The Nullity of the Pretended Assembly at St Andrews and Dundee, Treatise 2 · Review 39
REVIEW.
THis Inſtance which the Author gives of the Belgick Remonſtrance in their Proteſtation againſt the Synod of Dort, is quite differing from our caſe in ſeverall reſpects; Firſt, The hypotheſis that was in queſtion betwixt the Remonſtrants and the Anti-Remonſtrants, whom they deſired to be removed out of the Synod, as they were determined in the Confeſſions and Catechiſmes of the Belgick and other Reformed Churches; So did the Anti-Remonſtrants which were Members of that Synod, adhere to theſe determinations, and were willing that their Doctrine ſhould be judged thereby; whereas the Remonſtrances did decline the Doctrine of the Belgick and Reformed Churches in their Catechiſmes and Confeſſions, and do require it as one of the Conditions of the Synod, that every man ſhould give his oath, that he ſhould have no regard in this buſineſſe to Confeſſion or Catechiſme, but onelyonly to the Word of God, as appears from their own words, which be theſe; Ideo que quiſ que ſub fide juramenti coram Deo ſanctè praeſtandi promittat ſe non reſpecturum in hoc negotio ad Confeſſionem Catechiſmum aut ullum aliud humanae authoritis ſcriptum ſcriptoremque, ſed ad ſolam Scripturam quae pro ſolâ fidei norma haebetur. But the Commiſſioners of the Generall Aſſembly, as they do deny their reſolutions to have been formerly determined by this Church, and ſo upon the matter do handſomely decline to be judged in theſe things by the Acts thereof, as not being quadrant to their caſe: So do they cry out upon the oppoſers of Publick Reſolutions, for citing theſe Acts ſo often againſt them, and for inſiſting ſo little upon the Word of God, which they call for as the onelyonly rule whereby they will be judged in theſe things, to be determined by former Aſſemblies, ſo were they moſt willing and deſirous, that they and the Commiſſioners in their judgments and actings upon theſe things, ſhould be judged thereby. Secondly, The Remonſtrants did accuſe the Anti-Remonſtrants of Schiſme, and as Schiſmaticks moſt unjuſtly, of which we ſhall give the reaſon in the words of the Brittain Divines then in the Synod; Quia ipſi remonſtrantes recedendo à doctrinā cemmuniter recepta, initium & cauſatio hujus ſeparationis extiterum, nam veritas habetur, quod â primordio in Eccleſiâ aliquâ traditum & receptum fuerit, erpor reputatur quod poſtea inducitur, donec habito legitimo examine & Judicio contrarium concludatur, quo etiam accedit quod illi dici non poſſunt a doctrinâ Remonſtrantium receſſiſſe (quod in ſchiſmate praeſupponendum est) qui illam nunquam receperint ſed ab initio ſibi propoſitam rejecerint & condemnârint, (words worthy of obſervation in order to the whole debate upon the Publick Reſolutions) but theſe who did except againſt the ſitting of the Commiſſioners in the Generall Aſſembly, upon their making defection from the Cauſe and Covenant, did it juſtly, becauſe of their departing from the received Doctrine of this Church, and the bringing in of new and ſtrange Doctrine in that point which the other offered to verifie. Thirdly, The thing which the Remonſtrants did deſire, was, That the Anti-Remonſtrants ſhould be removed wholly out of the Synod, and be ſet to the Bar to anſwer as guilty of Schiſme, and as Parties againſt the Remonſtrants in this buſineſs; and hence are theſe ſentencet of the Britain and of the other Divines which are cited by the Author, But the thing deſired by theſe who excepted againſt the Commiſsioners, was not that they ſhould be removed wholly from the Aſſembly, or holden as guilty before tryall, but that their ſitting in the Aſſembly might be ſuſpended untill it were tryed whether they were guilty, yea or not, and therefore the Author in citing and expounding theſe ſentences as he doth, hath not onelyonly done wrong to the Proteſters, but alſo to the conſtant received Order of this Church in the conſtitution of her Aſſemblies, becauſe if theſe ſentences be exponed not onelyonly againſt the removing wholly out of the Aſſembly, but alſo againſt the removing of them for a time till they be tryed, then have all the Aſsemblies of this Church followed a wrong method, who did ordinarily upon exceptions proponed, remove ſundry of their number, though they were not as yet convicti nor condemnati; and though they did ſuſpend their ſentence about removing of them wholly, yet did they not ſuſpend their ſentence about removing them for a time, untill the exception ſhould be tryed, this being the very way eſtabliſhed, and conſtantly followed in all the free and lawfull Aſſemblies of this Kirk for keeping of her Aſsemblies pure. If the Author will not admit of the removing of any till he be convict, and will have thoſe Divines at Dort ſo to be exponed, then let him tell us how he will reconcile them and our Church in this particular; But it is eaſie by the anſwer which we have given, ſo to do; yea, it is manifeſt from the whole ſcope of the buſineſs at Dort, that theſe Divines ſpeak in order to a totall removall, which was never deſired by the Proteſters in reference to the Commiſsioners. But let us turn the Schene a little, and ſuppoſe that the Belgick Churches had choſen and ſent to the Synod of Dort the Remonſtrants as their Commiſsioners, and that the Anti-Remonſtrants had been cited before the Synod, and had proponed as an exception againſt the Remonſtrants ſitting in the Synod, that they were under a ſcandall of erroneous and corrupt doctrine, which they did offer inſtanily to prove by comparing their Doctrine with the Doctrine of the Belgick and Reformed Churches in their Confeſsions and Catechiſmes, and thereupon deſired that they might be removed from ſitting as Members in the Synod, untill this exception were tryed: Doth the Author think that the reſt of the Synod, would or could in reaſon have refuſed to grant this deſire. From all theſe things I hope it doth appear, that notwithſtanding of any thing anſwered by the Author, it is a relevant exception againſt the freedome and right conſtitution of the Aſſembly, that they did before trying of the Commiſsioners proceedings admit them to ſit as Members of the Aſsembly, notwithſtanding of the exception of ſcandall upon them timeouſly proponed and offered to be inſtructed. As for that which the Author ſaith of the Proteſters ſuffering Mr. Andrew Cant with good liking of all of them ſo far as could be perceived, to put Mr. Robert Blair and Mr. William Reate upon the Liſt to be Moderator, and that ſundry of them gave their vote to Mr. Robert Blair to be Moderator, let be to ſit as an ordinary Member of the Aſsembly: I anſwer, There were many of the Proteſters who had no place to ſpeak in making of the L…ſt, as not being Members of the Meeting, and I believe, that theſe did give no token either of their good or ill liking of what Mr. Andrew Cant did in that particular: Theſe who voted, though they would not refuſe to vote in the election of a Moderator, as they did afterwards for ſome time in other particulars, not yet deſpairing of ſome reaſonable ſatisfaction to their deſire of adjourning the Aſſembly, and that they voted to Mr. Rob. Blair, as one of the moſt pious, prudent, & peaceable of that way, there being none elſe upon the Liſt, yet did they vote with a Proteſtation; and though they had made no Proteſtation, the moſt that it would prove, were this, that from loathneſſe to be heard, and hopes of ſatisfaction in a peaceable way, they went further with the Aſſembly, then adhering ſtrictly to their right they ſhould have done, and (I believe) a paſsionate deſire of peace did alſo move Mr. Andrew Cant to put theſe men upon the Liſt, though afterwards when it could not be obtained without prejudice to the truth, he ſaw good cauſe to Proteſt againſt the Aſſembly, as not free, and as unlawfull.
VINDICATION.
AS for the particulars contained in the Writers large proſecution of this Argument, we ſhall not need to inſiſt much upon them, nor yet will we follow him in Anſwers to his Objections, onelyonly ſomwhat briefly to ſome particulars; and firſt what is alleadged from the Aſſembly 1562, 80, 81. Firſt it had been good the Writer had ſet down the very Acts, related in their full and formar words, that we might have ſeen, (for every one of us are not keepers of the Regiſters, nor have Copies of them beſide us) whether they meaned all perſons againſt whom any ſcandal was alleadged, ſhould be removed even before the Aſſembly be conſtitute into a Judicatory, which was the thing pretended by the Proteſters, and becauſe not done, was the ground of the quarrell; for we ſee not this by any thing that is brought here. Secondly, we ſuppoſe it could not be the minde of theſe Aſſemblies, that alleadgeance of ſcandals againſt perſons, ſhould be a cauſe to remove them from ſitting in that Aſſembly as Members altogether, unleſſe the ſcandall were clear and unqueſtionable, for the point de jure, and ſo their appointment comes not home to our preſent caſe. Next, for the grounds brought to prove, that the Commiſſioners were under ſcandall of defection; firſt we grant that hearing of a common report may be a ground of enquiry concerning a matter of ſcandall; but this was not refuſed about the preſent caſe in queſtion. Secondly, As for that cited from the 1. Cor. 5, 1. that proceeding ordered there, was an order to preſent c…nſure; ſo we may ſee that the Brother that writeth this, is of that minde, that the Commiſſioners upon that common report which he alleadgeth to have been paſſing upon them, ſhould have been without more ado ſentenced to cenſure, Good Sir, hold your hand, for my part I cannot wonder enough that he ſhould have alleadged from the Apoſtles words ſo generally without any qualification, that common report may be a ground of preſent ſentence againſt perſons, as he doth here certainly this ought to have been wel qualified and limited, otherwayes a wide door is opened to injuſtice and undoing the innocent and guiltleſs men; for, cannot one or two, or ſome few ill tongues ſpread an ill report of very honeſt men, and how eaſily ſhall that report become common, if that of the Poet be true, as it is moſt certainly,
Fama malum quo non aliud velociùs ullum,
Mobilitate viget, v…reſque acquirit eundo.
Therefore a common report that may be ground of ſo ſhort and ſummary proceeding, muſt be ſuch as firſt is of a matter that in point de jure is clear and unqueſtionably a ſcandall. Secondly, For the fact in a manner univerſall, uncontrolled either by the party, or any that hath beſt and neareſt notice of his actions, both were in that matter of the Corinthian, the matter was in jure clearly a hainous cryme, Inceſt, viz. having his fathers wife, and for the fact, the Report that had come to Paul was ſuch as we have ſaid, omnino anditur, as the Arab interpreter marked by Beza hath it, paſsim & in tota achaia; and another interpreter on the ſame place in Marlorat q.d. Sine negatione ſine tergiverſatione non dubius eſt rumor ſed res manifeſta, paſsim cum magno offendiculo publicata. In the preſent caſe in hand, both conditions were wanting, the matter was not clear de jure in the main queſtion of it; its report was not ſo common as the contradiction thereof. 3. the offence and ſtumbling of the godly, at the Proceeding of the Commiſsioners might have been, and was indeed not given by theſe Proceedings of themſelves, but cauſed and born upon them by the information, and miſ-repreſentation of them, by ſome of the ſame perſons who are the alleadgers and accuſers, and will be made good before any impartiall judge in the world, by a right information and diſcovery of the Proceedings themſelves, and of the practiſings of the accuſers againſt them, and therefore this can be no argument of the Commiſsiones being under ſcandal. 4. There were more teſtimonies by very far from Presbyteries and Synods for them then againſt them, and theſe teſtimonies given againſt them were really and in themſelves ſcandals, tending moſt evidently to the expoſing of the Kingdom and Cauſe to the power of the invaders, whereof the invaders themſelves were very ſenſible, and for that cauſe were ſome of the teſtimonies ſooner put in their hands then communicate to the Commiſsioners, and they in thankfulneſſe was very carefull to cauſe Print them. The third particular is a poor mans argument, the begging of the very principal Queſtion, and this very begged Queſtion is the onelyonly main ſum of this whole Paper repeated over and over again, this the Aſſembly was to try and examine, and till it was tryed, a nay-ſay was good enough anſwer to this Affirmative. 6. The Brethren who in the Aſſembly offered to prove the alleadgance, were ſome of the ſame who had been chief in ſpreading the teſtimonies, and bearing the offence upon the godly, and had defamed the Commiſsioners, and were intereſſed to have had them noted as under ſcandall; its againſt all equity that for the accuſation of ſuch they ſhould have been reputed ſcandalous, It was a word of Juſtice uttered by Haman otherwiſe wicked: Julian the Appoſtate, Quis innocens eſſe poterit ſi accuſare ſufficat.