The Nullity of the Pretended Assembly at St Andrews and Dundee, Treatise 2 · Review 33
REVIEW.
THe Author here pasſing by a great and material part of the Writers Anſwer, to wit, That albeit all that were true, yet it doth not make void what is ſaid for prelimiting the Elections by the Letter and Act of the Commisſion, becauſe theſe were prelimited in Presbyteries, by barring ſundry from being choſen, who otherwiſe were in a capacity to be choſen, falleth upon ſharp cenſuring of him, for ſaying, That Policy taught the Aſſembly ſo to do. But I conceive that though the writer did not ſee into the hearts of men in the Aſſembly, yet he had reaſon thus to ſpeak, becauſe their admitting ſome of them to ſit, was not conſonant nor homogenious neither to the Letter and Act for citing of them, which by the Authors own grant did infer the barring of them from ſitting til their matters ſhould be tryed; nor yet to the Aſſemblies aproving of the Letter and Act which did exclude them, which the Author alſo confeſſes; it was either great policy, or great ſimplicity that did lead them in ſo contrary and diſcordant parts; But as the Author elſ-where ſpeaks, they were no children; neither was it ſo really that none were rejected or refuſed to have vote upon the accompt of diſ-ſatisfaction, becauſe as ſome of them were rejected de facto, to wit, the Commisſioners of the firſt Election in Glaſgow; ſo all of them were rejected de jure as we ſhall hear anone. It could not but flow from ſome ſtrange principle, and be matter of wonder to the beholders, That at the ſame time, in the ſame Judicatory, ſome ſhould be ſtanding at the Bar, as rei, and cited to be tryed and judged, and others no leſs guilty of the ſame Crime ſhould be admitted to ſit upon the Bench as Judges of that very particular. I beleeve the Author ſhal not find many preſidents nor paralels of ſuch a practice as this in any well conſtitute and rightly proceeding Judicatory Civil or Eccleſiaſtick; ſo that meaſuring the freedom of the Aſſembly by the Acts done about the conſtitution and managing of it according to the matter of it, and not according to the intentions or moral motives upon which men did them: There is ſtill reaſon to ſay, that it was not free, notwithſtanding that ſome were admitted to ſit and vote, who were unſatisfied with, and oppoſit to the publick reſolutions. As to that which he ſayeth in Anſwer to the other two particulars: To the firſt of them I deſire it to be conſidered. 1. That the impertinency is on his own ſide, when he ſaith, that Mr. Rob. Ramſay his Proteſtation was not againſt theſe of Sterling at all▪ becauſe the Writer did not at all ſay in writ that it was ſo, or that the Commiſſion of Sterling was laid aſide, becauſe of that Proteſtation; if he found it ſo written in any Copy, it had ſavoured a little more of cha…iry to impute to the inadvertence of the Tranſcriber, ſeeing no man belike of common ſenſe would bring in Mr. Rob. Ramſay a Member of another Presbytery, and in another Province, proteſting againſt the Election of Sterling. 2. Not to fall on the debate of the laying of the other Commiſſions aſide, which were controverted with them, not upon the probableneſs, nor improbableneſs of the reaſons they pretended, as not belonging much to the buſines which we are now upon. The Author doth yeeld much of the cauſe when he ſaith, It followes not hence that they were ſimply excluded from voting, but ſuſpended from voting for a time, and had not vote in that particular; becauſe he yeelds theſe two things: 1. That they had not, nor were not to have (de jure) any vote at all in the particular of the Publick Reſolutions. 2. That (de facto) they had not, nor were not to have a vote in any particular till that exception ſhould be diſcuſſed, and ſo are they excluded for a long time, and from many particulars. But when the exception is diſcuſſed and ſuſtained, are they not wholly excluded, both de jure, and de facto, and cannot at all be admitted, unleſs we will bring in the Aſſembly going over the belly of what ſhe hath preſently found juſt and reaſonable; neither is it ſo inconſiderable as the Author would make it, which is added by the Writer for Confirmation, but is very conſiderable to evince the pre-limiting of the Aſſembly. That which was added is this, and this is ſo much the ſtronger, if we ſhall conſider that it was refuſed to lay aſide the Commiſſions of theſe who had carried on theſe Reſolutions in the Commiſſion of the Aſſembly, until their proceedings ſhould be tryed and approven. To which the Authors Anſwer is, That it is not conſiderable, becauſe the Commiſſion of the one was controverted in the Election, but ſo was not the other; and becauſe they were not to have vote in the matter of the Reſolutions; but this doth not at all looſe the difficulty. One of the grounds upon which the Commiſſion of the one was controverted in the Elections, was, becauſe the perſons elected were oppoſers of the Publick Reſolutions, and that ground aſwel as others, did to themwards ſuſtain as a relevant exception in jure to keep them from ſitting and voting in the Aſſembly, not only in that, but alſo in any particular elſe, until it ſhould be diſcuſſed; yea, ſome of the Commiſſioners were ſuſpended from having a vote in any thing till that ſhould be diſcuſſed, meerly and allenerly upon that ground, to wit, That Brother who was nominated in both the Elections; Now was not to be the Author or Abetter of the Publick Reſolutions, involving a courſe of defection, being objected at the down-ſitting of the Aſſembly, an exception as relevant in jure to bar thoſe who were choſen by their Presbytery, without any controverſie in the Presbytery it ſelf, from ſitting and voting in the Aſſembly in any particular until that Exception ſhould be tryed as the other was, though objected in the Presbytery at the time of the Election. Let us take the Authors ground (to wit) That the matter was controverſi, and not determinati juris, and let him or any man elſe vindicate it from partiality and pre-limitation, that exceptions being propounded hinc inde, he who carries on Publick Reſolutions ſhall be admitted to ſit in all other particulars, except in the trying and judging of theſe, and he who oppoſes them ſhall be ſuſpended from ſitting in any particular til theſe be tryed and Judged. On what he ſaith to the ſecond particular I offer, …. That the Writer doth not all along this Paper bear his Reader in hand (as the Author alleadges) that the Commiſſion had given order for citing ſuch as were unſatisfied indefinitly, becauſe the very firſt time that he mentions the Letter and Act of the Commiſſion he ſaith, That it was a Letter and Act appointing, That ſuch as after conference ſhould remain unſatisfied with, and continue to oppoſe the Publick Reſolutions, ſhould be cited; and having thus once ſet down the true nature and extent of it, it was needleſs as often as he ſpake of it to repeat the ſame words, and was enough qualicun que modo to circumſcribe it; therefore the Author doth more harm to himſelf then the Writer, when he taxeth him as ſpeaking contrary to the truth in this. 2. That it helps him not to ſay, That as the Aſſembly 51. did ratify the Letter and Act of the Commiſſion, ſo alſo did the Aſſembly 48. becauſe of the many differences already eſtabliſhed betwixt the one and the other. To which I ſhall now add this as to the point of Ratification, That the Act and Letter 48. was not controverted by any, nor any Elections becauſe of it, nor any Exception proponed thereupon againſt the freedom of the Aſſembly; nor indeed well could be, it being clothed with ſuch circumſtances as we have formerly ſpoken of which needs not now to be repeated; but in 51. it was controverted, and Elections therupon were queſtioned, and Exceptions thereupon proponed againſt the freedom of the General Aſſembly, which were rejected, notwithſtanding of contrary circumſtances wherewith the Letter and Act were clothed. 3. That the Author by yeelding, that the Aſſemblies approving of the Letter and Act of the Commiſſion (which he is neceſſitate to yeeld becauſe it was ſo) doth import, that notwithſtanding Oppoſers did ſit… yet they ought in the Judgment of the Aſſembly to have been excluded; puts himſelf to the diſadvantage many waies. 1. Becauſe the Aſſemblies approving ſimul & ſemel all the Acts, Warnings, Declarations and Remonſtrances of the Commiſſion againſt Oppoſers of the Publick Reſolutions, did not only judge, that ſuch by that Letter and Act ought ab initio to have been debarred from ſitt…ng in the Aſſembly in that particular, but alſo in all other particulars, yea not at all to have been choſen. 2. This goes far to nullify the Aſſembly another way, becauſe it acknowledges that de facto they allowed many ſcandalous men to ſit as Members therof, who de Jure and by a Law approven of themſelves, ought to have been removed. 3. It holds forth a groſſe contradiction betwixt the Aſſemblies Principle and their Practice, and ſo makes more then probable what the Writer ſaid for admitting ſome to ſit upon Policy and deſigns. 4. It holds forth a great ſoliciſm in the matter of Juſtice; that is; Socij criminis, to ſit as Judges to give ſentence on their complices, to wit, other oppoſers of the Publick Reſolutions, who were cited, and now ſtanding as rei before the General Aſſembly. All theſe things which the Author hath brought in Anſwer to the firſt Reaſon againſt the late Aſſembly, and what is ſet down for confirming and upholding of it in the other Paper, being now fully diſcuſſed, I leave it to the Reader to judge, whether that Reaſon of the Proteſtation doth not ſtill ſtand ſtrong againſt the freedom and lawfulneſs of that Aſſembly, and how little cauſe he hath to ſay, That if it have any force, Malignants may think themſelves obliged to the Proteſters for teaching them, if ever they ſhall have power again, how to call in queſtion and condemn the Aſſembly 1648. yea, and if they find it move for their purpoſe, even other Aſſembles too, even that ſolemn Aſſembly 1638. as unfree and unlawful, becauſe of the pre-limitation of Election of Commiſſioners thereto. The Malignants are in themſelves prone enough to evil inventions though they be not taught them by others, but I beleeve (themſelves being Judges) they had rather, as to the matter of conſtitution of Aſſemblies, and the interpretation of their Acts, be Diſciples to the Authors and Abetters of the Publick Reſolutions then to the Proteſters; for they have there in a little time learned the way how (notwithſtanding of all former Acts excluding them) to be admitted to all the priviledges of the Church, and to be imployed both in the Army and Judicatories, and by complying with the Commiſſion to get an Aſſembly after their own mind for ratifying and approving all theſe things which would never have been taught unto them by the Proteſters, who ſtudies to hold faſt the Acts of Aſſemblies in reference to Malignants in the genuine and litteral ſenſe and meaning thereof, and to prevent and oppoſe all corrupt conſtitutions of Aſſemblies, and that they may be compoſed of ſuch as do adhere to former Principles, which being attained, there is no cauſe to fear that Malignants ſhall eaſily ranverſe either the Aſſembly 48. or the Aſſembly 38. or any other lawful free General Aſsembly of this Church. I ſhal cloſe this whol buſines annent the pre limiting of the Elections, and the excluding of thoſe who oppoſed the Publick Reſolutions, with one ſentence of the Britane Divines in the Synod of Dort, who in anſwer to the Proteſtation of the Remonſtrants ſpeak thus, Quae ratio reddi poteſt cur ſuffragiorum Jure priventur omnes illi Paſtores, qui ex officio receptam Eccleſiae Doctrinam propugnantes, ſecus docentibus adverſati ſunt, ſi hoc obtinere nova dogmata ſpargentibus nemo obſiſteret ne ipſo facto jus omne poſt modum de illis controverſiis judicandi amitteret.
VINDICATION.
WE go on now to the ſecond in order of the Proteſtation, which is this; Becauſe of the abſence of Commiſsioners of many Burghs, as wanting free acceſſe becauſe of the motions of the Enemy, in the order of the late Paper, wherein other reaſons are added to theſe in the Proteſtation, this is ſet down in the 5. place and is caſt in … with ſome addition to the matter, becauſe as firſt proponed it hath not ſeemed faſt enough thus: That cannot be a free Aſſembly, to which there is no free acceſs and receſs, but there was no free acceſſe to the Aſsembly by reaſon of two Armies interjacent between the place of the meeting and the dwelling of many of the Commiſsioners, and being purſuing one another very hotely, having their parties comming abroad every where at the time they ſhould had come to the Aſsembly, and therefore many were abſent about the one halfe of the Burghs, many Presbyteries to the number of 9. or 10. neither was there free receſs from it, not onelyonly becauſe of the former reaſon, but becauſe the King and Committee of Eſtates did detain and keep under a kind of confinement, ſeverall numbers thereof, at their returning to their own homes, having nothing, nor alleadging any thing to challenge them for, but their carriage at the Aſsembly. Anſwer, I muſt profeſs ingenuouſly, when at firſt I did read the Proteſtation, I wondred much how men, eſpecially Miniſters of the Goſpell, making ſo ſolemn and high profeſsion and atteſtation as they do in this Proteſtation, viz. That they made one of the grounds contained therein, as being deſirous to be faithful in the day of tentation, and to exoner their conſciences as in the ſight of the LORD, could alleadg this as ground to diſclaim the late Aſſembly, as not a free and lawful Aſſembly of this Kirk. I confeſs my wondring is not a whit abated, but increaſed by this ſecond propounding Argumentation of it. For firſt, As to the propoſal of it in the Proteſtation, ſuppoſe that a good many Commiſsioners of Broughs and Presbyteries had been abſent then: this might have been alleadged with ſome appearance of reaſon to ſhow that the Aſſembly was not ſo ful in partibus integralibus, ſo numerous as could have been wiſhed, yet with no colour could it be alleadged, that it was not free, legal … eſsential requiſit for the conſtitution therof, unles it could be demonſtrat either that their abſence was for want of timous advertiſment concerning the time and place of it, which cannot be alleadged (the time being known by the preceding Aſsembly, and advertiſment concerning the place having been given timouſly by the Commiſsion) or that there was ſome appearance that ſome in the Aſſembly might have been inclined to act favourably for the enemy, or that the enemy might have ſome influence on the Aſsembly to corrupt or pervert it, which I conceive the Proteſtors wil not ſay. I know that the abſence of many Commiſſioners is alleadged as one ground anulling this pretended Aſsembly condemned at Glaſgow 38. but it is as wel known that the abſence of Commiſſioners was cauſed by untimous indiction and advertiſment or ſome other internal cauſe, having influence upon the corruption of this Aſsembly. 2. It had been requiſit the Writer of the laſt Paper had condeſcended namely upon theſe 9. or 10. Presbyteries abſent; which had he done, I doubt but it would have been found that ſome of them were abſent, becauſe they had none to ſend, or were not Presbyteries exiſting at all at that time, as Orknay and Caithneſs. 2. It ſhould be found that ſome of theſe Commisſioners of Presbyteries came within ſhort ſpace to the place where the Aſsembly was ſitting, and would not come forward to it, as for inſtance theſe of Hambleton. 3. Commisſioners came to the Aſsembly, between whom and the place of the Aſſembly the Armies were as interjacent, as to thoſe that came not; for did not Commisſioners from Presbyteries of Mer…e and Tevidale, Galloway, Glaſgow, Weſt Country; yea, the Commiſſioners of the Presbyteries of fartheſt parts off lying that way were preſent, and that others came not it may ſeem to have proceeded out of negligence, rather then from a neceſſity: Why then ſhould the Aſsembly be counted null, for the abſence of ſuch; it is known that Commiſſioners came not from Burghs, and yet Miniſters came out of theſe ſame Burghs. So, if becauſe of the abſence of ſome Commiſsioners, for fear of the motions of the Enemy, or becauſe of lying of Armies through the Countrey, the late Aſſembly be judged unfree and unlawfull; Then, by as good reaſon muſt the Aſsembly in the time of James Graham his reigning and raging through the Countrey, be holden unfree; for as many, if not m…e Commiſsioners were upon that occaſion abſent from the ſame Aſsembly; then ſee here again how good friends our Brethren proves to the former Aſsembly, by deviſing arguments againſt the late Aſsembly, wherby they plainly teach Malignants who were cenſured by this Aſſembly, how to caſt them as nul upon grounds of conſcience. Sixthly, let the Rols of this Aſsembly, be compared with the Rolls of former unqueſtioned Aſsemblies, and it ſhall be found to have been more numerous and full, then ſundries of them; yea, we know, that at the Aſsembly of Aberdeen 1650. there were but about twenty perſons preſent, which notwithſtanding is owned by the Kirk of Scotland as a free and lawfull Generall Aſsembly, and it cannot be ſaid, that any ſuch excuſe as this was made in that Aſsembly for the abſence of any, and granting that the motions of the Enemy had hindered ſome, yet here being ſo inconſiderable a number in compariſon of this Aſsembly, theſe who were conveened, ſhould not, nor could not lawfully be holden an Aſsembly, and gone about their duties. Seventhly, as for what was ſaid about the want of freedom of receſs, the firſt part is certain and clear in common ſenſe, that if any Aſsembly may ſit, or do ſit out its time, and conclude freely, though there be danger to the Members in their receſs, this cannot in any way reflect upon the conſtitution of the Aſsembly, how many Members of the Aſsembly in James Grahames time were there that had not ſafe receſs to their own homes. For the other part of theſe Members ſpoken of here, had proteſted againſt, and declined the Aſsembly, and deſerted (which the Writer wiſely paſſes in ſilence, and ſaies only they were returning to their own homes: as if for ſooth the Aſsembly had been cloſed, or that they had taken fair leave before the cloſe) And might not the King and the Committee do all this? They ſay unto them, until they had been informed upon what ground they had come away ſo untimouſly without any imputation to the freedom and lawfulneſs of the Aſſembly: Did not the Commiſſioners of the States at the Aſſembly of Dort when the Remonſtrants proceeded againſt, and declined that Synod, preſently confined and charged them to bide within that City until they ſhould anſwer unto the Aſſembly, without any imputation to the freedom of that Aſſembly. But again, the truth is this, upon the Proteſters deſerting of the Aſsembly, and going through the Army towards the Weſt, the report was, That they had made a broil in the Aſsembly, and were come to trouble the Army, and hinder the Levies appointed in the ſaid places, whither they were going: hereupon the King and the Committee required ſome to keep their Chambers til their carriage in the Aſsembly might be known. But ſo ſoon as the Aſsembly heard of this, they diſpatched unto the King, who preſently ſent them all to their own homes, excepting that they did require ſuch of them as were cited to the Aſſembly to return to it, and anſwer for themſelvs (which yet I cannot ſay, was certainly done) without one croſs word given to them. Theſe things being conſidered, impartial judicial Readers will acknowledge that there hath not bin much ingenuity or conſcience either in alleadging this reaſon for annulling the late Aſſembly, and cannot but think the alleadgers themſelves wil bluſh that here have propounded it for juſtifying their own proteſting, and hold it forth to others to induce them to joyn with them as a ground of conſcience whereof they could not but exoner their conſcience.