fi fnd I you. But •the Father gave 1 TS^^'8 The Arguments advafuedfor Defence of CHAP. XVIII. oAnjeChriflfuch a Fovjer of the Keys, as comprehends Power of Government y and not %eerly Dotirinah I^^-' 22: 21, 22. I will commit the Government into his Hand, &c. And the Keys of the Houfe of David will I lay upbn his Shoulder. - Thirdly, It may h proved alfo hy that "which immediatly followeth inVerfe 19. ( viz. Of the 18 Chapter of Matthew ) Again I fay unto you, that if two ot you ihall agree on Earth, C^c. which cannot be meant of the Power of Preaching ; for neither the Efficacy of Preaching, nor the Ratification of it in Heaven, nor the Fruit of it en Earth, deth depend upon this, ihat two Preachers mufi needs agree in the fajne T^hing. But it agreeth well to the Power of Difcipline, concerning which it anfwereth thefe two ObjeBions. Firft, It might be f aid, the Apoflles and other Church Governours, Thay fall to be very few in this or that Church where the Offence rifeth; Jhall we in that Cafe execute any Church Difcipline ? les, faith Chrifl, if there were but two Church Officers in a Church ( where no more can be had ) they are to exercife Difcipline, and it Jhall not be in vain, Again it might be obfecied, be they two or three or more, iVhat if they do not agree among thejnfelves ? To that he anfwereth, there mufl be an Agree- ment of two Church officers at leajl, other wife the Sentence jhaU be null; we cannot fay the like of the DoElrinal Power of Binding and Loofng, that it ts of no Force nor Vali- dity, unlefs two at leaJl agree in the fame DdBrine, as hath been faid ; two mufl agree in that Sentence or Cenfure, which is dejired to be ratified in Heafven, and they binding on Earth, and umnimoufly calling upon GOD to ratify it in Heaven, it jhall be done. And feing the Protefting Minifters never conftitute a Presbytery only of two Mini- niflers with a Ckrk and Ruling Elders, except only in a Cafe of great neceflity, and when more Miniflers could not be had, as is well known, and what they did in thefe Cafes, in Conftituting a Presbytery with fo few Miniflers, was agreeable to the Go/pel Rule^ as hath been m^de evident. CHAP. XVIII. Which contains a Refutation of the furants Defence of the OAT'H of ABjURATIONi taken from the Old Oath of Allegiance fvihni to King James the Sixth. THe Jurants in the Anfwer to 'the Sinfuhefs of the Oath of Abjuration difplayed, Pag: 55. endeavour to defend the Lawfulnefs of fwearing the Oath of Ab- juration,by an Argument,which they fay makes it clearly evident^ That the Oath of Abjuration is lawful -and thdx AchilkaH Argument is,That the Presby- terians did fwear an Oath of Allegiance to l^ng 'James the fixth. Which was exprefled in the Words following, viz^. /A. B. do truly and jiKcerely Acknowledge, Vrofefs, 'Tefiifie and Declare in my Coh- fcience, before GOD and the Pl^oxld , Ihat our Sovereign Lord King James, is Law III and Rightful King oj this Realm, and of all other His Majefly's Dominions and Countries I CHAP. XVIII. The Oith cf MjurAtinaAtilweyed ^ ^ H9 Countries, and that the Pope ^ neither ef himfeif, nor by any Authority ^ hy the Chtirih 4ifid See of Rome, or by any if her J\ie.ans. xvith any other, hath any Power or Authoii' tyy to depofiy the Kii^, cr to dJ/f'ife<.(f any ff His Majejly's Dominions, or Kingdonf*s cr to author iz.e any For^ignPritice to invade, or annoy him, or His Countries, er to dif- cha'ge any of his Subjects, of their Allegiance^ or Obedier.ce to His Majtfly, er togive Lice/iCe, or Leave to any of them to bear Arms, raife Tumuhs, or to ofier any Fiolence, Or HurttoHis Majejifs Sidjeth, mthin His Majefiy's Dominions. Alfol doJwear.freAt my Hearty That mtwithfianding any Decfaratim, or Sentence of Excotftmuniv'atiOfi, Or Deprivation made or granted, or to be made or graraed by the Pope, or his Succejfori, cr by any Authority derivtd^ or pretended to be derived from him, or his See, againfl the faid Kirigy his Heirs, nr Succejfors, or any Abfolution of thefaid SubjeBs from their Obe^ dience ; 1 •will bear Faith and true Allegiance to His Maje/iyy Hts Heirs, and Succejforr, and Hm and them mil defend to the utmojl of my Power, agairft all Confoiracies and A'tempta whatfoever, -which Jlmll be made againfl His, or their Perfons, their Crown and Dignity, by Reafon, or Co'our ofanyfuch Sentence and Declaration^ ar otherwife : And I -will do my Be ft. Endeavour to difdofe and make known unto His Majefiy, his Heirs andSucceJfors, all Treqfons or T'raiterous Cqnfpiracies, which IJhall know or hear of to bf again!} Him or any of them. And I do^ iurther f wear , That 1 do from my Heart abhor'^ deteft and aljiire as impious and heretical, that damnable DoBrine and Pcjition ; ( That Princes which be excommunicated or deprived by the Pope, may bedepoled or murdered by their Subjects, or any other whatfomever ) And I do believe, and in . my Cohfcience am refolved, that neither the Pope, nor any Perfon whatfomever hath Power to abfolve me of this Oath, or any part thereof , which I acknowledge by good and lawful Authority. to be lawfully mini fired to me ', and do renounce all Pardon and Difpenfation to the contrary. And all thefe things I do plainly and Jincerely acknowledge, and fwear ac cording to thcfe exprefs IVords by me fpoke a, and according to the plain and common Senfe of the fame U^ords, without any Equivocation, or Mental Evajion, orfecret Refervation whatfoever : And I do make this Recgnition and Acknowledgement heartily, willingly and truly upon the true Faith of a Chrijlinn. SO HELP ME GOD. What Time that Oath of Allegiance was enaded to be impofed, the Jurant Author tells not in the Place above cited : Bat in pag; lo. healledgeth the Oath of Allegiance, which Presbyterian Minifters were obliged to fwear to King yames the 6th. was enafted by Aft 45. Pari; -^.Km^ "James 6th. And to let all impar^" tial Readers fee that by that A(5t of Parliament Muiifters were not required, AS Prcsby.erianMiniftcrs butasPrelatickCurates tofwearit;! fhall fetdown the exprefs Words of that A(^ in full, as it is recorded in Pag: ipy. in Folio of the A-ds of King J Ames /6 th. which Adi was ftatuted Anno 1572. January 2^. The Words are thcie, viz,. 'For famikle as the Confervation and Purgation of the Rdigion, * cMefly.pertaiiistb the Chriftian Princes, and Godly Kings, Rewlcrs and Magi- ' flrats; and that it is.maiflrequiiite that the Kirk within this Realm be ferved * be<;5odly Perfons of found Religion, obedient to the Authority of the King's I Majeilyour Soveraine Lord ; It is therefore concluded^ ftatute and ordained, I i* be 1 i5 ftipcnd, penfion, or portion foorth of benefice, and are not already un^ '^ icr the Difcipline of the treu Kirk, and participates not with the facraments v^'ihtreof, fall in theprtfence of the Archbifhop, Superintendent or Commiflioner of •ft the Dioccfc, or Province quhair he hes or fall have the Ecclefiaftical livings, ^^ive his aflfent, and fobfcrive the artikles of Religion conteincd hi the a6ls of our •ftk>V«rainc Lords Parliament, and give his aith for acknawlcdging and recog- «<. tnofcing of our fovcraine Lord, and his Authority, and fall bring ane Teftimo- ;^' niiJ in writing thereupon. And openly on fuin Sunday in time of fermonot *5piibHckPrayers in theKitk, quhair be reafon of hisEeclefiaftick living, heaucht .^ to attend, or ofthefruites qxihair of he receives commodity, read baith rhe Te- !i\iftimosiial and oonfeflion awd of new mak the faid aith, within rhe fp:>ce of ane f^monetJiiBfter the publication of this prefcnt ad:. And gif he be foorth of the f-Kca4fniwithinthreefcoir days after the publication hereof, andintimecummand f- withiii ane moneth after his admiflityn, under the pain that every Perfou that f.fen notdo, asisaboveappoynted, fallbe IPSO FACTO deprived, and all hi^ J- Ecclefiaftical promotions and living, fall be vacand as gif he were then natural- fly ' dead* • Thus we .plainly fee by that Ad of Parliament, all Minifters were obliged to fvear the Oath of Allegiance, and fubfcribe the Confeflion in Subj^diou and O- bcdience not only to the King, but alfo to the Authority of the Archbifhop, and get his Teftimonial, and io thefe Minifters declared themfelves to be Prela- tick Curates, and not Presbyterian Minifters, as the Jurants falOy aftert. 2dly, They fwore Allegiance to the Eraftian Authority of the King, who by that Ad made aStatute for depriving allMmifters otOffice and Benefice,and rendering their Office void, as if they were naturally dead j and that it ftiould be ipfo FaEio void by meer Civil Authority, for their not fwearing in Obedience and Subjedion both to the King and Prelate^s Authority. :^dly. An Oath of Allegiance obliges the Swearer to maintain the whole Conftitution of Government eftablifhed at that time i as was made evident in the 3d Chapter. And therefwe, the Minifters in fiv^cating that Oath of Allegiance, did thereby oblige themfelves to maintain King James his Erallian Authority, as alfo the Lordly Po\ver ofBifiiopseftablifli- ©d by that very Ad, by which that Oath of Allegiance was impofed,in the Month eijtmuary 1572; the Earl of A/^ Regent in the King's Name and Authority, • with Advice ot the Lords of the Secret Council, gave Power and Commiffion - to the Bifliopit>f Orknay, to the Chancellor, Treafurer, Secretary, Juftice-Clerk, Nctber-Glerk, and Luiidy of that Ilk^-and Camphelo£ Glemrchie, to meet at Leith with the Superintendents and Minifters of the Kirk ; And to conclude, not only all Matters of Ecclefiaftick Policy, but alfo concerning the Suftentation of hi& Majefty, and common Aftiirs of the Realm: At which Convention T'ukhan Pre-^ b^ was eftablilh€d, and thitOath of Allegiance co be fworn ia Obedience to;and for CRAP XVIII Th Osth of Jhjurati.vf, answered. ^*^^\.„^J[^^ for die Defence of the King's Eraftian Power and Prelates Authority .- For this^ compare the A& of Parliament above (aid, with Calde>-viQv£s Hiftory Pag; 501 54. And in page y<5. Mr. Ca/Jenvocd^s, *It was cUieto the Court, to pbtaili ■• the Confent of many Minifters pd this Sort.of Epifcopacy, and other Articles o^ * the Book ( viz. of Pohcy ) fom^ being poorjCol^ne being covetous aixl ambitioas, ^ fome not taking up the grofs Corruptions of th^ Office, Tome having carnal Re- f fpeft to fome Noblemen their Friends. But th^ Book was never allowed by the < General Afl'cmbly ,• howbeit tliis Sort of Bifhops were tolerated tor three 01: Gc>uir * Years. And in Pag: ^$- Mr. Calderwofd tells us, when Mt. yohnDvu^iafs yfr^^ made the Tulchan Prelate at St. j4ndrevjSy who was the ficlt-of the l^ulchafji Bifliops, Mr. 'John Khox xtiukd to inaugurate Dcuglafsy and many other ]^ini^ fters alfo oppoied that Prelacy; ^nd before the Earl ot A?o)-fo«, and many others, Mr. Knox pronounced Atiathema to the Giver, and Anathema to the Receiver of that Office of Prelacy. So we fee jfioneft Minifters were far from fwearing Oaths in Obedience to, and for Detenc® of Tulchan Prelates : And {b that Achi^e4n Argument of the Jurantsi will nev^r prove the Oath of Abjuration lawful ;i, tli6* it were no worfe than that Old Oath o^ AUegiance, I do not deny a Lawful Oath ofAllegiance, but as I faid before, as the Oath of Allegiance contained in ourCovcnants is fufficient, fo I know noNeed for any elfe. CHAP. XIX. l^^%ch cant aim a Demoyiflraticn of the binding Poruery and formal ObhgapioK of the C«- njenantSy upon the Prefent and Succeeding Generationsy in thefe Three Kingdom!) Scot- land, England and Ireland. LAft of all, when all other Shifts and Refuges fail, many MiniQers in Reafon* ing and Conferences with honeft Chriflian Profeilbrs, who adhere to our Covenanted Work of Reformationj and therefore cannot join in Commu- nion with- ]u rants, nor with the prefent National Church of Jurants and Non- jurants joined together in Communion ; I fay, laft of all, many Minillers in Conterences, as their laft Refuge, ftifiy deny that our Covenants National and Solemn League, arc binding upon us of this Generation at all; becaufe, tho' our Forefathers entered into rhem^ yet the prefent Generation did not fwear them ; and fa they do not oblige the prefent Generation in thefe Three Kingdoms: And therefore, tho* it be proven that the prefent National Church oi' Scotland do many Things that arc contrary to thefe Covenants, yet the Church is not guilty ot Perjury, or breach of thefe National Oaths, becaufe they are not now binding on chc Church of this Generation. Bur fome others pretend foine Kind of more Refpe6 to thefe Covenants, and fay they are not formally Binding on us of this Gentration, becaufe wc did not formally fwear them: But they are- matterialiy Binding on uSj becaufe the Things that were fworn 10, in and by thefe lis Covg- ^ ^d ^ The Arguments advdfjced for Defence of CHAP. XIX. ' Covenants, are all moral Duties, to which we are obh'ged by the Word of God, and our Baptifmal Vow, which bind^ us to all the Duties that thefe Covenants oblige to, tho* thefe Covenants had never been made, Iri order to anfwer that Objedion the more diftindly- ifi. Let us confider who were the Parties Covenanting in thefe Covenants vj^r i. To what Party Were all the Duties and Conditions of thefe Covenants to be performed. And idiy. Who was the Party obliged by thefe Covenants, to periorm the Duties and Conditions of them. 3^. Wh^were the Dutiesand Conditions of thefe' Covenants, whether per-^ tetuatl nioral Dntib or not. ' • ■ t ^ ^thlf. What was the Extent of that -formal Obligation, whether reftrifted tO that particular Generation, or extended to Pofterity alfo. ■ ■l ■ As to- the firft oF thefe, it is undenyably clear by the Covenants themfelves. That the Great and Eternal GOD is the proper and principal Party to whom ^^ the Duties and Conditions of thefe Covenants were and are to be performed, the Conditions beitig all mo al Duties, wMch by the Word of GOD and our - ^aptifmal Oath, we are obliged to perform .• Tho* the Covenants,/ as to the 'Jorm of Expreflions, bind us to all- relative Duties between King and Subjeds, 'and Subjeds to one another, yea all relative Duties whatfomever j the Oath of the Covenants in that refpetl is^afolemn correlative Bond, binding all the Mem- bers of one Party together, but properly and principally obliging all that Party thus bound together in a folemn Oath, jointly to perform all the Duties ofchsfe 'Covenants to GOD, as the other Party to whom they are air due by his Law -, which obliges all and every one, to thefe Duties refpcftively, in their ' Callings and Stations, tho' there had been no^ fuch Covenants made. As by the Oath ofBaptifm, the Parentis obliged to all the Duties that the Law of GOD re- "q^ires him to Perform, to his Superiours, Inferiours and Equals, in all Relati- ons he is, and ftiall be in, whilein the World,, as well as all Parts of Rehgious Duties immediatly to GODj and tho* he thus folemnly Vows and Covenants 'to perform all relative Duties to Men, yet GOD is the proper and principal Party with whom he then enters^ in Covenant by that Vow; becaufe all re- llative Duties to Men, are to be performed principally to GOD, and only in Subordination to our fellow Creatures, and as in Obedience to GOD, who has commanded us by his Law to- do thefe Duties .% 2dly. For Clearing the next Thing propofed. Namely, Who was the.. Party obliged to perform all the DutieSj Articles, or Conditions of thefe Covenants? And as to this. Point, it is inconteftably clear. That thefe Three Kingdoms, Scotland, England 3ind Jreland, were the Pjrtythat was obliged to perform all • ^jjg Duties, .Articles or Conditions of the *I^P8WW Covenant. 2dly. For Clear- ■^iftgthis Point further, it mufl be confidered. That it is unqueftionably clear by rt^^-the Covenants themfelves. That our Forefathers entered not into thefe Covenants, «rr$ a$fo. many People in Number, without concern with one anQther, fweafing an CHAP; XIX. 7he OAth of Abjuration, anfwered. Oath; but as Bodies of People, Colleftively and jointly confidci-ed, as Nati^ST Churches, and National politick Bodies or Civil States- and fo they did formally ■oblige themftlves in Swearing thefe Covenants, to pertorm-all the Articles <>f them, •^veryene in their Station jointly; as Churches and Nations, as the Churches and* Nations of Scotland^ Englimdy and Ireland. As for clearing the 2d Point it is undeniably evident by the Covenants themfelves-, That the conditions of them arc moral Duties, which are required of all Generations by the Word of God» - ,' -'-■ ^dfy. The next Point to be fpoken to, was to ft ow what was the Form of "Obligation, whether it was reftrided to that particular Generation only or'ex- -^tcnded to Potoity of following Generations alfo. And for Clearing this let it be confidered, That Covenants do formally oblige Pofterity of After-ages'two '-ways. I. When the Party Covenanting doth make a formal exprefs Covenant •as fiich a colleftive Body by Designation, Then as long as that colleaive- Body of a Church or Nation, has the Being of a Church or Nation, the formal ObH- -gation lyes /till upon it to perform tliat Covenant, in all moral Duties that it was obliged toby that Covenant; for moral Duties are ftill Dutiei^ and while that Nation or Church has a Being,the formal Party otl ged flill remains • and the formal Obligation is the Obligation of that Church or Nation as fiich a Church or Nation ; and while that Church or Nation continues to' hay e a Being Of Nation or 'Church, the fermal Obligation flill remains in all follow- ing Agts. 2(Jly. A Covenant formally obliges Pofterity of After-ages, when the Party that h! ft entered into that Covenant inferts it as an exprefs Claufe and Condition in the Covenant, faying; / Bir?d myfilf, and my Pojienty, Heirs and SiicceJJors^ to ferforrn all the Duties, Articles and Conditions of this Covena,;ty as Men inordinary JBonxls for Pamyenr ot Debt do formally Bind thtir Pofttrity^ So a Covenant includ"^ 'ing a formal Claufe to this Purpofe, extending to Poflerity, undifputably binds Pofterity formally to all Conditions of that Covenant, that are Lawful Things in ^ themfelves. - Now I come in the next place to advance fome further Evidence for proving that our Covenants National, and Solemn League,^ do formally oblige us, and all following Ages of People, ot thefe three Kingdoms, to perform all the Articles and Conditions of them : Becaufe thefe three Kingdoms, AS three Kingdoms and three National Churches, did oblige themfelves to perform all the conditions and Articles ot the Solemn League, and the Nation and Church of Scotland as a Nation and Church, obliged her felf to perform all the Articles of the National Covenant ; And therefore, as long as they have the Being of Nations and Ciiurth- cs, they are formally, and as fuch, obliged to perform all the conditions of tbcfeCo- venants,as aboveiaid, m all fuccecding Ages. The Learned CROFTOr^,on the So- lemn' League and Cover ant, Pa^e 136. ioWowmg Grotius, dejure Belli, Lib: 2- cap: 16': Page. 1^6,. Proves this trom the Examples of ^ofiuah's Covenant with the Gibeonites, and Zedtkiah's with the King of Babylon. *And Mr. Cr often in the faine ,0fj The Jrgum(nts advanced for Defence of CHAP. XTX. iifxi^ B^qlk' Page \^6, reckons up? fix hundred Minifters m England ^ihu maintain- ed the fj^me to be th^ Senfe qfth^ Soleipn Leagucthat he didy wiipfe Teftimonips are yet upon Recorder and which he citeth in /»^ff 145, 147. of the fame Boo^. And the fame Thing is maintained concerning ^olJyuah's Covenant with the Gi- ^eotdtes by Peter Martyr^ ^/?/w, Menechius, Cornelius a Lapid^y and Ofiander on 2 ^am: 21' 3. p. Thera;ne is alfoDefendied by Bonfreriusy M^flos, s^nd CormUux ^ Lapiae on J^fiuah chapi.' ^* And F*®^ 11% bis Sympjis Critkcrum on that place ^olds the fame : Far tho' tfiere was FraiKJ nfed by the Gibeonites, in their indue- in g Ifraelto Covenant with them, and jt^iza^ and ^the Princes of ijfr^/ were in an Eiror ; Yet the Error was but in ciicumftantials, not in Subilantials : For tho' the LORD inExod'. 23. 32. acd Deut* j, 4. did forbid Ifmei to make a Covenant with the CamaniteSy the Regfon is given io the^e Scriptures, ^i. Leaft they fhoul4 Jntice //I (jtf/ to their IdoJs and Idolatry, if they dweU together: But as Majius ^-^d Ccrnelma lapideCin th.§ place fiiy,. The Reafon of a Law is the Soul of the Law, and where the Re^on ^k which that La^v was made ceafeth, thenrthe Law doth not oblige : For Ci, Z-;'k^, and Nachm^n following ■^«- guflin on the gth Verfe ol: that 9th Chapter of Jajhuah fay, the Gih^niiei Em- braced the true Religion, antdfo the Danger oftjheir Idolatry ceafcd, which was the Rearon of that Law forbidding to, make a Covenant with them. And it ap- pears fro.m :£xo^. 2 3.- 10. That IJraei^Sis icooiinanded tooffer Peace to any City before they Befieged it : Only 'Ifraelites could not make Peace with Canaanitesy on two coriditions. Viz.. Firfi, That they would give to the /jfr/reZ/ffj their Lands which GOD had beUowed on them. 2dlj. That they would become Profefytes and Embrace the true Religion, that they might not tempt Jfael to Idolatry, or falfe Worftip as Cornelius a Lafidcy BcKfreriusy Majiusy and Sera, ins on the 9th o^JfJJjuah obferve, and Pool in his Synopfis on the place obferves out of the yewifi Rabbiesy that Ifrael was not commanded to deftroy any Nation, without otter- ing Peace, except A/brt^^V^j and Ajnmonkes.. Butfeingthe Gibeonites condefcended to thefe conditions, as CahiKy LyrayZnd Nachfnan obferve : The circumftantial Error lay in this. That the Ifiaehtes took them to be Forreigners and not Inhabitants of the Land ; And theiefore the Co- venant was as ibrmally binding, as, a Man making a Marriage-Covenant with a Woman prefent, whom the Man thougJit to be a S/^^wyS-Woman, but fhe was a French Woman, in which cafe the Marriage Covenant formally binds the Man, notwithftanding of his Miftake ofthe circumftance of a Different Countrey, fte being otherwife a Woman Lawful to be married by the Man, without breaking the Law of GOD ; as Bonfrerim on the 18th Verfe obferves. And feing a Cove- nant thus made, under fuch a Circumftantial Error,, did formally bind the Ifra- elites, who made the Covenant, and their Pofterity in Afrcr-Ages ; Low nujch more evidently do-our Covenants formally bird Pofierity of After- Ages; femg our Covenants had not (o much as any circumftantial Error at all, in the making of thetn. ^dly» % CHAP. XIX. The OM of JhjurAth. idly. For further clearing this Point, Let it b' arc Solemn Oaths ; and therefore the Formal OL long as they bind to the Performance of the Cc For, as all found Philofophers do hold, Thv, woi-ds two Proper Forms; vix^. External and Internal : Th( Words confiilsin this; That they are Articulat Sounds tke Inftittttion of Men, who conftituted fuch a Language, to . of the Ideas or Thoughts of thcfe Mens Minds; for attair. ledge of one another's Minds, in all Things ncceflary tor Human ov,'Ci( C, t^ perform fuch Duties as are Moral Duties, that the Law of GOD commands every Gene* ration to prform, tho thre had been no fuch Covenant made at all: I'hen the Pojinrity of 1 r ,4med iorUifente of . /CFtAFXIX '^nadt are obliged _ Materially, bat net FortnaUy 'ions of it.. .. Tha?: is to fay, .T/^^ ard bound hyfbe ''fj^mCo&fiimtjjwM^kify.dll^the- Moml Duties^ . <}' ■■ . v :' :. u. ,.-,,: .::'•..:■♦ ... >: ■• / i/?. If the Party th^t ifialjqs that Gx^venant, be Suh- fermamnt SuiijeUy fuch- asa Nation^ or Church, and AS vH fwear to perfcbrra all the Conditions of that Covenant,.: ^^ , Nation, or Churdi has rhe Being,of a Nation,or Churcli, it is '^'^v-J?^^ 'eu, ,^ t^eiform the Conditions p,^ ti^,t Cpvejiant.. ^ , %d\ that fay, Pofterity are, ot)iy^joi>lig6d. in the Material Senfe, above fait' ' ^ '^ertue of the Law ofCOi), wiiichftiil obliges all Generations to pctio.m - ! .. ioral Duties, tho' fuch a Covenant had never been made at all; . They make that Obligation robe meerly .a Legal Qi^ligation, but no Covenant-; Obligation at all ; for according to th^r Argument, Pprtprity i^.only obliged to perform thefe Duties, by Vertue of GOP's Law.; But is it not Atheifticaltofay, We .i?eed not perform fuch Duties ^ ^ for there i&,n9 Obligation (p^i us to do fo, except the Law of GOD? :;] ,;- ,jo'J :.^ . '/ -^My. I have proven already, That a Coveaantj^m^d^gy Oath (an Oath being fir iBiffmi Juris) as long as that Oath binds at all to jiif ri"onn all, the Conditions of that Covenant, it obliges as a moll Solemn Pio mife, inviolably to perform all Conditions fworn to, in that Covenant; according to the exprefs vVords and true plain and full Senfe andSignificationoftKe^ords of thei^aid Covenant,as underllood by both Parties covenanting, and all intelligent, indifterent Perfons, without E- quivocation, Mental Rcfervatioi], or Evaiiou whatfoever^ and tiiat is all the for- mal Obligation that ever it had. ^thly. The proper End of an Oath makes this evident : For as the Learned /l^* 'vanel in his JSiblioth: Sacra, Part, i: Pag: 8^2. fays. Finis Juramenti efl ad confirm mationem,y^^h: 6. i6. ntfil: confirmemus Rem ita effe prout dicimus; that is, 'The End %f an Oath is forConfirmationy viz. That -we m^ confirm the Thug to be fo AS wefpeak : Whence it is clearly manifeil, That the very proper End of an Oath, is to confirm , the Thing to be exadly fo AS we fpeak .• And fo it confirms the zi\mg formally , AS fpokenin ("wearing, a,s long as it has the Vertue of an Oath, to conhrm that thing at all. , , ' ■ In the next Place, I come to fhow how our Covcnants/orwj^/^ bind and oblige , us, and all Pofterity by exprefs Clauies in them, which do ludifpatably bindPo-' f^erity by a formal Obligation. And this is plainly evident, as to rhe National. Covenant in the third Part of it, itV exprefiy faid,' And finaUj being convinced in our Mmdi\ and confeffing with cur Mouths, that the PRESENT a-id SUCCEEDING". ^GENERATIONS imhts Land are hi^ndtq keep, the for efiid National Oath and Sub* fqriPtiun invtolable. :.. ," , , By whicli Article it is undeniably manifelt;,,;that the then prefent and all Succeeding Generations y are formally and equally bound both by tlie.. Oath and Sub-. •■ - > fcription -T CH. XX. That the Power of Jppohthg fcription, which is an intire formal Oblig. tained in that Covenant fworn and fubfcribt League by feveral exprefs Claufes formal) of that Solemn Covenant; as in Article ift. us may^ as Brethren li-ve in Faith and Lo'vey a>. Midfi of US'. By which it is plain, That the . ^ and genuine Senfe extended to Poll:erity, obliging Reformed Religion, and Unity of the Three Kingac>< .vCic Covenant, which could not be without the conftanii -man- contained in that Solemn League. And in Article '^th. it a faid, y^ ]{«i- according to our ?lace and Inter efi endeavour that they ('uiz.. the* puoms/ . xy remain. conjoyned in a firm Peace andUnion to all Po/lerity: Whp "^^ plajn* ly and formally oblige all Pofterity, to preferve a conftant Unic jny of the th \;e Kingdoms,in Performance oftheDuties fworn to,in th ..uULeague? Thus I have demonflrated the binding Power and formal Obligation of our Covenants, National and Solemn League, obliging the prefent and all fucc^eding Generations in thefe Nations, to the Performance of all the Duties and Con- ditions, fworn to, in thefe facred National Oaths, which if the Lord of his Infi- nite free Grace would perfwade and enable all Ranks to perform, our DivifionSj and Controverfies would be at an end, which I heartily pray for. ' ^ "^^^ C H A P. XX. PFhich contains a plain Demonfiration of the Pozuer of Inditing National Fajls ani T'hankfgivwgs of a conjiitute fettled National Church, to belong to the Minifiers, and not to the Magifl rates ; as alfo an Enumeration of the Defe^ions of the prefent National Church : And likeiiije the Conditions on which all the PROTESTERS luill cheerfully join in Communion with the prefent National Church.' T is manifeft. That the National Church of Scotland^ hath by her Ad of Afl'embl •, Anno 1710, declared the Power of Authoritative Indifting publiclc Fafls and Thankfgivings, for ordinary, in a conftkute fettled National Church, to belong equally to the Civil Magiitrate, and to the Church : But pradi- cally the Church hath undenyably given up the Power of the fame wholly to the Civil Magiilrate ; for all Men know, that the National Church will not appoint either National Faft or Thankfgiving by her Intrinfick Pbwer, upon any Occafion whatfocvcr. • In order to ftate this Queftion diftindly, let it be confidered, That the Que*" ftion is not, Itit be lawful tor the Civil Magiilrate in any Cafe to Indid a pub- lick Fall Authoritatively, in a Cafe of fudden Danger, when the Miniflers can- not meet in Time, as in the Cafe of JehoJhaphat*s Appointment of a publick Fall, 2 Chrcn: 20. 3. Nor idly. Is the Queition, If it be lawful for the Civil Magiftr^c to appoint publick Fafls and Thankfgivings, when there is no cJon^- 'Aitute Church to appoint them ? Nor ^dly. After the Church hath been generally <^brrupt;ed,in a Time of extraordinary Reformgtions/or thcnche Magiftrate may tfc K k do I ^ikm^ ? of the Mhifiyy, proved CHAP. XX. .aority ; yet in fuch Cafes he ought to con- ies as can be had, either in his own, or from i Jar ens Rod, Pag. 2 25, faith, following •ch it belong to the Office of the Mfniflry, in a conflitute fettled Church, without any ex- ...a , .xinill:ers have not Time to meet) to appoint Fafts, •1 M*.- . Ihould for ordinary on necefiary Occafions, appoint 'Fa-... . J llianfgiviHgs ? ' , .tion, the prefent National Church of Scotland anfwereth in the That it belongeth to the Office of the Civil Magiftrate ; as |)lainr rom their A£t concerning Fads and Thankfgivings, Juno 1710: But! v.he Negative, that is, I deny that it belongs to the Office of th^ Civil Ma^xitrate. My firft Reafon is, Becaufe I find Mr. Gillefpie, (and with" him the fi^e&minfter Aflembly agrceth) hem Aaron s Rod, Page 260, {nkh. Such Aings are not to be difpenfed and adminiftred hy the Civil Magi (Irate ; I mean, faith he, the Word and SacramentSy the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, the Sufpenfton or ^xcpmrnuwcation of Church-Officers or Members, the Ordination or Depojition ofOficerSj the Detertnination and Refolution from Scriptures of Controverjles concerning Faith, the Worjhip of GOD, the Government of the Church, and Cafes of Confcience. And in Page 25i, he faith, All Things properly belonging to the Soul, or internal man, are the ChjeB ofEccleJtaflick Power, given to the Church Officers, Paflors, and other Ruling Officers. And it is undenyable. That the Caufes of Fail:ing being Matters ofCc^- fefpon znd Petition, as alfo Caufes of Thankfgiving, being Matters of Praifeio ■' taft^l^ they are Things that belong to the Soul; and therefore properf^;|i^i!i^/< t^^^Sfthe Office of the Miniftry, as is evident from our Confcffion of Faith, Chap' 'io. Sind Chap. 31. 2dly. Miniftersare called SEERS,the Light of the World,and Shepherds, and ^re commanded as Watch-men, to tell all Perfons of their Sin, and to warn all Ranks of Danger, under Pain of having the Blood of thofe that Periffi in their Sin, laid to their Charge^ compare iSa?n: 7. 9. Matth: 5. i^-Jer. 5. 13. Epl: 4: II. Ez-eh 33. 3, 4!, $i <^, 7, 8. And feing Magiftrates as well as other Per- fons, ace the Flqckand People committed to- the Charge of Minifters, as Pa- ilbrs and Watch-men, it certainly belongs to the Office of the Miniftry to ex- hort, and as Chrift'j Ambaflkdors, to in join all Perfons to the Performance of all Duties of Religion, both of Humiliation and Thankfgiving. 2dly- A publickFaft is fuch as is appointed by the Authority ofthefe who are the Officers of the Churct», and is celebrated by the Church, on fome neceffity falling out, Joel. I. 14. and 2. 1,5, 16, 17. Acis 13. 2. and 14. 23. and. Mi- fljfters are commanded to blow the Trumpet for Sanftifying publick Fafts,. compare 7«^/ 2. 15. with Num. 1.0. 8. ^thjy. I fliall adduce the Teftimonies of fome great Divines, and even of whole Ghytchcs, who maintain that it belonged to the Office of the Miniftry, to ap- PQinttheFaftsand Xhankfgivings of a c.oaftitute fettled Church* Famous Mr. *^ - - '• " - CaUirrJ CH XX. Thitthe Poorer of Jpf?ohtf»^ pfdhlk/et*. Calderwocd in his Hiftory, Page lyp, faith, GOD t of the Kirky to be as Eyes to t'e People, and as M'atch wherein they fall by Sin, who doubteth but thfe feeing y*^ Jhould both give Warning of the 'Judgment and lay « Fafiing and Prayer, if this be no Part of their Office, the King call them. Proclaimed not Jjremiah the fu^ '^on^h's Exhortations and Adinonitions ^ the Princes tf/Niniv*' rity, a Thing that bringeth good Succefs t» the Conflitutions o, A Ground was in Jonah's Preaching ; and further, there was\,ot a Who proclaimed all the Fa^s ivhen the People were in Captivity? ." tL the Prophets, and they that bare Eccle/iaflical Offices ? .Hitheno I - w, never heard of one particular Law for Chrjiians in theirVocations under Heatu^.^ Princes, and another under Chnflian Princes. And the fame is maintained by the Minifters of the Shires of Pi-/ f A and Fife.m the 20 Page of their Teflimony, Printed ^;?«o 16^9. I might here adduce Teftimonies of v4/>/)o//o«/«j,and many other great Divines, who have written particuhirly of Magiftrates Power about facred Things j b^t for Bre^atic's Sake, I pafs by them, and (liall cite the Teflimonies of fomc Churches. ^"^;he HELVEriCK CONFESSION of Faith, Chap. 18. In Defcribing the sWj^AL OFFICE of GofpelMinifters,this is one Part, viz^.Theymu ft be careful witlhhe utmofl D/ligence, in Performing publ ck Prayers and Supplications : as afo in Keeping and Caufing puhlick Fafts to be ohferved and keeped in lime efNecejfity. And ' all the Articles of that Confeflion ( except concerning Holy Days in Memo- ry of Saints ) were approven by the Church of Scotland. The fame Confeffioti ' was alfo approven by the Famous Chiirches of- Geneva, Savoy, Polland and Hungary. For this fee Crt/^/^-Ktuoo^'s Hiftory, Page 41, 42. And hence it is undenyably evident,. That the Church' of ico^/^^i, and all thefe Forreign Churches who approved that Confeflion, did thereby declare it to be an Article of their Faith, t^/j:,. That it is a fpecial Part.ot the Office of the Miniilry, to appoint publick Fads and Thankfgivings. In the WIRTEMBERG CONFESSION, Article 2S, ( which Article particu- larly concerns Fails and Thankfgivings ) 'tis faid. The A-;cients ( viz. Miniilcrs) didfometimesfafi who'e Days, that they might apply ths7nfelves to Player ; and by that Difcipline admonijh their own Churches, and chiefly the Youth, concerning paft, prefent, or imminent Dangers ; and that they might excite thefe, viz. Their Fluks, to perform Repentance, whereby the wrath of GOD might be mitigated. Thus we ■ fee the Church of Wirtemberg declares it as an Article of her Faith, That the Ancient, to \^ It, The Primitive Church, held it to be the proper Work of Minilters, to Exhort and Injoin their Flocks to the Duty of publick Falling. And if it be- longed to the OiHce of the Magiftracy, all the Chriftian Churches abroad could have had neither Fafts nor Thankfgivings for the firft Three hundred Years, file being under Heathen Emperors, who were for the moil Part Perftn;utopSjr' i K k 1 ?y^Qi. fivances to be RedreJJed^hefore the CHAP. XX. ^tef Narrative of the fKoft Matterial Grievances which *'•? Redrejfedy in order tOj and before they join in hurch. .lath neither at nor fince the Revolution, made .i>L. the finful Complyances of the Office-bearers and -A s Church in former Times, viz.. Betwixt the Year of • . , ^9, nor inflided Cenfures according to the Demerit of The Church hath, not, "judiciaily condemned the fad Step of JJefec . ;h and Land was guilty ol: before the Revolutiony between tjje Yt. and i68p, vix,. The publick Refolutions and Aflbciation with Malignants following thereupon, the Perfecuting Tyrannical Sentences of Church qenfures, pafled againft the PROTESTERS for their Faichfulnefs ; by the publiclj Refoluti oners. The finful Silence of the Generality of Minifters, in not Teftifying againft Cromwel's Toleration, The Silence of the Generality of Mi- nifters, in not Teftifying againft the Blafphemous Supremacj arrogated by Charles lid. And the Perfidious Subverfion of the Famous Reformation by the Aci Re^ fcijfory, and other wicked Laws to that Efted. His Introdudion and Eftablilh- ijient of abjured Prelacy y the Apoftacy of the moft Part of Minifters, in Joining with the faid Prelacy. The Hearing and owning of fuch as had thus Apofta- tized. The Receiving of //^iw/^fWf^ of* whatfoever Edition, from the forefaid Charles lid. Accepting of the Duke of Tork's Toleration. The States Framing and Impofing, and the Generality of Perfons of all Ranks, going into Blafphemous Oaths and Bonds, contradidory to the Word of GOD and our Covenants; together with all other Steps of Defedion, mentioned in the }{ind let loofe. ^dly. Since the Revolution, the National Church hath not made any Ad of Aflfembly, Juftifying the feveral Faithful Witneffings, Wreftlin^s and Sufferings of the Lord's Servants and People, in Contending for our LORD CHRIST his Interefts and Prerogatives, in Oppofition to all Encroachments made thereon, by his and his Churches Enemies,as the Word of GOD requires, $iev. 2 and 3 Chapters, and was the Pradice of the Church of Scotland Anno ^638. ^thly. The Church hath pradically declared, that by the FaHAmo 1690, all Scandal of former publick Sins, was fo removed, as it was not neceffary to call the Perfons Guilty to any further Acknowledgment ; tho* by the Ad ap- pointing that Faft, there was no faithful particular Enumeration of former pub- lick Sins: Yea, the Church in pureftTimes, might have made as large Acknow- , ledgment of finful Failings. 5/y. So tar hath this Church made Defedion from the Faith and Pradice of our worthy Reformers from^theYear 1^3 8 to 1^49, (who juftly fentenced thofe that maintained PrJacy,) tl-^t Prelatick Cwats have been received into Minifterial Communion, without requiring fo much in the AB 6f Mfumption, as an outward Shadow of Repentance, for their Apoftacy, and for- mer >yicked Pradices,much lefs a full Satisfadion as the Word of GOD requires; And others who were not t4ken into Minifterial CommwniQn, have, upon their . fweav' Ij JLi CH -XX. Vrotefttrs can joyn in C(^mmumon wu Swearing the Oaths of Allegiance ^ ani Suhfcribing the ^ ment, been all along allowed to officiat as Miniilei. Nay, when many of thefe Curat shsid been juflly • right Armimanifmy the Commiffion reponed them, y \ appro\'ed by the fubfequent General Aflembly ; Infla. irrk^ 1 hng^ and Skinner oi Bothkenner, S^c. 6thly. The Church hath nO^i 'Re- 'I volution, required the Perfons Inverted with the Regal Power of tm ,t)n, to Renounce all Errors inconfiftent with our ConfeHion, Catechifms and Covenants, and to fwear the Covenants (^iccording to goodActs for that £fFed,particularly an Ad of Parliament Ff^rw^ry 7th 1^49 ; and the General Aflembly's Warning and Declaration that fame Year, which alfo was put in Practice at the Coronation of Charles lid.) whereinMinifters were culpable in not dealing with the Eftates, to ^have our Covenants put among tlie Conditions of Government in the Claim of Right. •■jthly. Wicked and Ungodly Men, who were Enemies to CHRIST and his Caufe, and Evil Counfellors in the late Bloody Reigns, Inftruments of thjs then Tyranny, Contrivers, Enacters and Executors of the Bloody Laws againft the LORD'S People, were not removed from Places of Truft, at, nor (ince the Revolution;. Nor brought to Pubhck Repentance for their Atrocious Crimes, be- tore they were admitted to the Sacraments, and even to bear a part in Chur<;h Government as R.uling Elders, 8f/>/>'. In the Claim of Rights Presbytery is^ not aflerted to be according to the Holy Scriptures ^{nox Prelacy to be contrary to them) but only to the Inclinations of the People, ( they having Reformed from Popery by Presbyters) which might be as much pleadable in refpeci of any Form of Go- vernment of Man's Invention, ^thly. The Bx'mg of the JB of EJlaUij/meat npoi\ the Ad of Parliament Anno 1592. which the Minifters of this Church did not Faithtully Proteft againft, tho* thereby feveral Degrees of Attainments in Refor mation were paft over,&theChurch unjuftly and (infuUy Limited in her Freedom of Convocating and Diffohing General AJfembltesy and in feveral other Branches of her Intrwfick Power j Which Power and Freedom, with the Headjhip of CHRIST alone in and ever his Church, the firft Aflembly after the Revolution rcfufcd to af- fert by Ad of Aflembly, tho a Draught for that Effed was fram'd and Read in open Aflembly ; . And importunatly prefltd by certain Members,and was then, if ever, moft Seafonable and neceflary. lothly. The want of efledual Endeavours for Renewing our Covenants, and crufning all Attempts for that End, the Difre- fped fhown thereto by many Minifters, fome denying their binding Force, others not Preaching it up, a third Sort not making Honourable mention thereof at fuch Times and Occalionsas furniflicd the nOpportuniry fo to do. iithly. In Caufes of National Fafts,there hath not been to this very Day, fo full an Enumeration of the Lands Sins,d.s was both neceflary, and pleaded tor by many of the Minifters them- felves ; Many grofs Sins and National Abominations ( as the Self-contradiding Tef?, Complyance with thu Indulgence and Toleraurn, &:c. ) upon account where- of the LORD'S Wrath is burning againft the Land,, not being exprefly mention- ed therein, iithly. The good Ads of former Aflemblies betwixt 161 8 and 1649, Jiiclufive, aiient Ucenfmg and Ordaining Imams im the Minifiry, anent Faithfuhfs A ^ n evinces to he redreffed.before, the . CH. XX. ^ DoBrine te the Corruptiom of the Ttme, anent Due ^:to the Sacraments, and Church Offices ; Againll Sin- •V o^/;f r Malignants. And fuchlike jiift and necelfary ve not been revived and obferved as they ought j ^....^ .yiQS are Admitted into the Miniftry, who are not qua- Ef t.^ vD*s Word, and the forefaid Afts, by very many Mini- ft^jN yfis not Encouraged, but rather flighted, and Carnal and Profane Perit. _ rouraged, and Exeemed from Cenfure ; Efpecially if they be of any confiderable Grandure and Secular Greatnefs. Many Noblemen, Gentlemen and others, tho' ofc Scandalous and untender Converfations, Swearers, Drunk- ardSjNeglefters ot Family- W"orfhip,and fuch as joyn Occafionally inWorfliip with the Church of £^.;g/.w^, are admitted and continued Ruling Elders \ Many Vic f- ' oufly and grofly Ignorant ranked in the Number of Church Members, and ad- mitted to Sealmg Ordinances. Sinful AJfociations entered into, defended and plead- ed for, and the Succefs thereof made a good part in the Publick Petitions of the Church ; All which are contrary to the Dodrine, Difcipline and Practice of this Reformed Church, in her be ft Times. I'^tbly. The T'yrannical AEis arid Ccifuresy Depofing and Sufpending Minifters, and Silencing Preachers for their Faith ul- nefs, and Teflifying againii the many National Dcfedions this Church is Guilty of, as is evident from what hath been faid above upon that Head, i^thfy. The frequent and ordinary Ehcroachnents qf the Civil Magiftrat in a fettled State of the Church, in appointing Dyets and Caufes of.?ubIick Fafts and "fhayikfgivings, and the Approbation thereof by rheGenerai Allembly 17 lo. Appointing all iuch Fafts tobe Religioufly obferved,( but of this before) and by trequentDiilolving of National 'lAflcmblies in the Magiftrates Name, and by his Authority, not Protefted and Witnciled againft, and when at the Aflembly 1692, feveral Minifters had Proteft- ed Verbally againft the Earl oiLoathians Diflolving that Aflembly ; A Body of Minifters, having no Power for that effeft, did in the Name of the Church, Con- / demn thefe Proteftations,and were never Cenfured tor their fo doing,which makes their Fad become the Deed of the whole Church. I'^thly. The Generality of Minifters once and again fwearing the Oath of Allegiance and fiibfcribing the Af- fiirance, which confidercd in their Complex Nature with theAds ot Parliament re- lative theretOjdeprivingallMiniikrsthatfhould refufe them,oftbeOiEce of theMi- niftry/p/oJvz^?r^have aTtndencyto Eftablifh Pradical £rrty?/^;-/z/?;?-Andthe fo doing is contrary to the Act of Allembly, appointing no Oatlis to be taken in the common Caufe but fuch as are approven by the Church. i6thly. The Omitting ofNe- CQi^iixy Warnings ayid'fefiimomes ixomth^ ?ub\kk Watch Tower of the National Allembly, againlt the i^ublick National Sins -of Perfons of all Ranks, tz/z,. Sove- reigns, Eftates oi the Kingdom, and Subjects contrary to the Laudable Practicc-of former Faithful General Aiiemblics, who Warned all forts ot Perfons of the Sins and Snares they faw the Nation like to be involved in j as is cvidem from tiie . Letters to King Charles the i/?, their repeated Warnings and Declarations againft the Unlaioful Engagement ; their Aniwers to the Committee of Eftates, and the like. i"f/./v. l."he Confenting unto, in ftead of Teftifyingf<»dgainft the wotul In- CH XX. Proteflersjotn in Commnismwithth \.^ f- Ificorf oramg UNION o^ the Kingdoms, znd the CmC^A \- 'Tolnatwj, Patronages, OAtHoUByURAT'JON,&c. ' I of this Di/pute ) Limiting Minifters to Set Forww/. „^.^ /nexpreis Words for rerfons in Authority ; The late Peace with Prgnce^ and 'luch' like. All which Grievances one may fee fully explained, proved, andObjedions thereanent anfwered in the firft part of the Hunble Pleadings for the good Old li^ay^^ to whch I refer the Reader for theDeinoLillratioa of the heinousNature of thefc' Defeftions. And to remove all Sufpicion oi the PROTESTERS, being unwilling tojoyn in Communion with the prefent National Church oi Scotland upon Juft and Law- fiil Terms agreeable to the Word of GOD. Firfl^ I fay, that it is too notour to be denyed, that t\\% PROTESTERS prefent at the Conference held at Penpom in Nithfdale, in July Anno 17 14, did in their own Name, and in the Name of the reft of thefe who m Adherence to true Covenanted Rcformatioii of Religion m Doclrine, Worfiiip, Difcipline and Government of the Church 0^ Scotland y^woin. to, by our Covenants, and Eftabliflied in pureft Times, Viz,. Betwixt the^Year . 1^3 8, and i6^9inclufive^Ao withdraw from, and Proteft againft thisNationalChurch; I fay, the PROTESTERS prefent at that Conference did, in their own Name, and in the Name of the reft of their Brethren above faid, before the Commiffion- ers of the General Aflembly, and many moreMinifters and Gentlem.en, and many Hundreds of People prefent ,• Solemnly declare, that as foon as the National Church hath Redrefled thefe Grievances,' and returned from the Defeftions above faid to the Covenanted Reformation in pureft Times of the Church oi Scotland a- bovefaid, in the Way and Manner that is agreeable to the Word of GOD, and according to the Praftice of the Church of Scotland Anno 1638 : . And^as the Acts of General Aflemblies between 1^38 and 16^9 Imlufive do require; then upon this Church's having performed that Demand all the PROTESTERS would Cordially and Unanimoufly joyn in Communion with this National Church, ^dly.. I give the Reader to know, that all the PROTESTERS are moft intenfly willing ftill to Joyn in Communion with the National Church , upon her having performed the above faid Conditions : But perhaps fome will Objed and fay, the National Church hath done all that was Duty for her to do for Redreffing Griev- ances by her pthAft ot Aflembly Anno 17 15, appointing a Memorial tobefent to the King's Secretary, ancnt To ler at ion y,&nd Patronages. To that I anfwer, Fir/ly That Memorial was fo far from being either a Faith- fiil or full Reprefentation of Grievances, which the Church lycth under, by Rea- fon of Encroachments on the Church's Privileges by Civil Laws, that the Com- miflionersof feveral Synods who were Members of that Aflembly, openly in Af- fcmbly refufcd to give their Confent, or Vote to that Memorial, on account of its being neither a full nor Faithtul Reprelentation of Grievances of the Church. 7dly- That Memorial Reprefcnted only Toleration of Herefies, and Eftabliflimenc of Patronages, and.defirmg the Parliam_ent to declare the Oath of Abjuration not to be inconfiftent with the Legal EftabHfhment of the National Church.- ^ut it was fo far from RfpTcientir.g the Eflablilhment of the Incorporating Union to be Grievance, tho' it be Pandora's Box.oyt ot whicii all the reft of thefe deadly Maladies rocfd* that in i( the Chared pleads upon the ftaading of the A(X of S^^curity, AS be- ^, CONCLVSION. '& ♦ ^Article of the Union. id!y. The Church pleads for Re- ., f jon Politick Confiierations •, bat no' upon account of '""fhefe J "'i ^^ary to the exprefs Word of God, our GonfeiTion of Faitlr and Cj '"'is the Principal proper arid ftrongeft Grounds of plead- ing f<>r Redrefs. i^tviy TRo vne State had granted all the Redrefs that that Memorial Demands, the Union ftants fti'.l, and the Oath bv that Declaration of Parliament obliges j[j^rantstomaintaia£r< SVPREMACY, pRELJCy&ud Engli^ PopiJhCEREMOi NIES^ as was made evident abpve. ^thl\. As to Patronage^ the' the AflTerably made that Infignificant Faint Nefcio ^»t^,againft it, yet Praftically they approve of,and go Into it readily and chearfttliy generally through the wholeNaiion,and every where plead,that it is confiftent with Presbyterian Principles. 6thly. If the AlTembly had been in earneft, and did not contrive ihatMemorial for a fham to pleale fome weak weH meaning Psople,they ought and (hould, as in other Cafes, of far Icfs Moment, have Tent, lome Minifters Comj miffioners exprcfly to the King for that cfFefl, to prefent thefe Grievances, and fcek Re- drefs; Whereas the Affembly leaves it to their Corumiffion to fend it in a Letter to the Secretary, hence it fceras, they intended the King (liould not thiiik they looked on it as a Matter the Church was much concerned about to obtain, elfe they had (ent CommifHi ' oneri-^xprefs for that Effect. ythly. Tho' the State h^d redreflfed thefe Grievances, yet the Union and Oath of Ab- . juration ftand in their full Force, and the Church giving no Sitisfad^ion to the Confciences of Adherents to the Covenants, anent theie and the reft of the Defeftions abovefaid, all true Adherents to the Covenants, are where they were •, that is to fay, the^ juft Grounds of Separation, both Negative and PofitWe from this Nitiunal Church remain^ Having now vindicated the PROTESTERS from the «njuft Sentences againft them, and falfe Afperfions caft upon them, both with Tongue and Pen, and given Reafoni why they cannot join in Communion with the preieni National Chu'ch, without Re- drefsofGrievances,and removing thefe Offences that are fo grievous and notpur,we have only to add, That we know and are perfwadcd in our minds that asihe Divifmnsof this Church, are amongft the deepeft Wounds and greateft Afflitioni of our SouU, fo there is nothing ( n«xt unto Communion and Fellowfhip with GOD in his Truth ) which the PROTESTERS more earneftly defire, than a finkfs Union and Peace in the Church, and would redeem it at any Rate that will not pollute their Confciences, and make a Breach with GOD; And therefore, as through the Goodnefs and Mercy of QOD, thefe PROTESTERS have a Witnefs of their Innocency, and of the Jultice of their Caufc in the Hearts of manv of the Precious and Godly in the Land, (o we de- fire that none of the LORD'^s People will receive the Accufations that are laid againft them, or look upon them as Men ef Implacable Spirits, fet to hold up Contention and Divifio* in the Church, but efteem them fuch as ftand for the Defence of the Truth, and are feeking and purfuing fuch an Union and Peace, as mav nut be for the De- flruftion, but for the Prefervation of the Truth and CauTe of GOD, which they con- ceive ihemklveS bound to, 'and efteem above their own Perfonal Credit, and all thsir worldly Inrercfts whatfomever : And feing God" alone of his Infinite Grace, can efft'61 fuch an Union in his own Way,agreeable to his Word,as thefe PROTEST* ERS plead for, therefore the PROTESTERS earnertly lon^ for, and pray that the Glorious JEHOVAH, for the Sake of our Lord JESUs CHRIST, who healed th.c DmCionsoi /frae^ ind Judah^ and made them as one Stick in his Hand, £z,