Relation of the Sufferings of Ministers in Scotland Since 1660, Section 5
SECTION V.
The groundes of the suffering of Mr Iames Guthry Minister at Sterlin, who was executed the first Day of Iune 1661. examined.
AFter the parliament is assembled. Mr Iames Guthry, minister at Sterlin, who was one of those ministers who were incarcerated for the cause above mentioned, Sect. 3. & who after some weeks imprisonement in the castle of Edenburgh was carryed thence & imprisoned in Dundee from thence is sent for, by the parliament & impannalled before them being accused of high treason. He was a man who had been honoured of God to be zealous, & singularly faithfull, in carrying on the work of reformation, & had carryed himself streightly under all changes & revolutions: & because he had been such an eminent one he must live no longer; for he is condemned to die, & most basely handled as if he had been a notorious thief o… malefactor, he is hanged, & afterward his head is stuck up upon one of the ports of the city of Edinbrugh where it abideth unto this day, preaching the shamefull defection of these who dealt thus with him, & calling to all who goe out & in at the gate of the city to remember their covenant with God for which he died a martyr. But it is like many will think it behoved to be some great crime for which this eminent servant of the Lord, was thus handled, but what if it be no such crime? yea what if it was a duty, for which he was thus put to suffer? Reader, thou shall hear ir, & then thou mayest judge. Some ten years before, he was challenged by the King & his councell for a doctrinall thesis which he had maintained & spoken to, in sermon, & because he found them, incompetent judges in matters purely ecclesiasticall, such as is the examination, and censureing of doctrinall poynts primo instanti he did decline them upon that account: This is his crime, & for this he is condemned as guilty of high treason, & this will be the more wonderfull, if thou consider, how as thou hast heard, many worthy & precious servants of christ, did decline the King, & his councell in the dayes of King Iames, such as Mr Baleanqual, Mr Melvin, Mr Blake, Mr Welch, Mr Forbes & others as incompetent judges in causes meerly ecclesiasticke; and yet ther was never one of them put to death. It is true there was an act of Parliament, Anno 1584. dischargeing such declinatures under the paine of treason: but the very next year, An…o 1585. King Iames himself did emit a declaration shewing that he for his pairt should never, & that his posterity ought never, to cite summond, or apprehend any paster for matters of doctrine. in religion, salvation, heresies, or true interpretation of scripture, but avoucheth it to be a mater meerly ecclesiasticall, & altogether impertinent to his calling: Which though not equivalent to an Act of parliament; yet whether it may not be a supersede as to an Act, & a ground of exemption to the subject, from the rigour thereof till the law be revived by a posteriour act, which was never yet done, lawyers may judge. But which is more there is an Act of Parl. Anno 1592. declareing that that former Act shall no wayes be prejudiciall, nor derogat any thing to the privilege, that God hath given to the spirituall office bearers of the church, concerning heads of religion, matters of heresy, excommunication, collation or deprivation of ministers, or any such like essentiall censures, specially grounded & have and warrand of the word of God. And which is more considerable. The parliament 1648. did disclaime any such power of judging in church matters, & took it for an unjust challenge & charge, to say, that they took an antecedent judgment in maters of religion, for in their letter to the presbyteries of Scotland being their Act 16. May 11. 1648. they have these words [Neither can it be with any truth or justice in any sort alleidged that we have in the least measure wronged or violated, the true privileges or liberties of the church, or any way taken upon us, the determination or decision, of any matters of faith, or church discipline though we be unjustly charged with taking an antecedent judgment in matters of religion.] By which every one may see that the parliament did looke upon themselves as an incompetent judge in matters of faith or religion Primo instanti, or antecedently unto the decision & determination of the church. And now let lawyers judge, whether, when the parliament the supreme judicature of that land doth declare themselves, incompetent judges, in matters of religion; The Privy Councell (which is a judicature inferiour to the parliament by the fundamentall lawes of that land, having its originall power & antiquity from the Kings Maj. & the estates of parliament, & so is subordinat there to, & ought to be countable to, & censureable by them, according to the 12 Act of Parl. 2. King Iames 4. See for this Act 27. Parl 2. of King Charl I. 1640.) may become judges thereof & whether, seing by confession of Parliament they can be no lesse incompetent judges, then the parliament it self, it can be truely treasonable to decline them. Though it were granted that that Act of Parliament 1584. were no way weakened by the other Act 1592. which yet is expressely explicatory thereof; yet it could no wayes be treasonable in him to decline the councell as an incompetent judge to him, in that case; because the Act 1584. is to be understod in such cases only in which they are propper judges But it will be replyed that the Act maketh them judges competent to all persones spirituall or temp…rall, in all matters, wherin they or any of them shall be apprehended summoned or charged. Answ. True, the act speaks so, in the generall, & yet it is well known, that notwithstanding thereof, any of his majesties subjects might decline them when cited for causes, the cognition whereof did popperly belong to another distinct judicature such as the court of exchequer or the Lords of the Session: so that this all is to be restricted to such causes as do belong to them. And under it, causes purely ecclesiastike cannot be understood because of that which the Parliament, Anno 1648. said; Parliaments know best what causes belong to their cognition; & what doth not belong to a Parliament, will never belong to the Privy Councell. If it be replyed againe that the meaning of the Parliament 1584. was to give the councell power in church matters, because this act was devised of purpose to hinder ministers to protest against the King & his counsell, as they had done before Ans. that is true. But that will say nothing now when the Parliament 1648. hath declined to be judges in such matters; and Parliaments can best expound their own lawes and acts, & can best explaine the extent of their own power, and consequently can best declare what causes these are, of which, the Privie Councell, is competent judge, & what not; & when they declare that themselves are not competent judges in matters of doctrine & religion, they do more then sufficiently declare that the Privie Councell is not a competent judge in those matters. But for all this, this worthy man must die, & he dieth a martyr for the truth, against the Erastian abomination.