An Answer to Forbes Peaceable Warning, Chapter 2
To the second Chapter.
YOu saye, divine authoritie appertaineth absolutely to the canonicall Scriptures, conditionally to other writings and sermons, to wit, in so far as they have the trueth revealed in the Scriptures contained in them. What if there bee no errour, but all trueth which is contained, wil you call them therefore absolutely divine? Wee professe, wee believe with our hearts, confesse with our mouthes, subscribe with our hands, and constantly affirme both before God and the World, that the Religion particularly expressed in the conf…ssion of Faith confirmed by sundrie acts of Parliaments is Gods eternall Trueth, and therefore you are bound to sticke to it howbeit wee hold not that or any other confession absolutelie divine. For that testimonie, whether by word or writ is called divine, and hath absolutely divine authoritie, which hath God himselfe for the author of it, either immediatly by himselfe, or by the ministrie of men, to whom hee delivered his will by vision, dreame, or immediat inspiration of the Spirit. Both the matter and diction are from GOD. If the testimonie of learned men agreable with the Scriptures might bee called divine absolutely and simply, then there should be no difference betweene the holy Scripture & the same writings of the learned. The Manicheans saide, that what Orpheus Sybilla, and the Philosophers of the Gentiles foretold of Christ, Contra Faust. l. 13 c. 15.were of as great authoritie as the wordes of the Prophets. Augustine answereth, that if any trueth bee found in them, it availeth to their conviction, but not to bee holden in estimation or authoritie as the words of the Prophets. For the Devills, said hee, spake true things of Christ, yet were not of as great authoritie as the Angels. See in Gratian dist. 37. Sicut veri. But it may bee in stead of conditionally divine, you wold say in some regard or respect, that is in respect of the trueth of the matter, in which respect it cannot bee called conditionally divine because it is alreadie so farre divine. And this is the expression of Divines, Etsi enim verae Ecclesiae judicium & testimonium dici possit divinum, non foreign sed foreign, Polan syn. lib. cap. 25nis mirum quatenus cum Scriptura sacra, & proinde cum Spiritu sancto & revelata Dei voluntate congruit, tamen foreign considaratum non est divinum, sed humanum. quia non est immediate a spiritu sancto inspiratum. Alioqui omne juo dicium & testimonium cujuscun que hominis congruens cum sacra scriptura esset divinum, at que ita jamnulla esset differentia quoad authoritatem interscripta Prophetarum, & Apostolorum & aliorum ecclesia Doctorum sacris literis consentanea scribentium. So wee saye of our Confession of Faith, it is not simpliciter divine, but in respect of the matter & trueth contained into it, it may bee called in that respect, and so farre only divine.
Where you saye, if wee find in the writings of men any thing repugnant to the holy Scriptures wee ought to reject it, correct it, or amend it; as our progenitours willingly professed in their epistle prefixed to their nationall Confession. That epistle or preface seemeth to have beene written in name of the Barons, Gentlemen, Burgesses, & other Subjects professing the true Religion, who after that they had in their Supplication to the Estates offered to prove the doctrine of the Roman Kirk to bee repugnant to the word of God, were cōmanded to draw up the summe of that doctrine, which they would maintaine. and desire the Parliament to ratifie. Within foure dayes after, it was presented and read, first before the Lords of the Articles, and after. before the whole Estates. Some of the Ministrie were present standing readie to answere, what might bee alleadged against it. The Bishops and others of a contrarie mind were charged in the name of GOD to object against it, if they could. Everie Article was read by it selfe. None would, nor could object in the contrare. The Eerle of Marshall protested, that no Ecelesiasticall person should afterward have place to oppone, considering, that time was granted them to advise, and none opponed in so free and peaceable a Parliament. After that none opponed by argument. The Confession it selfe (without their epistle prefixed, when it was exhibited by the Protestants, as the title beareth before the Confession) was authorized, as a doctrine grounded upon the infallible Word of God, as you may see, where it is insert in the acts of Parliament.
Apparently you would have no Confession of Faith ratified and authorized, or to stand firme and stable, but that everie man may have libertie to impugne it. This were to unsettle a Kirk or Estate. After a Confession is ratified, none should bee suffered to be members, let bee office-bearers in that Kirk, who refuse to subscribe or impugneth it private or publick, in schooles or pulpits, unlesse it be first corrected by the Kirk and Estates, which hath approved and ratified it.
You say, that short Confession hath humane privat authoritie, and is respected for the Penner, and many well affected christians subscribers. But that in this regard wee are no more tyed to this Confession then any part of Augustin Ambrose, Luther, or Calvins workes approved by manie good Chistians, nor that the obligation of the subscribers can be extended beyond their owne persons and lifetimes. But wee have told you already, that it is the Confession of the Kirk of Scotland, approved by the Kirk of Scotland, and subscribed universally by direction of authoritie at two sundrie times, which is more than to bee penned by M. Craig, and subscribed by many good Christians, or hath beene done to any part of Aagustine, Ambrose, Luther, or Calvins workes
Beza set forth a notable Confession of faith, which is approved by many good Christians, yet is esteemed only as a private worke. But so is not the generall confession of the Kirk of Scotland. The orthodox confession of a reformed kirk deserveth greater respect than the treatises or works of Ambrose, Luther &c. Sunt enim hae Confessiones orthodoxae, tanquam tabulae authentica, privatorum Doctorum scriptis anteponendae. as is said in the Latine preface to the Confessions of faith. There is good reason for it: for humane authoritie admitteth degrees. The publick is more valide than a private. Sententia communi omnium assensu recepta; longé probabilior erit sententia ea, quam unus & alter statuit. One man speaking according to Scripture is to bee prefered before a great assembly of doctours speaking without criptures: But then his judgement is preferred because of Gods authoritie. not for his owne. B…r wee are now comparing private men with a whole Kirk ceteris paribus, in regard of themselves, and consider humane testimony or judgement qua tale in so far as it is humane. To conclude this point, Wee are aswell tyed to the generall Confession as to that which you call the nationall, for the generall is nationall aswell as the first. In the meane time, you have showne litle respect either to the penner or subscribers, for you call it the negative Confession, the short negative Confession.
The supreme authoritie civill you distinguish in royall or legall, and the legall you make also royall. So then the royall power is royall or legall. Or you meane, the royall power is either conjunct with the Estates, as in making Lawes, because ne civiles quidem leges ex fua solius authoritate ferre potest, as saith Burthillus contra Becani controvers. pag. 66. or without their concurrence, as in giving remissions &c. But this you may call the royall Prerogative. The power legall you should call legislative, or law giving power, which Polititians call foreign. for the power of execution, or administration of justice shuld bee also legall▪ and ruled by the lawes. This short Confession, you say, had never authoritie legall, for it was never ratified by act of Parliament, but all the civill authoritie it had, was only royall by the Kings mandat. You would say imposed by vertue of his royall prerogative▪ I believe that his Majestie professing lately in his Declaration, that hee would not urge the Service booke farther but in a legall manner, would not impose upon us subseription to the Confession of Faith by his royall mandat, but in a legall manner. I am sure there is as great reason for the one as for the other. But wee have shewed already, that it hath beene ratified by act of Parliament universally recived & subscribed, which is equivalent to a Parliament. But more of this anone.
You saye, Authoritie ecclesiasticall was given to this Confession by two nationall Synods. But I have cited moe, which you have omitted, whether of set purpose, or otherwise, I referre to your owne conscience.
You saye, the Authoritie synodicall immediat, was that approbation, whereby these Synods declared this Confession to bee a true, Christian, faithfull, and godly Confession, and that such as truely professe Iesus Christ ought to agree thereto. That by this reason it tendeth to manifest a divine authoritie of the confession of the doctrine thereof, and in respect of the matter so approved doth equallie oblish all Christians. Wee have already cleared that point of divine authoritie wherein you have fumbled. As for the other point, wee doe think that all good Christians should embrace our Confession, Wee beeing persuaded, when wee subscribe, that it is the undoubted trueth grounded upon the written Word. But our intention was not to set downe a Confession of faith, whereunto all Christians in the world should bee tyed, but only such as will bee members of this Kirk, and to make knowne to the world what wee professe. For as it is well observed in the preface to the harmonie of Confessions. If every man bee commanded to make Confession of his Faith, so often as Gods glorie & the edification of the Kirk shall require, what a wonderfull and strange thing ought it to seeme, if Cities, if Provinces, if whole Kingdomes have made profession of their Faith, When they were falselie charged by the Popish sort, that they had gone from the doctrine of the true Kirke. You acknowledge you are obliged to reverence the judgment of a nationall Synod of our Kirk in matters substantiall. Why not in matters also rituall and disciplinarie? for these I suppose you oppose to matters substantiall. Yet in matters substantiall, you professe you are no more oblidged to hearken to those two Synods, than to the preceeding, or following, or to the Synods in forraigne Kirks, or to the ancient Councells, that is, only by restriction. Yet you ought to depart from us, if you bee not of us; if your judgement bee not conforme to the judgement of our Kirk.
The ecclesiasticall authoritie mediat given by these Synods to this Confession you make to bee their injoyning Ministers to give obedience to his Majesties commandement anent the said Confession. Is the ordinance of the Assembly ecclesiasticall media…e authoritie. You vanish in your distinctions. An ordinance of an Assembly floweth immediatly from the ecclesiasticall authoritie or power of the Assembly▪ But you prove your mediat authoritie ecclesiasticall thus. Nothing is spoken in these statutes, but in relation to the Kings Majesties mandat and for a time, but that doth not make the power ecclesiasticall mediate, but only adj…vant or concurrent. I will tell you more, the Proclamation had taken small or no effect, if it had not beene seconded with the authoritie of the generall Assembly. Yea it had beene a dangerous preparative to command Ministers to crave subscriptions to a Confession of Faith not approved by the Kirk. The worke was good, but the order preposterous. In the yeere 1589. the assembly began, and desired Commissions to be given to that effect and gave in a roll of such, as they had nominat to bee Commissioners, which was performed by the secret Counsell. You must knowe also that there have beene acts of Assemblies made for subscribing that Confession without relation to the Kings commandment, as for that students in schools and Vniversities made anno 1587 and this following Sess. 3. quarto Martij 1589. Anent subscriptions to the Confession of Faith with protestation, that the Subscribers doe the same only to obey the King & his Lawes, the Assembly esteemeth of no such subscriptions, but ordaineth such persons to bee proceeded against, as against simple refusers. Suppose the two acts cited by your self make mention of the Kings mandat, yet they injoyne Ministers to doe the same thing that the mandat requyres, not beeing urged by the King or Counsell, but of their owne accord for furtherance of the work it selfe. The first Act requyred Ministers to follow the tenor of the Proclamation. But the second Act differeth in some points from the tenor of it. Where the King with advice of the Counsell injoyned Ministers to deliver the Names of the refusers, and the processe led against them to the Ministers of his House, under the pai…e of fourtie pounds, the Assembly enjoyned them to report their diligence to the next Synods, that the same might bee reported to the generall Assembly, and that under the paine of deprivation.
They intended perpetuitie in these Acts: for they acknowledged it to bee a true Christian conf…ssion worthie to bee received by all true professours, a godly and Christian confession, which ought to bee embraced by all the Kings subjects. where-upon they urged subscription. To approve a Confession, and to urge subscription, import an intent, that such as shall bee members of the Kirke, shall professe conforme to that Confession, and subscribe when they are requyred. When they ordained Students in time to come to subscribe, before they past their Degries, did they not intend perpetuitie. Did not the continuall practise afterward, when any suspect of Papistrie were requyred to subscribe, prove a perpetuitie was intended at the first. If the first Confession standeth, because it is nationall; This other, or the former with this appendicle continueth for the same reason. For a Confession subscribed universally through the whole Nation by direction of Authorititie both civill and ecclesiasticall may and should bee called nationall, and with as good reason, as a Confession authorized by Parliament without subscription of the Subjects, the one beeing the collective, the other but the representative bodie. And yet it was also approved by Parliament, as I shewed before. Doth any Nation receive a Confession, but of purpose to continue in the same? If everie generation should change their Confession, what a reproach should it be to a Kirk? Heare the reproach of Papists. Quoties non mut arunt suam quisque sententiam. Quod edificant bodie, cras destruunt saye the Professours of Culane in their Antidiagma, that is, How oft have everie one of them changed their opinion. That which they build the day, they demolish the next day, And Bellarmine sayeth likewise that the Catholick Kirk, meaning the Catholick Roman, is not like the Synagogues of the Protestants, quae singulis annis non solum ritus, sed etiam fidem mutant, De Ieiunio. c. 4.That change everie yeare not onelyonly their rites. but their faith also.
You call the Kings charge his royall mandat, and make no mention of the Counsells advice and consent. You see the second act of the assembly cited by your selfe beareth, that the Kings Majestie, with advice of his Counsell hath set foorth and proclaimed &c. The Commissions given in March 1509 were given likewise by authoritie of the King and counsell. Which is more than you doe insinuate, and yet had not beene sufficient without approbation and concurrence of the Assembly.
You say, the vigour of the act of assembly remained no longer than the Kings mandat stoode, which expyring it did expyre also. I have shewed alredie, that these acts of assemblyes were not made by direction or injunction of any royall mandat, and have cited some acts which make no mention of any act of Counsell, or royall mandate, but respect the stablished course.
You subsume, and saye the mandat royall hath expyred long agoe, because it was no perpetuall law, but a temporarie mandat given out in his Majesties minor age. First, I answere that mandat was not onelyonly given in his minoritie, but againe also in his Majoritie. Next, it was not only his Majesties mandat, but it was an act of Counsell. Doth not an act of counsell stand in force till it bee altered, or annulled. Thirdly, the mandat or act of Counsell began the worke not to continue for a time, but so long as the Kirk continued, Fourthly, it could not bee recalled, nor yet can bee either by act of counsell, or act of Parliament, because res non est integra. When they laboured to draw the whole Nation to subscription, intended they not the perpetuitie of a Confession. After the People were brought on to sweare by the great name of the Lord to continue in the obedience of the doctrine and discipline of this Kirk, how could the mandat or charge bee recalled?
Your sentence therefore cited out of the glosse upon Gratians Decree, Causa sublata tollitur constitutio ex causa illa orta, maketh nothing for the expyring of the force of the acts of the Assembly. For both the acts of Counsell and assemblyes tended to establish a perpetuall Confession in this Kirke and Kingdome. So the vigour of these acts yet remaineth and continueth. Next, this sentence is explained causa 19 quaest. 2. cap. Duae sunt. Glossa, propter criminosos. Vbi aliquid statuitur propter impulsivam causam▪ causa cessante non ideo cessat constitutio, sed ubi aliquid propter finalem causam est statutum, ibi, si cessat causa, cessat constitutio. That is, A constitution doth not expyre, when the impulsive cause ceaseth, but when the finall cause ceaseth. But heere the impulsive cause of bringing in this Confession was, as your selfe confesse, the deceit of Papists subscribing to the first Confession, minding thereby to subvert the true Religion, and the end of drawing up that Confession was to discover them. The same causes both impulsive and finall yet remaine. And suppose both should faile, there is another principall end wherefore Churches set foorth the Confessions of their Faith, to wit, to make knowne to the World, what they professe, as I have observed before out of the preface to the harmonie of the Confession.
You prove the royall mandat to bee expyred first, because hee dissallowed this confession in a certaine speach uttered in conference at Hampton Court. There have beene sundrie copies of that conference spread abroad, and wee have no reason to believe Bishop Barloes report. Suppose the report were true, we allow the speach in a part. For it would have made the Book of the English articles to swel to a great volumne to insert everie negative position. But thinke you that well applyed to this Confession: for it doth not containe everie negative position, but is only a rejection of sundrie popish errours particularly expressed, with generall clauses for rejection of the rest, as your selfe confesse in the 9 page. Neither is it a great volumne. How often doe your selfe call it a short Confession. You saye, it may bee gathered by that speach that hee did utterly disallow and annull that Confession. Hee allowed it before both in his none age, and majoritie. Next, it was necessarie for the discoverie of masked Papists, and still is for masked Papists and Ministers to use such formes of speach I detest, I abhorre &c. It is strange, that that should bee dislyked now, which was thought necessarie then. But suppose the forme of the Confession was disallowed by that speach, yet could it not annull the former mandat
A speach uttered in a conference holden out of the Countrie could not repeale the acts of Counsell made at home, and his owne publick Proclamation. Next, that speach was uttered. if uttered, in a free discourse to such as were there present, and was not delivered by way of precept, charge or declaration to us. M. Patrick Galloway in a letter dated the tenth of Februar, 1604. and directed to the Ptesbyterie of Edinburgh hath these words, Sundrie, as they favoured, gave out copies of things heere concluded. Where-upon I my selfe tooke occasion, as I was an eye and eare witnes, to set them downe, and presented them to his Majestie, who with his owne hand mended some things, and eeked other things which I had omitted. Which corrected copie with his owne hand I have, and have sent you heerewith the just transsumpt of it word by word, But in that transsumpt there is no mention of such a speach, nor the least inkling against the Confession of our faith, which had beene verie pertinent and requisite, if hee had intended either a recalling of his mandat, or a declaration of his disallowance of that Confession. But suppose hee had, yet as I have said, that could not bee a recalling of his royall mandat, the Confession of faith beeing authorized by acts of Counsell, acts of Assembly, and Parliament, neither could the Confession bee abandoned beeing alreadie received, sworne and subscribed by the Subjectes universallie. Doctor Andrews in his Tortura torti denyeth, that hee might have given libertie of conscience in respect of his oath, at his Coronation first in Scotland, and then in England. For then sayth hee, hee should bee twise perjured. Non semel perjurus esset quin bis si te andiat. You would draw upon him a greater guilt, that would have made him to draw others also into perjurie. You prove next, that the royall mandat was made voyde by his death, and expyred with the royall breath, and to this effect you cite the sentence following out of the glosse upon the 19 chapter of the first Booke of the Decretalls, Morte mandantis, expirat mandatum, which as you have cited: is false. But these words of the glosse are received, Mortuo mandatore, re existente integra, expirat mandatum. The scope of the text is to determine that the jurisdiction of him that is delegate expyreth not by the death of him who delegated, if there bee litiscontestation before his death, because then the matter is not whole and untouched. So likewise Iustinian sayeth of that mandatum that is contracted betwixt him that giveth, and him that undertaketh the charge of anye businesse, the Mandator and Mandatarius that the contract is loosed, if the death of any of them interveene before entrie to execution. Si adhuc integro mandato mors alterius interveniat. Such like in authorative mandats, if hee to whom commission was given to put it to execution depart before hee put it in execution, there can bee no farther proceeding, till another bee placed in his rowme. But for the receiving the Confession of Faith, the Commissions given were put in execution both in the 1580 and 1590 yeares. The Confession beeing once received, sworne to and subscribed, could not bee recalled by the death of the King, who was the first beginner, and ringleader of the work. Doth a house fall with the death of the Master builder? Neither was that Confession received for the Kings Mandat, or direction alone, but for the act of Counsell also. Now the Counsell never dyeth. For politick bodies are immortall, and continue by succession. Nor yet for the act of Counsell. but most of all and principally, for the ordinances and directions of the generall Assembly. And last of all this Confession of faith is nothing els but the first Confession enlarged with some generall clauses, and rejection of popish erours.