Defense of the Vindication of the Church of Scotland, Treatise (1 of 3)

Defense of the Vindication of the Church of Scotland · Treatise (1 of 3)

p. 3A Defence of the Vindication of the Church of Scotland, in Answer to an Apology for the Clergy of Scotland.

I Shall not pretend (as our Apologist doth) to have been forced into this Work, by the Authority of some great Man, tho' I may, with as much sincerity, averr, that I have no pleasure in this Eristick Exercise: Especially on a subject that bringeth with it a necessity of a Reflecting, and blaming of others, with whom I had rather live in peace and good correspondence; whatever different sentiments I may have from theirs, in some things. The necessity that Truth and Innocency shou'd be vindicated, and it not being done by them who could do it to more advantage, is that which prevaileth with me to undertake this unpleasant Task. Notwithstanding, If this Author had not engaged in some Theological debates occasioned by some passages in some of my former Books, it is like his abusive, and unjust Reproaches, against me and others, whom he is pleased to name, should not have brought me into this debate with him. As his squeamishness made my Book ly by him six Months, till he was over powered by commands to take it up and read it; so did his ly by me for some Months, through the throng of other Affairs, that I look on as of more moment and necessity: The Apologist should have had great advantage against his Antagonist, if all these things with which he chargeth him were manifest from the Book he refuteth, or could be otherwise made appear: And if he himself had shuned these things that he doth, with such contempt, blame in others, but if neither of these can be observed (as I suppose will appear to the impartial Reader) he is like to have little credit by this his Essay.

§. 2. It is a wonder if this Author believeth all that he writteth of them that he setteth for his mark, and shooteth all the invenomed Arrows against, that his quiver can afford: And If he, mean while, used no Reflection, whereby to discover the very same errours in his own Book, which he so tragically exposeth in that he refuteth; But it is not rare to spy a Mote in our Brothers Eye; when there is a Beam in our own. It is an old Observation, ubi invidia & odium in consilio sunt, caecum est ibi Judicium, and the wise Seneca did well observe, plerique sunt diserti in convicium suum, quos si audias in avaritiam, in libidinem &c. Perorantes, indicium sui putesprosessos, ita redundant in ipsos malidictain publicumemissa; quos non aliter intueri decet, quam medicos, quorum tituli remedia habent, pyxides venenum. If the Vanity, Partiality and Sophistry of this Title page, the Scarrility, ill Nature, Rudeness; Tergiversation, Lying, uncharitableness, and such like qualities, that he liberally ascribeth to his Adversarie, in many places of his Book, be found with his Antagonist, and not with himself; he hath whereof p. 4to boast; The Tryal of which will afterwards fall in, when he cometh to prove some of these benign Assertions. He giveth just Grounds to think that the whole Book was written in a passion for P. 1. He telleth us, that 'every line of the Book that he refuteth provoked him to the undecencies of passion, and P. 2. that he did but once peruse it, with purpose not to read it any more. From which one may expect, by a natural consequence, indigested Notions, a partial Refutation, and but of some things here and there that he was most angry at, and where he thought the Attack was easiest, and a parcel of Huffing, Angry Efforts of a commoved mind: Whether this effect do not appear in the strain of his Book, I shall not determine, let the Reader judge. If there be no farther degree of passion in his Lines then what amounteth to Indecency, and if there be nothing worse then idle words, (of which yet we must give an account) it will be the better for him. Surely a perpetual passion, or lasting Anger, on which the Sun goeth down, is no good temper for writting of Books. Impedit ira animum ne possit cernere verum. I pretend to no such prodigious parts, as to Answer his Book by Reading it once over, and whatever dislike I may have with not a few things in it, I shall consider them with out passion.

§. 3. His first head is, he will examine the general Apology, by which the Vindcator thinks to ward off the blame of the Barbarous Rablings of the Clergy, from his party: But me thinks he should have first made it appear that these Rablings were as Barbarous as his complices had represented them in their Pamphlets, Answered in the Second Vindication. For he knoweth, that some matters of fact by them alledged, are neither denied, nor defended, yet many of them are simply denied, and disproved, others are shewed to have been, tho' not commendable nor innocent Actions, yet far short of what they are aggravated into by these Narraters, but he is resolved to suppose all to be certain and undeniable truth, and only prove that they are imputable to the Presbyterians in General; and about this is our present debate with him. We maintain that these practices were acted by a very few; and not approved by either the most, or the best part of the Presbyterians.

§. 4. He is pleased to represent the Vindicators defence in this matter, as if he held that the Cameronians were no Presbyterians; and yet they are Zealous Godly Men: And that the Presbyterians are clear in this, because these things were not acted by Sober Presbyterians, and that it is incumbent on them who blame the Presbyterians, to prove that the Actors in these disorders were Sober and Intelligent Men. A, It is easy to deform the best Face by an ill paint, and the best Cause by misrepresentation: And our Author thinketh it convenient to use this Art to make his Refutation easy which otherwise might have proved hard for him: He should have shewed, where it was said that the Cameronians are no Presbyterians: Or where it was hinted that the Vindicator or his complices, were obliged to prove them to be Sober and Intelligent: All that was said to this purpose was, that the Cameronians had gone out from the rest of the Presbyterians, and had taken up some principles, and used practices, that the rest did not own, nor approve, and therefore if he should prove a thousand times, that the Cameronians are Presbyterians, he saith nothing to the purpose: unless he prove that they are all the Presbyterians, and that there are no Presbyterians, or no Body of Men under that Designation, who are not, in the things now under debate, of their way, which I hope he shall never evince. That I owned, they are Godly Men, is sophistically alledged: I doubt not but there are such among them; tho' I never thought what they differ in from the rest of the Presbyterians to be any part of their Godliness. But I never called them (yea nor any other party of Men) universally Godly. nor thought that all was well done, that is committed among a Body of Men where are many Godly: Yea nor that whatever is done by good Men is Good: Christs Disciples were good Men, yet their forsaking him and flying, was no Good Action. It is probable enough that some bad Men might creep in among these zealots, and might much influence these Disorders as the mixt multitude influenced the Israelits to Murmuring in the Wilderness.

§. 5. But he will prove the Cameronians to be Presbyterians: a Conclusion which (in the sense given we deny not) let us hear his Arguments. 1. If they be not Presbyterians, to what Communion then do p. 5they belong? A. This is as if we should alledge that the Arminians in the Church of England are the Episcopal Party; and ask them who deny it, To what Communion do they belong: Surely neither to the Presbyterians nor Independents, &c. Wherefore I answer directly, tho' in most things they agree with the Presbyterians, yet in other things they are a Communion by themselves: And indeed till the Lord was pleased to abate the heat of that division that was among us, they had cast off Communion with the Presbyterian Church, and would hear none of her Ministers, but cleaved to two or three of their own way. His second Argument is, have they any Principles, Discipline, or Government, different from the Presbyterian Church? A. For Discipline and Government, the Arminians of England have none different from the Episcopal Church, and yet the Apologist and others might Justly blame us if we should not distinguish between Arminians and Episcopalians. For Principles, they had principles both with Respect to the Civil Government, and as to that Submission that is due to Church Governours, which other Presbyterians did never hold. And tho' this had not been; and if they had been Members of our Congregations, our Dislike of the practice, and having no accession to it, doth clear us from the blame of it, and all that can be inferred against us is, that some Presbyterians have done ill things: And if he can instance in any party of Men, of whom the like cannot be said, we shall yield to his Argument: I hope he will not alledge it of his own party. His third Argument is, were not the leading men lately owned and received by the pretended General Assemblie, without retracting any Articles of Doctrine, or disowning any of their practices that they so zealously recommended to their followers, in the West, A. (to say nothing of his Discretion in the Epithet Pretended that he bestoweth on the Assemblie, which the King and Parliament indicted and owned, as well as it was the representative of the Church of Scotland) It is true the three Ministers who had headed that party, were received upon promise of Submission to the Church, and orderly behaviour; which they have since faithfully performed; and by that means multitudes of the People that followed them are brought to more sober Courses, and do wait on the ordinances of God dispensed by the Presbyterian Ministers, which before they could not be perswaded to. And was it not wisdom in the Assemblie to so pite these Divisions by lenitie, rather than to exasperate, and continue them, by putting men on formal retractation of what was done, seing the same thing was materially performed. Will any man (who is not fond of picking Quarrels) say, that by this Course the Assembly approved of what these men have done, or that all the Presbyterians are of the same sentiments that these men had been of? especially considering that the Presbyterian Church hath received into Ministerial Communion, and admitted to a share of the Government of the Church, severals of them who had complyed with Episcopacy (and are ready to do the same by all good and useful men among them who will not endeavour the hurt of the setled Government) without puting them to express retracting of their former principles or practices, this considered. I hope the Reader will see, to how little, purpose his Simile is, brought from the imagined Apology of the several parties among the Donatists: For if one only of these parties he mentioneth were guilty of these Irregularities he speaketh of, there is no reason to blame the other factions in those things; whatever blame might be fixed on them all in these things wherein they agreed.

§. 6. What he asserteth page, 3. That the most intelligent among them (the Presbyterians) did contrive and manage the irregular Heats, and Motions of their own Partizans. (I suppose he means the Cameronians) This we deny, and shall consider the proofs of this assertion in its place. But before he cometh to this, he pretendeth to oppose the vanity of this Apology more closely: How he performeth what he promiseth tanto hiatu; let us now hear; he saith, that the knoweth no Opinions that Mr. Cameron propagated which were peculiar to himself; He followed most closely, and ingenuously the Hypotheses of the old and zealous Presbyterians. A. We know that he and they who joyned with him, and they who succeeded to him, held that they owed no alledgeance to the King, because he had broken the Covenant: That they might not lawfully hear any of the Ministers of Scotland, because either they had received Indulgence from the King, or owned such as Ministers who had received it, or did not declare against them p. 6Were these the Hypotheses of the Old and zealous Presbyterians? But whatever were his principles, his practice in making so wide a separation from all the other Presbyterian Ministers in Scotland is a sufficient Apology for their Innocency, who neither were of his way, nor had any hand in the Disorders that we now debate about, which were committed by that party which he had headed, while he was alive. Another effort of his more closs arguing is, Mr. Cameron was not a proper Man to be the founder of a new Sect. As if profound Learning, and deep policy, were alwayes necessary to mislead a few of the less intelligent People, especially when the severity of persecution had imbittered their Minds, both against the Rulers, and the Episcopal Church, it was easy to set them oft from them: And from all that did not make the same Resentments with them, of what was then acted. I am yet unable to find out his close Reasoning, for what followeth is, That the Episcopal party first called that party Cameronians, and by that name mean all Presbyterians whose zeal for their Faction over-drives them beyond all Discretion: and this all along he imputeth to all Presbyterians, and therefore he will allow no difference among Presbyterians, some will call this a loose Declaration rather than close Argumentation, for whatever names he is pleased to give to persons, or things, they who know any thing of our affairs do know, that all Presbyterians did not join with, nor allow the courses of Mr. Cameron, and his followers: It is of the same stampt that cometh next. viz. That the Cameronians had better studied their Principles, and drawn more natural Conclusions from them than others: This is barely and falsely asserted. Also that the Cameronians did assert their principles when others were silent: This is also false, others did always, as they had opportunity, assert their Principles tho' not the same way that they were asserted by the Cameronians. this was done both in Field Meetings, and in other Meetings, such as then could be had. Tho' I confess the Presbyterians made it more their Business to inculcate upon Peoples minds the great truths of the Gospel, on which our Salvation dependeth, than what belongeth to Church Government.

§ 7. What further goeth with this Author, for his close Reasoning is, to shew that what the Cameronians did was according to Presbyterian Principles: All that I can find for proof of this most absurd assertion, is that the people may (with their Pastors) Reform the Church when the Magistrate is slack, or opposit to the designed Reformation, and the Presbyterians hold Presbytry to be Juris Divini, and the removal of the Episcopal Clergy was necessary for this Reformation. A. If he condemn all popular Reformations of the Church (as he here seemeth to do) he will not approve of many Reformations, either from Heathenism, or from Popery. But I will not digress to demonstrate this, the soundness of this principle rightly understood is made evident by the Learned Claude, Historic. Defence of the Reformation P. 7 &c. So that it is not to be lookt on as a principle peculiar to Scotch Presbyterians. The principle that they hold is, that every Man in his station, should endeavour the Reformation of the Church; that people may believe the Truth, and Worship God according to his institution, whether the Magistrat allow it or not: But if he will prove that the Presbyterian Church did ever determine, that private persons, or Ministers, may, by force of Arms, carry on this Reformation, then shall we own the Rablings that he is pleading against: And unless he can make this appear, all his talk is beside the purpose. He boldly, but most falsely, asserteth in the end of P. 4. and P. 5, that the Rable had the best directions that could be had: And had exact Intelligence, by their Agents, what they might venture on. This was in the Pamphlets formerly refuted, asserted with the same confidence, and was denyed in the second Vindication and is still denyed: But it is below this high pretender to closs Reasoning, to take notice of that: or to bring any shadow of proof for it: But this, the Rablings was not acted by the Parishoners of these Ministers who were Rabled; Ergo, it was done by vertue of a League and Covenant among the Presbyterians in general, or the chief Men of them. The meanest in our Universities would be ashamed of such Logick; could not a few who had separated from the Presbyterians, as well as from the Episcopalians, manage such an affair as this, without advice from Men of note, either in the state, or in the Church however this Authors tinctured fancy doth represent the Rabling to him, we see nothing in it which looketh like a Combination of the whole Society, (viz. Presbyterians) but rather, like the efforts of Passion, and Revenge: Or at least, an undiscreet zeal of a few Persons. p. 7That some of the Gentrie of the West, were scared from opposing these Rablings, is like his other Arguments to prove a Combination of Presbyterians in this matter: Men of less understanding than this Author pretendeth to, may conjecture other Reasons for their forbearance; they saw the interest they had fallen in with sinking, and they had no heart to appear for it, either by defending their Ministers who had led them upon the Ice, or by being active in the Elections for the Convocation for setling the Nation, that then was in a Convulsion, but were glad to Lurk. His Charitable assertions of the Presbyterians (without exception or limitation) I shall not endeavour to refute: pitieing the Author who thus doth expose his Temper while he crieth out against others for their want of that Spirit that becometh the Gospel: They are, that they never forgive any Injury, and they never say the Lords Prayer, because it is so opposite to their Nature: It is impossible to oblidge them by favours, that the People of the West are generally Cunning, Avaritious, and Dissembling beyond measure. Of these and many such like Assertions sprinkled, as the flowers of Rhetorick, throughout his Book, I shall only use his own words (mutato nomine de te &c p. 27 that such Assertions carrie with them all the marks by which a wilful and deliberate lie may be known from modest and ingenious truth, or our Author had Causam scientiae of the truth or falshood of these things. Let it also be considered, how agreeable these imputations are to that Charity and Gospel Spirit that he elsewhere talketh of.

§ 8. After he hath reasserted without farther (that is without any) proof, that the Maxims of our Moral Theologie do allow the greatest Villanies acted on the Clergy; he bringeth another Argument of the Rabblings being concerted by the Party, viz. Presbyterians: That some Presbyterians then at London contradicted the Reports that were sent thither concerning them As well they might deny many of them, tho I do not hear any denied all of them: He might know, that many of these stories which are printed, are not only denied, but disproved: And it is not like that the reports sent to London, were more universally true. What is Argumentative in his Paper, I am willing to consider; but am not concerned to answer what filleth up page sixth, and seventh, which is asserting the 5th, 6th, and 7th time, that what was done by these Rabbles was concerted by the Presbyterians. One good Argument would have convinced us more than such bold and repeated Affirmations. That the Presbyterian States men (and the Church and People also in their wishes) preferred Presbytery to union with England; is not to be wondered at by any, but them who think more of their civil Interests, than of what concerneth Religion. His out-cries against the Covenant and the Transactions of that time I do not regard, what was said more distinctly to that purpose in the Ten questions is answered, and he is not pleased to take farther notice of it, then to declame in the same strain of obloquie. His Marginal note, p. 7. Insinuating that Presbyterians do preach against the use of the Lords Prayer, is Injurious: I have heard many in Sermons asserting the Lawfulness of using it, tho at the same time they deny the necessity of using it; or that it is commanded to use these words: But I never heard any Preach against the use of it.

§ 9. He bringeth p 8. an instance of a Presbyterian Rabble Misrepresented by the Vindicator, in which he insulteth, as if he had at one blow, not only routed the poor Vindicator, but the whole Presbyterian Party (his big words are enough to fright an unwarry Reader) that the Vindicator doth by this passage Flie in the Face of all Evidence, and contradict the Conviction of all the Inhabitants at Edinburgh: And a little below, from this one single instance his Book is ruined, and his Authority bested, &c. And he telleth us of his Antagonist's shifting and confounding two very different Stories into one, viz. The tumultuous defacing of the Kings Chappel, and the burning of the Pope in Effigy. The former he says, was a horrible Tumult, the Latter an orderly Action. Let us now examine the ground of this his Triumph, he citeth the words of the 2d. Vindic. p 35. Edinburgh Edition. For the Tumults at Edinburgh; we know of none, but what was made by the Students of the Colledge, there in burning the Pope in Effigie. But our Apologist is pleased to leave out the words that immediatly follow, viz. And defacing the Chappel of Holy-Rood-House. Where is now this shufting and confounding of two distinct stories? are they not both expresly mentioned? and the one distinguished from the other. I hardly think this Author could be so unwise or dishonest as of purpose to omit so p. 8material a part of this passage; which he knew every Reader Would observe, and discover the Cheat; but rather judge that the indecency of his Passion with which he saith he read the whole Book (or some other present disorder) might make him overlook the half of the sentence: Some may be apt to think, that such a slip may more effectually ruine his whole Book, and bafle his Authoritie, than what he now chargeth on the Vindicator. Or may be, as he wrote his Book without the use of other Books (which he ofther than once will obtrude on us) for he had not the Book by him which he pretendeth to refute, but had once read it over with Indecent passion, and that same tempe… o… mind prompted him toso many hasting and angry words, little considering whether they would reflect shame on himself, or on his Antagonist. For the Burning of the Pope, he denieth it to be a Tumult… And so We are not concerned about it: But I observe he giveth account but of one attempt of that kind; another long before this, was quite different, as I learn from them who were then in Edinburgh (I was then at a great distance from it) he sayeth that a great many of the Nobility and Gentry were looking on, it was done at the Cross; the students marched in Rank with the Colledge Mace before them, which could not be done without the Masters permission. This was the last: for the former, I am told, that when it was known to be designed, and the place intended for it to be the Grass Market (the ordinary place of Execution of Malefactors) a party of Souldiers under the command of General Daly…l marched in all hast thither; which the Boyes understanding, they went to a far distant place off the Town, and did their work at the head of Black Frier Wind: That they had the Colledge Mace carried before them. I do not find: that the Masters did permit it, is neither true, nor probable for the Principal (who may be is not unknown to this Author) did most furiously rebuke and threaten one of the chief Actors in that scene, and how consistent is it to allow his Holinesse to be thus affronted, and yet shew such zeal against destroying the Monuments and utensiles of Idolatrie, in the Popish Chappel, as this Author doth for the Tumult at Holy-Rood-House To make it the more odious he cometh a very incoherent Story, that the Presbyterians intending it, gave out that the Papists intended a Massacre of the Protestants: and the Presbyterians flew to Arms; and for that night in the City were the marks of Hell and Confusion, nothing being heard but Screechs, &c. And all this was managed by some of the leading Presbyterians. The true History is, a Company of the Students of the Colledge (for they were the first even in the tumult at Holy-Rood-House, which he doth so much aggravate) together with a Rable of Apprentices, and others of the Populace, met together, near to the Abby gate; on what design we know not, but by guess; and may be themselves knew not, as it was with the Rabble mentioned, Act. 19.32. (For Rabbling, if Antiquity were as good an argument for Church Government as our Adversaries would have it to be, might vie with Episcopacy) as they approached to the Gate, the Guard, commanded by Mr. Wallace, drew out against them, they having no Arms (a good Argument that the business was not concerted by men of any common understanding) would not remove from before the Gate: Upon which some of the Guard fired among them, and killed some on the place; and wounded others; who all died of their Wounds except one: Which made many think that all the Bullets were some way Poysonous: Upon this, notice was given to some of the Statesmen, so the Councel met, and sent a Macer to Wallace, commanding him to surrender that post he was in, designing to put another Guard in the place of that, which might not provoke the Rable, nor favour the Popish Interest: This Message he refused: And then Souldiers were sent by Authority, to force him from it; which was easily effected; his courage being more against unarmned Boyes, than Armed men… While the Souldiers were thus imployed, the Rubble broke in to the Abby, and defaced the Popist Chapple, and destroyed what they met with that was fit for the Popish Worship, they also defaced th… Popish Colledge, and what belonged to it; it having been lately erected in defyance of the Law.

§ 10. Let us now a little examine the account of this matter, given by the Apologist, …st. Tha… the Presbyterians then designed to make the most numerous and most Terrible shew that they were able … make: Is false; because the Actors of this Tragedie were a mixed multitude: whereof the fewest ha… any inclination toward Presbyterie, and hardly any of them had formed principles about that controversie, p. 9being a Company of Boyes, also because the Presbyterians could have made a shew of 20 Armed men for every single unarmed Boy was there. And likewise because there was no conce…t about this matter; of which more anone, 2. The Apprehension of a Massacre, that he talketh ofbred in his own head, or in the Fancy of some of his sort. I do not find that there was any Talk of it. And it is most improbable that it should be from Papists, who (as himself observeth) were wholly out of Capacity. If the Presbyterians had feared such m…schief from the Jacobites and high Church-men, then enraged by the Change, (and which I find not that any did apprehend) It was strange, that they should raise a Rabble of such as were the likeliest to be the Executioners of what they feared. Also, it were the way to excite men to make a Massacre, as also to give some colour for Justifying it, thus to assault them who were living in peace. 3 That there was a Night spent in such confusions, or that there were such Screeching, and Terrour in the City, on this occasion, I cannot find by the best Information: Only such a fancy is Subservient to our Authors design; and it seems he can serve himself with truth or untruth, as need requireth. 4. That a report was spread that some were Killed, who were not Killed, is not denied, but that this Report was the contrivance of the Presbyterians to animate the People to rifle the King's House, is one of the grossest of Falsehoods: And that few of the Students of the Colledge were there is not true. 5. That this Tumult was concerted by the Presbyterians, he endeavoureth to prove, Because the Master of F. and several others whose Names he thinketh fit to conceal, were present. I know that many Men of good Note did appear, after the killing of the Boyes, and that by Authority Wallace was ordered to remove with his Guard: The acting of these Men was not concurring with the Rabble, the one acted without Authority, the other with it; but that any such Persons either appeared with the Rabble, and without Command from Superior Powers, or had any hand in defacing any part of the Abbey, he shall never be able to prove. If he can either by confession of Party, or any probable Evidence, make it appear that G. S. or Mr. M, were the Contrivers of this Tumult; or that they glory in it (as he would have us believe) he shall have the better in this particular; but if there be no Truth in this (as indeed there is not) then the Reader may know who best deserveth to be thus branded, that the spirit of Lies and Vanity runneth through his Book. The Plea of an Advocate at the Tryal of Mr Wallace is a ridiculous Argument to prove what it is brought for; every Body knoweth, that in their Pleadings, they consider only what may make for the Cause which they are Patrons of. He (unwa…ily and ominously) maketh this Essay at Edinburgh but the Preface to what they intended to the Clergy in that place. As insinuating that the Popish Clergy whom the Rabble had spoiled of their Superstitious Trinke…s, and the Episcopal Clergy of Edinburgh, were to be considered alike; were managing the same designs, and had the same Friends and Foes. If the Ministers at the Trone Church thanked God for a glorious Reformation; he had many other Causes for so doing then this Rabbling; and it is evil surmising, to ascribe such a sense to his words, unless he had either named the Rabbling, or by Circumlocution particularized it.

§ 11. He maketh p. 10. the Vindicators next Plea to be that there was an interregnum when these things were acted. It had been some Candor, if he had pleased to tell his Reader to what end, and how far, this Plea was used. It was never brought to justifie what was done by the Rabble: But on the contrary, it is expresly said 2d Vindic. p 26. (where that Plea is mentioned) that what they did was not allowable: but that it was not to be wondered at, considering what provocations the People had by their former Sufferings; and saw no way of Legal Redress ▪ How impertinent then are his Reasonings against this Plea, that these Men were not loosed from the Law of God, which should have restrained them. Did his Antagonist ever say so, or did he use words to that effect: And that he is pleased to impute these Rabblings to Saints and to Godly and Zealous Presbyterians, is no sign of that regard to Truth that is fit, nor of that respect to serious Religion, which might be expected from every Christian, much more from a Minister, and Doctor of Divinity. The Peoples being injured and provoked by the Clergy he bringeth as another Plea, used by the Vindicator: And the same is to be observed concerning it which is said of the former Plea; it was never used to justifie the Actors of p. 10these disorders: We think they should have committed their Case to him who judgeth Righteously; and that in the use of Orderly and Legal means, for redressing their Grievances. Unde… this H…ad our Apologist maketh a saint denyal of matter of Fact: He knoweth not what the Clergy did in the West (though al Scotland know that many of them did severely persecute their People, and did stir up the Magistrate to ruin them) But he never knew one that presecuted the Dissenters without great reluctancy; but many that did them kindnesses Others can …ell of some in the City where he lived, who delated Meetings, and them who came not to Church with great forwardness and zeal, and multitudes of Instances in most parts of the Country of their persecutions against Dissenters are in Print: That to deny it, deserveth other words then I lift to use; even such as himself liberally bestoweth on them who affirm what disliketh him. We never did Charge all with this practice, nor did ever deny but that some of them did shew kindness to Dissenters.

§ 12 Next he defendeth the Clergies prosecuting Dissenters according to Law p. 11. and that with a Ha…angu… pretending to somewhat of Argument; but cloathed in words becoming this Authors Genius, and of some other Pamphleteers of the Party: But of which I am sure Sober Episcopal Men will be …shamed: Such as Dark and Enthusiastical Principles, a Career of insolence and Villany: Bou…efeues and incendiaries who were to be lashed with greater Severities: Speaking evil of Dignities took place of the ten Commandments, &c. His first Argument for the persecution by the Clergy is, The Peace of the Nation endangered; the Government, by frequent shakings, in hazard to relapse into a Civil War, &c. If this Argument have any force it is only for the Clergies discovering such as had risen in Arms, or were acting, or contriving what was of that tendency. But many of our Clergy were instrumental in persecution, long before there had been any Insurrection, or before they were injoyned to delate the People to the Circuit Courts: And they did …ve… many who never had hand in any of these Risings against the King. And indeed it was the intollerable Oppressions the People suffered, which caused these Tumults and Troubles which might seem to shake the Government; wherefore, here is non causa pro causa. Another Argument is, the Souls of People were poisoned with dark and Enthusiastick Principles. I wish he had named them: It is true, some wild Principles were taught by some, who separated themselves from the generality of the Presbyterians, as well as from the Episcopal Church: But with what Brow can he impute this to Presbyterians, without exception, and set the Dogs on them all to worry them, because of these mens Principles. And will he dare to say, that none were persecuted but they who taught these wild Principles? Wherefore it was not Zeal for the Peoples Souls, but a Spirit of Persecution, which prompted them to this Conduct. Yea, I have known, where Minister and People dayly went to hear the Parish Minister; only after both Sermons the Minister used to exercise in his own Family, and some Neighbours came to joyn with the Family, and for this he was persecuted; while they could charge him with no thing else, in Doctrine, or in Practice. His 3d. Argument is, they made Schisms, and therefore they must be persecuted. Who made the Schism, I have made elsewhere appear: And shall now only deny that the Presbyterians made it: They were forced to it▪ when he shall bring Arguments for his Assertion, they shall be considered. Again, Must all be persecuted to extirpation who divide from the Legal Church, because their Conscience will not allow them to joyn with it, while they otherwise live peaceably? For Boutefeues and Incendiaries, who labour to raise Sedition in the State, or do unpeaceably dissent from the Church, we plead for no Toleration to them: But were none else persecuted? Yea, I could make it appear in many Instances that several of the most peaceable Dissenters suffered most Obloquie, and much Persecution. What he c…eth out of the Learned Bochari, is no more then that Episcopacy is Tolerable; which was that good Man's Opinion: But our Author concealeth, that he at length pleadeth for Presbytery, as more ancient than Episcopacy; and to be preferred to it; and that he blameth Episcopal Usurpation, as intolerable, against which to contend was our Case. Yea, he saith, p 35. Edit. Francfurt: Mutua tollerantia opus est (speaking of the differences be…wixt Presbyterians and Episcopalians:) Then certainly they who could not comply with Episcopacy, and so (In our Authors Dialect) made a Schism, are not to be prosecuted with that severity that he pleadeth for.

p. 11§. 13. Another of his Arguments for this persecution by the Clergy is, Were these of the Clergy who never persecuted, more kindly used at the Revolution. A. If any made no distinction in this matter, but served all alike, we do not defend, but blame that Conduct: And I deny not but some of them who carved on the Rabbling work, considered all alike: But I am sure that was not approved, nor practised by the Generality of Presbyterians, nor by the Presbyterian Church. I nauseat his repetitions, p. 11. Sub sinem, he asserteth, that the Clergy, as well as the L…itie, w…re obliged to crush and extripate the beginnings of Rebellion, and the attempts of such as Preached the most pernicious principles. This is above answered: There were cruel Persecutions when none of these things appeared, and against such as were never chargeable with any of these. This Author all along taketh a few Cameronians for the Body of the Presbyterians: And on this Fundation buildeth all his Batterie against us. He saith p. 12. That the Ministers at the Restitution of K. C. Suffered no more then to be turned out, for not obeying the Law, in taking a presentation and Episcopal Collation, and that Bishop Light on made such offers of accommodation, as none could refuse but fallen and desperate incendiaries, nor was any thing required of them but what the most Rigid Presbyterians might comply with, if their …eal to support their faction had not infatuated them, as much against the vow of Baptism, as against the Peace and safety of their Countrey. These are the modest words that this Author useth, while he talketh so much against others for want of the meek Spirit of the Gospel: It is false that Ministers suffered no more than turning out, tho even that is agravated now (when it toucheth his party) with hideous out-dryes, of an unparalelled persecution. How many of them were Inprisoned, Banished, Intercommuned &c. The offers that B. Lighton made, did shew him to be a moderate B. and a man of a truely Gospel Temper, far from that of his Brethren: yet even his offers could not be accepted by Presbyterians, with a good Conference: For none could Preach in his Diocess without owning (at least in practice) his Episcopal Authority, by joyning with the Presbytrie, and Synod where he presided as Bishop; and by taking his warrand to the Presbytrie to admit such a one to Preach in such a place, Experto crede.

§. 14. There followeth a further evidence of this Gentlemans Veracity. Candor and Meekness: The Presbyterians in Scotland (saith he) are generally blinded with this fatal prejudice an evidence of their incurable Enthusiasm) they think that no man can Act any thing against the Presbyterians, but he immediat…y acteth against the light of his own Conscience: and a great deal more to that purpose Every assertion is not only false but manifestly so, to all who have ever conversed with us, and who is not Fatally blinded with other prejudices. Tho we be far from judging the Consciences of them who differ: And are convinced, and do on all occasions, declare, that we think many of the Episcopal Clergy, and People, are Conscienciously of …hat opinion; Yea, and that some who have Acted against us, thought that they did God service, as Sa…l and other Persecutors have done before. Yet it is not easie to have the the same thoughts of this Author (and the rest that write and speak in this strain) considering that he hath lived among Presbyterians and cannot but know that these are not the sentiments of all of them, nor of the most part Yea, I doubt that any one, even of the most Ignorant or most Zealous of them, did ever speak at this Rate. His Declamation, p 13. (for in this way of writing his talent seemeth to lie, rather than in solid reasoning; which may move an ignorant Reader, but never satisfie on that is intelligent) against the Actings of the Presbyterians in K. C. The fi…st's time; is sufficiently answered, Vindic. 1. q. 8. Wherefore I shall not trouble the Reader with that debate; seing there is here nothing new, except bitter words, and false imputations; that Ministers did, and do, endeavour to ruine their Neighbours (further than by the exercise of Discipline to purge the Church of unqualified Ministers) that they used Engines to prie into the secrets of Families, that the Ministers said their Cause was like to prosper when they justified one Crime by the commission of another: Or that ever they did so justifie Crimes▪ That they value Soveraignty above all others, that it is the Idol they bow to, &c. These I say are a heap of notorious falshoods, boldly assererd, but not attempted to be proved: But the mans tongue is his own: Several of these assertions p. 12are disproved (having been brought by his associates) in the Book that he refuteth, but this he had no mind to consider. The Presbyterians must be the worst of men: that he is resolved on, per fa… ant nesas.

§. 15. In the end of p. 13. He (the Vindic…tor) insinuateth all along his Book, that most part of the Clergy were wicked men. It had been fair dealing in the Apologist to have mentioned some on… place or other where this was Insinuated, Supposed or asserted: I know no such place. It is like he said so of many of them, but if ever he said they were generally so, or did proportion the number o… them to those Who were of a good Conversation, (which he never did) in that case he will … peccavi, For he professeth that he doth not think it is so. Some of them have been charged with Crimes and these Crimes proved against them, and they censured ac…ordingly: And more of that kind shall be proved when ever he pleaseth. Tho I am far from thinking all is true that is said of them: more then that all is true that he and his friend who wrote the Presbyterian …loquence have written of the Presbyterians; I think, what men write they should be able to give evidence for it: But we are not obliged to prove what is the talk of the Town, of any Person. He asketh who made them (the Presbyterians) Judges of the Scandalous Clergy. A. 1. Christ hath made his Church judge of them: And we are able to make it appear that the Presbyterian Ministers and Elders are the Church of Scotland Representative. 2. The Law settling Presbyterian Government, hath given its sanction to that judicative Authority that they have from Christ. I approve of what he saith, p. 14. That the Scandalous Ministers are rather to be lamented then insulted over. Yet it does not hinder but that the scandal may be mentioned when a reason is given of the Peoples Aversation from them, or may be charged on them, tried, and censured, by these in Authority. If any be glad (as he feareth) when they can discover the trippings of their Adversaries: We look on that as not a Christian Temper, which rejoyceth not in iniquity, but rej…yceth in the truth: I do solemnly profess (and I hope none of my Brethren will say, otherwise) that I wish they all were holy and good men. If any ever looked on the immoralities of the Clergy as a sufficient Argument against Episcopacy, and that it should therefore be overturned, tho (as he supposeth) it had continued since the dayes of the Apostles: I conclude such a Person to be no good Logician: yet I cannot shun to averre, that if it can be proved, that there are other good grounds for laying it aside, and withal, it do appear, that immorralities have much flourished under its wings, among the People and among the Clergie; this is a good commulative Argument for its abolishment. If any of the Presbyterians have gathered stories against the Clergie, which they could not prove; let them bear their Blame: We dislike such practices, as much as he doth. All who have been libelled, have either had their Crimes proved, or they have been acquitted, which is a sufficient vindication of the Church; and a clearing of them who were so libelled; and where any by mistake have been Censured by Presbytries, without sufficient ground (the instances of which are very few) as the Church took care to prevent it, so she hath done to redress any grievance of this kind that was complained of. We know the People in the North were more pleased with Episcopal Ministers, then they in the West were, but not that, but the Commission of the General Assembly being hindred to sit in the North, was the cause why scandalous Ministers there were not tried and censured. The Apologist had more consulted his own credit as a Christian, if he had forborn such unmannerly mocking at serious Religion, as to insinuate that we look on sniveling as necessary to make a good saint ▪ what a temper of mind this passage, with many others in his Book, doth signifie, I am not willing to name; but rather to lament it, and wish that he may be convinced of the evil of it. What he mentioneth of Recrimination, we shall not decline, provided they will affirm nothing but truth, and what they can make appear; by rational evidence. And i… they will delate, and prove what Scandals they can find among us, that they may be censured, w… shall reckon itea good Work, but this is far from that Authors conduct, while he is expresly condemn in imputing Scandals to the Clergy, as a scurilous way of writting, yet with the same breath, he saith, if t… thing were allowable he could tell that many of the Presbyterian Ministers were very Scandalous … some them Adulterers, some Fornicat…rs, some Blasphemers, some whole Presbyterian Families …. p. 13Here is little either Wit, or Honesty, or of that good Nature, that he chargeth his Antagonist with the want of. What Wisdom is it to say that we question the allowableness of an Act, when we are resolutely, and deliberately, and openly doing it? Is he not charging some Presbyterian Ministers with the horridest of Crimes, and that in the basest manner without giving occasion to the Church to try them, or them to vindicate themselves, their Names being concealed: he can neither vindicate his Honesty, nor good Nature in this matter, unless he name the Persons, and prove the things, and when he has done that, if they be not duly censured, let him reproach us at his pleasure. If I knew any such Persons among the Presbyterians, I should have little peace in concealing their Faults. If he (which he asserteth) know not five of the Clergy of Scotland, who could not undergo the severest Examinations: I hope he will not blame others because their knowledge is more extensive than his. Many more have been orderly convicted of Immoralities, and more are notoriously of a bad Conversation: But I dislike this subject, as much as he pretendeth to do, and therefore leave it. We do not envy or derogate from any good that any of them have done, or designed to do; nor his Joy and Gloriation that he speaketh of in his Suffering: Only I cannot well reconcile this strain, with the rest of his Book. I am sure if I should be guilty of so many false Imputations, and bitter Speeches, and Reflections against any body of Protestants, as he venteth against the Presbyterians (without discrimination) I should have little Peace or Joy.

§. 16. Our Author bringeth us another Topick used to vindicate the Presbyterians: That the Clergy pressed the Consciences of the Presbyterians, and that the People could not own them as their Ministers, because they were obtruded on them, and not invited by Popular Elections: And for this he citeth p. 52. and 87. in neither of which places there is one word to that purpose: I have taken some pains to find that passage (for I believe it is some where in that Book, tho' may be not to the purpose that it is here brought for) but cannot find it: Not being at leasure to read every Line of the Book for the sake of this Citation. What I hold in this matter is, That it is the Peoples right to chuse their Pastors; and it is a grievance to have a Pastor set over them by the Bishop or Patron, without their Consent: And that tho' it is their Wisdom, to consent a post facto, if the man be qualified; yet till they consent explicitly, or implicitly, they are under no tye to own that Man as their Minister: However they may lawfully receive the Ordinances from him. Let us now hear what our Apologist hath to say on this Head. He first bringeth some argumenta ad hominem: As that Popular Elections could not be had for a Presbyterian in the North. A. This is not universally true: But where it is so, the Church will not obtrude a Pastor on that Flock, unless they neglect to chuse a person whom the Presbytry, on tryal, may find to be qualified; and this neglect continueth for the time appointed by the Law: And then the Election in all reason, as well as by the Law of the Nation, devolveth into the hands of the Presbytry. And when the Presbytry hath set a Man so over a People, such of them as will not own him as their Minister, I see not how he is obliged to own them as his Flock, further than to do what he can to perswade them to good and to restrain them from Sin. Next he tells us of many Remonstrators inducted by Cromwell's Troopers. A. I never thought that a Pastoral Relation could be founded on such induction; where no consent of the People was, either antecedent, or consequent to it. He 3dly. mentioneth, That the same was done in the old Colledge of Aberdeen without regular and Collegiate Election, and without Tryal or Examination. A. It is a wise Argument from a Colledge to a Church: The Affairs of the one are to be regulated by the Laws of the Nation; the other by the Institution of Christ. In that Colledge by a Visitation, in a Legal and Orderly way, the Principal and Sub-Principal, and two of the Regents were deposed: To supply the two Regents places, all who would offer themselves were invited by a Program to dispute; six or seven appeared; after several days disputation, two of them were chosen (as having fairly won these places) by the Masters of the Colledge, with some who were by Publick Authority to assist them. The Principal and Sub-Principal did notwithstanding Officiate till two years after, by the Authority of Oliver Cromwell (who then was owned as having the Supreme Authority de facto) A Visitation was appointed; and these two Places were found Vacant, and a Minister of Aberdeen was put into the Principal's place; and one of the two Regents p. 14who had entered as abovesaid, and had taught Philosophy two years, was made Sub-Principal: What is there in all this that can be blamed, further than that it was the general Calamity of the Nation to be under a Forreign Power, by whom all the places of the Nation were then disposed of, I know our Author would not have so impertinently digressed, but that he would have a fling at a Person for whom he seemeth to have no kindness, and whose having a Room in a Colledge is an Eye-sore to him.

§ 17. Now the Author will no more trisle (as hitherto he hath indeed done) let us then hear his solid and serious Reasons. He giveth a long account of the way of Admission in the Episcopal Church, against which I could object several things; but I shall only take notice of what is to our present purpose, viz. That an Edict is served, and the People allowed to object against the Candidate, whom the Patron hath chosen for them. Even this is often so done that it were as good it were not done; as when Mr. Mckenzie's Edict to be Minister at Kirklistoun was served at St. Andrews, about twenty six Miles distant. But supposing it were always duly managed, it doth not sufficiently answer the right that the People have to chuse their own Pastors. His Argument from disorders happening upon popular Election is fully answered, Rational defence of Nonconform, Part 5. §. 6. p. 207, 208. But it is like the Apologist cannot read such Books as that without the Indecency of Passion. Tho' he is pleased to bring a passage out of it, when he fancieth he can expose the Author by it. It is his way, here and elsewhere, to assert strongly, the conclusion, without taking notice of Reasons against it. That this, as all Christs Institutions, managed by sinful Men, may be abused, we deny not. Hath not Prelatical Power often degenerated into Tyranny; and yet I suppose he would not have it abrogated. It is denied (which he saith cannot be denied) That the methods of Election differed, often in divers Ages and Countries, since the first plantation of Christianity: Unless he understand this of the more degenerate Ages of the Church, after the eighth Century: Before that, it was uniform and constant, viz. It was done a clero & populo; as it is abundantly proved in the Book cited, p. 201. &c. It is also false, That no Christian Church came nearer the Apostolick Method than the Church of Scotland, under the Episcopal Constitution. For it is evident that in the Apostolick, and Primitive Church, there was no Election made by a Patron▪ The Act of the General Assembly, depriving a disaffected Parish of the Power of E…ection, maketh nothing for his design. For it is without question, that Peoples Rights and Church Priviledges, may for some Causes, be Suspended, by Authority of the Church: His account of the Election of Leith is most false. Mr. Gray had not one of the Legal Eldership for him, nor the Magistrates of Leith, who represent the Heritors; and a great body of the People did oppose him; with what Brow then, can our Author say, That this Election was unanimous. For Muslebrugh and Tranent, none hath, to this day, been Elected in a Legal way, that is, by the Heritors and Elders. That Patronages were not taken away in Scotland till 1649; proveth no more, then that Presbyterians think it not unlawful to own a Man who is not antecedently Elected by the People; and this was never denied by us: Only it was pleaded, that when the People had other objections against a Minister, this might fortify their aversion from him, that he had not entered in a due way. Presbyterians did always think Elections by Patrons to be a great Grievance: Yet they bare it; till it could be removed by Law. The reason of his following discourse I cannot comprehend, viz. How it should come to pass that so many Artifices are needed to promote a Clergy Man, if Popular Election take place: And that it is otherwise, where the Patron chuseth. Nothing is more evidently false, then are both parts of this Assertion. For our way is, when a Parish is Vacant, the Presbytry sendeth two or three, or more, by turns, to preach among them; if the People desire to hear yet others; it is granted: And the People chuse whom they like best. Where doth the Artifice lie, that the Candidate can use, except it be to Preach better than another doth? On the other hand, all do know what Artifices to gain a Presentation from a Patron are commonly used: And how seldom it is seen, that a retired Clergy Man is forced out of his Solitude by the Patron (which our Author dreameth) Symoniacal Compact: and other Solistations are far more frequent.

p. 15§. 18. He blameth the Vindicator (p. 18) for saying that the Clergy pressed the Consciences of their hearers: But he is not pleased to let us know what place of the Book this is to be found in, that it might be tried, whether these words were used, or some other words th…t our Author is pleased to draw to that sense. Also that it might be known on what occasion, and to what purpose, this was said. He saith, nothing was in our worship but the Lords Prayer. Creed and Doxology A It was never said by the Vindicator, that these were sufficient grounds of separation from the Episcopal Church: But it is like he might say that some did sc…uple some of these, and app…ehended that they also had some other Grounds for their not hearing the Ministers that then had the Churches: And as they did run their Scruples too high, on the one hand, so the Ministers did too rigorously prosecute them, on the other hand, For what their Conscience would not suffer them to comply in: And what harm is there in asserting this? He impu…eth to the Vindicator, as if he had said, that Presbyterians were not against the use of these Forms, but they would not use them as the Prelatists did. Where this was said, I know not: Nor is he pleased to quot the place that it might be examined: Whether by these means, the unitie of the Christian Church is broken, let any judge who is not blinded with Superstition. Also let it be considered how wisely the Apologist compareth joyning in these form: with Subscribing the Confession of Faith? Surely this Gentleman must either have a low esteem of the Christian Faith contained in that Confession of it; or a superlative value for the use of Forms: For we have no controversie with him about the matter that is under these forms of words. It is not true, that addressers to the General Assembly did plainly declare that they would Subscribe the Westminster Confession, as it contained the Fundamentals of the Protestant Religion. This is not truly represented nor is there advantage to his design in mentioning it. There was no mention in their Formula (and they would not when required, add on word for explaining it) of the fundamentals of the Protestant Religion. And if they had so far condescended, what security could such Subscription befor their Orthodoxic: For the Fundamentals are very few; and it is a controversie among Divines, what is their number: And sure if these men dislike any Article of the Confession they will alledge it is not fundamental: And indeed by such Subscription they are at liberty to believe, and Preach what they will. On this occasion he declameth (with many words, but nothing of Argument) against the Presbyterians; because they would be secure that they whom they receive, be not Arminians; as if the Arminian controversies were only abstruse, Metaphysical Notions; and would have these left as disputable points. But he might have known that the Apostle, by the direction of the unerring Spirit, thought sit to instruct the Church in these points: And is it a Crime in us if we endeavour to explain what he hath taught. And endeavour to secure …he Church that nothing be taught that is Contrary. I deny not that the Scholastick way of handling these Controversies, is not fit for the Pulpit; and that the Schoolmen have been very extravagant in this matter: but which of the Presbyterians can he charge with this? It is not for not teaching the People the School Notions in these matters that we blame some of his Clergy; but for teaching Errour, and that against the plain and positive Doctrine contained in Scripture, and in the Confession of Faith.

§. 19. He proceedeth, p. 9. to another quarrel with his Antagonist: That he laboureth to provoke the present powers against the Episcopal Clergy that they are Enemies to King William and Queen Mary, and that he saith the interest of King William and that of the Presbyterians is imbarked together, and for this he citeth p 24. The former of these is not in that page; nor any words to that effect: except the latter Assertion; which is there drawn as an inference from what his Adversary had brought, but whatever he may think of its being … mean complement to King William, It hath been the observation of Thousands in Scotland. (I say not it is so elsewhere) and it is hard to beat it out of the minds of thinking men. He puteth a strange gloss on this Assertion; Id est. saith he) if King William doth not observe the original contract, they know well enough what they owe all earthly Kings. This is like the gloss of Orleans. He cha…geth his Margine with this sentence, as what must not be left out. For the Fancy, the Covenant to be the Tenure by which any King may hold his Cro…n: This the Presbyterians disown, and have convinced all men, (whose malice doth not shut their eyes) to the contrary, by p. 16owning and submitting to Kings who brake the Covenant, disowned it, and made the People abjure it. Such unlimited and unproved affirmations, are more fit to give a Character of the Author of them, than to refute his Antagonist. Another Assertion like this is p. 20. I know no notion that Presbyterians can have of a King, but that he should be Arch-bedle to the Kirk: And that he should imploy his power to execute their Decrees. And for this he citeth Sanquhair Declaration, and a saying of the Provest of Rutherglen: Which Presbyterians never owned. But do abhor such Principles: And therefore all that followeth in his Discourse on this Head falleth to the Ground, viz. That the Clergy in the West having never met with any thing but acts of Hostility, without Law, Tryal, or Justice (an accusation against the present Government, which giveth a Specimen of the Author) they ought to continue in opposition to King William, by these Principles. Let them who own these Principles defend them, and consider the consequents of them. I do not remember where the Vindicator foundeth a Libel against the Clergy on account of the Doctrine of Non Resistance: Tho' this he is charged with p 20. and our Apologist is shy of telling his Opinion about it, p. 21. He well knoweth that this Point hath been debated hinc inde, and that not all the Episcopalians do stand for it. I am as backward to enter the Lists on this Subject as he is, but am rather willing to observe that many who pleaded vehemently for it, have changed their Principle: Others have practised quite contrary to that Principle, and yet will maintain their old Opinion in defiance of Sense and Reason, sheltering themselves under some distinctions, and explications, that few Men can understand. Tho' our Author will not tell his Opinion directly; yet he doth it intelligibly enough: While he not only condemneth some late Insurrections (about which I will not Controvert with him) but telleth us of a Supreme Tribunal (which with us is King and Parliament) from which there is no Appeal, and which may not be resisted; by every one whose Caprice is not satisfied; running to Arms. I applaud his Wit not debating this question till he understand it better, and learn to fix foreign For I think few sober Men will contradict him in this; whatever they may think of the body of the Nation joyning with the Primores Regni, resisting the execution of bad Laws, and calling to account the Makers and Executors of them. I will neither debate this, nor determine any thing in it, nor take notice what aspect the late Revolution, and present Settlement hath toward the determination of this question. I shall leave this head, after I have observed a pretty pleasant Argument this high pretender, and despiser of others, bringeth for his Opinion: Do not we see every day, such as opposed the Government any where, Fined, Confined, or Executed. If he had hence inferred, Ergo, no Government is willing to be resisted; the consequence could not have been denied: But the conclusion must be Ergo, it is unlawful to resist any Supreme Governour. Some will say it is pitiful Logick.

§. 20. Because he cannot find sufficient ground to blame his Adversary, he thinketh fit to use some Artifices to reach him. He p. 21. citeth the Vindicator, affirming, That the Authority of the Nation in the Convention, or Parliament, may take away the Legal Right that belongeth to the Clergy. But he leaveth out what might vindicate that Author, viz. That he expresly leaveth the decision of that question to Lawyers; and giveth no Opinion about it. Here the Apologist maketh a heavy complaint, of the Arbitrary Power acted by the Presbyterian Party, in what the Convention now did, and what the Covenanting Parliaments had done before. I shall here also determine nothing but leave it to Men Learned in the Law, to inform us whether the notion of acting Arbitrarily can agree to the Parliament, where the body of the People with the King are represented (none doubteth but they may act irrationally and wickedly) or if it be peculiar to Executors of the Law when they act not by Law, but take their own will for their Rule. He imputeth to the Presbyterians and to the Author of the Vindication p. 22. This Assertion That the kindness that any hath for Episcopacy proceeds from the Episcopal Clergy their Indulging Men in their Sins and Immoralities. And for this he citeth p. 76. and p. 166. In the former of the two places there is not one word to this purpose: In the other, all that is said is, reproving his Antagonist for saying that Presbyterians were dreaded as the plague of Mankind. The Vindicator replyeth, That they are not so looked on by any but a debauched Crew, whom his Faction indulged in their Immoralities; to which Presbyterian Discipline is a Terrour. p. 17Now let the Reader judge whether this Author dealeth fairly? Is this Assertion so universal as he maketh it? Is it said, or hinted at, that none have respect to Episcopacy on other accounts, tho' I am perswaded that not a few like it on that account, yet I never thought nor said, that all who are for Episcopacy are of that Stamp▪ I know some of them, Ministers and others, who hate Immoralities. But let us hear his Refutation of this Assertion. What we first meet with is; this is Spight and Malice: They are Sons of Strife who say so, it is Impudence, it is a senseless Accusation: Who can stand before such Arguments: The force they have is to shew the Man's Spirit who useth them. I only take notice, that he calleth the Accusation also indefinite: Which is most injurious; it is limited to the profane Persons among the Episcopal Party. He cometh next to run down this Assertion; by this tuant Reason. The Episcopal Church hath taught no Doctrine that hath any tendency to breaking any of Gods Commandments. As if no Church could be negligent in the exercise of Discipline, unless it be also her Doctrine, that Discipline should be neglected. He hath Supeciliously insulted over the Vindicator, when nothing so ridiculous or contemptible was said. For another Argument, he falleth with a great deal of scorn and bitterness, on the Discipline exercised in the Presbyterian Church against Whoredom. He hath two quarrels against it; the former, Bringing Whores to receive a publick Rebuke, causeth the murthering of many Bastards; the other is, Three Women cannot be named who ever mounted the Publick stool of Repentance but they became Prostitutes, their Publick appearance rendering them Impudent. Can any think that such Stuff needeth an Answer? That they that sin (viz. openly and scandalously) should be rebuked before all, is the express Commandment of Christ, by his Apostle, 1 Tim. 5.20. id est, palam & in publico caetu, graviter & severe, increpa, saith Estius, and he was no Presbyterian: It is true, he saith, it is likely the Apostle had an eye at the faults of Elders; but he addeth, Idem tamen faciendum cum aliis. It is a shame for this Author to speak against the strictness of Discipline against publick Scandals, which even Papists allow, when they consider things without the prejudice of the practice of their Church. Yea, Tertullian, Admonebantur criminosi a senioribus astante & audiente plebe, magno cum pondere. If this publick Rebuke be given, we are not fond whether the Person be on the Stool of Repentance or elsewhere, in the Church, tho' we think it (as our Ancestors did) a convenient place, where the person may be seen and heard by all; as the Minister is in the Pulpit. It is strange that this Author should speak against pub…ick Rebuking of Offenders; for it was ever the practice of the Church of Scotland; even under Prelacy; and under the late Prelacy; tho' it was not so frequently used as there was need for it: But he is now in England, and it seems thinketh himself obliged to rail at all that is not according to the English way. That Womens murthering their Bastards is the effect of this Discipline, is a strange Assertion, and an effort of a confidence not to be reguarded: It may enervate that wild conj…cture, that at the Revolution, seven Women were left in prison in Edinburgh, for that one Crime: Each of them murthering their own Infants: Since which time I have heard of none but one or two: For his other inconvenience, what he asserteth, is a manifest falsehood: Some have given evidence of true Repentance; not only by publick profession; but by their after good Conversation: And tho' I will not say, that never any of them turned Prostitutes, yet it is known not to be commonly so; and I may say, I never heard of any that turned to that way, on that occasion. He is pleased to reproach us for too strict observation of the Lord's Day: When he complaineth, that the People are not allowed to have fresh Water. This is false; the prohibition at Edinburgh is, that none, on that day, bring Water from the Wells in greater quantity then a Scotch Pint; which is supposed to be, ordinarily, enough for drinking, or for the necessities of the Sick: In any extraordinary case, they may have what they need: But for other uses in Families it is thought as much may be provided on Saturday night as may serve for the Sabbath. This is especially necessary in Edinburgh, where all that populous City is served by a few Wells, to which great Crowds resort, and often make disturbance, by striving who should be first served, which might occasion much profanation of that Holy Day. His ill words against this Discipline, I overlook, intending only to defend our way against what may look like Argument. After all this, our Author hath the Brow, to wish that the ancient Discipline of the Church p. 18were revived. I would gladly learn of him, what that Discipline is, which is not either the same with ours, or is not a great deal more strict and severe.

§. 21. Thus our Apologist hath finished his Defence of the Clergy: With what Success, let tho Reader judge: And let it be considered, whither the things that he laboureth to excuse, or justifie, were ever charged upon the Clergy; but only on the Pamphleteers refuted in that Book which he opposeth: Or on some particular Persons among the Clergy; and if it be found that no such charge is laid against the Clergy; let every one judge, whether he hath not hitherto been fighting with a shadow. His next work (which beginneth p. 26. and filleth up the greatest part of his Book) is to disparage his Antagonist, and Mr. Rule; against whom he seemeth to have a particular indignation (it is not hard to guess at the Cause of it) which design he manageth by some very unmanly Methods; to say no worse. Such silly Artifices should be utterly despised, if a matter of more importance were not struck at then the credit of either of them. They are known (and so is this Author) in Scotland: And every one will judge (some as they know, others as they affect) let him say what he pleaseth: The first thing that he thinketh fit to charge his Adversary with, is Partiality. In his attempt to make this appear, he hath a kind of Apology for what he is about to say; which I cannot well reconcile with what followeth; it looketh so like protestatio contraria facto: He will not conclude him habitually such as he representeth him to be, but ascribeth his Book to Paroxisms of Passion. Here is a high pretence to charitable Judging; some would think that so many acts as must be in composing a Book of so many Sheets, if they did not flow from a previous habit, might at least produce one: But let him call me whether actually, or habitually passionate, as best pleaseth him, if he can make the Paroxisms that he talketh of appear, I shall take with blame: But I hope he will, mean while, allow indifferent Readers a liberty of judging of the temper of that mans mind, in writing a Refutation of a Book who could not read it without being provoked to the indecencies of Passion by every line of it; as he saith himself p. 1. The expressions that he taxeth as unmannerly, are only so, when they are unduly applyed. I suppose there are none in the World of whom every one of them may be said: If he will prove any of these to be imputed directly, or indirectly to his Party (as he often layeth heavier charges to the Presbyterians, without exception) or to any person, or more, without cause; when he shall point to the place of my Book where it is done, if I cannot shew that he mistaketh, let him censure at his pleasure; but it is his way (here and elsewhere) to pick up some words, here and there, which he thinketh found harshly, and from these to expose his Adversary, without taking notice where, or on what occasion, or against whom, such expressions were used: Wh…ch is an easie way to make any Man black enough; if it be a fair way, if not, it is enough to make himself so. The absurdity of venting Passion in Personal Reflections, he doth justly blame: But doth pitifully lay it off himself, when he telleth us of his fixing nothing on his (the Vindicators) person; but what naturally followeth from his own words, or deeds, or some ground given by themselves. Such Reflections are then blameworthy when they are either groundless, or needless; by which let the Reader judge, whether he, or I, be more guilty of venting Passion in personal Reflections. But I have staid too long on this preliminary.

§ 22. He proveth the Vindicator's Partiality, from his rejecting the Testimony of such as are not of his Party. This is false: His proof is, The Testimony of a Baily in Glasgow is rejected because he was chosen by the Archbishop. It is evident p. 94. (which he citeth) that the story it self is disproved as false, whence it will follow that no Witnesses should be believed in asserting of it: And it is but mentioned ex abundanti, that the Baily, and some others there named, were the less to be regarded, because Men who had shewed much ill will against the Presbyterians. If we reject any Episcopal person relating matter of Fact that is probable, and not aliunde found to be false, only because of that persons Opinion about our present differences; let us then bear the blame of Partiality. The same is answered to what he citeth out of p. 85.100. & 109 his great and exact Historians Testimony is not rejected; but his accounts are disproved, and his Vouchers found to be insufficient; as the best of Men might be when he is found to assert a Falsehood. What he alledgeth concerning the Writer of p. 19the first Letter, refuted by the Vindicator (who he saith is Mr. Morer) is far remote from truth; the falsehood of that Authors Histories is asserted, and made evident; but it is no where said, nor hinted, that he was not to be believed because a Jacobite. I shall not contradict the Apologists account of his Loyalty to King William (tho' some are such Infidels as not to believe the conclusion, though the premises were true) but I judged of the Man by his Book: And I know not what any Man, on such a subject, could have said more against King William's interest. That all the accounts be (the Vindicator) had from the West, in defence of the Enemies of the Episcopal Clergy, are thus overthrown with one dash of his Pen, Is a wide mistake: For these accounts were not from any of the Rabblers of the Clergy; but from such as he can make no rational exception against; either for their Morality in their Conversation, or for their concern in that matter: That they (the Presbyterians) are obliged by their Oaths to ruin Episcopacy, would indeed be to his purpose, if he could make it appear, that the Covenant, or any other Oath, doth bind us to tell lies, or use any means, good or bad, toward that end: But if that be false (as all do know) let it be considered, what Morality, or Argumentative Skill, the Man is Master of, who doth so boldly affirm this, and maketh such inference from it.