A Vindication of the Church of Scotland 2, Question 2
QUESTION II.
HAving brought his first Question to so wise a conclusion, he advanceth to a second, which is,
Whither ever Presbytery was setled in the Church of Scotland, without constraint from tumultuous times?
What advantage to the Cause of Prelacy, or detriment to Presbytery is designed by this Question and the Answer of it, is not easie to divine. Is every thing bad that hath been done in tumultuous times? Doth not the Lord say Daniel 9. 25. That he will build his House in troublous times? Will this man therefore condemn the Reformation from Popery in Scotland for this, That it was setled against the will of the Queen, and the popish Grandees, and some pretended, but unfaithful, Protestants, in a very tumultuous time? It may be he will; and his Citation pag. 4. out of Basil. Dor. Lib. 2. seemeth to import no less: But if he thence conclude, That Popery is the Truth and Protestantism an Error, we shall then know where to find him: And if he do not, all that he here saith is extra oleas vagari. But it may be the strength of his ratiocination lieth in this, That Presbytery was setled by constraint; And these by whose authority it was done, were by the tumults of the people forced to it. Let us a little examine this. First, Is every thing bad that men are forced to? Ill men do few good things willingly, and of their own proper motion: By his way of reasoning, the will and inclination of great men must be the standard of good and evil. 2ly, Presbytery had a twofold Settlement in Scotland: One by Church-authority: After searching the Scripture, the General Assemblies of this Church did find Prelacy unwarranted there; And that it was contrary to that Form of Government that the Apostles setled in the hands of the ordinary Office bearers of the House of God: And this they declared authoritatively in the Name of Jesus Christ: I hope he will not say, that this was done by constraint. Another Settlement it had by the Authority of King and Parliament, giving their civil Sanction to it: Neither can he alledge, That the Parliament was any way constrained to this; Or that any force was put on them: Nothing appeareth but that the Parliament 1592. [which made this Settlement] was as free in the Election of its Members, in their Consultations and Votings, as any that have been since: And some will say, more-free than these Parliaments which since have undone what they did. It resteth then, That he must mean, That the King was some way violented in that he assented to this Act contrary to his own sentiments and inclinations. But this resteth to be proved: beside, that it is a greater reflection upon the Conscientiousness and Uprightness of that Great and Wise Prince, than is decent for a dutiful Subject to be guilty of.
§ 2. Let us now hear how he will prove, first, That King James, Anno 1592; Then, that King Charles, Anno 1639, Assented to Presbyterial Government unwillingly and by constraint. His proofs are, first, King James in Basil. Dor. L. 2. p. 28. speaketh with great bitterness against the Presbyterians, and their Way. Ans. This doth indeed prove, that he had changed his thoughts of that Way: Not that he was never of another mind. It were not hard to cite words of his, as much to the commendation of Presbytery, as these in Basil. Dor. are against it. But that Way, and its opposite, standeth or falleth, by the sentence of a higher Authority than that of men. 2ly, He thinketh it against Reason and Charity, to think, That this being his thought of Presbytery, he would settle it in the Church without some kind of compulsion. Ans. It is little more charity to think, That a man of any degree of Conscience or Religion, would have so eminent a hand in plaguing the Church with that which he looked on as so pernicious, as the words cited by our Author do express: Yea, the fear of God would restain one from such an act, even under the highest kind of compulsion. 3ly, He next objecteth the Preamble to the Act for Restoring of Episcopacy, Anno 1606. Ans. Who can doubt, that when men had a mind to set up that Government, they would say all the good of it that they could devise, and speak to the disadvantage of the contrary what could be thought upon; but this signifieth no more, than that they were changed from what once they were; and they who do so say and unsay, are unfit to give decisive Testimony about any point of Truth. 4ly, He ascribeth K. James's assent to Presbytery to his Youth. Ans. He was no Child in 1592, having been married to Queen Ann three years before, viz. in 1589. He was at least 30 years of age. 5ly, He pleadeth from the unsetled condition of his Affairs: but doth not shew wherein they were unsetled. It's true, the King then had some trouble with the Earl of Bothwell, but it is well known that Bothwell was no Presbyterian; and setling of Presbytery could not tend to quiet him: But I am weary of such silly Arguments which deserve no answer. What he maketh the King alledge, That the Presbyterians were always ready to joyn with any Faction in the State: is as groundless as any thing can be spoken: They never owned any but such as owned the interest of Christ, and his Truth. Their appearing against his Grand mother and Mother, was only in defence of Christ's Truth, which these two Queens did labour to extirpate. And what is said of inordinate and popular Tumults, reflecteth upon Procestantism, rather than on Presbytery. It's a strange Insinuation that he hath in the end of the paragraph, pag. 4. That that young King was forced to settle Presbytery in the Church, that thereby he might bring off Presbyterians from joyning with the Acts of their Kirk to unsettle his Throne. Here is Malice twisted with incoherent Imaginations: For nothing but Malice can make any think that Presbytery is an Enemy to Monarchy: but what dirt he casteth on us, of this kind, afterward shall, in its place, be wiped off. It's also a strange fancy, that if K. James lookt on Presbytery as capable by the Acts of their Kirk to unsettle his Throne, that he should put it in that capacity, by setling it by Law, with a design to secure the Throne: It is as if a man should let in the Thief at the door, that he might sleep the more securely in his house.
§ 3. What King Charles says for Prelacy [to which all know that he ever was a constant friend] is much more modest than what we heard before: And we deny not, but what countenance he gave to Presbytery, was in condescendency to his People: Yet from the transactions of these times, we may confidently infer, That the Nation, both in its diffusive and its representative Body, the Parliament, was for Presbytery: And what our Author says of the Tumults of these times, [which were sad, and lamented by all good men] layeth more load on Prelacy: The Tyranny and Innovations of the Church-Rulers of which way did force the people either to see first the purity of Gospel Ordinances taken from them, and then their Religion destroyed by a popish Faction [as of later years appeared more convincingly, when the designs of these men were more ripened] or stand in their own defence. So that what our Author gaineth by this passage is, that Episcopacy raised a Tumult, which ended in its own ruine.