TrueCovenanter.com Editor's Introduction. Dear Reader, The following vindication of Covenanter principles was published in the year 1710. It is one of the earliest post-revolution defences of Covenanter principles and Terms of Communion, and will therefore be of special interest to all who adhere to our Covenanted Reformation. A large portion of the work is dedicated to answering a list of questions, not unlike many of the questions which are posed to modern Covenanters by those who disown the Reformation at this day. These Questions and Answers may serve as a Covenanter "FAQ" for those who care to understand the grounds on which faithful Presbyterians opposed the Revolution settlement in Scotland some three-hundred years ago, as well as why a small remnant still dissent from the civil and ecclesiastic constitutions of Britain and America at the present day. It is important to note, for the sake of modern readers, that the author is herein responding to a piece published by Mr. Thomas Linning written against John McMillan, the first pastor to join with the Covenanters after the Revolution. Mr. Linning himself had been one of the few pastors remaining amongst the Covenanters prior to the "Re-constitution" of the national Church of Scotland. At that time however, he abandoned the flock, and left the faithful remnant destitute of shepherds. Thereafter he opposed those who contended for Christ's Crown & Covenant against the Covenant-breaking Church and State of Scotland. His "Friendly Letter" written to Mr. McMillan was less than friendly, and evidenced the effects of apostacy on a soul who had once enjoyed much light concerning the word of Christ's patience, and made high professions for the Cause of Truth. As with many at this day, malice towards those who endeavoured to be faithful, while he compromised Christ's truth, led to malignant principles, very unlike historic Presbyterian beliefs, and yet vainly cloaked with the appearance of strict Presbyterian formalities. As at this day, ecclesiastical communions such as the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC) in North America facilitate the spread of error and defection by inhibiting any actions against the same, using the "rules of proper order"; and as at this time many individuals attempt to bring slanders against the Covenanter Testimony and Principles as subversive of the ordinances of Church and State, so Mr. Linning in his day, falsely accused the Covenanters of opposing God's ordinances of Church and State, when in reality, it was himself, and the party of malignants and backsliders with which he was confederated, that had, by defending tyranny and tolerating heresy & idolatry, subverted the Scriptural constitutions of Church and State, to the overturning of God's ordinances and the healing of the head of the Beast within the lands of Scotland and England. But their accusations need nothing fear God's saints. When our Lord Jesus Christ, King of kings, shall come to judge, he shall show, on the one hand, what was his ordinance, and who had either obeyed or opposed his power; and on the other hand, what was not his ordinance, and who had received and used their power from the Dragon.

THE times into which we are fallen, seem exactly to quadrate with the Apostle's Prediction in his 2nd Epistle to Timothy: Chapter 3, verses 1,2,3, &c. As these are the last times, the Old Age and Gray Hairs of the World, so they are eminently Perilous, in all the respects, and for all the Causes there specified by the Apostle. Self Love that Cardinal evil, the execrable Source and Fountain of all the abounding sins and Plagues, under which the Land groaneth, is now like a spreading Leprosy and contagion, daily fixing deeper Roots, and sending out stronger Branches, to the great Detriment and hurt of Religion. Hence are all our grievous Backslidings from God and his way: Hence are our faintings and yieldings to the Enemies of Religion & Liberty: Hence are our unworthy Compliances with every new Imposition and Innovation, for gaining to our selves a false and ill grounded Peace, upon base and Slavish Terms: Yea; hence, from this base principle and corrupt Root of undue and immoderate respect to ourselves, our Ease, Pleasures, Preferments, & profits doth spring almost all the Gall and wormwood that embitters our Cup, all the circumstances of Misery into which the Land is immersed, and under which it sinks. Hinc illæ eachrymæ. But I must not detain the Reader; Volumes would not express Scotland's sins, nor contain the Complaints whereof they are the Causes. Therefore I shall here only give these few Advertisements. The Reason why I do sometimes in the following Reply speak in Plural Terms, is not because the Letter is the product of more Pens than one (as I am certainly informed that it is) but because the Matter herein treated of, is of publick Concern, respecting the whole of the Ministers of this present Church, who are justly chargeable with the Defections herein testified against. If it be inquired why this Essay is so Compendious, whereas it considers matters which might cause it swell to a greater bulk; the reason shortly is this: that these Heads, here touched, have been largely treated on already by others, and there is nothing here new, but what the Suffering Remnant of the true Church of Scotland has all alongst been owning and contending for. What plainness and freedom is here used being intended for the Vindication of Truth, and not for reflection upon, or Irritation of any, will not, or at least cannot in Justice offend the Ingenuous Reader, nor is this to dishonour the Ministry (as some may possibly object) of which I desire (as all ought) to think and speak honourably, and the persons rightly invested with, & walking worthy of that great Trust, but such as by their unsuitable walk dishonour it are not worthy of Honour, while they continue so to do. I judge it needless to make any apology, why these following Observations appear to the World so rude and unpolished. It is not the [ ... ] [of Oratory] and [Embellishments] of fine and flourishing Terms, but the instruction and edification of the weak, to whom such high and elegant styles are generally needless, which next to the glory of God & Vindication of his Truth is here intended. There are I know, into whose hands this may come, who superciliously disdain whatever can be written or spoken in Defense of the Truths of Christ, but such would do well to consider the Prophet's Admonition, be not mockers, lest your bands be made strong. E're I conclude, I must tell the Reader, that this being written without Mr. M'm's and Mr. M'Neil's knowledge, its lameness cannot be imputed to them, nor ought any ways to prejudge their Cause, and wherein they shall find themselves not duly vindicate, or their Cause misrepresented, this shall not prevent them, or any to do it more largely, and to better purpose. {1}

---

SIR,

Seeing it is your FRIENDLY method, to Print and Publish your Letter, before you send it to him for whom you endorse it, (which, for ought I know, you have yet to do) you cannot in reason be offended, though another shall give his modest Observations upon it. Upon the Title I observe, that this FRIENDLY Author has somewhat mistaken, either the matter of his Letter, or the nature of Demonstration; unless he will say that QUERIES are Demonstrations, for I find little else in it. If he say this is done in his REMARKS, yet I think the Title seems to import, that these are different from the Letter; and whether either of them perform what the Title promiseth, shall be seen when I come to them: As also wherein lies the difference between the Written and Printed Copies of Mr. M'millan's Declinature, shall then be observed. But seeing perhaps he may allege, that Titles are Arbitrary, I leave it, and come to the Preface, wherein I shall especially notice that which concerns the present Controversy, leaving the rest to such as may find themselves more immediately concerned in it.

And first, You entertain your CHRISTIAN READER with a long and grievous Complaint, containing an Enumeration of Evils and Sins sufficient (your self being Judge) to cause bleeding Hearts and weeping Eyes: The Complaint is not only true and certain, but astonishing and horrible; So many Sins, with such killing Aggravations, lifting up their Heads, and doing it unpunished! Where can this be? not in Scotland, a Church not only Pure, but Faithful, (if you may be believed) not under Persecution, but having the Countenance of so gracious a Queen; Yea a Queen superlatively Gracious. But let not your Reader be so much astonished. This is in Scotland indeed: but Scotland is not NOW as formerly. She hath lost much, (I had almost said all) of her Ancient Glory and Beauty, and of the Heroick Courage, unbiased Faithfulness and Flaming Zeal for Christ, and his Cause, she once had, & on all occasions manifested to the World. Pray, Sir, reconcile all this with your so many assertions of this Church's Faithfulness, Purity, Zeal, and Reformation, you have through your following Remarks, yea even in the small verge of this little Preface; and these bold Brags and Asseverations of it, that your Brethren on all occasions, in their Sermons, and Conferences clamour Peoples ears with. It would, no doubt, have been thought, that this STRONG FRIEND, who so upbraids others for weakness, would have acted more consistently with himself. But if it be so as you assert, (and so in very deed it is) that Scotland hath lost this her Ancient Glory, &c. You would do your CHRISTIAN READER a great deal of kindness, to explain a little Your meaning. What Glory, & Beauty is it She {2} hath lost, or when had she that Glory? Not in the dawning of Reformation, when yet she was but on the ascendant; and there were many Corruptions not purged out of her, which her Faithful and Zealous Ministers were not resting satisfied with; but labouring, and that effectually and successfully, to discover and purge out of her: Neither can this Beauty and Glory be meant, of any she has had since the late Revolution, for You will not grant that you are declining since that time: But will have the World believe, you are making progress in Reformation. Can you mean, that GLORY she had in these her Covenanting Days, especially from the Year 1638, when she began to shake off that Grievous and insupportable Yoke of Prelacy and Erastianism, to the Year 1649 or 1650, at which time the Publick Resolutions came in Agitation in the Judicatories. This certainly cannot be meant by you, who looked upon that piece of the Church's attainment in Reformation, to be such a Deformity, that it was not meet to be put into your Constitution, But [ye] rejected it as a piece of an old Garment, fit for nought, but to deface your new model of Government. Unless, your CHRISTIAN READER will be so charitable to you, as to think you did it for your own Credit, who knowing that your Constitution could not reach such a degree of perfection, unless you had endangered the loss of your Benefices, and perhaps your Lives too, and brought most, if not all of you under Censure, or Deprivation, for your manifest Compliance with, or sinful Connivance at, the abominations of the Persecuting times; were therefore obliged to be content with the Claim of Right, instead of the Divine Right of Presbytery; and your Sovereign's Royal Will and Pleasure to Corroborate your Acts, instead of the Intrinsick Power of the Church; and the Oath of Allegiance, and Bond of Assurance to W. and M. instead of the Oath & Bond of the Covenants: And, being Conscious of the vast Disparity of the one from the other, lest your Cowardice and Unfaithfulness should have been ashamed, and (as I may say) looked out of Countenance with the Glory of your Ancestors' Zeal, Courage and Faithfulness; thought fit to your utmost to Bury, and hold it down or at least not to Set it up beside yours, to Discover its Lameness and Imperfection. It's like, you'll think your Reader either Dull or Critical, that he should Require of you any further Description of this Glory, Zeal, Faithfulness, &c. Whereof you speak, when you tell him in general, that it was for Christ and his Cause, & that she once had it, and on all occasions Manifested it to the World; Whereby you will be thought to mean all the Acts of Zeal, Courage, and Faithfulness, which she Exerted and put forth against Popery, Prelacy, Erastianism, Sectarianism, Tyranny, &c. all which are now Connived at, Subjected unto, and supported, drawing alongst with them, all these Circumstances of Sinfulness, and Danger, into which this Church (as you complain) is now involved. Is this Church Involved into all Circumstances of Sinfulness and Danger, which has so good a Constitution (as you would make your Reader believe) so good a Standard of Doctrine, so pure and unmixed Worship, a Discipline, and Government exactly Correspondent to the Word of GOD, and such just and Lawful Terms of Communion. Whence pray, is the danger? not from within, if all this be true which {3} you have asserted (and if it be so or not shall anon be Examined) not from without, for the Law is on your side and the Countenance of your Gracious Queen is on your side, unless you be either flattering, or mocking when you call her so Gracious, which takes so little Notice of these your heavy Complaints, and does so little for Redressing your wrongs. Well, but your Reader must not doubt of any thing here, he must both Believe that all is right with you, and also that you are involved in all manner of Sinful, and dangerous Circumstances. O strange Faith! which must not doubt even of Contradictories: Or if he do in the least fear that Matters be wrong with you, when he reflects upon all those sins and dangers, into which you are Involved; And so bethink him of any way how to escape them by departing from those sins and dangers, and the persons involving themselves in them, then, with you, he is not a Man of common understanding: For, all these sins and dangers notwithstanding, he is obliged to go on with you, and is not in the least to think of any other means of helping the case. Only he may lament with you, that all flesh hath corrupted their ways: But may scarce be allowed to say, that Ministers and Magistrates have done it, or if he may say so much, he must mean only, that their personal walk is corrupted with some personal failings, but must not presume to charge their publick Management with any thing culpable; Or if he may step one degree higher in his search, and say that there are some publick Faults; Yet he must mean only in the Administration, but by all means hold off the Constitution. And when he Complains of Faults in the Administration, he must only say so much in general, but may not Condescend on particulars, otherways its questionable if you will look upon him to Answer his Designation of Christian Reader. But you go further with your Reader and to deal more ingenuously, you lead him into a more particular consideration, and give him a fuller View of those sinful and dangerous Circumstances, viz. Law and Gospel are Contemned and trampled on, all that's Sacred is mocked; and Laughed at, Atheism, Deism, and Popery are Rampant &c. But will you deal so ingenuously with him, as to tell him, what you look upon to be the Causes of these Grassant or (to use your own phase) Rampant Sins. Is it this Church's Apostasy from God? Is it the Backsliding of her Ministers? Is it the unwatchfulness of her Watchmen, who have suffered her hedge to be broken down, or rather have broken it down themselves? Or finally, is it her Perjury, in violating her Marriage Covenant, and dealing treacherously with her Husband? Yes, by all means this is the Cause, and therefore it is (as yourself acknowledge) That a justly provoked God has left her in his Anger, to be Oppressed on all Hands, and by all means and instruments, every Boar of the Forrest, Malignants, Jacobites, Prelatick Teachers, Promoters of Superstition, Corrupt mixture of Human Inventions, English Popish Ceremonies in the Worship of God, and false Prophets, invades, wastes, and ruins her. Well, what must your poor Reader do after so many Concessions? May he think of withdrawing from the Men that have thus neglected, and suffered his Lord's Vineyard to be ruined, after he sees, that they will not be Reclaimed, but go still on from evil to worse? No, by no means, for that compleats {4} the dismal scene of your Misery; to see any that will appear more Zealously and Faithfully against the Indignities, that this Church hath done to her Lord and Husband, in dealing treacherously and falsely in his Covenant; and any that take not those same measures with you, to involve themselves, and the Church of Christ in all extremity of Defection, are presently in your Sense, carrying on a most scandalous, pernicious, and unaccountable Schism. SCANDALOUS, in regard it offends the Ministers and Professors that live at ease in Zion, as being some Disturbance of their beloved quiet, which they have bought at so dear a rate, as the loss of Christ's favour, and incurring of his Anger. PERNICIOUS in regard it draws away the People, the sole pillars and supports of your present Constitution, it being settled upon their Inclinations, which are but unsteadfast and movable like themselves. So that its no wonder, you set Your Selves by all Means to hedge in these Scattering and Tottering Waves of their Inclinations and Affections, which once lost, you must needs Sink. And yet UNACCOUNTABLE, below your Observation or Notice. Your Reader will perhaps tacitly admire, how that which is in itself (or rather in your Notion) so Scandalous and pernicious, should be to you so Unaccountable. But when he considers, how small Account you make of all these gross pieces of Defection you persist in, so provoking to GOD, and really Scandalous to the Godly, it will help to allay his Admiration: And besides it's Unaccountable on this Consideration, that it's not carried on by a great many Learned and Able Men, nor by a Rich and Potent People; but by Three weak Men, supported by a Poor People, and which is worst of all, both are equally ignorant of the Nature of Union with, and Separation from a Church, and what will justify the one or the other. Those Expressions may indeed Disquiet your Reader at first View; but if he take a more narrow Look into your Meaning and Intention in all this, he will find that these your Vilifying Terms you make use of, are not Concludent Arguments, nor fit Materials for doing your Work: For, it's like, your Illiterate Reader, who hath little more Policy than what the Scriptures teach him, will Answer you in Paul's Dialect, 1 Cor. 1.26-28, "For you see your Calling, Brethren, how that not many wise men after the Flesh, not many mighty, not many Noble are called. (Verse 27,) But God hath chosen the foolish things of the World, to confound the things that are mighty. (Verse 28,) And base things of the World, and things which are despised, hath God chosen; yea, and things which are not to bring to nought things that are. (Verse 29,) That no Flesh should glory in his Presence." And with our Lord's words, Matthew 11.25, "At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of Heaven and Earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto Babes." Besides, your Reader Desiderates [desires, longs] to know, whom you mean by these Three Weak Men. That this will not agree to Mr. M'millan and Mr. M'Neil every Body knows; both because they do not really carry on a Schism (as shall be proven) and Supposing that were Granted, yet they have not been the carriers on of that falsely so-called Schism; for this Schism (say you) hath been for a long time {5} amongst us. Moreover you speak of Three, Whereas they are but two, for it can not in Reason be thought, that you will Class Mr. Hepburn with them, seeing he was Reponed [restored] by your Commission some years ago, and taken Engaged to Live Regularly, to exhort the people (as you understood it) to keep Unity with you, not to intrude on other Mens Labours, &c. And he accordingly stands to his Engagements, so far as is Consistent with his Designs best known to himself. And yet the Current of your Phrase seems to Intimate, that by those three weak Men you understand some that are now at this very Day contributing to complete that dismal scene of your Misery. Shall your Reader be so injurious to you, as to imagine that you point at the three Curates, which after they were Deposed by the Synods in the bounds, where they live, for Arminian Tenets and other Scandals, were without acknowledgment or promise of Amendment, reponed [restored] by the Commission; sure these are not they, for such (though they be Schismaticks indeed from the true Church of Scotland) are not so reputed by you: otherwise you might have reckoned up 150 of them enjoying Churches and Manses, besides all that enjoy Meeting-Houses, whereof 15 are in the Capital City of the Kingdom; as they have been lately computed by a certain Author of your own. But its notour, that those come not under the designation of Schismaticks, but of Good Men justly expecting yours, while they enjoy such a large share of your gracious Sovereign's Countenance. Seeing then your dark & Enigmatick phrase will not allow any of the former Senses, will it quadrate to Mr. Richard Cameron, Mr. Donald Cargil, and Mr. James Renwick, who successively as the Lord raised them up, & employed them, did Valiantly & Zealously (even to Death) contend for the Church of Scotland's Privileges, in Opposition to the many Sinful Courses which the Ministers of this Church then took to ruin and divest her of all her Glory and Beauty, by subjecting their Ministry to the exorbitant will and arbitrament of the then Tyrants. Which Faithfulness of theirs was by you indeed called Schism, and all Espousing that Interest, (which was not theirs but Christ's) termed Schismaticks, Tearers of the flesh of their Mother, &c. Unless you assign another Sense of your Words, you'll allow your Reader to acquiesce in this. And if you would be understood when you speak of this long continued Schism, it were your part Candidly to tell what Schism you mean, when it began, what were the Originals of it? Whether you mean the differences, which arose between the Faithful and Corrupt part of the Ministry, occasioned by taking Malignants into places of power and trust, in Church, State, and Army, (a practice not yet repented of, nor abandoned; but daily followed by you, as might be instanced in many particulars) or what other time, Cause, or Occasion of the rise, and progress of it you please to assign. For certainly you cannot say that Mr. M'millan began that Schism, for that which you so call, is nothing else, but what hath been asserted, and maintained formerly, that and that of a long time with your own concession: So that it is not Mr. M'millan you have to do with in this Plea; but the Principles and Practices of the Church of Scotland, which he Espouseth, and a great many of which you have banished from your publick Registers, perhaps because you thought them Schismatical. And this I hope to {6} evince when I come to your Queries; and to let you see that neither Mr. M'millan, nor the People you so upbraid with Ignorance, are so far unacquainted with the Terms of Communion and Separation, as you would represent them. Which shall be made good from their Principles, published in their Declarations, to be seen in their Informatory Vindication and other pieces relative thereto. You add They cannot (in a Consistency with their Principles) hold Communion with any Church this Day upon Earth, Thereby to render them odious, not only to Backslidden Ministers and Professors at home (as indeed they are, because Resisters of their Courses) but even, so far as in you lies, to render them suspect of Schism from all the Churches of Christ in the World. This is indeed a heavy Charge, and yet such a one as would have been no shame for the seven thousand, who had not bowed their knees to Baal: But that this is a most false Charge, shall be made appear to every intelligent Person, by making evident that their Principles and Practices (their present Circumstances being considered) are (all your Cavils notwithstanding) agreeable to the word of God, and so consequently to the Principles of the Churches of Christ: Unless you will say, that no church this Day on Earth, holds by that Standard; which I hope you will not. And I Judge it but bad Logick to argue at this rate, “that the Dissenting Party, who adhere to the Ancient Principles of the Church of Scotland, cannot (in a consistency with those Principles) hold Communion with this Backslidden Church, declining from these Principles, and practically everting them; Ergo, They cannot join with any Church this day on Earth.” Unless you first prove that every Church this Day on Earth are in your Circumstances; declining from their former Principles, & that they are continuing in that their Declension, notwithstanding the endeavours of their Brethren to reclaim them. But you'll possibly say, you are wronged by the Dissenters, if they allege you will not be Reclaimed, who Confess to your Shame, that there are many things wrong among you:

Surely, these must be an unreasonable People (say you) that will not be satisfied with any thing we can do; We have concluded already that it was superfluous, and contrary to this our Tottering Unity, which by all means we must keep up amongst ourselves, to impose it upon any of the Ministers of this Church, who were guilty of Compliance with the Enemies of Christ's Church, in our Persecuting Times, by taking their Oaths and Bonds, as Tests of their Loyalty to them, and Disloyalty to their Master Jesus Christ, that they should make any acknowledgment of these, or any other steps of Defection, whereof they are Guilty, seeing they (for want of a Tentation) are not in the present Practice of these evils; and yet that rigid People have even extorted some Confessions from some of us, We have granted that there are many things wrong among us, and yet they are not satisfied; nor will they be, except we declare publickly in our National Fasts, and Acts of Assembly, what Sense we have of the Evil of these and the like Courses: And we may justly suspect, that though we should do all this, they would still be uneasy, till we should practically forsake them; telling us, that they always think these two must be connected, viz. Confession and Forsaking, before we can expect to find Mercy. So that truly it will be too Expensive {7} for us to gain that People: But what hazard is there, whether or not for we persuade ourselves (say you) That no Man of common understanding will think, this National Church should be cast off, and that we should separate from her.

If by a National Church you understand, the Doctrine, Worship, Discipline, and Government anciently received, maintained, and sworn to, in our Covenants, National, and Solemn League; then indeed I think that, whatever Men of common understanding may do, yet all such as are the true Lovers of Zion, and desire their Lords approbation, will be most loath to cast off, or separate from this National Church: But if by National Church you mean the collective Body of Ministers and Professors in the Land, who have declined from that standard of Doctrine, Worship, Discipline, & Government, and are only Equivocally and Improperly called the National Church of Scotland, insofar as they are established in the room of those who were indeed the Church of Scotland, that is, such as owned the foresaid Standard of her Doctrine, &c. Then why such as disown her, in this Sense, should be termed Men of no understanding, I see not, nor will any find another reason for it, but your pleasure, whose Tongues are your own.

But you go further, to give the Reasons of what you say; and like a FRIEND you kindly inform these poor weak Antagonists of yours, what are the Grounds of Union with, and Separation from a Church, and what will justify either: And it seems you expect, for a Retribution of this your FRIENDLY Dealing, that these Ignorant and Illiterate people will Implicitly concede all your Assertions. viz. We have a good Constitution, &c. For mere Assertions they are, as void of Probation, as the very first Principles of Nature's Light, which admit of no such thing. But if you should fail of this your Intention, and they for their better understanding, should crave of you some Definitions of your Terms, and evidences of the Truth of your Positions; It's hoped you'll Candidly grant it them. First then, I would Inquire, what you mean by this good Constitution of yours? Is it the Acts of Parliament upon which your Constitution is founded? If so, then what goodness is in it, will appear, by a more particular Inspection into these Acts. Then First, Your strong, and almost only support and prop of this Nature is the Claim of Right, the Words whereof, Relative to the Church, are; "That Prelacy, and Superiority of any Office in the Church above Presbyters, is and hath been a great and Insupportable Grievance, and trouble to this Nation, and contrary to the INCLINATIONS of the Generality of the People (they having Reformed from Popery by Presbyters) and therefore ought to be Abolished." From which words its observable: First, That Prelacy is not called contrary to Law, as the rest of the particulars Complained of, and abolished in that Claim of Right are: But only a Grievance and trouble to the Nation, (Mark) it is not said Nations, though it was indeed an Insupportable Grievance to all the Three Nations of Scotland, England, and Ireland, as is undeniable from their entering into a Solemn Covenant to oppose and Extirpate it, of which Covenant, it's Remarkable, there is made no mention in this Claim of Right. 2dly, It's not said, that Prelacy is contrary to the Word of GOD, and the Covenanted {8} Work of Reformation, but only it's contrary to the people's Inclinations, and that not for any other Reason, but because the Nation was Reformed from Popery by Presbyters, and not by Prelates: And that reason would Militate as much against Presbytery as Prelacy, upon Supposition, that the Land had been Reformed from Popery by Prelates. Now, I hope it was upon the same Grounds that Prelacy was Abolished, upon which Presbytery was Restored, viz:

First, Because Presbytery was not so grievous and troublesome to the Nation.

2dly, Because it was more answerable to the People's Inclination: And

3dly, Because it had the start of the other in the Nation's Reformation.

There is never a word of its Divine Right here, Nor of our Covenants binding us to own it, with our Lives and Estates; So much for the Claim of Right. And though this Act be comprehensive of all, that is, more fully expressed in any other Acts of Parliament, Relating to the Settlement of the Church, since the late Revolution, so that having seen this we may say,

Aceipe nunc Procerum insidias, & crimine ab uno     disce omnes.

Yet for the Reader's further satisfaction, I shall transcribe a part of another act, made Anno 1693, Entitled An Act for Settling the Peace and quiet of the Church, wherein it is ordained:

That no person be admitted, or continued for hereafter to be a Minister, or Preacher within this Church, unless that he having first taken, and Subscribed the Oath of Allegiance, and Assurance; As also, that he owns and acknowledges Presbyterian Government, as Settled by the Act of the 2d Session of this Parliament, to be the only Government of this Church; and that he will submit thereto, and Concur therewith, and never endeavour directly, nor indirectly, the Prejudice and Subversion thereof. And their Majesties with Advice and Consent foresaid, Statute and ordain, that Uniformity of Worship, and of the Administration of all publick Ordinances within this Church, be observed by all the saids Ministers, and Preachers, as the same are at present performed, and allowed them, or shall be hereafter declared by the Authority of the same, and no Minister or Preacher be admitted, or continued for hereafter, unless that he Subscribe to observe, and do actually observe the foresaid Uniformity.

In which Act its remarkable, First, What are the New Ministerial Qualifications required by the Magistrate, and the Terms of Ministerial Communion in this present Church; viz. The Oath of Allegiance and Assurance, Imposed (as is plainly declared by the Act imposing it) instead of all other Oaths that might be required, and so in room of our Covenants.

2dly, That this Constitution admits of no Reformation, by the Ministers; for they are bound to Observe the particulars mentioned in the Act, only as they are at present allowed, or shall be hereafter granted to them.

3dly, That this Constitution carries in its Bosom the highest degree of Erastianism, for here the Minister's power Depends Solely upon their Sovereign's allowance with Consent of Parliament; And so have made themselves the Vassals of Men, not the Ministers of JESUS CHRIST. {9}

A third Act made in the last Session of the Scottish Parliament Anno 1707, and engrossed amongst the Fundamental Articles of the Union, Entitled Act for Securing the Protestant Religion, and Presbyterian Church Government is now your strong Tower, and an undoubted Sanctuary, to which you in your utmost straits betake yourselves, and of which you hold your Right of Constitution, as is evident from the Commissions Act, August 5, 1709, against Innovations in the Worship of God. By which Act of Parliament, you are involved into all the Guilt of that Union, and particularly of consenting to the Establishment of Prelacy, upon as firm a Basis and Foundation in the Neighbouring Kingdom of England, as Presbytery is constitute upon in Scotland, contrary to God's word, who has commanded that we should not suffer Sin to lie upon our Brother; and contrary to that solemn Covenant, wherein we engaged to the extirpation of it out of all the three Kingdoms. By all which you declare to the World, that you are Men satisfied with anything that makes for your own private interest, and are ready to account any constitution a good one, which secures to you your Benefices with Ease and Quiet. But if you be ashamed to call the Acts of Parliament your good Constitution; then show us what it is. Is it the Assemblies settling themselves according to the Act Anno 1592? Industriously passing over our best times, as being Conscious to yourselves of the utter inconsistency, and irreconcilable Difference betwixt their Faithful Acts, and your Unfaithful Practices and Designs, under the pretext, that the Church had then the Civil Sanction which she wanted in her Re-establishment Anno 1638. But if this be a sufficient reason (or if you have another give it) then it's evident, that you look upon the civil Sanction as absolutely necessary, not to the Well-being only, but also to the Being of a Church-constitution. And however you look upon it, I hope none that remembers or considers God's signal Goodness to this Church, in granting her such a Faithful Ministry, and such a Glorious Reformation, will account the mere want of the civil Sanction (which yet they even then for the most part had, either the King's Commissioner in their Assemblies, or the Concurrence of the Parliament Corroborating their Acts, or both) a sufficient salvo, for your obliterating the whole proceedings of those Faithful and free Assemblies, betwixt 1638 and 1649; and consigning them, so much as in you lay, to perpetual Oblivion. So much for your first Assertion, viz. We have a good Constitution.

I come now to your second Assertion, We have a standard of Doctrine without Error, Westminster Confession of Faith, which we own as the Confession of our Faith, we have Subscribed it, and Preach the Doctrine therein contained. I Answer, So have the Church of England a Doctrine without Error, and so have Independents: are they not therefore to be separated from? And though some, yea many of the Church of England's Communion be Arminian, and otherwise Heterodox, yet no such thing is asserted in their standard of Doctrine; nor can that Church be charged with these Tenets, more than this Church will allow Arminianism, Borynianism, &c. to be looked upon as her Doctrine, though it's notour, that she hath them in her Communion, who are Maintainers and Favourers {10} of these Tenets: And moreover I still looked upon our Covenants as the Confession of our Faith, as well as the Westminster Confession; and if you abstract it from the Covenants, I do not see what difference, in point of Doctrine, there is between you and Independents, or the Bishops of England. But will you be pleased to assign the Chapter and Section of the Westminster Confession, wherein your Reader will find the Doctrine of Association with Malignants, Prelatists, Papists, or any other known Enemies of Truth and Godliness, asserted: That this Doctrine is yours, appears daily by your practice in Praying for such Confederacies, supporting to your Power, the Persons engaged in them, and Teaching your People so to do. But sure I am this was neither in Doctrine nor Practice held by the Church of Scotland in her purest times. And albeit it were granted, that the Standard of your Doctrine is without Error, if it can be proven that you walk contrary to this Standard, it will not make much for your purpose; only it says, That you know your Master's will: but endeavour not to do it.

Now follows your third Assertion, Our Worship is pure, without the addition of Men's Inventions. Answer, I do indeed grant, that your Worship is so far pure, as that in the Form thereof you do not mix with it those Popish Ceremonies of Crossing, Kneeling towards the East, Bowing before Altars and Crucifixes, and the like. These are indeed too gross pieces of Corruption, to pass without Observation: But shall your Worship be accounted pure, because not chargeable with these gross perversions, when you have other Corruptions, no less dangerous, though not so Palpable and easy to be discovered? Such as your keeping Days of Fasting & Thanksgiving for Causes that will not bear either; and enjoined by such as (though never so Lawfully invested with Authority) have no Right to do it; except in such Exigences of the Church as you will not grant yourselves to be in. And is not the Lord's Table Profaned, though not by the Addition of Men's Inventions, yet by the Admission of Ignorant and Scandalous Persons, (I mean Persons Guilty of Bloodshed, Swearers of Contradictorious Oaths and Bonds, Informers against the People of GOD when flying for fear of their Lives, and otherwise Scandalous in the times of Persecution, (a great part of them who are employed about the Elements, the Symbols of CHRIST's Body and Blood, being Guilty of, and not yet purged from these sins by a publick Acknowledgment) as is Alas, too manifest almost in all places of the Kingdom. And though you may allege these to be but failings in the Administration, yet when this is become Epidemick, it shews that your Worship is not so pure, as you would bear us in Hand: And if your Worship be unsound in the Matter of it, though without mixture of Human Inventions, is it therefore Pure? As for Instance, when you Pray for Success and Prosperity to these Complex Courses of Apostasy from GOD, that have been, and are carried on, in Church and State; As for Divine Conduct to the Head of the Prelates, while Supporting them, and bearing down Reformation in her Dominions, and for themselves as Members of the British Parliament, seeing you have no Warrant {11} for your so doing from GOD's Word, and knows, that it is Perjury, as being contrary to your Solemn Vows in our Covenants, which you pretend to own and are really under the Obligation of them: I say, when you Pray for them in these circumstances, you Pray not in Faith, and so you sin, and consequently pollute that act of the Worship.

As for the Discipline, it's apparent you have it not entirely in your power, but as you hold your Government, and Ecclesiastick Right of the Civil Magistrate, and are dependent on them for your power of Convening in Assemblies, and in appointing your Diets, in making your Acts Valid, and even in the Exercise of your Ministry; as is evident from the Act of Parliament above quoted, making it an Essential Requisite to any who would be a Minister of this National Church, that he Swear and Subscribe the Allegiance and Assurance; which proves your Government faulty, even in the Constitution, as well as Administration; and so by necessary Consequence will infer a Flaw in the Discipline: For, as the Discipline is Dependent on the Government (as none will deny) so it must partake of its Lameness, even in its Constitution. But if you have the Sword of Discipline in your hand, why do ye not draw it out against Offenders? Why are so many rampant Sins, and Evils, yea Evils never before known, suffered to go unpunished? Why have not Known Enemies of Truth and Godliness been censured? Wherefore have not they who shed the Blood of the Saints been Staged for it? Wherefore are not Prelatick Teachers, intruding themselves into the Lord's Vineyard, suppressed and cast out? Why are Persons of Quality passed without Censure, when guilty of the same Sins, for which the meaner sort are by you punished? Surely, this is either because you will not, which is your shame and Reproach, and argues a willful Neglect of your undoubted Duty; or because you cannot: If so, then this is either because yourselves are guilty of the same Evils, and so you are ashamed to call others to Trial, lest your Deeds should be made manifest; or it is, because you have not a Power to do it, that being Extorted out of your hands by the Civil Magistrate; which yet you will not allow to be said, lest it should Reflect on Your Constitution. But if you can Assign any other Reason, why you contravene your Lord's Commission, who has bid you be instant in Season, and out of Season, to Reprove, Rebuke, Exhort, with all Long Suffering, &c. You may do it, yourselves best knows it.

I come now to consider the Terms of your Communion, which you Assert Lawful, and for the better understanding of them; I shall first set down the Ancient Boundaries of the Church of Scotland's Communion, as they are to be seen in the Acts of her Assemblies, and Ratified with the Civil Sanction of Parliamentary Authority. To this Purpose, see the Act of Assembly held at Edinburgh, August 17, 1639, Entitled Act Ordaining the Subscription of the Confession of Faith and Covenant, with the Assembly's Declaration; wherein “the General Assembly, by their Act and Ecclesiastical Constitution” (observe them Acting by Virtue of their Intrinsick power) “do approve the foresaid Covenant, in all the Heads and Clauses thereof, and ordains of new” (note the Terms, [ ... ... ... ... ] Custom in your Acts since the Church lost {12} power and Authority) “under all Ecclesiastical Censure, that all the Masters of Universities, Colleges, and Schools, all Scholars at the passing of their Degrees, all persons suspect of Papistry, or any other Errour; and finally, all the Members of this Kirk and Kingdom Subscribe the same.”

Here the National Covenant with this Declaration of the Assembly is made the Terms of the Church's Communion, as well as a Requisite for the Admission of Masters into Colleges, and Schools. See likewise the Act of the General Assembly Convened at Aberdeen, July 28, 1640, Session 5, Entitled Act for Censuring Speakers against the Covenant: Wherein “The Assembly Ordains Ministers that having taken the Covenant, shall speak against it, to be Deprived (here is Exclusion from Ministerial Communion) “and if Continuing so, to be Excommunicate,” (behold Exclusion even from Laick Communion) and not only were Ministers Excluded from it, but also others were Reputed as Perjured, till they gave Publick Satisfaction. As also another Act of that Assembly, Session 10, Entitled, Act Against Expectants Refusing to Subscribe the Covenant. “Ordains, that if any Expectant shall Refuse to Subscribe the Covenant, he shall be Declared Uncapable of a Pedagogy, Teaching a School, Reading at a Kirk, Preaching within a Presbytery, and shall not have Liberty of Residing within a Burgh, University, or College: And if they continue Obstinate, to be Processed.”

Which Acts were Ratified by Civil Authority, Parliament 2d. Act 5, Charles 1st, Anno 1640, Entitled, Act anent the Ratification of the Covenant. The tenor whereof is,

The Estates of Parliament presently Convened by His Majesty's Special Authority, Considering the Supplication of the General Assembly at Edinburgh, the 12th of August 1639, to His Majesty's High Commissioner, and the Lords of His Majesty's Honourable Privy Council, the 30th of August 1639, containing the Answer of the said Supplication, and the Act of the said General Assembly, Ordaining by their Ecclesiastick Constitution, the Subscription of the Confession of Faith, and Covenant, mentioned in their Supplication: And withal having Supplicated His Majesty, to Ratify and Enjoin the same by His Royal Authority, under all Civil Pains, as tending to the Glory of God, Preservation of Religion, the King's Majesty's Honour, and the Perfect Peace of this Kirk and Kingdom: Do Ratify and Approve the said Supplication, Act of Council, and Act of Assembly; and conform thereunto Ordains and Commands the said Confession and Covenant to be Subscribed by all His Majesty's Subjects, of what Quality soever, under all Civil Pains: And Ordains the said Supplication, Act of Council and Act of Assembly, with the whole Confession and Covenant itself, to be Insert and Registrat in the Acts and Books of Parliament, and also ordains the same to be presented at the entry of every Parliament; and that before they proceed to any other Act, the same be publickly read and Sworn to by the whole Members of Parliament, claiming Voice therein, otherways the Refusers to Subscribe and Swear the same, shall have no Place nor Voice in Parliament. And such like ordains all Judges, Magistrates, or other Officers, of whatsoever Place, Rank, or Quality, Ministers at their Entry, to Swear and {13} subscribe the same Covenant.

And that the Solemn League was also made the Terms of the Church's Communion, may be evinced from an Act of the Assembly holden at Edinburgh, August 2, 1643, Entitled, Approbation of the Solemn League and Covenant, which appoints that after its reception and Approbation in the Kingdom of England, it shall be subscribed by all the true Professors of the Reformed Religion. And from an Act of the Assembly met at Edinburgh, May 1644, Entitled, Act against secret Disaffecters of the Covenant. And that this same Solemn League & Covenant was made the Terms of Admission to the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, is evident, from an Act of the Assembly at Edinburgh, July 1648, Entitled, Act for taking the Covenant at the first receiving of the Sacrament, &c. To all which Acts for his further satisfaction, I refer the Reader. Having now shown from the Records of the Church of Scotland, that the true and Genuine Terms of her Communion are our Covenants, National and Solemn League: I come to inquire if these same Covenants be the Terms of Communion; with this now established Church. That those Covenants are not the terms of your Communion is clear from your practice, and the Acts of Parliament enjoining other Oaths in their room.

First, from your Practice in your neglecting those Covenants, never making them of force in your Acts of Assemblies, nor imposing them upon entrants to the Ministry, as a necessary Test of their Faithfulness to the Church of Scotland, your not Preaching up their Obligation, nor moving their Renovation; all which you behooved to do if they were the terms of your Communion. 2dly. From the Acts of Parliament enjoining (as hath been above said) the Oath of Allegiance, and Bond of Assurance, upon all entrants to the Ministry, otherwise they are declared uncapable of any Benefice, yea and upon all in the Ministry already, unless they will be deprived of it, and the Benefice annexed to it. And though you may allege this to be an injurious Imposition of the State, and not therefore to be imputed to the Church, yet you can never make it appear, that you opposed the state in it, but did heartily embrace those Oaths: Which is proven by your excluding of some Ministers and Elders from having Access to, or Voice in your Judicatories, because not thus qualified. But if you still say, that you impose not these Oaths as Terms of your Communion; then I would ask you, what are the Terms of your Communion? Is it subjection to your Judicatures? Then sure I am this is unlawful, for if your Judicatures be unlawfully constitute (as hath been proved) and carrying on unlawful courses, to the subversion of the Ancient Acts and Laws of the Church of Scotland, as is likewise evident from the consideration of their contrariety to her Ancient Practices, then subjection to your Judicatories, does necessarily involve the Persons subjecting themselves, into these courses, and consequently is unlawful. So much for your Terms of Communion. Well, but (say you) though we have suffered the Work of Reformation to be broken down, and have yourselves thrown down those fair corner Stones of Zions Palaces, yet we favour Zion's dust? Who ever doubted but you loved, and favoured the Dust and Rubbish of the Church of Scotland's Reformation, yea with such Respect, that you will never allow (so far as you {14} can) that, that Dust and Rubbish should be any ways restored to its ancient Beauty and Glory. But you'll pray that the Lord may build his House himself, for Men have not courage to do it. I would ask you, is it Men's duty to endeavour the Rebuilding of the Lord's House? Then why do you so vigorously oppose them, who do but tell that you are neglecting this your Duty? Wherefore may not any complain of your slack-handedness in setting about this Work without censure? Yea, Why may none shew their desires, to have this their Lord's House repaired, but presently they must be the Butt of your Malice, and the subject of your virulent Tongues and Pens. There are a Set of Faithful Ministers in the Church (say you) who are troubled for the many Offenses that are given, and for laying so many Stumbling Blocks before the Blind. But will you tell us where they are? And wherein their Faithfulness appears? Is it in a publick Resentment of all the indignities, that have been, and are done to our Lord’s Interest? Is it in keeping their Vows to the most High GOD? Is it in discovering the Sin and Danger of the Times monstrous Defections? Is it in guarding off from, and testifying against the sinful courses, that are carried on in the Judicatories? Is it in purging the Judicatories of Lax, and unsound Members? Is it in opposing the Injurious Usurpations of the secular powers over Christ’s Church, and declaring to them the exceeding danger, & horrible Guilt of their so doing? No: Their Faithfulness lies not so much in these particulars which to assert, might be of dangerous consequence, as the case now stands: but it discovers itself, in their trouble for the many Offences that are given and the stumbling Blocks, that are laid in the way of the Blind. I would gladly have some evidences of this their trouble; is this a token of it, to heap up daily more stumbling Blocks in the way of the Blind, and still to Minister new matter of Offence: But, say you, herein their trouble appears, that They mourn for these things in secret. Indeed, it’s safest Mourning so; and so much only as may well be consistent with rejoicing and thanksgiving for the success of your Queen, and her Idolatrous and Antichristian Allies; which Alliance and Confederacy by you countenanced, and so much extolled, is not the least of these Stumbling Blocks you speak of, laid before the Blind; yea which in a great measure has blinded yourselves, who will needs be accounted to see. But do you really look upon secret Mourning to be a sufficient salvo for all the Perjury, Blood-shed, Apostacy, and high violations of our Marriage Contract with our Lord and Husband (which you grant the Land to be Guilty of)? It seems you do, when it was denied by a solemn Vote in your Assemblies that Breach of Covenant should be put into the Causes of a National Fast Anno 1706. And as for your frequent Testimonies of this your Grief, I wish you would produce them to the World, that you might at length wipe off your selves the too just imputation of unfaithfulness.

I have said already, that I shall leave that part of your Preface which concerns Messrs. Calamy and Fleming, to such as may be more nearly concerned in it. Only I must observe (as I doubt not but every Reader may do) how irrelevant it is to your present purpose. If it be for Anticipating the Objection of unsound Doctrine, because you cannot deny them to be of your Communion who had access {15} to your Assemblies: yet seeing there are a great many more Grounds of exception against you; this one concession, and that with a little probation, as the rest of your Assertions, can make but little for your purpose. I shall willingly pray with you, Lord pluck up what thou didst not plant: But must add, and every degenerate Plant that bears not Fruit to him, but cumbereth the Ground of his Vineyard. What apprehensions the Godly of the Land have of the approaching Judgments; would God, they were such as might have that blessed Effect, and issue as to turn them from these Sins Publick and Personal, which procure those Judgments. So I leave your Preface, upon which I have of necessity been too prolix: But what I have said on it, shall save me of some trouble in answering the Body of your Letter, and Remarks.

---

SIR,

YOUR Interrogative Letter is ushered in with a very special, and plausible Maxim, so correspondent even to Nature’s Light, that none can have any colour or pretext to deny it, viz. As unity, is the very Ligament, Strength, and Bulwark of all Societies, so Division weakens and at length ruins it. And I think your witty method is not a little discovered in it. For your whole scope throughout, being so dubious, and several palpable lies couched in it, it had need of such a Frontispiece. Had you introduced yourself by any Sentence more obscure or suspicious, your Reader might have said Fronti parva fides; and so have taken the better notice of the Falsehoods it contains, and the circumveening scope of it: But, If I mistake not, you have not consulted Truth in the Case; For this Position of yours is not full, whether we respect Human, or Ecclesiastical Societies. That it is not the VERY, or only Strength of Human Societies is certain, unless it be joined with Justice, without which it cannot be long preserved, this being the Original and Support of the other. And without Truth Unity in Ecclesiastical Societies is more dangerous than Division: The want of Unity may and doth exceedingly hurt the Church: But the want of Truth, or the neglect of it, and declining from it does utterly Adulterate her, so that she is no more a Church, but a Synagogue of Satan. Wherefore we must purpose Unity, only in the Lord, as we must do all other Actions: That is, in so far as not to neglect Truth in our pursuance of Peace and Unity. It hath always been (I know) the Maxim of Christ’s Enemies, Divide and Rule: But now they may, for ought I see, alter their Principle, and say, Unite and Rule. For notwithstanding all your Unity, your Enemies are not molested in their Rule. The Prelates of England have more by your Unity, than ever they had formerly, in all the Church’s saddest Divisions: For now they have Presbyterians (though but Nominal) subject to them, keeping Solemnities in conjunction with, and devised by them. Now the Hireling Curates have, nemine contradicente, the peaceable Possession of many Kirks and Manses in this Kingdom, (as {16} was said above) & what do they require more. You fear the imputations of uncharitableness when you charge Mr. M’millan with a design of ruining the Church of Scotland: But you need not so much fear that; for you have left little of that nature for him to do; you have done so well at it yourselves. And how much soever there may be of Informality in Mr. M’millan’s way of managing the Work he is engaged in, yet that will no ways justify you: Nor his Zeal, though it were not according to knowledge, as you allege, be any excuse for your detestable neutrality: Had you behaved yourselves more Zealously for Christ’s cause, there had been less ground for Mr. M’millan’s present courses; which though they cannot be every way, and in every thing justified in an advancing state of the Church, yet in such a declining condition as she is now in, they are become necessary for the preservation and propagation of Truth, and keeping up the Church of Scotland’s ancient Standard. It is not my design to enter into a particular inquiry into every thing proposed in your Queries, whereof not a few are Tautologies, others of them circumveening Fallacies, and most of them already Answered, in substance by Mr. M’millan himself in his true Narrative, and Examination of Mr. Cameron’s Pamphlet upon the said Narrative; And as for such of them as immediately respect his Conscience, as I think he is not bound to give you an Account of it, so in this you shall expect none from me.

Query 1st. How your present disorderly practice, agreeth with the first Paper you gave in to the Commission of the Church sitting at Edinburgh, June 9th, 1704. In which you plainly, and in express Terms (Subscribed with your Hand) declared it was your Judgment, that the Sentences of a Church Judicatory ought to be submitted unto, though unjust, and that redress is to be craved and expected from Superior Judicatories. Sir, This hath always been the Sentiment of Orthodox Divines, and seemed then to have been yours.

Answer: If this was imposed or sustained by the Commission of the Kirk, or given by him illimitedly, then it was a wickedness in both; for if a Church Judicatory should depose or suspend a Minister of the Gospel for some Acts of Faithfulness absolutely necessary in such a juncture, and in which Acts of Faithfulness, he is obliged to persevere, as he will be countable to Christ from whom he receiveth his Mission; Then it will follow (According to this Principle [of yours]) that he must inevitably disobey Christ and forsake his necessary Duty, which how absurd is it? I think this was not the Apostles Sentiment, Acts 5.29, in their Answer to the high Priest and Elders of the Jews. We ought to obey GOD rather than Man. And that this is not the Sentiment of all Orthodox Divines, that the unlawful Sentences of Church Judicatories ought to be obeyed absolutely, might be instanced from several Divines both Ancient, and Modern. See in special, the Judgment of the Venerable Assembly of Divines at Westminster, Chapter 31, Section 3, of our Confession of Faith. The words are, It belongeth to Synods and Councils Ministerially to determine, &c. Which Decrees and Determinations, (mark the Condition) IF CONSONANT TO THE WORD OF GOD, are to be received with Reverence and Submission, &c. You may likewise see for the same purpose, many others quoted by Mr. M’millan in his True Narrative {17} from page 38, to page 51. And if according to the Revealed Will of GOD, there ought to be such Submission in all Cases, without Counteracting, what shall we say of the Practice of the Prophets, Apostles, and others of the People of God, who Lived before us in Corrupt Times? Must all their Preachings and other Actings, thought most agreeable to the Word of God, be Condemned, because they were contrary to the determinations of the Churches wherein they Lived: This were indeed to set up a Papal power over the Word of God, a power for Destruction, and not for Edification. That would indeed make a Sinful Unity, and Order, and Teach a way to avoid Persecution; and readily to obtain Peace with Men; but with the loss of Truth and a good Conscience. But if Mr. M’millan’s Sense was, That the Sentence of a Judicature for alleged (though false) Scandals, and so past Clave errante were to be submitted to for the sake of Peace, and good order, till a Redress should be had from a Superior Judicature; then it helps you nothing: For Mr. M’millan was not Deposed for Scandal, there being none in the Libel and Grounds of the Sentence alleged against him. And though it be too true that Mr. M’millan, what through his own Weakness, what through your industrious Circumvention was carried off his Feet, and Succumbed to you in those Acknowledgments, Yet seeing he has declared in his Narrative, and elsewhere, that its the Matter of his Grief, it cannot invalidate all his after Acts of Faithfulness, nor render him utterly incapable of doing his necessary and incumbent duty, viz. To bear Testimony by publick Preaching against your Backslidings, and all the Sins of the Times, so far as God discovers them to him: Which is that I take to be meant by the Disorderly and irregular Courses you object to Mr. M’millan, which if they justly deserve that Name, let the Word of God be Judge. And whatever Disorder or Irregularity is in them, is (as was just now observed) occasioned by your far greater irregularities in which you persist, and will not be Reclaimed. You object to Mr. M’millan that he should have said, It’s one thing what a Man does out of Conscience, and another what he does for Peace’s sake: Which Sentence of his, makes you apt to believe, that he juggled both with God and Man. And I nothing doubt, but you are apt to believe this and much more of Mr. M’millan, though you had no Ground for it, seeing you have believed and asserted as great Falsehoods in these your Queries, as shall be detected in their proper places: But this being your mere Assertion, you must bring some Probation of it, otherwise I am not concerned to Notice it: But, and if you shall prove it, Mr. M’millan will in all Reason and Justice be allowed to explain his meaning. And if I would allow my self to deal with you by Retortion: How much of this unconscionable Dealing is evident in your whole Conduct? You will not mention the Covenants in your Assembly-Acts for Peace’s sake; You will not reprove the Sins of the State for Peace’s sake; You will not punish Scandalous Offenders for Peace’s sake: Yea, this is almost your whole Defence, when you are told of the wrong Steps and Defects of your Procedure, say you, we must do so and so, for the sake of Peace and Unity. {18}

Query 2d. What Arguments have induced you to alter your Judgment, and to go cross to the Judgment of all Orthodox Divines; if you have found any, produce them, &c.

Answer. I have already shown you, that Mr. M'millan has not gone contrary to the Judgment of all Orthodox Divines, and that he hath Quoted not a few Divines, their Judgment anent this, in his Narrative, to which you may please to have Recourse: Had you Read it before your Letter was Writ, you might have saved yourself of much Superfluous Labour you have put your self to in those Queries. And whereas you allege he has gone cross to his own Judgment, I see no reason why he may not, if at that time by being Conversant with you, who are Men of such a Judgment, he had been unsound in that particular; which yet I have shown you he was not. For I don't think that ever he meaned that Subjection to unjust Sentences is lawful, when they are for express Duty: But only that they ought to be Subjected to, when inflicted for things in themselves really scandalous; but falsely alleged to the Party Censured; and so he goes not contrary to his former Judgment; And granting he did, it were no Reproach to him. Non est pudor ad meliora transire. You say, you have heard of one Argument used by Mr. M'millan: viz. That the Remonstrators [protesters] when Deposed, continued to Preach as he does. Whether Mr. M'millan ever used this as an Argument, I wot not: A precedent indeed it is: But can not, except we speak improperly, be called an Argument. Mr. M'millan's Arguments are taken from a surer Foundation, to wit, his Lord's Commission; his orderly Call and Admission to the Ministry, not yet invalidated, nor can be by any unjust Sentence; the necessity of the Duty of Preaching, and finally the danger of incurring the Anger of God, in case of neglecting so plain and clear a Duty. It is true, all these were in the Remonstrators case, and therefore the same Reasons that moved them to Counter-act the unjust Sentences of the then Judicatures will Warrant him now, the Case being parallel: And any Disparity that I see betwixt the Cases lies chiefly in this, that this present Church is more chargeable with Defection from her Sworn Principles, than at that time she was, and less hope of her being reclaimed from her evil Courses, and that her Constitution is now vitiated (I should have said Subverted) which was not then, though at that time it began to be Corrupted. And though it were granted, that, that was a broken State of the Church, which you say this is not, yet this holds, a fortiori, that there is as good Reason for Mr. M'millan's Preaching, notwithstanding of the Sentence. You urge the Disparity of the Case then, and now, from this, that there was a Party then in the Judicatures which declaimed against the unjust Sentences, (though I don't find any such thing) whereas Mr. M'millan's Sentence was confirmed in the Judicatures from the lowest to the highest, nemine contradicente. But if this commend an unjust Sentence, that it has many Voices approving it, then the Sentences against our Lord, past in the Jewish Sanhedrim were valid Sentences. And let us suppose, a Person duly qualified is Suspended from the Lord's Supper, or the exercise of the Ministry, or Excommunicated and cast {19} out of the Church, because of his pressing and holding forth some precious Truth of God, which a Church Judicature condemneth for a lie, and passeth such Sentences and Censures upon him, because he doth adhere thereunto; shall we say that such a Person is bound not to Communicate, not to Preach the Gospel, or to absent himself from the Fellowship and Prayers of the Saints? You'll say, he is bound so to do for Peace's sake, till his Appeal be Discussed, but what shall the innocent Person do, when it is Discussed, and he Condemned, nemine contradicente, in all the Judicatures, so that he hath not a higher to which he may Appeal. What will you now allow him? Must he still be the Servant of Men? And though the Lord Jesus hath commanded him to Preach the Gospel, to Communicate, to Assemble himself with the Saints; yet he must not do it, because contrary to a Church Sentence, ratified without Opposition, or any contrary Voice; is not this to obey Men rather than GOD?

Query 3d. If the Commission of the Kirk, according to Your Desire (in your Paper given in to them, June 9th, 1704) had Reponed You to the Exercise of the Ministry at Balmaghie; if you would really in that Case, have thought it your Duty to have separate from this Church, &c.

Answer: This Query cannot be Solved, but by a Declaration of Mr. M'millan's Intentions, which I know not; and though I knew them, would not hold my self obliged to relate them: But sure I am, whatever he would have done, he had the same Grounds for so doing then, that he yet hath; unless the Commission had Redressed his Grievances, which, that they are sufficient Grounds of Separation, shall be shown in its proper place. But may not I, altering the Terms a little, thus Retort the Question? If it had not been Criminal to Renew the Covenants, would you have done it? If you could with Your Sovereign's Favour, would you judge it your Duty to purge this Church of Prelatick Teachers? Surely I have no less Reason to inquire this at you, than you have to inquire into Mr. M'millan's Intentions.

Query 4. Is not Your Sin highly aggravated, by counteracting the Sentence of the Presbytery of Kirkcudbright, after the same was Ratified by the Commission? &c.

Answer: This, for substance, is Answered already in the former Queries wherein it's demonstrate, that it was not only Lawful, but necessary for Mr. M'millan so to do; in Regard that, that Act and Sentence of the Presbytery, Ratified by the Commission, puts him (if yielded unto) in an Utter Incapacity for performing his Necessary Duty, and involves him in a Necessity of Sinning, in disobeying God to please Men. And whatever Acknowledgments he gave of the contrary, he has publickly Declared in his Writings, and Doctrinally in his Preaching, that these are the Matter of his Grief and Resentment. And yet you still insist on these, as if that Dissimulation of his (to give it the harshest designation) could admit of no Repentance. If the Ministers of this Church had, in a way Competent to their station, and according to the Scripture Rule, done so much in testifying their Grief, for the Land's Publick and National Sins and Defections, {20} and set themselves, to the utmost of their Power, to Redress the Grievances, which the Godly of the Land groan under; I would have reckoned them unjust that should still have objected these to them, and kept at a Distance from them, upon that account.

Query 5. What Conscience have you made of the Performance of that Solemn Promise in the foresaid Paper, That in the Strength of God you would live more Orderly, and in Subjection to the Judicatures of this Church, and would use your utmost Endeavours to maintain Unity, Concord, and Peace therein?

Answer. This Query is much of a piece with the former, and so needs not a particular Answer. But I hope you will not be offended, if I paraphrase Your Query, thus: What Conscience have you made of that Solemn Promise, and Tremendous Oath of the Covenant, to which you stand engaged, that Solemn Promise, I say, made in presence of Almighty God, the Searcher of all hearts, with a true Intention to perform the same; Wherein you are Bound to endeavour the Reformation (not the Deformation) of Religion in Doctrine, Worship, Discipline, and Government; the Extirpation (not the Confirmation and Establishment) of Prelacy out of these Lands: The Preservation (not the Subversion) of the Privileges, the Rights of Parliament; the Defence of the Kings Majesty in Maintaining and Propagating (not the Suppressing) of Religion? As for what Mr. M’millan promised, if it was contrary to his Duty, he must Retract it, rather than forego his Duty. Besides that Submission promised behooved to be in the Lord, otherwise it was not Lawful for you to accept such a promise, nor for him to give it. And he has Likewise given his Answers to this in his true Narrative, page 52 and 53. You add, Do you now think it was Really a Sin for you to promise to maintain Unity, Concord, and Peace in this Church, if these be your Thoughts, then sure I am you are no Covenanter, being bound to Unity in our Covenants. I shall indeed grant you, if the Unity, Concord, and Peace you speak of were Qualified with the Maintaining and Propagating of Truth (of which its observable you have never a word, being intent to press that only which makes for your purpose) and the Reformation and Flourishing of Religion; then it would be not only no Sin to promise to maintain it; but also really a Duty with all Sedulous Endeavours to perform that promise: But that our Covenants do require Unity without Truth you have yet to Demonstrate: which till you do or otherwise clear yourselves of the Charge of neglecting, and Burying not a few Truths necessary to be asserted, you cannot evince Mr. M’millan to be no Covenanter: And your arguing, seems not to be so sound on this Head, as might have been expected. Your Argument in its Native and Genuine strain runs thus, Our Covenants bind us to Unity so and so qualified. Ergo, it binds us to Unity absolutely, and without these qualifications: which I think not concludent.

Query 6. Did you not once own the Church’s Authority? And if you did (which I suppose you cannot deny) were you not (according to your own Principle) guilty in Concurring with all the steps of Defection you Charge on this Church, &c. {21}

Answer. This is a Dilemma wherewith you urge Mr. M’millan, no doubt, in your Opinion, unanswerable; and yet it pushes not so hard as you conceive: For if by the Authority of the Church, you mean that lawful Power, which Christ hath conferred on his Church, of Ordination and Deprivation, binding and loosing, upon Grounds Relevant and Weighty, shown to be such from his Word, Meeting and Consulting anent things pertaining to his Glory and his Church’s good; Sitting, Voting, and Dissolving at his Appointment, Warrant, and Command; then Mr. M’millan yet owns that Authority and still did. But must he therefore own your Authority, for Destruction many times, rather than Edification? And if Mr. M’millan did, by reason of his want of a full Discovery of the badness of this present Church’s Constitution, really subject himself to her Authority, may he not therefore alter his Course, when he sees it inconsistent with the preservation of Truth? & to say with Seneca, Non est levitas a cognito errore discedere sed ingenue fatendum, aliud put avi, deceptus sum, hæc vera superbæ Stultitiæ perseverantia est; quod semel dixi, vel feci, qualicunque est fixum, ratumque sit. For the second part of your Query: What step of Defection hath the Church of Christ in this Land, been Guilty of betwixt the time you first owned her Authority, and the time of your casting it off? I Answer, Though there had been no step of Defection in the Church all that time (which I do not grant) yet the steps of Defection, whereof she was Guilty before, when discovered, were ground of disowning her while persisting therein. And yet many can be instanced, as for instance reiterated Acts of Erastianism, submitted unto: Such as W. proroguing Assemblies at pleasure by open Proclamation, without Opposition, his dissolving Assembly by his Commissioner, without an ample protest against it. Your Swearing an illimited Oath of Allegiance to A. contradictory to the Covenants; and why should I multiply more, if you please to have recourse to the Grievances offered to the Presbytery of Kirkcudbright by Messrs. R. T. and M. there you will find the steps of Defection chargeable on this Church in that interim of which you speak.

Query 7. If you can produce one Scripture in all the Bible, that will Sufficiently prove, that all those Grievances which you allege to be in this Church, are a Sufficient Ground of Separation from her as now Constitute, &c.

Answer. I am glad that you are now at last come to the Balance of the Sanctuary, that you call your Antagonists to the Law and to the Testimony; and I shall grant you, that if their Principles speak not according to these, there is no Light in them: But if they be found consonant to these, there is no ground for Despising them. And seeing this concerns not Mr. M’millan alone; But likewise many of the Godly in the Land, who could never see it to be their Duty to join with, and adhere to this Church as now Constitute; I Judge it Necessary to Treat somewhat more Largely upon this head, and shall thereby save my pains of giving a particular Answer to your Remarks, wherein you object to Mr. M’millan and Mr. M’Neill the casting off all Ecclesiastick Authority. The THESIS, therefore, which I am to prove from Scripture is this: {22} The Grievances which are really in this Church, and the Defection which she hath made from the Truths Received and Maintained by the Church of Scotland in her Purest times; are sufficient Ground of Separation from her, while Persisted in, and not Reformed. In proving of which, Method would require that I should first set down the Terms of Communion with, and just grounds of separation from a Church in abstracto, that is, without any Relation to this or that Church in particular. 2dly. That I should show, that these Grounds of Separation are really to be found in this Church, and that the lawful terms of Communion with a Church are not in her as now established. But this not being my intention to Write a Volume upon the Subject, which I behoved to do, if I should prosecute this method, and having shown in Answer to the Author’s Preface, that the Terms of Communion which he asserts to be in this present Church, are not so indeed (to which I refer the Reader) I shall only for clearing and confirming the Thesis, 1st. Give an Enumeration of the most weighty Grievances and grossest steps of Defection, obvious in this Church, and prove them to be really chargeable upon her as now Constitute And, 2dly. Adduce the Scriptures warranting and commanding Separation from a Church in these Circumstances, retaining such matter of Grievance, and persisting in such steps of Defection. The first of these I shall do in the following Assertions.

Assertion 1st. This Church is Guilty of all the steps of Defection made in the time of the publick Resolutions from the Purity of the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church of Scotland. The Reasons of my Assertion are, First. Because this present Church hath never declared by Acts of Assembly, that these Courses the Judicatures then took, tending to the ruin of the Church of CHRIST (as the sad Event proved) were sinful and unlawful. 2dly. This Church follows their Foot-steps, in receiving into places of Power and Trust, with their consent, Men Malignant and Disaffected to the cause of God. 3dly. This present Church approves of Association and Confederacy with Idolaters, Hereticks, and Enemies to Truth and Godliness, as the Resolution Party then did; which is irrefragably proven from the Practice of this present Church, in their keeping at the Command of the Magistrate, Diets of Fasting and Thanksgiving for, and in their Publick Prayers making mention of that Confederacy.

Assertion 2d. This present Church is Chargeable with all the Backslidings, Perjury, Bloodshed, Erastianism, Tyranny, & Apostacy from God, and the received Principles of the Church of Scotland, committed in the late Times of Persecution, under Cha. II, and Jam. VII. their Tyrannous Reigns. Perhaps some will say, this is a bold and uncharitable Assertion: But alas its too true and evident. That this is no calumny, but a sober Truth, will appear to any seriously, and without prejudice, weighing those Reasons. 1st. The Ministers guilty of, Connivance at, or Acceptance of the favours and indulgences of Christ’s declared, stated, and avowed Enemies, such as Addressed for, and embraced a Toleration from these Monstrous Tyrants, and that Clogged with Sinful Limitations, {23} and Restrictions utterly inconsistent with the Duty then called for, viz. A Faithful Testimony against Antichristian Idolatry (the Sin being aggreged with those heinous circumstances of consenting to the whole Bloodshed of their Brethren, who Suffered for Displaying a Banner for CHRIST in the Fields, and opposing their Faithful Testimonies, and Warnings, particularly that of Mr. James Renwick, who Died Witnessing against those who had embraced that Toleration) were never called to an Account for these scandalous Practices, nor Censured by this Church, but continued in Ministerial Communion without Acknowledgment of these gross and hateful Evils.

2dly. The perjuring Oaths, Declaration, Test, Abjuration, &c. made in Opposition to our Covenants, and the whole Work of Uniformity in Reformation, imposed by the Perfidious Tyrant Cha. 2d. on purpose, if possible, to eradicate the very Memory of Religion out of the Land; have never been by Act of Assembly declared Infamous and Unlawful, nor the Sin of them discovered, and their Contrariety to our Covenants demonstrated; they have never been explicitly Enumerated in Causes of National Fasts, Persons who accepted them, both Ministers and others, have not been called to make publick Repentance for them; but without Acknowledgement, received to Ecclesiastick Functions. 3dly. As the Oaths Contradictory to our Covenants have never been judicially condemned by the Church, nor by them Required to be Annulled and Rescinded by the State, so neither have the Covenants been Revived and Renewed, nor the Maltreatment they met with, when publickly burnt by the Tyrant’s Command, Confessed and Mourned over Nationally, and by all Ranks. 4ly. They that were the Actual Persecutors and Murderers of the Lord’s People, (I mean, such as pursued them in the Fields, brought them before Courts, sat on their Assizes, marched in Arms against them at Pentland and Bothwell, and at the Tyrant’s Command kept Days of Thanksgiving for their Defeat,) have never been Processed before this Church; yea, even some guilty of those Terrible Evils have been taken into Ministerial Communion. 5thly. And Lastly, This Present Church did not Require of W. and M. nor of their Present Queen, at their Entrance to the Regal Power, that they should acknowledge those Fearful Evils, Sins, Perjuries, and Bloodshed, that the foresaid Tyrants were guilty of, to have been heinous Pollutions of the Throne; as the Church did with Charles 2d. for his Father’s Opposition to the Word of God. By all which it appears, that this Church hath not taken proper Measures, nay, nor any Measures to purge the Land of all that horrid Guilt, and so by necessary Consequence are themselves guilty of it.

Assertion 3d. This Present Church is Erastian, not only, insofar as she is guilty of that complexly with other Evils of the Late Times: (as was shown in the last Assertion) but also in her present Establishment, and Exercise of her Discipline. 1st. Because this Present Church is Constitute upon the same Level with the late Prelacy, (which none doubts to have been Erastian) as may appear from this: 1st. Prelacy was never Ecclesiastically asserted, neither is Presbytery by an Explicit and Formal Act of Assembly since the Revolution. 2ly. The Prelatists High Ecclesiastick {24} Court was Called, Adjourned, and Dissolved in the King’s Name; so likewise are the Assemblies of this Present Church. 3dly. The Prelatists owned the King in the Exercise of his Erastian Supremacy over them; so this Present Church hath never declined the Exercise of that Supremacy in her Annual Assemblies, by an Uniform and Ample Protest, Insert and Recorded in the Assembly-Books. 4ly. King and Parliament prescribed Limits unto, and at their pleasure altered Prelatical Government; so to this Church the King and Parliament have prescribed a Formula, that all the Ordinances within the same, be so performed by the Ministers thereof, as they were then allowed them, or should be thereafter Declared by their Authority, as the very Act itself bears.

2dly. This Church is Erastian in regard her Ministers have embraced and Sworn the illimited Oath of Allegiance, and Subscribed the Bond of Assurance, by the Narrative of the Act imposing it, declared to be a necessary Qualification for all Ministers that would legally enjoy any Benefice in this Land; and that (as was said above upon the Preface) in room of the Covenants, the standing Laws of the Nation, which if it be not a most wicked Usurpation over the Church of Christ, Let God’s word and the Acts of the Church of Scotland determine.

3dly. This Church is Erastian, in regard (as hath likewise been already observed) of her keeping Fasts and Thanksgivings at the Command and Appointment of the Magistrate, a manifest encroachment on the privileges of the Church, and a reproach to her Ministers who has so little Zeal for their Lord’s Interest. All which Acts of Usurpation by the Civil Powers over the Church willingly subjected unto, and suffered without a Testimony against, by the Ministers, do with sufficient evidence infer that which was to be proved, viz. That this Church is Erastian.

Assertion 4th. This Present Church is guilty of, and chargeable with unparalleled Unfaithfulness; as appears almost in every Emergent Providence: To pass many particulars, I instance only the late Union, and Oath of Abjuration. When the Late Union was on foot, it became the Ministers of this Church, and particularly the Commission then Sitting, not to have dealt with the Parliament by Addresses only, (in a Matter of so great Import and Moment, as well to Religion as Civil Liberty) and that only for some Additional Acts or Clauses, for the Securing to them their Present Establishment; but Faithfully to have Remonstrate to them by Protestations, and to the whole Kingdom by Declarations, (as was the Practice of the Church of Scotland, in Cases of like Danger to the Interest of Religion) the Utter Inconsistency of such an Union, with the Safety of Religion, and with that Noble Work of Uniformity in Religion, though, alas! now Buried and Forgot: Yea by this Union utterly incapacitate to be again revived. They ought to have in their publick Acts declared their Resentment of such a course; and in their Sermons to have shown to the People, the Sin and Danger of any way complying with, or Contributing to support it. And yet none of these things were done: But on the contrary they were either Silent altogether, or Ambiguous in the Application of their Doctrine to it, {25} and in their Prayers for it; Many using these or the like doubtful expressions, “That if it were for the Glory of God he might prosper it, if not, that he would prevent and overturn it,” thereby leaving their Flocks which they pretend to Feed without Light and Direction as to the Sin or Duty of it, contrary to that Comfortable Promise, given by God to his Church, concerning her Ministers, Malachi 2.7, For the Priests Lips should preserve knowledge, and they should seek the Law at his mouth, for he is the Messenger of the Lord of Hosts. And such as seemed then to be against it, have since evidenced themselves for it, being Reuben-like, unstable as Water, and therefore cannot expect to excel.

As for the Oath of Abjuration, they did not Faithfully Warn the Court of the Injury done to Religion by Imposing New Oaths, or Bonds without the Consent of the Church; contrary to an Act of Assembly holden at Edinburgh July 28, 1648, Session 18, “Enjoining all Members of the Church to forbear the Swearing or Subscribing any new Oaths, or Bonds in the common Cause, without Advice and Concurrence of the Church; especially any Negative Oaths or Bonds, which may any way Limit, or restrain them in the Duties whereunto they are obliged by National, or Solemn League and Covenant”: For as it was plainly declared by the Assembly, that it was a sin for Church Members that are Subjects to Swear such Oaths, so likewise it must be a sin for the State to impose them. And when the Ministers had for ends best known to themselves, (for they have not made them known to the World) evaded this Oath, they left their Flock without Faithful Discovery of the sin of it, as it necessarily involves in it a Swearing That the Successor to the Crown of Britain shall be of the Communion of the Church of England, and so is an express Breach of our Solemn League and Covenant, herein personating the Hireling, of whom our Lord gives this Character, that when he seeth the Wolf coming, he leaveth the Sheep and fleeth, John 10.12. Moreover some did Counsel People to take it, telling them it was no sin, but Duty to Swear against a Popish Pretender; but not showing the Perjury couched in it. And those who have taken it are not Censured: But some of them received and continued to be Ruling Elders, and admitted to the Holy Table of the Lord. From which Instances (though many others might have been brought) it is more than apparent, what unparalleled unfaithfulness to the Cause, and Interest of Christ, and the Souls of their People, the Ministers of this Church are chargeable with. It were endless to enumerate all the particular Steps of Defection, this Church is guilty of; together with their several Aggravations and magnifying Circumstances, viz. Of a willful, obstinate, and irreclaimable continuance, and progress in all these enumerate, and many other sinful Courses, contrary to God's Word, and express Vows, and Covenants; And that so soon after such a Glorious Reformation as the Church attained unto betwixt 1638 and 1650.

Seeing then, the Ministers of this Church are Actually or Virtually, Directly or Indirectly Guilty of all these fore-mentioned sins. viz: Apostasy from former {26} received and professed Principles, consonant to God's Word; Perjury, and Breach of Covenants, and Vows made for the Defence of these Principles; Bloodshed, even of their Covenanted Brethren, who were put to Death for Adherence to these Principles, from which they are Declining; Erastianism, giving up the Privileges of Christ's Church, to the Will and Disposal of his Enemies, and taking their License, and holding of them not of Christ, the sole head and King in his Church; Unfaithfulness, not Warning the people of whatever Rank and quality, of the Sins and evils Practiced and carried on in the Land; and finally of Sinful silence, Indifferency, and Neutrality in the Cause of God; I would ask at every Unprejudiced Person, who have not set up the Stumbling Block of their Iniquity before their Eyes, and have any Impression of the Heinous and Dreadful Guilt of those Sins, whether they Judge those Sufficient Grounds of Depriving any one Person of the Sacred Office of the Ministry, while not Repented of and forsaken? If it be Granted, that they are, then will it not much more hold, that a whole National Church being Guilty of, and Persisting in such Sins; Seeing they are really worthy of Deprivation, and are Condemned and Sentenced by God's Word, and the Faithful Acts of free and well Constitute General Assemblies (though they be not formally Condemned and Censured, Because there wants Faithful Judicatures to do it) ought to be separate from, and Disowned by all who will not incur the Participation of those Sins, and consent to the Violation of those Acts. The Reason of the Consequence is clear, For if the Sins, which will Validly Deprive a Person of the Exercise of the Ministry, considered in themselves, be Clothed with other Aggravations, they will much more do it. And certainly when these forementioned Sins are National, they are highly Aggravated beyond what they are, when only Personal.

Having now laid down some of the Weightiest Grievances, and most Comprehensive Steps of Defection, and proven them really to be chargeable upon this Church, as now Constitute: It remains for the Establishing of the Thesis, that I adduce some places of Scripture, that may evince these Sins, enumerate and proven to be in this Church, to be (while persisted in) sufficient Grounds of Separation from her. But here I must observe (in transitu) how the Author of this Letter has the Boldness & Impudence, to require one Scripture in all the Word of God, that may Warrant Separation from this church, when almost the whole Current of it strikes directly against her present Courses. See Ezra 9.14, Should we again break thy Commandments, and join in affinity with the People of these abominations? Wouldest thou not be angry with us, till thou hadst consumed us; that there should be no remnant, nor escaping? Here the Holy Penman by an Interrogation, importing one of the strongest Negations imaginable, asserts it unlawful to join with the People of these Abominations: Now certainly to join in Church-Communion, is equally, yea, more dangerous, than in Conjugal Contracts, (as the case is here;) and the Reason given against Affinity, in Deut. 7.4, will hold as well in the Case of Church Communion, to wit, Lest they with whom we join, turn away our hearts from the Lord and his way. But this Church being guilty of all the forementioned abominations (as is proven) and having thereby {27} departed, in tanto, from God, are apt to draw others away after them, to break God's Commandments. Ergo, She is to be separated from. See for another Proof of this, Proverbs 22.28, Remove not the Ancient Landmark, which thy Fathers have set. If it be a dreadful and accursed thing to remove our Neighbours Marks and Bounds: O! how much more dreadful is it to change and alter God's Land-marks, his Privileges, Oaths, and Covenants! which this Church hath done; and is therefore, if we will not be guilty with her of the same, to be separated from, while so doing. Turn over to Isaiah 8.12, Say ye not a Confederacy, to all them to whom this People shall say a Confederacy, Compared with Jerem. 2.18, What hast thou to do in the way of Egypt, to drink the Waters of Sihor? Or what hast thou to do in the way of Assyria, to drink the Waters of the River? v. 19, Thine own Wickedness shall correct thee, and thy Backsliding shall reprove thee. If the Lord instructed the Prophets, and the Godly with them, not to say a Confederacy, and that but a Civil one, with Egypt for self-Defence; how much more are we not to say a Confederacy with this Church, and that in matters Religious, which is going back to Egypt, and so is more guilty before God, and more dangerous to be joined with than the Egyptians were, who though they were Idolaters, yet had never been Reformed from it. And so according to this place, this present Church ought to be separated from. See likewise for this, Jer. 23. v. 14, They strengthen also the Hands of evil Doers, that none doth return from his wickedness, compared with verse 16, Thus saith the Lord of Hosts, hearken not unto the words of the Prophets, that Prophesy unto you, &c. Now it is evident that the Ministers of this Church do strengthen the hands of the wicked; partly by Example, going before others in Backsliding; partly by neglecting to punish and censure Evil-doers, whereby others are emboldened to go on in the like evil courses, and partly in maintaining the present powers; while acting contrary to the Covenanted Reformation. What then is to be done in this case? The Lord by his Prophet expressly tells us, we must not hearken to them. And this Command we cannot obey, if we keep still Communion with them, for thereby we do corroborate their evil Examples to our power; and declare ourselves willing to hearken to them; As therefore we would obey this Command, we must separate from this present Church. Glance forward to Ezek. 22.25,26,28,31, There is a Conspiracy of her Prophets in the midst thereof; her Priests have violated my Law, and profaned mine holy things: they have put no Difference between the holy and profane, neither have they shewed difference between the unclean and the clean. Surely this is applicable to the Ministers of this present Church: For seeing their Unity is not in the Lord, and according to the Bond of our Holy Covenants, it cannot but be a Conspiracy: And they neglect to put Difference between the clean and unclean, by receiving into Church Communion (as is already proven) and into Offices in the Church Men unclean, that is, such as are not purged from their Scandalous Practices. Verse 28, And her Prophets {28} have Daubed them with untempered Mortar, &c. This likewise is most evident in this present Church, by all means seeking to palliate, and Plaster over all these evils that are couched in her; but not to purge them out, and amend them. And so to build on the Ancient Basis, and endeavour to keep a good Superstructure. Now see what is that, the Lord Threatens against such, verse 31, To pour out his Indignation upon them, to consume them with the fire of his Wrath? Which, as we would escape, we must separate from these courses, and by consequence from the Men of these courses which deserves this indignation, and may expect, if they Repent not, to be consumed, according to this Threatening. In the New Testament, See Matthew 18.15,16,17, Moreover if thy Brother shall trespass against thee, go & tell him his fault between him & thee, &c. If we are to esteem our Brother as an Heathen-man, and a Publican, upon the account of Personal and private Scandals, in case he hear not the Church, how much more ought we to do so upon the account of publick and National Scandals and Offences: But the Ministers of this present Church being guilty of publick and National Scandals and Offences (as has been proven in the foregoing Assertions) do Refuse to hear the Church; ergo, they are to be accounted and held, while so doing, as Heathens and Publicans, and so are to be separated from. The Minor [proposition] (viz: That the present Ministers do Refuse to hear the Church) is evident, because though they have been admonished and testified against, by not a few of the Godly in the Land, and Grievances offered to them by Ministers and private Persons, and a Redress craved, and they called to hear the Church; that is, the standing Acts and Laws of the Church, yet they have never hearkened to these Acts and Statutes, but go quite contrary to them, and will not, according as these Acts require, confess and acknowledge their Scandals and Offences.

As also, Romans 16.17, and 18, Now I beseech you, Brethren, mark them which cause Divisions and Offences, contrary to the Doctrine which you have Learned: And avoid them, verse 18, For they that are such, serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own Belly; and by good Words, and fair Speeches Deceive the hearts of the Simple. Here the Apostle commands us to Mark and avoid them, that cause Divisions and offences, contrary to the Doctrine which we have Received: But the Ministers of this present Church, cause Divisions and Offences contrary to the Doctrine which we have Received, and therefore, we are to mark and avoid them. The Minor [proposition], viz: That the Ministers of this present Church do cause Divisions and Offences, contrary to the Doctrine we have received, I have proved at large in the foregoing Assertions, and in Answer to the Author's Preface, and therefore need not do it here. Turn over to 2 Thess. 3.6, and 14, Now we command you Brethren, in the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw yourselves from every Brother that walketh Disorderly and not after the Tradition which he received of us. Verse 14, And if any Man obey not our word by this Epistle, note that Man, and have no Company with him, that he may be ashamed. The Apostle in this Place by a most {29} pathetic and pithy Exhortation, and command in the Name, and backed with the Authority of Jesus Christ, does expressly charge us to withdraw from every Brother that walketh disorderly, and not according to the Tradition received, And I have already demonstrate, that the Ministers of this present Church do walk most disorderly, (for the context shews that the Apostle is speaking of them, who would not work with their hands, which holds true of the Ministers by Analogy, who work not the Work incumbent upon them) and contrary to the Ancient Acts and Ordinances of the Church of Scotland, which are the Tradition we have received. Therefore we are to withdraw from them, and every one of them, while they continue so disorderly, according to this charge given us by the Apostle.

For further confirming the point, that separation from this present Church is lawful and necessary, as the case now stands, I shall adduce two or three Sentences from our Approved Authors. The Grave and Learned Mr. Durham in his Commentary upon Revelation, chapter 1, page 55, hath these Words:

In the matter of hearing it is not so hard to discern who are to be Accounted, to speak without GOD's Commission; Because ordinarily, such have either no warrantable Call at all, (no not in the outward Form; and so cannot be Accounted, but to run unsent) or, by palpable Defection from the Truth, and Commission given them in that Call, they have Forfeited their Commission, and so no more are to be accounted Ambassadors for Christ, or Watchmen of his Flock, than a Watchman of the City is to be Accounted an Observer thereof, when he hath publickly made Defection to the Enemy, and taken on with him.

Now it's evident from the foregoing Assertions, That the Ministers of this Church have made gross Defection from, and are greatly Unfaithful in the Discharge of their Commission, and so consequently according to this Author, have insofar and for the time Forfeited their Commission; and if so, who can be blamed for separating from them? Consider likewise the Reasons brought by the same Author, why we should not Countenance such as have thus made Defection from their Commission. ibid.

1. The Countenancing of such, puts the Person so doing in the hazard of a snare &c. 2. It carries Offence along with it in reference to the Party who runs unsent (or, which is the same thing, has by palpable Defection forfei