A Vindication of the Church of Scotland 2, Question 7
QUEST. VII.
Whether the Episcopal Church of Scotland were compliers with the Designs for taking away the Penal Law against the Papists.
HE will here vindicate his own Church from this blame, and in the next Question, throw it on the Presbyterians; both of them with a like truth and candor. We are far from charging all the Episcopal Party in this matter, especially the Church diffusive, which he saith was represented in Parliament. We know these Patriots did worthily in opposing that ill and dangerous Design; but we will not own, that all that sat in that honourable Assembly were Episcopal; however, they went a further length in complying with it than some have freedom to do. Not a few of them, we hope, will now shew, and have shewed, that that way was not their choice: for the Bishops, he seemeth not to deny, that two of the fourteen were for it; and it is well known how far these two (and they were the two Heads, the Archbishops) appeared for it, both in Council, and Parliament: and that two were deprived, yea, and appeared against this design, we deny not: but can he say, that the rest appeared against it in Parliament, when they had the fairest opportunity, and were in a special manner called to it. For the inferior Clergy, he will have them all innocent in this matter, because they preached against the Doctrins of Popery; that they prayed for the Protestants in France: and other appearances they made against Popery. None of these things we deny; nor do we envy them their due praise on this account, yet two things are to be considered; one is, That it was but the practice of some. It is well known how many were sinfully and shamefully silent; and others, who were bold to speak, were checkt by their Bishops for it. The other is, That it is very consistent to be against the Doctrins of Popery, and yet to be for a Toleration to them, and against their being under the hazard of Penal Laws for their Religion: Whence I infer, That his Conclusion doth no way follow from his Premisses.
§ 2. The Zeal that some of the Prelatists shew'd for continuance of the Penal Laws, might be considered, either with respect to Papists, or to Protestant Dissenters, who might have ease by the removal of these Laws: the former part of their Zeal was laudable; not the latter: which of them did preponderate, we are left to guess: and may be helped in this guess, by a commune principle, that many of them (I say not all) have expressed; That they had far rather that Popery should prevail than Presbytery: and the actings of the chief men, and of the most part of them, do correspond with this principle at this day. What are the sentiments of the Prelatists in Scotland, about taking off the Penal Laws against Papists, may be manifestly gathered (unless we will abandon all argumentation and the rational inference of one thing from another) if we consider what our prelatical Parliaments have declared; what the Archbishops and Bishops in their Letter to K. James, Nov. 3. 1688. have with much flattery said; and what the University of St. Andrews, in their Address to that same King have published, partly of their adherence to him, while the subversion of our Laws and Religion was not secretly, but visibly carrying on; partly of that absolute, irresistable and despotick Power that they ascribe to him; for if he have such power to do what he will, and if he was for taking off the the force of these Laws, (as they cannot once question) how is it consistent with that unlimited obedience that they owe to such a Monarch, that they should not be also for removing them?