The Nullity of the Pretended Assembly at St Andrews and Dundee, Treatise 2 · Review 31
REVIEW.
BEfore the Author come directly to ſpeak to what is alleadged by the Writer, he ſeems firſt to anſwer by denying that there was any pre-limitation of the Aſſembly, even upon ſuppoſall that theſe men were by that Citation excluded from ſitting Members thereof; But let us conſider the Reaſons of his denyall. The firſt is, that there were but ſome few perſons oppoſing themſelves to a courſe taken by a Judicatory intruſted with the Publick Affairs of the Church, conſiſting of men (till that time) judged faithfull, and ſtill profeſsing faithfulneſſe therein, as in the ſight of God, and accuſing that Judicatory for that courſe they had taken, as guilty of defection, &c. although they had been but few, yet their Teſtimony againſt the proceedings of that Judicatory, as againſt the courſe of defection, notwithſtanding of any thing that that Judicatory had formerly been, and was then profeſsing, being true and clearly conſonant to the doctrine and determinations of this Church, it was a pre-limitation of the Aſſembly, becauſe of that Teſtimony to exclude them: But I have often told him, and made it to appear, that they were not few, but many. It is true, that the Commiſsion till that time had been judged faithfull; but it is alſo true, that a great part of theſe to whom that Teſtimony was due, did with-draw from the Commiſsion upon occaſion of that defection, and gave open teſtimony againſt the ſame. And though ſome eminent men did abide with them, yet the plurality were ſuch who had not been much converſant in, nor well acquainted with the Publick Affairs of the Church. The other part of his Anſwer is, that there were beſides theſe excluded, a competent number of Members lawfully authorized (for ſuch as he ſuppoſeth the reſt to be for any thing that is ſaid in this particular, that he is now upon the anſwer of) to make up a competent Judicatory, to cognoſce and judge upon that matter and controverſie, according to the rule of Gods Word, and the Conſtitution of the Kirk, which they are bound by their Commiſsions and oath to judge by. Yeelding all this, yet may there ſtill be a pre-limitation, incaſe others no leſſe in capacity to be choſen to ſit as Judges, be excluded. If the Presbyteries by order of the Commiſsion, ſhall exclude a great many of their Members in a capacity to be choſen from being Commiſsioners, though they ſend a competent number of others, is not the Aſſembly pre-limited in the election of its conſtituent Members, even as if the Barrons and Burghs ſhould exclude from their Elections many of their number, in a capacity of being choſen Commiſsioners to the Parliament, and yet ſend the ordinary number of Commiſsioners, would not the Parliament becauſe of this thing be pre-limited in the election of its conſtituent Members? But in order to that which he ſaith of a competent Judicatory to cognoſce and judge upon the matter, according to the rules of Gods Word and Conſtitutions of the Kirk, and of the exceptions of the Remonſtrants made againſt the Synod of Dort: I deſire him to conſider firſt, of that which is ſaid of Mr. David Catherwood, a witneſs that deſerved well of the Kirk of Scotland, and whom (I believe) he will not except in this matter on his nullities againſt Pearth Aſſembly, and in his Tractate againſt confuſed Communions, concerning competent Judges in a time of defection, and of what is ſaid of the ſame purpoſe, by the reforming Party in their Publick Papers in the year 1637. & 1638. to whoſe judgments, I believe, the Proteſters will ſubmit in the matter of a competent Judge. Secondly, that if the exception of the Remonſtrants of the Synod of Dort had been this, that the Members conſtituent of that Synod had declared their judgments not onelyonly contrary to the doctrine of the Remonſtrants, but contrary to the Word of God, and to the clear doctrine and conſtitution of the Belgick Churches, it would in jure have been a relevant exception, and being true in facto, had ſuſtained as well againſt that Synod, as the like exception againſt the Councell of Trent, which is to this day counted valid by all the Proteſtant Divines. Thirdly, let us ſuppoſe hâc eadem viâ, ac modo & methodo, that the Commiſsion had brought in the Prelaticall or Popiſh Party, as they did the Malignant Party, and had by-Presbyteries obeying their order there anent, excluded all ſuch from being Members of the Aſſembly as did bear teſtimony againſt them, whoſe number we ſhall alſo ſuppoſe to be as few as the oppoſers of Publick Reſolutions, and the number of the other as many as theſe who are for them; whether would this have been a pre-limited Aſſembly, yea or not, and a Competent Judicatory to judge that matter according to the Word of God and Conſtitutions of the Church? All theſe things being put together, make it to appear that the Writer hath brought in no ſuch ſtraits in the buſines, as the Author ſuppoſeth.
VINDICATION.
SEcondly, To the former part of the Reply, I confeſſe that it is probable, that a man being cited to the Generall Aſſembly upon a ſcandall in doctrine and manners where the ſcandall is uncontroverted, and already particularly determined quoad jus, or in point of Law, and the queſtion is only about the fact, ought not to be choſen Commiſſioner to the Aſſembly, at leaſt not to ſit and vote untill he be tryed and judged; for I doubt, if he may not be choſen Commiſſioner, if there be not ſome probable preſumptions of the fact. But if the ſcandal be yet controverſi & indeterminati juris, controverted, and as yet not a determined caſe in point of Law by the doctrine of the Kirk, I ſee not but a man cited upon ſuch a ground, may be choſen a Commiſſioner to the Aſſembly, and ſit and vote as a Member in other matters, except that thereupon he was cited; and do remember well, that upon this very ground anno 48, upon the putting off of ſome from the Liſt to be Commiſſioners to the Aſsembly, who had been referred and cited to the Aſsembly for ſilence at that time, according to the direction of the then Commiſſion, exception was made by ſome, that ſuch perſons could not be choſen Commiſſioners, and conſequently could not be upon a Liſt. This motion was rejected by ſome judicious and pious, affirming indeed, that ſuch perſons could not well vote in the Aſsembly, until their matter was tryed, but that that reference could not hinder them to be upon a Liſt for elections, and conſequently not from being elected to be Commiſsioners. Now, ſuch was the caſe of the Citation in hand, it was upon alleadgeance of ſcandall, as yet controverſi juris, as to any particular determination thereanent by the publick judgment of the Kirk, and therefore both the perſons cited, and theſe that ordained them to be cited, were to be tryed and judged by the Aſſembly, and for that removed in that particular, not only about the fact, but alſo about the matter Juris of Law. However if this pleaſe not the Writer, let him anſwer what he will for clearing the order of the Commiſſion 48, and it will ſerve as well the order of the Commiſsion 51. As to any illegality relating to the Conſtitution of the Aſſembly; for upon the form clearly both were alike, except in what wil make for the advantage of the later, and as for the matter in both it was alike, as to the Generall Aſſemblies judgment at the time of the Protestation, and alſo in reipſâ, which we take upon us to make good.