The Nullity of the Pretended Assembly at St Andrews and Dundee, Treatise 2 · Review 37
REVIEW.
I Do humbly conceive that the Author by diſtinguiſhing and differencing of exceptions made in the Presbytery, and exceptions made in the Gen. Aſſembly, and granting that the firſt doth exclude from ſitting in the Aſſembly, but not the laſt, except where the exceptions prima fronte, at leaſt are relevant in Law, and that for the matter of fact, theirs being a ſcandall of ſome preſumptions, doth but darken a clear buſineſſe, becauſe if we ſhall take the ſame exceptions, and in the ſame caſe they have alwayes ai…ke force to exclude perſons nominate to be Commiſſioners, whether they be firſt proponed in the Presbytery at the time of the election, and afterwards followed in the General Aſſembly, or not at all proponed till it come to the Aſſembly: All exceptions againſt Commiſſioners whether made in Presbyteries, or in the Aſſembly, may conveniently be reduced to that compaſſe, as to lye in ſomewhat that concerns the Commiſſion, as not being formall and regular, as the Author ſpeaks; for if we take a formall and regular Commiſſion in all the cauſes and requiſits of it, it doth comprehend all theſe things againſt which any exception doth ly; but for the better underſtanding of the buſineſſe, it is to be conſidered, That almoſt all exceptions againſt Commiſſioners ly in one of theſe, either becauſe they are Commiſſionated by theſe who have no power, or becauſe the elections was not free, or becauſe the Commiſſion doth not contain its due powers; or becauſe the perſons choſen are not capable to be Commiſsionated; now let us take exceptions of any of theſe kinds, or of any other kind that may be inſtanced beſides theſe: have they not the ſame weight, being proponed primo inſtanti, in the Aſſembly, as if they had been at firſt proponed in the Presbytery, and afterwards followed in the Aſſembly? Hath not every member of the Aſſembly liberty before the Conſtitution of the Aſſembly to propone exceptions of all or any of theſe kinds, as well as any perſon in the Presbytery, or comming from the Presbytery, and is not the Aſſembly without reference, or appeal, or diſſent, or Proteſtation made in the Presbytery primo inſtanti a judge competent to take in and judge theſe exceptions being proponed; The Author gives a difference, to wit, becauſe exceptions of the firſt kind being followed and preſented, put under queſtion whether they be elected and commiſsionated, which muſt be known before they fit as men cloathed with Authority; but to paſſe that, it ſeems to be inſinuate that the election cannot be queſtioned in the Aſſembly, if it hath not been que…tioned in the Presbytery, do not exceptions of the laſt kinde put in queſtion whether they be men capable of authority, and is it not as relevant to exclude a man from being a judge, that he is not capable to receive authority, as that no authority hath been given him: That he is not capable to be elected, as that he is not elected, that he is not rightly Commiſsionated, as that he is not Commiſsionated at all; notwithſtanding of this diſtinction made by the Author (which for my part I ſee little or no leſs of in this matter) yet he grants that exceptions, at leaſt prima fronte do appear to be relevant in Law, and concerning which there are ſcandalls of preſumption as to the matter of fact, are relevant to exclude perſons from ſitting in the Aſſembly, till they be firſt tryed and judged, and onelyonly denyes the third branch, to wit, That it is enough if there be ſome perſons offering to make out what is alleadged; in order to which, I would firſt ask, whether upon ſuppoſall that at the time of the election, ſome perſons of the Presbytery offered to inſtruct, and becauſe of their not being heard there, had afterwards come and offered it to the Aſſembly before their conſtitution, would it then be a relevant exception to exclude them from ſitting till it ſhould be firſt tryed and judged? If he ſay it would, then ſay I, it would alſo have been relevant, though it had not been proponed untill the Aſſembly, and if it be denyed? I would know the reaſon of the difference, if he ſay it would not have been relevant, then I deſire it to be conſidered, whether the offer of ſome perſons undertaking inſtantly to verifie what they do alleadge; be not of as great weight as ſome preſumptions of the fact, let be a ſcandall of ſome preſumptions of the fact, which is granted by the Author to be ſufficient, if the matter be relevant in Law: But granting this, he cannot ſee but ſtill the abuſed conſequence followes, to wit, the making a ready way for perverſe and bold perſons to diſappoint the Church of all Aſsemblies for ever. Upon ſuppoſall that there were ſome occaſion given hereby to fear ſuch a thing, yet if another as evill a conſequence do more probably follow upon denying this: That is remeadileſs corrupting of Aſſemblies in their conſtitution; what ſhall be done in that caſe? That this conſequence will follow, eſpecially where the exceptions do concern many, and leading menare, is of a more common and univerſall influence, appears, becauſe if theſe perſons be admitted to ſit as members after the proponing of theſe exceptions, before tryall of them, there can be no regreſs to the removing of them afterwards upon that ground, unleſs we ſay that the Aſsembly may afterwards undoe that which formerly they did approve, in for… contradictorio, and that thoſe that were once found members, notwithſtanding of theſe exceptions, yet afterwards by the ſame exceptions may be found no members; that the one conſequence doth more probably follow then the other, appears not onelyonly from this, that it is not ordinary for men of common ſenſe and reaſon, not almoſt for the moſt perverſe and irrationall men, to offer that to a Judicatory, againſt their conſtituent members, which they have no probable hope to verifie; but alſo from the doolfull experience of this Church. When did it ever fall out in the Church of Scotland, that a Generall Aſſembly was diſappointed by perverſe and bold men, offering to prove exceptions relevant in Law, but fals in fact againſt the conſtituent members thereof? who can give any inſtance thereof, unleſs men will bring the Aſsembly 51. (which is to bring the thing in queſtion) for an inſtance: But upon the other hand, the admitting of men to ſit againſt whom ſuch exceptions were, or might have been proponed, hath been one of the main cauſes of corruptions of Aſsemblies, and defection in this Church, as is known in the time of the Prelates, and it is the duty of wiſe men to provide moſt againſt that which ut plurimum is their danger: But as I do not ſee how the laſt conſequence by the Authors way, can be prevented, ſo I do not ſee how the firſt conſequence doth follow, becauſe theſe perverſe & bold perſons who propones the exceptions, & offers to verifie them inſtantly, doth not ſuppoſe that all the Meeting to whom they offer the exceptions are guilty; for if they did ſuppoſe that they could not propone any exceptions to be tryed by them, but behoved primo inſtanti to decline them all as judges, reſerving the verification of their alleadgances to a judge competent. Now if they do thus, the Aſsembly is not diſappointed by perverſe and bold perſons, offering to verifie exceptions, becauſe in this caſe they do not make any offer of verification of any exception, before that Meeting; upon the other hand, if they do acknowledge a part of them as perſons competent, and fitly qualified to try and diſcuſs theſe exceptions which they offer to verifie, then the perſons againſt whom they except being removed, and the exceptions taken in, and cognoſced upon, according to the verification offered, they are found either true or falſe; if they be found falſe, the Aſſembly is not diſappointed, but may proceed to its Conſtitution, having found their members blameleſſe, and having ſtopped theſe mens mouths. If the exceptions be found true of ſuch a number, without whom the reſt cannot make an Aſſembly, there is a great advantage in ſtead of a feared diſadvantage, that is the prevention of a corrupt Meeting, conſtituting themſelves in an Aſſembly; if but a fewer number, the corrupt are removed, and the blameleſſe are admitted, and the Aſſembly goes on: Beſides all this, it may by way of Commiſſion, without any diſadvantage to the Proteſters cauſe be yeelded to the Author; that it is to be looked to that the Perſons offering to verifie theſe exceptions be not perverſe perſons, but men of a good report, and ſuch as are known to walk honeſtly, and not to act upon a Principle of malice or il-will againſt the perſons whom the exceptions do concern, all which was true in the Proteſters caſ…, they being ſundry of them members of that Meeting, to whom it was incumbent ex officio to propone any exception conſiſting in their knowledge, and allowed to ſit as Members of the Aſſembly (a priviledge not belonging to pervers men) and all of them men of good report, & of a blameleſs converſation, and ſuch as are known to be ſo far from malinging the Commiſſioners, againſt whom they did except, that they then had and ſtil have them in eſtimation, and do love them as brethren. The Author yeelds that the Aſsembly being conſtitute, the exception and grounds thereof are to be tryed with all convenient diligence and expedition, and alleadges that this was offered to the Proteſters in the preſent caſe and debate. That ſuch an offer was made, I ſhall not contradict; I believe it was ſo, but to paſs by that, even this which he himſelf thinks reaſonable, though offered, yet was not well performed, becauſe moſt of the time that the Aſsembly ſate, was paſt before that exception and the grounds thereof were tryed, theſe men all the while, and for a good many dayes, ſitting and voycing in all things that paſt in the Aſsembly, even in theſe things that did concern the proponers of the exception: The Proteſters could not accept of this offer, not onelyonly becauſe it did ſuppoſe their ſitting in the Aſsembly as members before the trying of the exception, but alſo becauſe the exception was not an exception againſt one or ſome few particular perſons in the caſe of ſome particular or perſonal ſcandals, but an exception of common concernment to many in things relating to the diſcharge of their truſt in the Cauſe.
VINDICATION.
BƲt ſaith the writer in hand (both theſe were clear in the preſent caſe, to wit, the exception made againſt the late Commiſſioners, it was relevant in jure, if there be any relevancie why a man ſhould not ſit in the Generall Aſſembly, this certainly is one that he hath betrayed his former truſt, hath made defection from the Covenant and Cauſe, and being inſtrumentall to carry on a courſe of defection throughout the Kirk and Kingdom, and as to the truth of the fact, in reference againſt whom the exception was made, all theſe did concur a flagrant ſcandall, pregnant preſumptions and perſons in the Judicatory, offering to inſtruct and verifie what was alleadged) by this the Writer believes that he hath cleared as with a Sun beam, and gained his point, but we hope it ſhall be made to appear, that he hath left the matter yet in the miſt, and gained never a white. Its true indeed that for Commiſſioners to betray their truſt, to make defection from the Covenant and Cauſe, &c. is in jure a relevant cauſe to exclude any man from ſitting in the Generall Aſſembly as a member, and deſerves more (as I doubt not but the Writer, and ſome others intended the challenge of it againſt the Commiſſioners for more) but that the Commiſſioners for the matter of fact had betrayed their truſt, &c. There might have been and was indeed by ſome ſpread a flagrant ſcandall, but there was no flagrant ſcandall (theſe ſame who afterwards accuſed them in the Aſſembly) I mean preſumptions objective by any thing they did though there was preſumptions enough in ſome men againſt them, and as for ſome perſons offering to inſtruct it, that is to little purpoſe to argue them ſcandallous, but the great ſophiſm in this whole diſcourſe (whereinto I will not determine, whether out of inanimadvertency or willingly the Writer hath run) lyeth in this, that the main and principal queſtion de jure, which ſhould have been cleared to the effect that ſcandall might been juſtly charged upon the Commiſsioners, was not the Generall or theſis, whether betraying of truſt or making defection from the Covenant and Cauſe, if it be ſuch a fault as deſerveth excluſion from ſitting as a Member in a General Aſſembly, but this particular hypotheſis, whether the reſolving that all perſons in the land, excepting ſuch as are notoriouſly &c. maybe admitted to joyn in Arms for juſt & neceſſary defence of the Kingdom, when otherwayes there cannot be Forces had otherways in warrantable prudence for defence of it, item reſolving that the time of civill cenſures inflicted by the Parliament upon perſons acceſſory to former malignant courſes, as the ſinfull Engagement, might be diſpenſed with and taken off by the Parliament, with this proviſion, that none ſhould be admitted to places of power and truſt, but ſuch as are qualified poſitively according to the rules of the Word of God, in that caſe held in our Solemn Engagement, item ordaining Presbyteries to proceed with perſons formerly guilty of malignant courſes, for admiſſion of them unto publick repentance, in a way conform to the rules ſet down by the Generall Aſſembly, for admitting of ſuch upon teſtimonials from Presbyteries, bearing ſatisfaction given by them conform to theſe rules; whether theſe things (I ſay) contains defection from the Covenant & Cauſe, & conſequently doth import betraying of truſt in a Commiſſion intruſted with the care of preſerving the Covenant and Cauſe; this is a queſtion in jure, that the Writer ſhould have alleadged to have been clear, I mean in the affirmative of it, ere he alleadged that there was upon the late Commiſſioners, a ſcandall of ſome preſumptions, that they had betrayed their truſt, made defection from the Covenant and Cauſe; but the Writer paſſeth by this in ſilence. Now, though we might ſay, and are able in the Lords ſtrength to make it good, that theſe things contained not any defection from the Covenant and Cauſe, yet now we ſhall ſay but this, that this was not at the time of the Proteſtation clear to the Aſsembly, becauſe as yet there was not any particular determination thereanent in former Generall Aſsemblies, wherefore for further clearing of this matter that we are upon, the excluding the perſons choſen by their Presbyteries without contradiction, to be Commiſſioners from ſitting as Members in the Aſſembly upon alledgance of ſcandal againſt them, it ſhould be obſerved by all honeſt and ingenuous Readers, that when the imputation of ſcandal upon them depends upon a particular hypotheſis, which at leaſt is queſtionable, and the very point of controverſie betwixt them and their accuſers, is againſt all reaſon and equity that they ſhould be holden to be under a preſumption of ſcandall, untill that hypotheſis ſhould be diſcuſsed and cleared, and therefore untill that be done, the Adverſaries alleadgeance of ſcandall againſt them is to be held but a meer alleadgeance, which by the Writers own confeſſion is not a ſufficient ground whereupon to exclude perſons from being admitted to ſit as Members in a Generall Aſsembly, untill their cauſe be tryed and judged.