The Nullity of the Pretended Assembly at St Andrews and Dundee, Treatise 2 · Review 21
REVIEW.
ALbeit this Inſtance ſeem to the Author to be alleadged with ſome colour to evidence ſome influence of the Commiſsions Letter and Act; yet he thinks when it is diſcuſſed, there will be found litle to the purpoſe in it, and his reaſon is, becauſe it is known that the Presbytery at the ſecond Election ſtill did chooſe Brethren diſ-ſatisfied with the Reſolutions, and as he believes theſe ſame whom they had choſen before, &c. But notwithſtanding of all the Author ſays, there is very much to the purpoſe in it. Firſt, there is this in it to the purpoſe, that the judgments and voices of ſome of the Members of the Presbytery, viz. of theſe who did diſſent from the firſt election were pre-limited by the Letter and Act of the Commiſſion, they giving theſe onelyonly for the reaſon of their diſſent. Secondly, there is this in it to the purpoſe, that the judgment of the whole Synod, which doth include five Presbyteries (except a few who did diſſent from, and Proteſt againſt the Synod, ſuſtaining the diſſent of theſe in Dunkel from the Election upon that ground) was by the ſame Letter and Act pre-limited to the declaring of that Election void and null, meerly upon this reaſon, that they had proc…eded contrary to the Letter and Act of the Commiſſion. Thirdly, there is this to the purpoſe in it, that the whole Presbyterie was ſo pre-limited by an Act of the Synod, founded on the other Act and Letter, as to be neceſſitate to paſſe from the firſt Election which was lawfully made, and againſt which no exception was made, but the Letter and Act; and to make a new Election, that they did again chooſe perſons oppoſite to the Publick Reſolutions, was from the overbearing Conſcience of their duty. That they were admitted in the Aſſembly without any queſtion, is not true; their admittence was queſtioned by a Member of the Commiſſion, then a Member of the Aſſembly, a man zealous for the Publick Reſolutions; and the Moderator perceiving that others oppoſite to the Publick Reſolutions were like to take advantage by it, he did handſomely wave it. Now, theſe things being examined which the Author ſayeth to the firſt part of the Aſſumption, I leave it to be judged whether he had cauſe to ſay, that whatever pre-limitations were in the Commiſsions Act and Letter, yet the Elections were free, becauſe Presbyteries therein were not paſsively pre-limited but choſen freely according to their own minde; and whether he had cauſe to draw ſo ſtrong inſulting lines as he ſubjoyns thereto. If there be no more to ſay then he hath yet ſaid, I profeſſe ingenuouſly, I ſee no cauſe why the Proteſters ſhould bethink themſelves better in their ſecond thoughts of their adventuring on ſuch a high Act, as to proteſt againſt, and decline from that Meeting at St. Andrews, and Dundee as not being a lawfull free Generall Aſſembly, or why others ſhould have adviſed better, ere they had joyned themſelves to … by approbation; it ſeems a little beyond the bounds of modeſty for men to drive and vent ſuch concluſions upon their own reaſonings, though haply they might bear them; It being fit to leave theſe things to the judicious and unbyaſſed Readers, to give judgement as they find cauſe.
VINDICATION.
IT is true that for proof of the unlawfulneſs of theſe pretended Aſsemblies, condemned by the Aſsembly at Glaſgow 38. amongſt other reaſons the want of freedome in the matter of election of Commiſsioners is alleadged as a main and principal one, but there the matter was not meerly alledged, but clearly evidenced, that the Commiſsioners ſent to theſe Meetings were not indeed elected by Presbyteries, but nominated by the Kings Letters, See Seſsion 12. Reaſ. againſt the pretended Aſsembly, at Lithgow 1606. and at Glaſgow 1610.