A Vindication of the Church of Scotland 2, Title page – Preface

A Vindication of the Church of Scotland 2 · Title page – Preface

A VINDICATION OF THE Church of Scotland. BEING AN ANSWER To a PAPER, Intituled, Some Questions concerning Episcopal and Presbyterial Government in SCOTLAND. WHEREIN The Latter is Vindicated from the Arguments and Calumnies of that Author; and the former is made appear to be a Stranger in that NATION.

By a Minister of the Church of Scotland, as it is now Established by Law.

LONDON, Printed for Tho. Salusbury at the Sign of the Temple near Temple-Bar in Fleetstreet. 1691.

THE PREFACE.

THat which is determined concerning all them that will live Godly in Christ Jesus, that they must suffer Persecution, is (and hath long been) the Lot of the Presbyterian Church of Scotland; and a Generation of Men have thus exercised her for many Years by Severities hardly parallell'd among Protestants: And now when their Hands are tyed, that they can no more thus afflict her, their Tongues and Pens are let loose to tear her without mercy, by the most virulent Invectives, and the most horrid Lies and Calumnies that their Wit can invent; there are more ways than one by which the Serpent casteth out of his mouth waters as a Flood, that the Woman may be carried away of it. We hoped in the little reviving that the Lord hath given us from our Bondage, to have had no diversion from feeding the Flocks over which the Holy Ghost hath made us Overseers: But our Adversaries will force us unto a less pleasing Work, which is yet also necessary for the continuence of the Truth and Purity of the Gospel with the People of God. They are the Assailants, and we must act the part of Defendants, without which necessity I should not have troubled the Reader with the following Sheets. It was judged necessary, not by me only, but by them whose Opinion and Authority I do justly reverence; in obedience to which, it was written five or six Months agoe, but was by several Accidents hitherto kept from coming forth to the Light. We are for Peace (even with them who have not only differed from us, but dealt hardly with us; and are willing to receive such of them as are qualified to be Ministers of the Gospel) but when we speak (yea, tho' we are silent, and neither speak nor act against any of them but such as the Gospel declares to be unsavoury Salt) they are for War; and labour to make us odious to Mankind, but especially to our Rulers.

Beside this Pamphlet, several other Prints have been emitted by these Men, containing partly Historical passages full of Lies and Reproaches, and partly false and spightful representations of our Principles and way: To which an Answer, such as they need or deserve, shall e're long be given, if the Lord permit. That this hath not sooner been done, hath been in a great measure caused by the multitude of matters of Fact narrated in them, said to be done in divers places of the Nation, far remote one from another, to all which it was necessary to send for getting a true Account of these things, and there being but one Copy of each of these Books that we could find in all Scotland, the several passages for the divers parts of the Country behoved to be transcribed and dispersed, before Information about them could be bad, which could not shun to require a long time; and when these Informations were obtained, some other things fell in, which did yet longer retard the Answer, which is now intended to be hastened as soon as may be. In this matter our Adversaries have used a piece of Cunning, which is, that these Books were spread in England only, where the things contained in them could not be known nor examined: But in Scotland (where most Readers could have discovered the falshood of their Allegations) there never was one of them to be found in a Book seller's Shop: But veritas non quaerit Angulos.

I shall not anticipate what is to be said in answer to the Books mentioned, as also to a Letter of the same strain, very lately come from the Press; only it may be thought strange, that the Men with whom we have to do, should make such Tragical Outcries about their Sufferings, when it may be made appear that in the late Times, when Presbyterians suffered from their hand, any one of many who may be instanced, suffered more Hardship and barbarous Cruelty, than all of them have endured. It is also unaccountable that they should on this occasion so reproach the Church as they do, while very few (not above a dozen, if I mistake not) have suffered by the Sentence of any Church Iudicatory, and these for Scandals that no man will have the brow to plead for: And if two or three of them have been censured on slender grounds, as is alledged; not only our Church did give express warning to Presbyteries against this Practice: But the late General Assembly hath Committed it to some of the gravest and most experienced of their number to review such Processes (where Appeal or Complaint hath been made) and to relieve them who are injured. And it is evident to all who know our practices, and can judge of them without partiality, that the Presbyterian Church in Scotland hath at this juncture used all due means to make her Moderation known to all Men, believing that the Lord is at hand, who will judge between us and them who shew such spight against us; to whose Iudgment, and to the Censure of unbyassed Men, when they have heard both Parties, and understood our matters, we refer our Cause.

p. 1A VINDICATION of the Church of Scotland; Being an Answer to a Paper, Intituled, Some Questions concerning Episcopal and Presbyterial Government in Scotland; wherein the latter is vindicated from the Arguments and Calumnies of that Author; and the former is made appear to be a stranger in that Nation.

SO apparently weak and inconsequential are the Reasonings of this Pamphleter, that nothing could make it reasonable for a Man who hath few spare hours from more necessary work, to undertake an Answer, except the Advice that the Wise man giveth Prov. 26. 5. for we find it to be the Genius of some of his Party, when they find that Scripture and Reason cannot, and Authority will not, support their tottering Cause, to betake themselves to clamorous lies and railing, and charging others, (as sometimes Children do) with the same thing in which themselves are most culpable; as in a late Piece, intituled, An Account of the present Perscutions of the Church in Scotland by the Presbyterians. And to write (with or without reason, seemeth to be much the same with them) something that may prevail with their easie and biassed Disciples; for some men are more ashamed to say nothing, then to say nothing to purpose.

§ 2. He beginneth in his Title page with some Testimonies of King James VI. against the Presbyterians. To which two things may be said: 1. That King James, in an after Edition of his Basilicon Doron, did declare he meant none but such as Anabaptists and Familists. 2. We set in opposition to this Assertion, another saying of the same Royal Author, mentioned a little below.

§ 3. His Preface taketh notice of two opposite Narratives concerning Episcopacy; the one to the Act restoring it 1662. the other to the Act by which it was abolished 1689. whether of these contain most Truth and Sincerity, is not to be judged of, but by entring on the Merits of the Cause; and his Pamphlet, with this Answer to it, may p. 2contribute some light to it. But that he supposeth Episcopacy to be best fitted to keep out Heresie, is gratis dictum: and the falshood of it is manifest, if we accompt Popery to be Heresie; the Abominations of which arose, and grew up under that Government of the Church in this Nation; what might be its effects in other Churches, we do not now consider. And our Experience may inform us what steps have been made, not only toward the Superstitions, but even the Doctrines of Popery under its Wings, since its restauration. And how Arminianism hath been warmed, and got life by its influence in Scotland, is too well known. He cannot be ignorant of what K. James VI. (whose Authority in matters of Truth, he often brings as an Argument) used to say of Presbytery, as managed in Scotland, That no Error could get footing there while Kirk-Sessions, Presbyteries, Synods, and General Assemblies stood in their force. What evil speaking and reviling there is in the Brief and True Account of the Sufferings of the Church of Scotland, occasioned by the Episcopalians since the Year 1660. I know not, not having seen that Book: But I am sure his Party is in mala fide to challenge it, their stile being such to the Life, not in this Pamphlet only, but especially in those before mentioned.

§ 4. The first of his Questions is, Whether Presbytery (as contrary to the Episcopacy restored in Scotland 1662.) was settled by Law, when the Protestant Religion came to have the Legal Establishment in that Kingdom? Which Question may be two ways understood, and neither of them much to his purpose: either, whether the Protestant Religion, when it was setled by Law, found Presbytery already established; which is a foolish Question; for who ever heard of Presbytery under regnant Popery; we deny not Episcopacy to be as old as Popery: or, whether Protestanism and Presbytery were by Law established at the same instant: neither is this Question to the present purpose; for it is enough to shew the Opinion of the Church of Scotland (as soon as reformed) about Church Government, if our Adversaries cannot make it appear that she chused to be governed by Bishops: And if we can shew that Presbytery was the Government practised in her from the beginning of the Reformation; and that it was by Law established, as soon as any fixed Government could be settled. And good Reasons may be given why it was not done at the very first. First, The Errors and Idolatry of that way were so gross, and of such immediate hazard to the Souls of People, that it is no wonder that our Reformers minded these first and mainly, and thought it a great step to get these removed, so that they took some more time to consult about the reforming of the Government of the Church. Secondly, It was p. 3possible at first, when the Nation was scarcely crept out of Popery, to get a competent number of Ministers and Elders, who might manage the Government of the Church; but this behoved to be a work of time: But what they did in this, and what was their Sentiments about Church Order, we shall after have occasion to discourse.

§ 5. Toward the Resolution of his first Question, he tells us, in several particulars, wherein all the dispute is, that is intrinsick to the Notion of a Church Government; which his Question he stateth with no great shew of understanding in these Controversies. But that I insist not on, that which is here chiefly to be observed is, that he overlooketh that which is the chief (yea the only) Question, on which our Controversie with the Prelatists doth turn; viz. Whether the Government of the Church should be in the hands of a single Person, or of a Community? whether the Rulers of the Church ought to manage that Work in parity, or one should manage it as Supreme, and the rest in Subordination to him. The distorted notion of a Moderator in Church Meetings that he hath taken up, seemeth to mislead him in this matter; for we will not yield that the Moderator, qua talis, is a Church Governour, nor that he hath any Jurisdiction over his Brethren; his power is meerly ordinative, not decisive; to be the Mouth of the Meeting, not to be their Will or commanding Faculty; to keep order in the manner and managing what cometh before them; not to determine what is debated among them. The Author talketh at random, not knowing what he saith, nor whereof he affirmeth, when he speaketh of our election of a Moderator, as done by the Clergy (as he speaketh) Lay-Elders and Deacons: For where was it ever heard of that Deacons had a Vote in Presbyteries or Synods, among Scotch Presbyterians; we count them (though they are Officers of Divine appointment, yet) the Servants of the Church, not her Rulers; they are employed about her Goods, not in the Government.

§ 6. He asserteth that the Protestant Religion was by Law established in Anno 1567. and the Constitution of Bishops remained as the Legal establishment, and that Presbytery was not legally settled till 1592. His proofs for this, and Objections that he obviateth against it, I shall consider, after I have given a true Historical Accompt of the being and establishment of Presbytery in this Nation. Two things we maintain as to this; the former is, That not Episcopacy, but a Government managed by the Teachers of the Church acting in commune, and in parity, had place in the Church of Scotland with its first Christianity, and some Ages after. The other is, That not Episcopacy, but Presbytery, was the Government of the Church of Scotland p. 4as soon as it was reformed from Popery. For the former, Though we assert not that the first Christians in Scotland had Presbytery in all the Modes of it, as we have; neither can we attain the distinct Knowledge of the Actings of these Times by any Records that are left us; yet that there was a Parity, and no Prelacy among the Church Rulers in Scotland: For all agree that Donald (who entered upon the Government in the Year 199.) was the first Christian King in Scotland, though it is rationally thought, by the best Historians, that Christianity was embraced by many of the people before that: And Baronius affirmeth, That the Scots received the Christian Faith from Pope Victor; (had he said in his time, we should have assented fully, but what he saith is enough to our purpose) who was Bishop of Rome from 194. to 203. And it is clear from Baronius, and the current of Historians, that Palladius was the first Bishop of the Scots: (Spondan: exit Annal. Baron. ad Annum Christi 431. p. (mihi) 592. hath these words; Sanctus Prosper missum ait Palladium ordinatum primum Episcopum ad Scotos.) He was sent thither by Pope Celestine, who ascended that Chair Anno 424. So that the Scotch Christians lived without Bishops for about 320 years, until Popery and its Appendices did overspread the World. What is alledged by some, that Palladius was sent to convert the Scots, is contrary to Beda, who tells us lib. 1. cap. 13. that he was sent ad Scotos in Christum credentes. And what others alledge, that he was sent to the Irish in Ireland, who then were called Scots, is without ground. For 1. Beda Hist. lib. 1. c. 12. sheweth whom he meaneth by Scots, to wit, those that were separated from the Britains by the two Seas, which he sheweth to be Clyde and Forth. 2. Patrick was sent to them at the same time; viz. Palladius was sent to Scotland Anno 431. and Celestine died in the beginning of 132. who yet sent Patrick to Ireland; and there is sufficient ground for this from Balaeus (cited by Sir G. Mekenzie against St. Asaph) where it is said that Palladius was sent to Scotland; that Claruit Anno 434. and therefore could not dye to make room for Patrick in Ireland, 431. and that he died at Fordon in the Mernes in Scotland. Also Tertullian, who lived in the beginning of the Third Century, speaketh of the Scots as then Christians; & Britannorum Romanis inaccessa loca Christo vero subdita, which Baronius applieth to the Scots; and to no other in that Ifle it can be applied. Spanhem. Epit. Isag. ad Hist. N. T. Saecul. 3. Sect. 2. distichon hoc dicit esse Vulgatum.

Christi transactis tribus Annis atque ducentis

Scotia Catholicam coepit habere fidem.

Besides this, it is clear from Beda Hist. lib. 3. c. 25. & lib. 5. c. 16. & 22. how averse the Scots were from the practises of the Romish Church in p. 5the Observation of Easter and the Tonsure. And that Venerable Author taxeth them as ignorant of the Canons; and that they knew nothing but the Writings of the Apostles: Which may give good ground to think, that it was long before that Church-Domination, Prelacy, which at last they were forced to submit to, got place among them.

§. 7. That Bishops were setled in Scotland with the beginning of Christianity, Arch-Bishop Spotswood doth boldly assert, but doth not bring any Vouchers for what he affirmeth: Neither doth he name any one of these Bishops till Amphibalus, who (he saith) sat first Bishop in the Isle Iona, or Icolmkill: But this was long after Christianity came into Scotland; to wit, all the time was now lapsed that the Culdees remained in the Isle of Man, where Crathelinth (little less than a hundred Years after Donald, and the entrance of Christianity) built a Church for them, called Fanum Sodorense; so that they were at least above a Hundred Years without a Bishop. Again, Spotswood is alone in this, all other Historians making Palladius the first Bishop. Neither is there any ground to think that Amphibalus was in any degree of Jurisdiction above other Culdees, but that he was a Famous Man, and the first of them that is expressed by Name in History. This Author telleth also of other Bishops, but giveth no ground to believe any more of them, than that there were Men so named, who were Famous among the Scotch Christians, and it is like were their Preachers. We conclude then that the Christian Church of Scotland was governed by the Culdees, who are sometimes called Priests, sometimes Monks, sometimes Bishops. Neither is there any ground to think that this Name was appropriated to any of them, secluding the rest, till Palladius came to Scotland; far less that any of them had Jurisdiction over the rest: What may be met with concerning any Famous Man that was Head over the Society at Icolmkill, or elsewhere, maketh nothing for Episcopacy, for he was there the Head of a School, where Students were bred for the Ministry; but that he had Jurisdiction over the Culdees, who either there, or through the Country, preached the Gospel to the People, hath no semblance of truth. Yea, we further assert, that however a Prelacy (together with other Romish Innovations) was brought into the Scotch Church with Palladius; yet Episcopacy, as our Pamphleteer pleadeth for it, and as it was lately in Scotland, was not known in this Church for a long time after. For Constantine the Second, King of Scots, in the Ninth Century, made a Law against Church-men's medling with Secular Business; so that they could not sit in Parliament: And it was Malcolme Canmore, in the Eleventh Century, who, as he brought in new Titles of Honour p. 6into the Civil State, so he changed the Discipline of the Church, and brought Episcopacy to its foreign.

§. 8. The second thing that we above have asserted, is, That when the Reformed Religion was brought into Scotland, and Popery cast out of it, this Protestant Church was not setled under Episcopal Government, but under Presbytery, and did so continue for many years; till by the secret practices, and at last by open force of ambitious men, the Government was changed, to the great disquiet of the Nation. Although the knowledge of the Truth did begin privately to creep into Scotland, and spread among the People more early, even in the Reign of K. James the Fifth, and made greater advances under his Daughter Queen Mary; yet the first publick step of the Reformation that is found in History, was in 1540. when, in a Parliament, the rigour of Acts against them who have English Bibles, was taken off, and liberty was granted to read the Bible in their Mother-Tongue; also to read other Treatises: this was 1543. After this, for divers Years, many of the Nobility, Gentry, and Commons, owned the true Religion, tho' the publick Profession was still Popish: Yea, by many of the Nobility and Gentry a Bond was solemnly entred into, for the defence of the Truth, and adherence to it, Anno 1557. In the same Year the Queen granted Liberty for Publick Administration of the Word and Sacraments, as was desired by a Petition of the Protestants. Anno 1559. the Protestant Ministers and People held a General Assembly at St. Johnstown, saith Knox, Hist. lib. 2. 137. at which I. Knox was present. All this while there was no Episcopal Authority owned or submitted to among the Protestants; however Bishops still retained their places in the Romish Church, and in the State. In the Year 1560. July 17. in a Parliament held at Edenburgh, the Confession of Faith, containing the Heads of the Protestant Religion, was by Law established; August 24. an Act past against saying of Mass. The same Year the Pope's Authority in Scotland was abolished by Act of Parliament. Anno 1561. the first Book of Discipline was presented to the Convention of Estates, but delayed and not approved nor condemned at that time; yet soon after it was approved by the Authority of the Council, and in it Presbyterian Government approved; for it owneth no fixed Officers in the Church, but Pastors, Teachers, Elders, and Deacons, (what is to be thought of the Superintendents therein mentioned, is after to be considered) this Discipline, and the Book containing it, was subscribed to in January 1561. (1560. stilo vetere) by a great part of the Nobility. December 1560. a General Assembly was held, where sat no Churchmen p. 7but Ministers. Another General Assembly was held Decemb. 25. 1562. where Bishops are so far from Church-Domination, that they and other Ministers, who had not entred by the Order in the Book of Discipline, are inhibited till further Tryal. 1563. A General Assembly at Perth about the end of June, gave the same Power, or Commission, for planting Kirks, suspending, depriving, transplanting Ministers, &c. to some Ministers, that had been given to Superintendents: And it is noticed by the Historian, that Presbyteries were not yet constituted because of the scarcity of Ministers. What is there in all this that looketh like Episcopal Government? Another General Assembly met June 1565. also Decemb. 25. of the same Year; where the Power of Superintendents was a little clipt; also about the end of June 1567. At a Parliament held at Edenburgh, Decemb. 15. 1567. several Acts were made about Church Affairs, where not only mention is made of Synods and General Assemblies, but Appeals allowed to the latter, and from it Appeals are forbidden; and a Commission appointed to enquire into what Points should belong to the Jurisdiction of the Church, and all Church-Jurisdiction forbidden but what is, or shall presently be established. Another General Assembly Decemb. 25. 1567. also July 1568. in both which Superintendents were censured; and a Bishop (to wit, who had been such) deposed from the Ministry. In the last Assembly it is appointed who shall Vote in Assemblies, and not one word of Bishops. Another Assembly July 1569. Another March 1st. 1570. where Order is set down about chusing the Moderator, there was no Prelate to pretend to that Priviledge. Another in the beginning of July 1570. Another in the beginning of March 1571. where again Superintendents are limited. In January 1572. a Convention of Church men met at Leith, who were too much influenced by the Court: The Council also with the Regent appointed Articles to be drawn for the Policy of the Kirk, and after approved them: By them was restored the Image of Prelacy, (yet the real Exercise of Presbytery, in all its Meetings, lesser and greater, continued and was allowed) for these called Tulchan Bishops were set up; who had the name of Bishops while Noblemen and others had the Revenue, and the Church had the Power. This cannot be pretended to be a restoring of Prelacy, more than of Popish Abbacies and Priories, which were then the same way brought in. This Constitution was never allowed by the General Assembly, and it lasted but three or four years, and as a Corruption was protested against by the General Assembly 6th. of August 1572. In an Assembly at Edenburgh March 6. 1573. David Ferguson was Moderator, tho' neither Bishop nor Superintendent. p. 8Another Assembly August 6. Mr. Alexander Arbuthnot, Principal of the old Colledge of Aberdeen, was Moderator. Assemb. 1574. concluded that the power of Bishops should be no more than that of Superintendents. In many of these Assemblies the Policy of the Church was revised and still carrying on toward perfection. After this, in other Assemblies pains was taken to perfect the Policy of the Church, which at last came forth in the Second Book of Policy, agreed on in the General Assembly Octob. 25. 1577. Also 1578. at several Assemblies Acts were made against Bishops, the revising of the Book of Policy was delayed in a Parliament at Sterling Castle 1578. called the Imprisoned Parliament. General Assembly July 13. at Dundie 1580. condemned the Office of Bishops as unlawful: Another at Edenburgh Octob. 20. appointed a platform to be drawn for Presbyteries. 1581. The second Confession of Faith was subscribed by the King and his Houshold: Where Episcopacy is condemned under the Name of the Hierarchy, it being declared that no other Church policy was to be allowed save that which then was used, which every one knoweth was Presbytery. The same Year the Assembly caused Registrate the Book of Policy among their Acts. In May 1584. some Acts of Parliament were made, derogating from the Liberties of the Church, but so little weight was laid on them, that by the King's Command some Ministers were appointed to make Animadversions on them, to which the King answered, explaining and smoothing most of these grievous Acts. In the Assembly 1586. Commissions for Visitations were taken from Bishops, Superintendents, and others, and the Church in several Meetings declared against Prelacy. Much Contention there was between the Church in her lesser and greater Assemblies, and a Court-Faction, about Prelacy, which yet was never re-established; but at last in the Parliament begun 29 of March 1592. it was utterly abolished, and Presbyterial Government fully settled; which Arch-Bishop Spotswood in his History, tho'he cannot deny, yet doth most disingenuously labour to obscure.

§. 9. Let us now consider what grounds the Pamphleter lays for his Conclusion, and what is the Conclusion he buildeth on them; the latter of these I first consider. In it I observe first, he is out in his Arithmetick; for between 1567 and 1592. are not 35 but 25 Years. Another thing to be observed is, that it can make nothing for his Design, that Presbyterian Government was not presently established by Law with the Protestant Religion, because then the Nation having so lately been wholly Popish, and but few of the Clergy, or other Learned Men, converted to the True Religion, there could not be a p. 9competent number of Ministers got, who were tolerably qualified, either to rule the Church or to administer other Ordinances: and the space of 25 years was not long for growing up of such an increase of useful Plants as might furnish Churches and constitute Presbyteries every where in the Nation; especially if we consider what opposition was made to this settlement by the Court and its dependents; and how some unfaithful preachers complied with the Court, in hope of preferment from the year 1584. it was rather to be wondered at, that this work was so speedily brought to such issue, and through such opposition. Let him make what advantage of his conclusion he can: it is evident from what hath been said, that Episcopacy never took place in the Protestant Church after the Reformation, till Presbytery was fully setled: also that the Inclinations of the protestant people of Scotland (to speak in the dialect of our time) were always for Presbytery, and strongly against Prelacy: and that whatever the State did to retard this work, the Authority of the Church was always on the side of Presbytery. It is also evident, that Episcopal Jurisdiction over the Protestants was condemned by Law in that same Parliament, 1567. wherein the Protestant Religion was established: for it is there statute and ordain'd, that no other Iurisdiction Ecclesiastical be acknowledged within this Realm than that which is, and shall be within this same Kirk established presently, or which floweth therefrom, concerning preaching the Word, correction of Manners, administration of Sacraments. Now I hope none will affirm, that prelatical Jurisdiction then was, or was soon after established in the protestant Church of Scotland.

§. 10. The Foundations on which he buildeth his Conclusion make as little against what we hold: he saith, the Constitution of Bishops, having then the Publick Authority, (the Popish Bishops sitting in this Parliament which setled the Reformation) must in the Construction of the Law be confest to remain firm from 1567, to 1592. Ans. It is not denied, that the Constitution of Bishops, in regard of their Temporalties, (such as sitting in Parliament, &c.) remained after 1567. yea, neither do we say that, that Law took from them the Authority they had over the Popish Church, (so far as then 'twas in being) for this Law did not pretend to unbishop them, or make them no Priests; nor did it touch their pretended Indelible Character. But it is manifest, that after this Law they had no legal Title to rule the Protestant Church: and that by this, nor any other Law, no other Bishops were put in their room for the ruling of the Church. To what he saith of the Popish Bishops sitting in a reforming Parliament, I oppose what Leslie, Bishop of Rosse a Papist, hath, De gest. Scotorum, lib. 10. pag. 536. that concilium p. 10à sectae nobilibus cum Regina habitum nullo ecclesiastico admisso, ubi sancitum, ne quis quod ad religionem attinet, quicquam novi, moliretur; ex hac lege (inquit) omne sive haereseos, sive inimicitiarum, sive seditionis malum tanquam ex fonte fluxit. Another thing he alledgeth (or rather insinuateth) viz. in the 1st Book of Policy, a Superintendency, (which is another Model of Episcopacy) was set up. Ans. It is true, the Protestant Church of Scotland in its infancy (it was neither by an Act of Parliament that it was brought in, nor that it was after cast out) did set up Superintendents, but this was truly (and was so declared to be) from the force of necessity, and designed only for that present exigency of the Church. Neither was it ever intended to be the lasting way of managing the Affairs of that Church. At that time it was hard, in a Province, to find two or three men qualified for any more work toward the edifying of the Church, than reading the Scripture to the people, and therefore they found it needful to appoint one qualified man in a Province, (and at first fewer, only five in all Scotland) who had Commission from the Church to go up and down and preach, to visit Churches, to plant and erect Churches: they acted only as Delegates from the Church, and were accountable to every General Assembly; where they were frequently censured: and ordinarily the first work in the Assemblies was to try their Administrations: as the number of Ministers grew, their power was lessened, and at last wholly taken away: their Commission was renewed often: other Commissioners also beside them were sometimes appointed with the same power. They were never designed to be instead of Bishops; for they did not keep to the old division of the popish Diocesses. They might not stay above 20 days, in one place, in their Visitations: they must preach thrice a Week at least. In their particular Charge they must not remain above three or four Months, but go abroad to Visitation again; they must be subject to the Censure of the Church, in her provincial and general Assemblies. All this considered, let any one judge with what candor our Author calleth a Superintendency, a New Model of Episcopacy. It is evident from our Church Histories, that the Protetestant Church of Scotland was so far from that sentiment, that they had a strict eye over Superintendents, lest their power should have degenerated into a lordly Prelacy: and that they laid aside the use of Commissions to Churchmen, and giving them such power, as soon as the Church could be provided with such number of Ministers as was needful.