£ 
 
A N 
 
 APOLOGY 
 
 FOR THE 
 
 Presbyterians of Scotland 
 
 Who are Hearers of 
 The Reverend , 
 
 Mr- George Whitefield, 
 
 SHEWING, 
 
 That their keeping Communion with him, iri 
 the Ordinances of the GOSPEL, ftand 3 j li- 
 ft ified by the Trine if les and TraBke of the 
 CHURCH of SCOTLAND from the 
 REFORMATION to this Day, efpecially by 
 the Weftminfter CONFESSION of FAITH, and 
 Solemn League and Covenant. 
 
 EDINBURGH, 
 
 Primed by T. Lumisden and J. Robertson, and fold 
 at their Printing-houle in the Fifi-markt. 
 
 M.DCGXLII. 
 
( 3 ) 
 
 A N 
 
 
 APOLOGY 
 
 FOR THE 
 
 Presbyterians of Scotland 
 
 Who are Hearers of 
 The Reverend 
 
 Mr. George Whitefeld. 
 
 HE Reflexions of late thrown out 
 againft the Hearers of the Reverend 
 Mr. WbitefieUl in general are fo fre- 
 quent, and there has been ib much 
 Noile railed againft the Presbyterians 
 in particular who countenance his pu« 
 blick Miniftrations, as if, by fb doing, 
 they acled inconliftently with them- 
 lelves, and virtually condemned the 
 Practice of their worthy Forefathers, who, in the late 
 Reigns, iuffcred lb much for refufing to hear the Epilcopal 
 Clergy, leveral of whom mull be allowed to have been 
 good Men, and to have preached the Calvinift DocTrine as 
 well as Mr. WhitefieM, that we have judged it would not 
 be unacceptable to the Publick, to have this Matter let in a 
 true Light ^ and, in order to which, we propole to fhew, 
 Firfti The State and Circumftances of our Church un- 
 der the Epifcopacy introduced upon the Reft oration. 
 
 A a Secondly y 
 
(.4 ) 
 
 Secondly i The Reafons which on that Occafion induced our 
 Forefathers, to refufe Obedience to the Law obliging them 
 to fubmit to the Miniftry of the then Epiftopal Incumbents. 
 Thirdly, We fhall account for the different Conduct of 
 thofe in our firft Period of Epilcppacy, from the Year itfio 
 to the 1 6 3 6, who fubmitted to the then Epifcopal Mini- 
 fters, without any fuch Oppofition as happened after the 
 'Restoration, fourthly, We fhall fhew, that as our join- 
 ing with Mr. WhitefieU in the Ordinances of the Gofpel 
 flands juftified by the Principles and Practice of our Church 
 from the Reformation, {6 alio by cur Weftrainfter Confef- 
 fion, and Solemn League and Covenant. 
 
 With refpedH to the Firft, As Nations, as well as Perfons, 
 deal too often in Extremes j ib the Engiip Nation, from 
 a wanton lawleis Liberty in Religion as well as Civil 
 Government under the Ufiirpation, run into a far greater 
 Height of arbitrary Government than ever, of which we in 
 Scotland felt the miferable Effects. And altho' Presbytery 
 is well confident with a limited Monarchy, as is plain from 
 upwards of Fifty Years Experience fince the Revolution ; 
 yet it is too much pofTefled of the Principles of Liberty, 
 to fubfift with an abiblute Government. 
 
 Wherefore, upon the Refioration, Presbytery was caflii- 
 red, to make Way for Epifcopacy, and a bold Supremacy, 
 an order to complete the moft abiblute Tyranny pver both 
 Church and State, that ever this Nation knew before ; which 
 will beft appear from a fhort Recital of a few of the Acts 
 of Parliament whereby it was introduced, and thele moil 
 rigidly execute upon the moft modeft Oppofer, and which 
 Acts are neceflary in the after Reaibning. 
 
 i?)2o, By the firft Acl of Parliament 1661, the Oath of 
 Supremacy is enacted, " Declaring the King Supreme over 
 " allPeribns, and in all Caufes, (£c. fwearing never to de- 
 V claim his Power or Juriidiclion, &c." This is called an 
 Oath of Allegiance, and conceived in Terms fbmewhat 
 floubtful as to the Supremacy thereby intended, and on 
 that account refuted by many 5 but the Ambiguity was ex- 
 plained to the utmoft Extent of Supremacy, by the firft: 
 Ail of the next Sefiion introducing Epifcopacy, Th/s 
 
 QatJ} 
 
( s ) 
 
 Qath was fworn by the Parliament, and then by all Per- 
 ibns in Truft through the Nation. 
 
 zdo, By the z6th Act of the lame Parliament 166 i y no 
 Minifter can be prefented to any Church until he fwear this 
 Oath of Supremacy. 
 
 3?/o, By the firft Aft of Parliament 1662, Epifcopacy 
 is enadted, and with it the mod absolute Supremacy imagi- 
 nable, as an inherent Right of the Crown : It begins thus, 
 *' Forafmuchas the Ordering and Difpoial of the external 
 " Government and Policy of the Church, doth belong to 
 " his Majefty as an inherent Right of the Crown, by ver- 
 " tue of Jiis Royal Prerogative and Supremacy in Caules 
 ** Ecclcfiaftical, £jfc. it is declared, That whatever fhall 
 " be determined by his Majefty, with the Advice of the 
 •' Archbifhops and Bifhops, &c. fhall be valid and efre&u- 
 " al, &c. And refcinds and annuls all Acts of Parliament, 
 " or of the Church, which may be interprete to have given 
 *' any Church Power, Jurifdi&ion or Government, to the 
 " Office-bearers of the Church, $$C, other than that which 
 *' acknowledged a Dependence upon the fbvereign Power 
 *' of the King as Supreme, $$c. to be regulate, &c. by the 
 " Archbifhops and Bifhops, who are, gfo to be account- 
 u able to his Majefty for their Adminiftration." 
 
 4/0, By the 2d Acl of this fame Parliament 1662, it is 
 declared, " That if any Peribn or Perfons, by Writing, Print- 
 *' ing, Praying, Preaching, orRemonftrance, expreisorde- 
 *' clare any Words or Sentences, £S?£. to the Diflike of his 
 " Majefty's Royal Prerogative and Supremacy in Caules 
 4< Ecclcfiaftical, or of the Government of the Church by 
 " Archbifhops, Bifhops, ££?r. fuch fhall be liable to the 
 f* Pains therein-mentioned." 
 
 5?o, By the 3d Acl of this fame Parliament 1662, the 
 Churches of all fuch Minifters as had entred fince the Year 
 1649 are declared vacant 5 allowing neverthelels every fuch 
 Minifter to be re-admitted to theie their Churches, upon 
 their accepting a Prelentation from the Patron, and Collation 
 from the Bifliop of the Pioceie 3 and, by the Aft, the Pa- 
 tron is obliged to preient them. 
 
 Gto, By the 4th Aft of this fame Parliament 1662, every 
 Mjnifter within the Church is appointed to attend the Vifi- 
 
 rations 
 
( 6 . ) 
 
 tations of the Dioccfe by the Bifhop or thole appointed by 
 him, as alio his Dioceian Aflemblies $ and to affift in all 
 Acls of Dilcipline, as he fhall be required by the Arch- 
 bifhop or Bilhop : And, in cale of his Ablence from any of 
 thefe, he fhall for the firft Fault be fufpended ab officio & 
 beneficio, and for the lecond depoled. This A£t alio di£ 
 chargeth all Meetings in private Houles for religious Exer- 
 cifes, other than by the Members of the Family, 
 
 By thefe Acls, every Minifler within the Church was 
 brought under the miferable Alternative, either to comply 
 with this rigid Epilcopacy he had but lately abjured, or be 
 turned out of his Church, and dilchargcd theExercile of his 
 Min iffcry fo much as in a private Family. 
 
 From the Writings of thele Times, of good Credit, we 
 are informed of the following Particulars j That, before the 
 Reftoratiotiy a Spirit of Religion and Godlinefs did much 
 abound, with an outward moral Deportment luitable there- 
 to. It was rare to meet with Families where the Worihip 
 of God was not to be found, and as rare to have heard fb 
 much as a profane Oath, or to have leen a Perfon drunk 5 
 which thereafter became ordinary Offences, but were then a 
 very great Scandal. And which, under God, did proceed 
 from the painful and fuccelsful Labours of a Multitude of 
 zealous and faithful Minifters, who were, upon the Reft ora- 
 tion, all turned out of their Churches, for no other Caufe 
 than that they would not fubmit to the Prelacy, which they 
 had but lately abjured as contrary to the Word of God 5 and 
 were obliged to remove from their Houles and Parifhes, 
 with their Families, they knew not where : And for preach- 
 ing in Corners, and among Hills and Delerts, they were de- 
 clared Rebels, and hunted from Place to Place, until they 
 were forced to flee theii* native Country, and wander in fo-* 
 reign Parts. 
 
 Above one third Part of the Minifters of Scotland^ and 
 thele the moll eminent of them for Piety and Learning, 
 moitly in the South and Weft Parts, were thus turned out of 
 their Churches 5 while near the other Two thirds of them, 
 generally through the North and Ifles, did fubmit to Epilco- 
 pacy. 
 
 The Churches thus vacated were, by the Bifhons, filled 
 
 with 
 
( 7 ) 
 
 with fuch as they could find. Bifhop Burnet's Account of 
 them is in thefe Words : " The new Incumbents, who were 
 " put in the Places of the ejected Preachers, were generally 
 " very mean and defpicable in all RelpefK They were 
 " the worft Preachers I ever heard ; they were ignorant to a 
 r Reproach, and many of them were openly vitious; they 
 " were a Diigrace to their Orders, and the iacred Funttion, 
 " and were the Dreg and Refufe of the Northern Parts. 
 " Thole of them who arole above Contempt and Scandal, 
 *' were Men of fuch violent Tempers, that they were as 
 ** much hated as the others were defpifed." And this his 
 Character of them agrees with the other Accounts of thole 
 Times. Now, fuch having no other Title to their Churches 
 than the Prefentation of the Patron, and Collation of the 
 Bifhop, were thruft upon their Parifhes. 
 
 Wherefore their Reception generally was bad t In fbme 
 Places they were received with Tears and Entreaties to be 
 gone, and in other Places with Realbns and Arguments they 
 could not anfwer, and others entertained them with Affronts 
 and Indignities too many to be repeated j while the more 
 grave and ferious mourned in fecret over the mifcrable Ex- 
 change, and, from a Principle, could never fubmit to hear 
 them or countenance their Miniftry. The Effect, of which 
 was empty Churches through whole Counties of the Nation. 
 
 And as this Epifcopacy, the Idol of the State, wanted 
 now nothing to make it complete but the Submiflion of the 
 Nation, from the Reformation averfe to it, therefore, by 
 the id Ait of 3d Seffion of this firft Parliament itftf?, 
 cgainfl Separation, it is ftatute as follows, " And as his 
 *' Majefty doth expert from all his dutiful Subjects an 
 *' Acknowledgment of, and hearty Compliance with, his 
 *' Government Ecclefiaftical and Civil, as now eftablifhed 
 " by Law, gjfc. and that, in order thereunto, they will give 
 11 their cheerful Concurrence, Countenance and Afliftance to 
 " fuch Ministers as, by publick Authority, are or mall be 
 " admitted into their ieveral Parifhes, and attend all the 
 • ordinary Meetings for divine Worfhip in the fame 3 lb his 
 M Majefty doth declare, that he will account a withdrawing 
 u from, and not keeping and joining in, thele Meetings, to 
 * c be feditious, {fc. And that all and every Perfon, whd 
 
 « ihaU 
 
( 8 ) 
 
 " fhall hereafter ordinarily and wilfully withdraw and ab- 
 " lent themfelves from the ordinary Meetings of divine Wor- 
 *' /hip in their own Parifh-church on the Lord's Day, fliall 
 <c incur the Pains and Penalties under-written, viz. Each 
 " Nobleman, Gentleman, or Heritor, the Lofs of a fourth 
 " Part of each Year's Rent in which they fhall be accufed 
 " and convicted ; and every Tenant or Farmer, the Lois of 
 " fuch Proportion of his free Moveables (after Payment of 
 " his Mailer's Rent) as his Majefty fhall think fit, not ex- 
 " ceeding a fourth Part thereof; and every Burgefs the Lois 
 <l of the Liberty of Merchandizing, and all other Privi- 
 «' leges within Burgh, and a fourth Part of his Moveables." 
 All which Fines the Council are, by the Act, appointed to 
 caufe levy, and to inflict fuch other corporal Punifhment as 
 tney fhall think fit. 
 
 In January -thereafter: \66 4, the High CommlJJion Court 
 was erected, confifting of Archbifhops, Bifhops, and the 
 other Ecclefiaftick and Laick Perfbns therein named by his 
 Majefty ; the Ihameful Inftance of a Proteftant Inquifition. 
 To this Court the Execution of this laft Aft, and the whole 
 other Laws againft the Presbyterians, was committed : And 
 the regular Troops were lent through the Country for levy- 
 ing thefe Fines, who everywhere took free Quarters, with 
 many other Barbarities, until the Fines were paid. And, 
 by the Repetition of thefe Fines, Multitudes of honeft 
 People being robbed of all their Subftance, were forced 
 to wander in Deferts, and from Place to Place, in the Want 
 of all Things. 
 
 Many, who could not bear to be thus robbed of their 
 Subftance, complied to hear thefe Epifcopal Incumbents, 
 whom they called Curates, but defpifed them in their 
 Hearts - 7 their Practice (as our Authors fay) was lb unwor- 
 thy of their Profeffion. However, feveral of thefe Curates 
 being lound in their Doctrine, and regular in their Lives, 
 not only reconciled their Parifhes to hear them, but alfo in 
 Time brought them to a liking of Epifeopacy itfelf. 
 
 And as this their refufing to hear the Curates was really 
 the Ground-work of the many and grievous Hardfhips after- 
 wards infli&ed upon the Presbyterians during this Period, 
 thro' the Obftinacy of the Government to force Epifeopacy 
 
 on 
 
On the Nation 5 and which, however, could never be ef- 
 fectual, until the Nation was brought to lubmit to it, in 
 order to complete the ablblute Tyranny over both Church, 
 and State then intended : Such as did iubmit to hear 
 fuffered no Hardfhips, but were accounted the Friends of 
 the Government, from their bare Attendance on the Mi- 
 niftry of thele Curates 3 while thofe, who refuted to hear, 
 were efleemed the Enemies of the Government, and profc- 
 cute as above, merely for this fimple Refufal to hear, and 
 which was all they could now do to flgnify their Difappro- 
 bation of the Violence then done to both Church and State : 
 For, at this Time, no Perlbndurft either preach, pray, write, 
 print, or fpeak againft thele, or any Thing clfc the Govern- 
 ment was pleaied to do 3 as appears by the 4 th Act before- 
 recited. 
 
 And however this their rcfufing to hear the Curates may- 
 appear to fome at this Dav, to be an Article too weak ancl 
 eircumftantial to have founded fuch Suffering upon 5 yet it 
 is to their Stedfaftnels and Perleverance in this and ibmc 
 other Things, that we, at this Time, owe all the Liberty, 
 Peace and Tranquillity we have enjoyed flnce the Revo! ut ion t 
 as a Mean in the Hand of Providence to bring about that 
 happy Event of our Freedom from Tyranny and arbitrary 
 Power. Wherefore, 
 
 II. We fhall give the Reafons which induced thefe one 
 worthy Predeceflbrs to furFer any Hardships, rather than fub- 
 mit to hear thele Epifcopal Incumbents, then called Curates 
 by the Vulgar 3 and, as we go along, fhall fliow under each 
 Realbn, that none of them do at all concern our hearing 
 Mr. Whiteficld, except the Epifcopacy and Supremacy, our 
 Aniwer to which is referved to the fourth and laft Head. 
 
 Reason I. From the Ac! of Parliament laft recited, 
 the hearing of thele Curates, required by that Act, was 
 an Attendance upon all ordinary Meetings for divine Wor- 
 fhip dilpenied by them 3 and that as an Evidence, not only 
 of their hearty Compliance ivith the Government Ecckfiafti- 
 cnl and Civil as then appointed by La-iv (which was the fore- 
 laid Epifcopacy and Supremacy in the Church, and Tyranny 
 in the State) but alio as an Evidence of their cheerful Coh- 
 
 B current e 
 
( ' io ) 
 
 cumnce, Countenance and Affi fiance to the Minifiry of tbefe 
 Curates, as fettled in their Tarifiies by that Authority : For 
 the one is expreily affirmed to be in order to the other, and 
 therefore an Evidence of it. 
 
 ifi, Let it be only fuppofed, that the hearing of Epif- 
 copal Incumbents was in its Nature lawful, as was the Practice 
 of Presbyterians in the Period before the Year \6 3 8, (and 
 in certain Cafes, and upon certain Conditions, it will be 
 made appear that it is lawful 5 but, at prefent, it is only 
 fuppofed to be fo) yet, as the Hearing then required by the 
 forefaid A6t is in order to fhew, and as an Evidence of, 
 their hearty Compliance with the Prelacy and Supremacy in 
 the Church, and Tyranny in the State, then eftablifhed by 
 Law, it was impoffible for any Presbyterian to give that 
 Hearing without Sin. The Heathen Perfecutors ufed to re- 
 quire the Chriftians to throw their Bibles into the Fire, to 
 fave themielves from it, which they refuted 5 and then con- 
 defcended that they Should only throw a Bit of Paper into 
 the Fire inftead of the Bible, but this they alio refuied, 
 chufing rather to be burnt themielves. The Cafes are pre- 
 cisely parallel : For, as throwing a Piece of Paper into the 
 Fire, and hearing the Curates (when fuppofed lawful) are 
 innocent ; yet, being connected with, and Evidences of, 
 other finful Acls as above, they are Sin : But we mull i'ufrer 
 rather than fin. 
 
 idly, The Hearing of thele Curates, required by the Aci, 
 is an Attendance upon all the ordinary Meetings for Ijivine 
 Wcrfioip by them diipenied 3 joined with a cheerful Concur- 
 rence, Countenance and Affifiance to their Minifiry, as fettled 
 in their c Parifijes by the Authority therein-mentioned, merely 
 Erafiian. Now, as the then Presbyterians had but lately, 
 by the Covenants, fworn to the Do£lrine and Government, &c. 
 of their Presbyterian Church as conform to the Word of God, 
 and on that account had abjured Popery, Prelacy, ££?<;. be- 
 caule contrary thereto : Therefore, if any fuch believed his 
 Principles on that Head to be conform to the Word, and his 
 fuperadded Obligation from the Oath he had fworn, it was 
 impoffible for him to give Obedience to this Adl, without 
 Sin, and manifeft Terjury 5 fo that Suffering was much 
 more eligible. 
 
 Now, 
 
( II ) 
 
 Now, is our hearing of Mr. Whiiefiell required of us as 
 an hearty Approbation of, or Submiflion to, Epiicopacy and 
 Supremacy, or of our Submiflion to it in any Sort ? Were 
 that the Cafe, we are fure as little Countenance would have 
 been given, even by us at this Day, to any of his Mini- 
 ftrations, upon fuch Terms, as by our worthy Predeceflbrs 
 at the Reitoration. Nay, did Mr. Wbitefidd fo much as 
 attempt to juftify his Epiicopacy, by teaching us Arguments 
 in favours of it, we believe he would have few Hearers ; 
 But, on the contrary, he appears amongft us as a Presby- 
 terian, laying afide all that belongs to his Epiicopacy, for 
 the Pleafure he has of preaching to usChrift and him only ; 
 and hath openly declared, from the Pulpit, before the moft 
 numerous Congregations, that our Presbyterian Church 
 (whatever were his former Sentiments^ is the belt constitute 
 National Church upon Earth : And that he acknowledges 
 no Head of the Church but Jefus and him only. 
 
 Reason II. They tell us, They could never give O- 
 bedience to the forefaid Aft, by acknowledging thefe Cu- 
 rates as the lawful Ministers of the Parifhes into which they 
 had intruded themlelves : For, as Presbyterians, they be- 
 lieve that this Church, as well as every other true Church, 
 has a Right to introduce her own Paltors, according to the 
 Order preicribed by God's Word j but thefe Curates were 
 thruft into their Churches over the ftrongeft Oppofition of 
 their Parifhes, and without the Conlent of any Judicatory, 
 who were all then cafhired ; lb that they could pretend no 
 Right to thefe Parifhes, but the Prefentation of the Patron : 
 A ftiameful Bondage on the Church of Chrilt, introduced 
 in the Darkneis of Popery, and now unworthily re-introdu- 
 ced j and, at belt, could only give Title to the Benefice, in 
 the Event of a regular Vacancy, which was not the Cale. 
 And the other Part of their Right was the Collation of the 
 Bifhop, which, according to Presbyterian Principles (even 
 the molt moderate of them) could give no Right to any Pa~ 
 rifli, or found a Paltoral Relation without the Conlent of 
 the People. But cfpecially, when the worthy Paltors were 
 all turned out, allenarly for adhering to the Work of Refor- 
 mation they had iworn to, and thele thruft in who had de- 
 nied the fame j their Submiflion to fuch, by a cheerful Con- 
 
 B z currence, 
 
C . i? ) 
 
 currence, &c. as the Act requires, would be a conferring to 
 the Exclufion of the one, and the Intrufion of the other ; 
 which they could never do without Sin, but muft look u- 
 pon them as our Saviour teacheth, John x. i,— 5. as not 
 coming in by the Door, and therefore 'Thieves, and Robbers ', 
 whom they could not hear, but muft flee from them, as the 
 Text commands. 
 
 Now the Sum of all this is, that thefe Curates had no 
 Right to their Parifhes. But then Mr. Whitefield claims no 
 Relation to any Parifh in- Scotland 5 nor did he condefcend 
 to come here, until he was perfwaded to it by the Invitation 
 and Sublcription of a good many Chriftians, and at the ear- 
 ner!: Defire of feveral Miniflers : And, after his Arrival, 
 preached nowhere without an Invitation from the Miniflers 
 of the Parifhes, one or two Inflances excepted, which hap- 
 pened thro' Miflake, or from Elders or People in fome few 
 vacant Congregations. 
 
 Reason III. That they ought to refufe Compliance 
 with this Acl for the Sake of the Curates themfelve6, who 
 were not only immoral in their Lives, but had alio corru- 
 pted their Doctrine, 2 Thejf. iii. 6, — 14. Jf any Man obey 
 mt the Word, note that Man, and have no Company 'with 
 loim, N. B. that he may be afiamed. And 1 Cor. v. i'i. 
 Jf any Man that is called a Brother, be a Fornicator^ 
 cr Covetous, or an Idolater, or a Railer, or an Extortioner, 
 *with fuch an one, no not to eat. And, fays our Author, 
 iuch as know our Curates heft will grant, that, were they 
 Smpannelled, there are but few of them whom an impartial 
 Jury would not find guilty of ibme one or other of thefe 
 Crimes. And it is, fays he, notour, that many of them, 
 both in their Minifterial and Perional Capacities, are fo 
 fcandalous, that Profanenefs has gone forth through the 
 Land, whereby they have made Men to abhor the Offering 
 of the Lord, 1 Sam. ii. 17. And even fuch as are Strangers 
 to their perional Immoralities and Ignorance cannot but know 
 the Scandal of Apoftafy, Perjury and Breach of Covenant. 
 And not only, fay they, were the Curates thus fcandalous 
 -in their Lives, but alfb had corrupted and perverted their 
 iPoclrine and Worfhip, £*fc. in fo far as, many of them 
 were tainted wit|i j&minian and Popifh Errors, and all of 
 
therj, in Preaching, taught the Lawfulness of Prelacy, and 
 vented bitter Invectives againft Presbytery • and condemned 
 the Reformation that had been attained to, the Covenants 
 and their Teftimony for the fame, as if fuch were no other 
 than Sedition and Treafon : And therefore they mult efteem 
 them as Blafphemers in doing fb. Nay, fay they, even in 
 their very Prayers, they reproach the Work of Reformation 
 praying for a Blefling on the Prelates, and their finful Coun- 
 cils and Courfes, with ieveral other Things which tender 
 Conferences could not endure $ and therefore thev could not 
 give Obedience to the forefaid Act without Sin, ' Qeut. xiii. 
 5, — 8. Jfa.ix. \6. Rom. xvi . 17. 1 7/k vi. 3, — 5. 
 
 Now, as we know no fuch Immoralities in Mr. White- 
 fieltFs Life, fo his Hearers arc appealed to for the Orthodoxy 
 of his Doctrine. And with refpect to Perjury, altho' a late 
 printed Paper does alledge that he has abjured the Solemn 
 League and Covenant 5 yet he utterly refufes the Charge as 
 falfe. And, with refpect to Apoftafy and Defection, we 
 know no Truth of God, to the Knowledge of which he 
 has attained, that ever he again denied, but perfifts therein 
 ftedfaftly. If he did preach to us as the Curates appear to 
 have done, he would foon thin his Congregation : But, on 
 the contrary, it is his Doctrine, indefatigable Labour, Zeal 
 and fervent Preaching of Chrift to the Souls of Men, with 
 the blefled Effects of it, which we obferve, that commend? 
 him to our Love and Efteem. 
 
 Reason IV. Say they, That no Man mufl give a 
 Ground of Offence or Scandal to another, nor put a Stum- 
 bling-block or Occafion to fall in bjs Brother's Way, Rom. 
 xiv. 1 3. We muft forbear fome 'Things for Confcience Sake 5 
 1 fay, not our own, but of others, 1 Cor. x. 28, 29. For 
 ixhofoever fhall offend one of Chriffs little Ones, it were bet- 
 ter for him, &c. Mar. xviii. 6. But their Compliance with 
 the forefaid Act mufl create an Offence or Scandal ; i/f, 
 Say they, with refpect to Malignants, as it may harden and 
 encourage them in their Oppofition, and all other Backfli- 
 ders and Compilers with them in their Apoftaly. zdly, In 
 reference to the Godly, while fuch Example might induce 
 them to the like finful Compliance, to the after woundinc of 
 their Confcience. $diy, W ith refpect to Posterity ; For, al- 
 tho' 
 
( '4 ) . 
 
 tiio' they could not tranfmit to Poflenty what they wifhed, 
 yet, fay they, a {landing Controverfy for Zion fhould be 
 kept up j for thereby Pofterity fhall fee, at leaft, the Inte- 
 reft of Chrift neither fold nor buried quick, but living tho' 
 in a dying Condition, and thereby induce them to engage in 
 the Quarrel. 
 
 Now, what Relation has all this to Mr. JVhitefield ? 
 There is no Ufurpation on our Church at prefent, as was 
 then ; and therefore no Occafion for fuch Teftimony. So 
 that there can be no Argument from their Cafe to ours. 
 
 And, in refpecl that ibme People do alledge that Offence 
 is given by Presbyterians running after Mr. Whitefield 5 we 
 anfwer, It is their Ignorance of Presbyterian Principles which 
 makes them take fuch Offence, as we fhall prefently fhew. 
 And as their Ignorance is their Sin, fo, we hope, they do 
 not expecl that we are to partake of their Sin to avoid their 
 Offence. The Matter of Offence can only relate to fuch 
 Things as are indifferent and belong to our Chriftian Liber- 
 ty, 1 Cor. viii. 12, 13. When the Thing is not indifferenr, 
 then we are in the Cafe of Sin and Duty, by which we are 
 determined peremptorily, without Regard to Offence being 
 taken at what we do. Thus, becaufe we are bound to pur- 
 sue the Purpofes of our Souls Salvation by all the Means 
 that the Word of God, and our Conferences enlightned 
 thereby, direct us to 5 therefore, if any of us find thefe va- 
 luable Purpofes advanced by the Miniftry of Mr. White- 
 field (to the hearing of whom we can fee no Impediment) 
 in that Cafe our abftaining from fuch Miniftry would be our 
 Sin, which we can never iiibmit to, for avoiding the Offence 
 which any Man fhall take at our ib doing. 
 
 Reason V. They endeavour to fhew, that the Pre- 
 lates and their Curates are guilty of Schifm, and caufe 2)i- 
 vifionSy &c. whom therefore they were called to avoid, 
 Rom. xvi. 17. 1 Cor. xii. 25. For, fay they, imo y They 
 had feparated from the Presbyterian Church of Scotland, 
 while they could never yet challenge any Principle or Pra- 
 ctice thereof as contrary to the Word of God, or as not fub- 
 fervient to the Union and Order therein prefcribed. ido, 
 That they had innovate the Worfhip and Government of a 
 true Church, and thereby had made a Rent in her very 
 
 Bowels, 
 
Bowels, yio, They had divided thernfelves from the Fel- 
 lowship of a true Church, in her Miniftry, Ordinances, and 
 Judicatures ; in that they had cauied the Ejection of her 
 Minifters, the diflipating of her Judicatures, and Subverfiou 
 of their pure Ordinances. 4/0, That they had broken Uni- 
 on with iuch to whom they were bound to adhere, both 
 from antecedent moral Obligations, and the fuperadded Ties 
 of the National Oath 5 while they could never as yet pretend 
 any Caufe whatever to loofe them from either of thele Ties. 
 5/0, The Prelates and their Curates were a Party within the 
 Reformed Church, who had overturned the Reformation, 
 and thruft out and periecuted the found Adherers thereto. 
 From all which they were plainly Schifmaticks, from whom 
 they muft withdraw by the fore-cited Texts, and were bound 
 to endeavour the Extirpation of fuch their Schifm by the 
 Covenants. 
 
 Now, thele fchifmatical Practices of the then Curates, 
 was fo for the reverfe of Mr. JVhitef eld's ConducT, that, 
 ever fince he came amongft us, he has made it his Bufinels 
 to reconcile us to our God, to our Minifters, and to one 
 another in Love 5 labouring inceflfantly, both in publick 
 and private, for thele excellent Purpoles. 
 
 Reason VI. They fay, That as they muft keep at the 
 greateft Diftance from every Sin, into which their joining 
 with the Curates in thele Circumftances would involve them, 
 iT'heJf.v. 11. Abstaining from all Appearance of Evil: 
 And therefore from every Thing that Circumftances may 
 make finful. For luppole a Thing to be materially lawful, 
 yet Circumftances may make it finful : As an Idol is no- 
 thing, and Things offered to Idols are nothing, and yet they 
 who eat of them, when they know them to be fo circum- 
 
 ftanced, have Fellowpip with Devils, 1 Cor. x. 18, ■ 
 
 21. and is called Idolatry, Ver. 14. and provokes the Lord 
 to Jealoufy, Ver. 22. elpecially when an Action is lb cir- 
 cumftanced, as that it would infer an Omiffion of their 
 Duty, or a denying of their Teftimony againft Sin, then it is 
 clearly finful : For whq/bever will deny Chrift before Men, 
 &c. Mat. x. 33. And even a fmall Matter becomes great, 
 when a Teftimony is concerned in it 3 were it but an open 
 Window, Daniel muft not omit it to avoid the Lion's Den. 
 
 And 
 
( 16 ) 
 
 And now their Refufal to hear the Curates was become a 
 Caie of Confeflion, when there was no other Way left them 
 to exoner their Conferences before God and the World, a- 
 gainft the then Defection from the Truth : For then there 
 was no Accefs by Petition, Proteftation, Remonftrance, 
 l$c. the Parliament having declared all fuch treaion- 
 able; and that they muft of Neceflity give Teftimony 
 againft thele evil Courfes, carried on againft the Word ot 
 God and folemn Engagements. There was no other Way 
 left but this of refilling to hear thele Curates, altho' fuf- 
 fering fhould be the Confequence of it. 
 
 Now, as the whole of this tfth Reafon relates entirely to 
 what was peculiar to thole Times, and their then Teftimony 
 againft the lame, iuch can have no Concern with our hearing 
 Mr. Wljitefield : But then we obferve, that this Realbn was ufe- 
 kfs, unlels we allow that, even on the Reftoration, it was an 
 Opinion that hearing an Epifcopal Miniftcr was in its Na- 
 ture lawful 5 and feverals of their then Realbnings do plain- 
 ly fuppofe it. And in the firft Period of Epiicopacy, it was 
 the Opinion, becaufe it was the Practice, as we lliall pre- 
 iently fee, and of which we fhall mention only one emi- 
 nent Inftance, viz. Of thele eight worthy Minifters whom 
 King James called to London Anno 1606 , and kept them 
 there for fbme Years 5 we find theie hearing the Bi/hops 
 and Deans, &c. of the Church of England. Now, we are 
 fure from the Boldnefs of thele great Men, Meffieurs An- 
 drew and jfames Mehils, &c. that, if they thought it a 
 Sin in its Nature to hear Perfons who held Suprema- 
 cy and Epiicopacy as their Principle, no Command of the 
 King would have made them fubmit to it 3 but, on the 
 contrary, Mr. Calder-wood mentions no Scruple that any of 
 them had in the Matter, but that they did it as oft as de- 
 fired by the King. 
 
 Reason VII. That the Prelates had taken the Aflu- 
 ranee to re-ordain the Presbyterian Minifters, and contrived 
 the 5th Aft (before cited) 1661 for thatPurpole, to induce 
 the unthinking Part of Mankind to believe that Ordination 
 could only belong to them. This led lbme few of our Pres- 
 byterians of that Period to dilpute the Validity of their 
 Epifcopal Ordination, by Ihevving, 1/?, That the Curates 
 
 had 
 
( '7 ) 
 
 had not the Scripture Qualifications of Miniflers, 1 Tim. iif. 
 2, — - 4. from the grois Diibrders of their Lives, which (they 
 fay) was then notour, and from their Ignorance, &c. and there- 
 fore could have no inward Call to the Office of a Minifter : 
 For, whom God calis to that holy Office, he fits and qua- 
 lifies for it, as his Word deicribes, by affording the Means 
 necefury to the End. zdly, That, as they had no inward 
 Call to the Miniflry, fo (fay they) from the Nullity of 
 their Epilcopal Ordination, they had not even the external 
 Call 5 in which they fliew the Validity of Presbyterian Or- 
 dination by following forth the Order which theWord of God 
 prelcribes, and the Nullity of Epilcopal Ordination for the 
 Neglect of that Order, and the entire Dependence it has u- 
 pon a human Authority ulurped upon the Church of Chrift 
 by the Magilfrate 3 in fo far as, by the 3d Act before cited 
 introducing Prelacy, as alfb by the Act for the High Com- 
 miffion, it appears that theBilhopis, as it were, the King's 
 Depute accountable to him, and the Curate the Bifhop's De- 
 pute accountable to him. But then, for us to enter into 
 Particulars, whereby to give any tolerable Account of this 
 Debate, and the Arguments on both Sides, lb as to fatisfy 
 an impartial Reader, would far exceed the Bounds of this 
 Effay, eipecially that this Debate is continued for fo many 
 Ages thro' the Church to this Day. 
 
 However, it mufl be oblerved, nno, That, after they 
 have diiputed the Nullity of Epilcopal Ordination, they 
 ftill give up the Queflion as to the total Nullity of their 
 Miniflry, and iecm to reftricT: it, fo as thereby to prove that 
 they could have no Right to theie their Pariihcs, from this 
 bare Prelatical Ordination, and no more : For the Author 
 of the Hind let kofe, Page 238. at the End, after he has 
 largely diiputed this Nullity of their Ordination, he infers 
 from thence the Nullity of their Baptilm as by them per- 
 formed, as indeed the one mufl be the unavoidable Conlc- 
 quence of the other : But to this he replies, viz. The Jh/ie 
 jfafuxn may ferve here which are adduced for c Popip Or- 
 dinations and 'Baptifms ; and factum valet quod fieri iiori 
 debuit, i. e. it ought not to be done, but, being once done, it 
 is efeclual and valid : Which he could never lay, if he be- 
 lieved the ablblute Nullity of their Ordination and Baptiim, 
 
 C from 
 
. ( ,s ) 
 
 from the certain Principle in Law concerning Nullity, viz. 
 Quod nullum eft, nullum in jure fortitur effe rum. AnH thus, 
 when he has done, he both admits Popifh and Epiicopal 
 Ordination and Baprilm : But, as Nullity is a Law-term, fo 
 thefe Divines do not ieem to have understood the full Im- 
 port of it. And fo alio the Author of the Apologetical Re- 
 lation, P. 294, 295. plainly reflricts this Nullity to this, 
 That the Curates, by fuch Ordination, could have no Inte- 
 reft, Right or Title to thefe their Parifhes, but allows them 
 to be Ministers. And the Author of Naphtaii, in his fifth 
 Reafon againft hearing the Curates. P. 170. follows Apo- 
 logetkal Relation in the Place above-cited. And the Cafe 
 muil be fo : For, 
 
 ido, That whatever Arguments fome few particular Mem- 
 bers of our Church have thus occafionally uied for invali- 
 dating the Epiicopal Ordination, yet our Church herfelf did 
 at no Time adventure, by any Church-deed whatever, to 
 declare fuch Ordination null 5 but, on the contrary, in all 
 the Periods of it, have acknowledged fuch Ordination : For, 
 in the Year 1658, when many M.iniilers ordained by the 
 Bifhops were then in the Church, not one of theie was ever 
 re-ordained ; and fo it was alio at the Revolution, follow- 
 ing the Example at the 1638 ; and the rather, becauie, at 
 the Reformation, many of the Popifh Clergv, turning Pro- 
 teftant, went on in the Exercife of their Miniftry without 
 Re-ordination by this or any other of the Reforming 
 Churches 5 and that becauie our Church ftill chufed to re- 
 fpecl the Scripture Qualifications of a Miniiter, as his Piety, 
 Knowledge, Aptnels to teach, with thefe other Endow- 
 ments, whereby the Spirit of God, having fitted and qua- 
 lified a Man for the Office, in due Time by his Providence 
 calls him to the Exercile of it. Theie our Church ieem to 
 have regarded principally as the Evidences of the inward 
 Call of God's Spirit : But the Epiicopal Clergy (with us 
 at leaf!) laid the principal Streis on the external Form 
 of Ordination, to the diipenfing whereof they claim to 
 themielves an uninterrupted Right of Succeffion, while 
 our Church did not fo much mind who were the Admini- 
 ftrators of the external Form, provided the foreiaid Evi- 
 dences of the inward Call to the Office appeared in the Per^ 
 
 fon: 
 
.. . ( '9 ) 
 
 ion : For it is certain, that there have been many eminent 
 High* in the Chriftian Church, of the Popifh as well as 
 the Lpifcopal Ordination ; and, in l'bme Inftances, our 
 Church ieemed to neglect the external Call by Ordination 
 more than they ought, as in the Cafe of Mr. Robert "Bruce. 
 See Calderwood's Hiftory, P. 423, 424. 
 
 From the whole it appears, that as the forefaid extrava- 
 gant AfTurance of the Epilcopal Clergy of this Period, in 
 pretending to re-ordain the Presbyterian Minifters, introdu- 
 ced the Difpute of the Validity of fuch their own Ordina- 
 tion, when bellowed on icme at leafl, who, by all the Ac- 
 counts of thele Times, had none of the valuable Minillerial 
 Qualifications before-mentioned, nay, nor any other Title 
 whatever to that holy Office, except the Shell or Husk of 
 an external Ordination by a Prelate, then wantonly given 
 to Men lb unworthy of it 5 lb from thence they Ihew, 
 that this was really nothing, and at bell could never en- 
 title them to thele Parilhes, from which the true and wor- 
 thy Pallors of them were forcibly call out, and who there- 
 fore, notwithftanding that Violence, did Hill remain the 
 true Ipiritual Pallors of thefe Parifhes ; while the Curates, 
 altho' in Pofleflion, were only Intruders, without any Title 
 whatever. 
 
 And, with refpeft to fuch as had fubmitted to be re- 
 ordained by the Bilhops, they realbn thus : That altho', by 
 their Presbyterian Ordination regularly execute by the Call 
 and Invitation of their Flocks by them accepted, they had 
 been regularly admitted the lawful Pallors of their Parifhes, 
 by Falling and Prayer, and the Impotition of Hands of the 
 Presbytery, according to the Order of God's Word, where- 
 by they had then an unquellionable Right to their Parilhes 5 
 yet, as, by the 5 th Acl before cited, their Churches were 
 declared vacant until they acccepted of Re-ordination from 
 the Bifhop, fuch Minillers, who accepted that Condition of 
 Re-ordination to recover the PoflHTion of their Churches, 
 acknowledged the Vacancy by fuch Acceptance, and there- 
 fore implicitely renounced their former jull Title to their 
 Parilhes, having nothing left them but this Re-ordination of 
 the Bilhop, good for nothing : Wherefore, altho' they for- 
 merly had Right to their Parifhes, they now have none. 
 C z Kea* 
 
( ao ) 
 
 Reason VIII. That, by Presbyterian Principles, all 
 Minifters of Chrift fhould hold their CommifTion from 
 Chrift, as the only King and Head of his Church ; and their 
 Office not only conveyed to them by Officers ot Chrift's Ap- 
 pointment, and conform to the Order he has prefcribed, 
 but alio in a Way of Dependence and Subordination to Chrift 
 as King and Head, to whom they muft account for the 
 ft iniftry committed to them. 
 
 But, by the 3d forecited Acl eftablifhing Prelacy, the 
 Biihops and their Curates were fubje£ted to the King as Su- 
 preme 3 and this Supremacy thereby declared to be the ** in- 
 *' herent Right and Prerogative of the Crown, and that 
 *' there is no Power in Church-officers but what depends u- 
 " pon the King as Supreme 5 and the Biftiops thereby de- 
 " clared accountable to him for their Adminiftration." And, 
 by vertue of which Supremacy, he has, by his forefaid A£l 
 for the High Commiffion, put Excommunication and Church- 
 cenfures, and thereby the Power of the Keys, into the Hands 
 of Perfbns merely Civil. By all which Ulurpation upon 
 the Church of Chrift, the King, as the Fountain of all 
 Church -go verment, did impart his Authority to fuch as he 
 pleaied $ and the Bifhops feemed to be no other than his 
 Commiffioners in the Exercife of that Ecclefiaftical Power 
 originally in himfelf 3 and the Curates only, as it were, his 
 Under-clerks. Now, thele Things were lb contrary to the 
 Principles of Presbyterians founded upon the Scriptures of 
 Truth, that a cheerful Submiffion to the Miniflry of fuch \ 
 and that as an Evidence of their hearty Compliance with this 
 very Supremacy, in terms of the forefaid Act 1663, muft 
 have been a Sin, &c. 
 
 But our Anfwer to this Supremacy and Epiicopacy /hall 
 be given under the 4th and laft Head, when we fhall have 
 under the 3d Head confidered the different Practice of our 
 Church during the firft Period of her Epifcopacy. 
 
 Reason IX. That, by Unfaithfulnels to God in his 
 holy Covenants fvvorn by thele Curates, they were become 
 perjured, and Truce-breakers, 2 'Tim. iii. 3. and from whom 
 fhey were there commanded to turn away, ver. 5. For, by 
 the Solemn League^ thefe Curates s as well as others through 
 
( 21 ) 
 
 the Nation, were bound, ift, To the jDoflrine, Worjhip, 
 %)ifcipline and Government of the 'Presbyterian Church of 
 Scotland, idly, In order thereunto, they Hood bound to en- 
 deavour the Extirpation of 'Popery, Prelacy, with all that 
 depends upon it, Superftition, Herefy, Schifm, Profanenefs, 
 and whatever elfe is contrary to found 1)o6irine and the 
 Power of Godline/s. Now, thele Curates, inftead of follow- 
 ing forth the Particulars of this their Oath, had not only 
 embraced the Prelacy thereby particularly abjured, but had 
 become the Perfecutors of all thofe that endeavoured to ad- 
 here to that Oath. Therefore, &c. 
 
 We have already obferved, that Mr. Whitefield never ab- 
 jured our Covenants, nay, he lays, that he never ib much as 
 heard of this Solemn League until he came to Scotland. But 
 a further Confederation of the Solemn League comes alio 
 under the 4th and laft Head. 
 
 This AbftracT: of the Realbns for not hearing the Curates, 
 on the Reft or at ion, is gathered from the Apologetical Re- 
 lation, the Hind let loofe, and others of that Time - 7 in which 
 we have fometimes caft two of them together becauie of 
 their Coincidence, but have not defignedly ommitted any 
 Thing that was material in them. 
 
 III. We come to account for the different Conduct of thefe 
 in our firft Period of Epifcopacy, from 1610 to 16^6, who 
 fubmitted to the then Epijcopal Minifters, without any fuch 
 Oppofition as happened after the Restoration. 
 
 That in the Year 1606, by Aft 2. Pari. 18. James VI. 
 the Eftate of Bifhops was reftored j and therein the King is 
 declared to be " fovereign Monarch, abiblute Prince, Judge 
 ii and Governor over all Perfbns, Eftates and Caufes, both 
 " Spiritual and Temporal, within the Realm." The Supre- 
 macy had been enaded before this, as by ift Act, Pari. 8. 
 Anno 1584. 
 
 And in itfio, by the ift Acl, Pari. 21. James y I. after 
 further Ratification of the Eftate of Bifhops, it is among 
 other Things enacled, That every Minifter, at his Ad- 
 miflion, fhall iwear Obedience to his Majefty, and to the 
 Bilhop of his Diocele, there called his Ordinary, according 
 \o the Form following j 1* I JL %, now nominated and ad- 
 
 «* mitted 
 
( « ). 
 
 " mitted to the Kirk of D. do teftify and declare, in my 
 " Confcience, That King James VI. King of Scotland, Z£>c. 
 " is the only lawful lupreme Governor of this Realm, as 
 " well in Matters Spiritual andEcclefiaftical, as in Things 
 '' Temporal, f$c. And further, I acknowledge and confeis 
 " to have and hold the faid Church, and Pofleflion cf the 
 u lame, under God, of his Majefty and his Crown Royal 
 " of this Realm; and, for the faid PoflHTion, I do Homage 
 " preiently to his Highnefs, in your Pretence, &c. So 
 '* help me God !" And alfo it is hereby enacted, That e- 
 very Minifter ihall, at his Admiflion, fwear Obedience to 
 his Bifhop (there called his Ordinary) in the Form follow- 
 ing ; " I A. "B. now admitted to the Kirk off. promife and 
 " iwear to E. F. Bifhop of that Diocele, Obedience, and to 
 " his Succeflbrs, in all lawful Things. So help me God ! n 
 
 And by this lame Act it is ftatuted, That every Minifter, 
 who lhall abfent from the Vifitation of the Diocefe by the 
 Biihop, or from the Diocefan Aflembly, he lhall for the 
 firft Fault be lulpended from his Office and Benefice ; and, 
 if he amend not, he lhall be depofed. As alio, the 1 14th 
 Acl of Parliament 1592, eftablifhing Presbytery, is repeal- 
 ed by this Act. 
 
 By the A£ts above cited it appears, that Epifcopacy was 
 fully eftablifhed in this Period. 
 
 The Apologies offered by our Authors, after the Restora- 
 tion, for this lame Diverfity of Practice of the firfl Period, 
 by their hearing the Epifcopal Incumbents, while thole of 
 the lecond Period refufed it as above, are, from the Apolo- 
 getical Relation, and the Hind let loofe, as follow ; 
 
 i/2, " That thole of the forelaid firft Period bore Tefti- 
 " mony againll thofe finful Innovations, by Proteflation, Re- 
 " monftrance, &c. againll them." As to which, we ob- 
 ferve, That fuch Teltimony was then given by Ibme zealous 
 and worthy Minifters of that Period, who luffered for it. 
 
 zdh, " That they had General Aflemblies, and were ftill 
 " in Hopes of recovering them for Redrels of their Grie- 
 " vances ; and therefore fubmitted to their Epileopal In- 
 " cumbents in the mean Time." As to which we oblerve. 
 That, as there were no Aflemblies during the firft Period 
 pf Twenty fix Years Epifcopacy, but what were declared 
 
 corrupt 
 
( *3 ) 
 
 corrupt and null upon the 1638 ; fo, during the Reign ©f 
 King James VI. they had as little Reafon to expect Re- 
 drels, as during the Reign of Kino Charles II. feeing the one 
 thirfted as much after ablblute Government in Church and 
 State as the other. And thefe their Expectations could be 
 no Argument for a finful Compliance in the mean Time ; 
 but we believe they thought it no Sin, otherwile they would 
 never have complied. 
 
 ylly, " They lay, It is a bad Confequence, that they in 
 " that Generation fhould go backward, becaufe their Fore- 
 '• fathers, in the firffc Period of Epifcopacy, could not ad- 
 " vance forward." As to which we obferve, that, the 
 Queftion being about refufing to hear Epifcopal Incumbents, 
 this could have been rcfuied in the flrft Period as well as in 
 the fecond j and with much more Safety, becaufe there was 
 then no Law commanding to hear under Pains and Penalties, 
 as was in the fecond Period : So that they were at Liberty 
 to have refuted, but continued to hear notwithstanding. 
 From which we muil allow, that either they judged it their 
 Duty to do ib 5 or that they continued to hear againfl their 
 Light and Confcience, which it is abfurd to admit. 
 
 4tMy, They lay, " That the Church, at or near the Re- 
 <c formation, may do many Things which cannot be done 
 " when fhe is fully reformed 5 feeing, in the one Cafe, /he 
 11 is but coming from Darknefs to Light - 7 and, in the o- 
 " ther, fhe mult not part with the Light and Reformation 
 " fhe has attained to : For the one is as the Twilight, and 
 " the other as the Sun-fhine 5 " with a great deal more to 
 this Purpofe. Which amounts in whole to this, That 
 Wrongs in a Perfbn or Church are more or lefs f uch, accor- 
 ding to the Degrees of Light they are pofleilcd of at the 
 Time they commit fuch Wrongs. 
 
 Now, this Argument is molr certainly true : But then it 
 will apply much more favourably to Mr. Wbitefield, born 
 and bred up withjn the preient Darknels of the Church of 
 England, who, with reipe<St to his Situation and Means of 
 Knowledge, mufl have been &» much prejudged in favours 
 of Epifcopacy as any Papift could be in the Errors of Pope- 
 ry, and therefore more excufeable than even thofe of our firfl 
 Period of Epifcopacy, where the People were generally bred 
 
 up 
 
( 2 .4 ) 
 
 up with an Opinion that Epiicopacy was a Corruption in 
 God's Houfe 5 and, by their then Proteftations and Remon- 
 ftrances againft it, fhew much more Knowledge of the Er- 
 ror of Epifcopacy, than it was yofiibk for Mr. IV/iitefield to 
 know, being educate in the Belief of it as a Truth. And, 
 confidering the Situation of the Doftrine of the Church of 
 England, by Arminianifm and other Errors, he muft have 
 been in as great Darknefs as to fome of the mioft valuable 
 Doctrines of the Gofpel : With refpecl to which he is now, by 
 the BlefTing of God, brought into a State of Light and Con- 
 version, and that attended (as we are bound to believe) with 
 a Difpofition ready to renounce every Error, and embrace 
 every Truth, fo fbon as he is able to diicover them 5 which 
 is the true and very Difpofition of a converted Mind : There- 
 fore he ought to be embraced by every Chriftian, conform 
 to Presbyterian Principles, as we fhall fhew. 
 
 But as thele Apologies, made by the Writers on the Re- 
 
 ftoration, appear to be too weak and inefficient for the Jufti- 
 
 fication of this firft Period, and that they do not exhauft 
 
 what we learn from the Hiftories of thele Times, we fhall 
 
 add as follows 5 
 
 imo, That altho' Epifcopacy was always, as it muft be, 
 by every Presbyterian held as an Error, and is truly a very 
 great Incroachment on the Chriftian Church, againft which 
 we find feveral worthy Minifters, in this firft Period of E- 
 pifcopacy, petitioning, protefting and remonftrating 5 yet 
 we hear nothing of the People refufing to hear the Epifco- 
 pal Minifters of that Period 3 altho' Epifcopacy and Supre- 
 macy were then fully eftablifhed by Law, and fubmitted 
 to through the Nation $ and altho' they were ftill Presbyte- 
 rian in their Principle, as appears from their zealoully throw- 
 ing off Epiicopacy in the Year 16^8, yet they fubmitted to 
 their Minifters, tho' then fubjecred to the Bifliops and the 
 King's Supremacy in the abfolute Manner already mentioned. 
 The Remonftrance made againft it in this Period was only 
 by fbme worthy Minifters, a few of whom were banifhed, 
 and others confined, while the reft fubmitted. 
 
 Again, in the fecond Period of Epifcopacy, after the Re- 
 fioration y the refufing to hear the Curates was from the Ne- 
 ceffity laid upon them by the forefaid Aft of that Period, 
 
 where- 
 
( *s ) 
 
 thereby the hearing there required was a Ted of their to- 
 ward and hearty Approbation of the Supremacy, and a cheer- 
 ful Compliance with the Epiicopacy then introduced, as ap- 
 pears from their firft Reaibn before mentioned : A Thin" 
 never required of the People during the firft Period $ for, it 
 it had, it would have been refuied. Wherefore, in the firft 
 Period, they heard and continued Presbyterian ftill ; but, in 
 the iecond Period, they could not do io, but, by their 
 hearing, renounced Presbytery, and became Epilcopal, prae- 
 jumptftmB* juris : For the Law did ena£r. the Preiumption 
 upon them, and accordingly this is the true Reafon for their 
 not hearing. From which it appears, that : t was never ac- 
 counted unlawful, in this Church, to hear a Minifter, mere- 
 ly becaule he wasEpifcopal, without other Reafons joined 5 
 akho' we ftill held and do hold Epifcopacy to be an Error % 
 and do as firmly believe as ever that the Presbyterian Church - 
 governmenr, as now eftablifhed in Scotland, is the only 
 Form of Church-government we know that is agreeable to 
 the Word of God. 
 
 zdo, That, in this firft Period of Epifcopacy, there was 
 no Intrufion ; the Minifters then, tho' ordained by the 
 Eifliops, being regularly called or lubmitted to by their re- 
 ipeftive Flocks. But it was quite the reverie after the Re- 
 JloratiWy the Curates being then thruft upon their Pariflies, 
 befides the Exclufion of the worthy and regular Paftors of 
 theleParilh.es, which was a principal Cauie of their refufing 
 to hear the Intruded. 
 
 5/W, That the Incumbents, in the foreiaid firft Period, 
 had not abiured Epiicopacy, as thoie in the Iecond had done, 
 but a few Years before their Submiflion to it, which wai 
 another Reaibn for refufing to hear them, as was obierved, 
 But thisObjeetionof Perjury could not be made againft Mi- 
 nifters by the Hearers of the firft Period. 
 
 4?<?, That, upon the Restoration, this refufing to hear the 
 Curares was the only Teftimony left them of that Period a- 
 gainft the Supremacy, Epiicopacy and Perjury then introdu- 
 ced ; feeing Petitioning, Proteftingand Remonftranee, were 
 then utterly difcharged, as by the Act before cited. But, iii 
 this firft Period, there was no fuch Inhibition laid upon 
 t.hrm j but they continued petitioning, protefting, tj?c. And 
 
 D there* 
 
"C *o 
 
 therefore, as long as they could exerciie their 'I eftiffiony iri 
 this Way, they judged Hearing and SubmiiTion their Duty. 
 
 <5/C', We find, from the great and worthy Men about that. 
 Time, Mr. Andrew Jlfelvil, Mr. John 2)avidfon at Salt ■ 
 'Preftoun, ckc. that as the Doctrine of the Reformed Church 
 was the great Thing to be attended to, fb the Difcipline was 
 looked upon as the Hedge for Preicrvation of it. Thus 
 Mr. 'Davtdfon, in his Letter to the Affembly i 597, fearing 
 the Miichief then attempted upon the Dilcipline, lays, 
 *' That the Unity in the fincere Doclrine is this Day the 
 <c Rofe-garland of the Kirk of Scotland 3 and that the Pre- 
 " lervation of this Unity in the Dochrine came from the A- 
 *' greement in the Liberty of the Execution of the Diici- 
 " pline, which (N.S.) hath been the Hedge and Bulwark, 
 " as it were, of the Doctrine." And as this was the Opi- 
 nion of thole Times, therefore, in this firft Period, they 
 thought it wrong to throw away the Doctrine merely be* 
 caule it had loll its Hedge, to their great Grief 5 efpecially 
 that they had other Ways of executing their Teftimony a- 
 gainll tht Incroachments made on the Dilcipline, than by 
 throwing up the Doclrine too ; or that, becaufe they could 
 not have both, they would have neither. And which was 
 not the Cafe upon the Restoration, when they had neither 
 Doctrine nor Difcipline left them, as we have heard ; and 
 had no other Way left to bear a Teftimony againft the In- 
 croachments made on the Difcipline, but by withdrawing 
 from hearing in their publick Aflemblies. 
 
 6tc, That, in this lecond Period of Epifcopacy, the great 
 Complaint againll the then Curates was the Errors in their 
 Doctrine, as well as the Immoralities of their Lives, as be- 
 fore let forth 3 which is a concluding Objection againll any 
 Man's Miniitry, of whatever Denomination. But, in the 
 firft Period, they had no luch Objection, and were then 
 nearer the Times of our Reformation, when the inward Call 
 to the Miniftry was principally attended to, by the Eviden- 
 ces of a Man's Piety, Knowledge, Aptnels to teach, £ff<r. 
 whereby the Spirit of God, having fitted and qualified a 
 Peribn for the Office, in due Time calls him to the Exerciie 
 of it by his Providence : W r hich was the Cale of leveral 
 of our flrft Reformers, particularly Mr. Robert Bruce a».d 
 
 Mr. 
 
( v ;) 
 
 Mr. fames 'Balfcur, Anno 1598, who had OKercifed their 
 Miniftry, for a Courfe of Years, without any external Or- 
 dination j iniomuch that Mr. Calkr-zvood fays, on thisOcca- 
 fion, " That the external Ordination, by Imposition of Hands, 
 " was held as a Ceremony unnecessary and indifferent in our 
 " Kirk, until that, now they are laying the Foundation of 
 " Epilcopacy, it is urged as neceiiary." This was the Opi- 
 nio!, of that Time. And tho' we do not approve of it, yet 
 as this Debate about Ordination was when they were laying 
 the Foundation of Epilcopacy, and but a very few Years be- 
 fore the full Eftablifhmcnt of it by Law, it mud have in- 
 fluenced the Conduct on thatOccalion : So that if they were 
 iatisfied about their Mini iter's having the inward Call to the 
 Miniftry as above, and .that the external Ordination was but 
 a Ceremony and indifferent, it muft be equally indifferent by 
 whom it was given, whether by Bifhop or Presbyters ; be- 
 cauie that, whether given or not, or by whom given, is 
 all one, as to a Thing indifferent. Wherefore, altho' Epil- 
 copacy was always looked upon as a Wrong in this Church, 
 yet Epifcopal Ordination, being once given, was accounted 
 valid. 
 
 IV. We come to fhew that, as our joining with Mr. 
 Whiteficld, in the Ordinances of the Goipel, Hands juftified 
 by the Principles and Practice of our Church from the Re- 
 formation, thro' the different Periods of it, lb alfo by our 
 JVeftminifter Confeffion of Faith, and Solemn league and Co- 
 venant. 
 
 Now, as itappears,by the abovePaffage ftomMr.Calderwooa t 
 that, from the Reformation to the fir ft Period of our Epil- 
 copacy Anno 1606 and 1610, it was accounted indifferent 
 by whom tire external Form of Ordination was given - 7 to, 
 during the flrft Period of our Epifcopacy, they accepted 
 Ordination from the Prelates, as they had done before from 
 Presbyters : And their People notwithstanding continued in 
 Submiifion to them as their lawful Pallors, yet ftill remon- 
 ftrating againil that 'Prelacy and Supremacy then introduced, 
 as an Incroachment on the Church of Ghrift ; but, upon 
 rhe Reft oration, they refuted iuch Submiilion to the Curates, 
 becaufe they had no other Wcuy left them for a Teftimorry 
 I) a againlt 
 
( 2g ) 
 
 againft the then Ufurpations, but by refuting to hear as we 
 have fhewed. And in reipecl that the Supremacy and Epif- 
 copacy are the only two Particulars, within the whole of the 
 Realbns before-mentioned, that can concern Mr. JVhitefield, 
 we fhall further obferve, 
 
 imo, That, in the Reign of Henry VIII. the Englijb 
 Bifhops, diipoied to the Reformation ', endeavoured to prove 
 from Scripture, that the King was fupreme Head of the 
 Church, and not the Pope of Rome j which they did by 
 Shewing what David and the other good Kings of Judah 
 had done, by difpofing of the Priefts in their Courfes, and 
 reforming the Temple-iervice, ££>c. Whatever was in their 
 Reaibning, yet it prevailed ib far with that King, as to in- 
 duce his Revolt from the Romifh See, and to do many 
 Things which brought on the Reformation of that Church. 
 It was quite otherwile in Scotland, where our Reformers 
 iftruggled againft all fuch Attempts to Supremacy by King 
 JamesYl. (as fond of it as Henry VIII. could be) : There- 
 fore io loon as he got upon the Throne of England, where 
 Jie found Supremacy and Epiicopacy, thefe favourite En- 
 gines of arbitrary Power, to be the very Principles of that 
 Church deliberately profefied from their Reformation, as 
 above 5 he then relblved to force it upon Scotland alio, as 
 he did by the Acls above-mentioned, and by Confinement 
 and Banilhment of fuch worthy Minifters as oppofed it. 
 
 So that Supremacy and Epiicopacy having been mantained 
 as tenacioufly in England from their Reformation to this Day, 
 as Freedom llom it has been Ifiuggled for in Scotland from 
 Age to Age fince our Reformation, it follows, that Supre- 
 macy and Epiicopacy, however bad in themielves, mull be 
 far more tolerable in the Engliflj Clergy than they could e- 
 ver be in the Scots 5 as the Opinions of Forefathers, long 
 Cuftom, and the Prejudice of Education, are iirong Biafles 
 upon their Minds, which we in Scotland never felt : Nay, 
 ib ftrong are thefe, that they are the belt Account that the 
 moft Part of the World of Mankind can make of their very 
 Principles. 
 
 If Mr. WUtefield, being in this Situation, did take an 
 
 Path of Supremacy, at his Ordination, it is evident that 
 
 this can be no Argument againft joining with him at prefenr, 
 
 feeing' 
 \ - ■ a^ 
 
. C : *> ) 
 
 feeing, upon confidering the Matter more fully, he now 
 openly declares, as before hinted, his Belief of the Head- 
 ihip of Chrift over his Church, and his Abhorrence of 
 every Principle in the leaft inconfiftent therewith. 
 
 zdOy We muft beg leave here to notice what was formerly 
 >hferved, That feeing Supremacy and Epifcopacy were fully 
 eftablifhed both on the Reftoration, and alio in our firft Pe- 
 riod of Epilcopacy, and that, in both Periods, each Mini- 
 ster was, at his Admifiion, obliged to fwear the Oath of 
 Supremacy 5 in the firft Period they fubmitted to the Mini- 
 llry of iuch notwithftanding $ in the fecond they refufed 
 bccaule it was then become a Sin againft their Knowledge, 
 and an Apoftafy from the Reformation they had attained 
 to j whereas in the firft Period they were not lo fully infor- 
 med concerning the Evil of thefe Things, and, being nearer 
 the Times of our firft Reformation, they were but coming 
 from Darknefs to Light, i£c. Which as it is the very Apolo- 
 gy that they upon the Reft or at ion make for this different 
 Practice of the firft Period, as we have heared; ib it ex- 
 actly fuits Mr. WhitefielcTs Cafe, bred up in greater Dark- 
 nefs of his Church than ever was in ours as to thefe Points. 
 
 From whence we conclude, That as our hearing of Mr. 
 WLitc field itands juftified by the Practice of our firft Period 
 of Epifcopacy, as alfb by the forefaid Apology of thefe on 
 the Reftoration ; therefore, our Practice being juftified by 
 the Practice of the firft and Judgment of the fecond Period, 
 it follows, that, if the Presbyterians of both thefe Periods 
 were in Life, they would hear and embrace Mr. WhitefielcTs 
 Miniftry juft as we do, and to doing of which (as we fhall 
 prefently fliew) they ftand bound by the Principles of our 
 Confeffion of Faith, and Solemn League and Covenant. 
 
 And yet at the fame Time we arc perfwaded, that nei- 
 ther the Presbyterians of our firft Period, nor any Presby- 
 rerian at this Day, would have fubmitted to hear thefe Cu- 
 rates on the Reftoration, for the very firft Reafbn before 
 given, altho' there had been no other, becaufe they could 
 not give Obedience to the forefaid Act of Parliament until 
 they became really Epifcopal in their Judgment : For, if 
 they continued Presbyterian, they became guilty of the 
 groffeft Diffimulation imaginable, by Obedience to that Act j 
 
 not 
 
( 3° ) 
 
 not to mention the other Reafons before recited, which are 
 by themielves taken together relevant to infer a Refufal to 
 hear theie Curates, and to admit of the hearing of Mr. 
 Whitefiett at the fame Time. 
 
 3//0, That as it pleafed God, from the blackeil of Po- 
 pifh Darknefs, at the Reformation to enlighten fbme great 
 Men eminently as to the Doctrine, and yet to allow them 
 to die unenlightned as to to the Prelacy of that Romilh, 
 Church, as in many Indances in foreign Parts, and in Eng- 
 land particularly, where theie great Bifhops, Ridley, Lati- 
 mer and Cranmer, were honoured to make io glorious an 
 Appearance for the 'Doctrine, and for their ftedfaft Adhe- 
 rence thereto were burnt at a Stake, with Multitudes of 
 others at that Time, giving Glory to God and theTeftimony 
 of Jefus in the Midft of Flames ; and yet it plealed God to 
 allow them to die unenlightncd as to the Supremacy and Efif- 
 copacy, which was then and is ftill in that Church : We 
 fay why might not the fame God, from amidfl the prelent 
 Darknefs of that fame Church, enlighten a Man as to the 
 Doctrine, and fend him to preach it, eminently fupported, 
 and followed with remarkable Succeis ; and yet in the fame 
 Manner allow him to die unenlightned as to the Supremacy 
 and Epifcopacy ? But the Reader will obferve, that there is 
 no Need of this Supposition to fapport our prefent Argument, 
 (ince Mr. Wbitefield by no means adheres to the Supremacy 
 hi its Coniequences. 
 
 And now, we come to juftify this Conduct of our Church 
 from the Solemn League and Covenant, and our Wefiminfier 
 ConfeJJion. And, with refpect to the Solemn League, altho' 
 we ourfeives could not fwear that Oath, unlefs it was altered 
 in ieveral Refpects, nor can we approve of the Methods 
 then taken to oblige Perfons to fwear it 5 yet we do not in- 
 cline to enter into any Difpute about theie or the Oath itfelf, 
 as it was the Deed of our worthy Predeceflbrs, who are not 
 here to anfwer for themfelves, and who we believe entred 
 into it in the Simplicity and Sincerity of their Hearts. But 
 then we cannot help noticing the Reflections of a late Author, 
 who, i(i, treats it lb contemptibly as to call it a mifchievous 
 State-tool of certain Perfons, i£c. We anfwer, That, as we 
 hinted before, that the Reformation of England was brought 
 
 on 
 
( .3' ) 
 
 on by the Pride and Ambition of Henry VIII. fo, at our 
 Reformation in Scotland, the Pofleffions of our Popi/h Clergy, 
 being the one Half of the Nation, betwixt their Tiends and 
 Temporalities, were given away to the Nobility and Gentry, 
 and erected into temporal Lordfhips and Baronies j where- 
 by that valuable Event was greatly forwarded by the covetous 
 Views of a Multitude of Perlbns enriched thereby. Now, 
 will it follow that thele great and valuable Events both in 
 England and Scotland were bad Things, becauie the Defigns 
 of thole, who perhaps were principally concerned in bring- 
 ing them about, were thus evil ? 
 
 idly, He excepts againft: the Exprefllon, That they (hall 
 endeavour the Extirpation of 'Popery, Prelacy, &c. This 
 is generally exclaimed againfl, and fliould never be juftified 
 by us, if it was not for the Senfe which our Predeceflbrs 
 appear to have had of it when they fware that Oath, as we 
 have it in their Paper called An Exhortation to the taking 
 the So'emn League, &c. (See our Collection of Confeflions, 
 printed 1725, Page 1 04th at the Top.) in Paragraph 4th con- 
 cerning the Extirpation of Prelacy, they aflert thus, Nor is 
 aty Man hereby bound to offer any Violence to their Perfons, 
 i. e. of Prelues, but only in his Place and Calling to endea- 
 vour their Extirpation in a lawful Way. Now, as this Ex- 
 hortation and Declaration was drawn up by the Affembly at 
 Wefwinifler, and approved by the Parliament of England, 
 and by them ordered to be read in every Parifh-churcb 
 before the fwearing of the Covenant j lb we have thereby 
 the whole Authority which authoriled and appointed the 
 Covenant, declaring that this was the Senfe of it, and in 
 which Senle they themfelves had by this Time (worn it, and 
 therefore do now give it out to the Nation to be lworn in this 
 Senle, and in no other. Nor was it poffible it could have any 
 other Senfe in Scotland, feeing it would be monftrous that 
 the Oath fhould have two Senies, one in Scotland and another 
 in England 3 elpecially thaft, as our Commiffioners from 
 Scotland were prefent at the Weftminifer Affembly when fuch 
 is declared to be the Senfe of it, fo they had been alfo pre- 
 fent at every Conference, both in Scotland and England, con- 
 cerning the Covenant, and thereby mud know what was meant 
 and intended by every Expreflron in it, Therefore of Ne- 
 
 ceftity 
 
( 32 ) 
 
 ceflity this mull be the Senfe in which both Nations took it. 
 
 From thence it is evident, that, by their endeavouring the 
 Extirpation of 'Prelacy, they meant, 17/20, No Hurt or Vio- 
 lence to the Perlon of any Man, not even of the Prelates 
 themfelves. ido, That their Endeavours muft be in a Way 
 that was lawful, i. e. firft by the Laws of God, and then 
 by the Laws of the Land j which comprehends all thefe Scri- 
 pture Means whereby we ought to reclaim our Brother from 
 an Error, as by Exhortation, Reproof, Perfwafion, ££c. or 
 by hindering or preventing his Practice or Execution of any 
 Part of his Prelatical Uiurpation on the Church of Chrift, 
 as the Laws of the Land did permit or prefcribe. 3//0, That, 
 in doing of all this, no Man muft exceed his Calling and 
 Station. 
 
 Now, as this was all they meant, we can fee no juft Ex- 
 ception that can arife from the Sound of a Word 5 nam ver- 
 ba valent ufu. Indeed if that Oath was to be fworn at this 
 Day, that Word behoved to be altered, becaufe it would 
 not now imply the Senie in which they then conceived it 
 as above : But at prefent we are only concerned with their 
 Senfe of it. 
 
 yio, He lays, " That thefe Covenants were not binding 
 " on any other Perfons than thole who figned them 5 and, 
 " if his Father's Subfcription to thefe could bind him, he 
 * c might by the lame Rule bind him to be a Mahometan." 
 This is a common Objection, but of no greater Weight thari 
 the other : For the Father's Oath to be a Mahometan could 
 neither bind Father nor Son 5 becaufe no Oath can bind any 
 Man, far lels his Pofterity, to fin againft God. But, if the 
 Gentleman fhews any particular Thing to be finfiil in our 
 Covenants, we (hall then acknowledge that neither he nor 
 we are bound to that Particular 3 and, if he can go through 
 the whole of the Covenants in that Way, we fhall then ac- 
 knowledge that we have no more to do with them : But, 
 till then, we muft beg his Excule, and to be allowed to ftate 
 the Cafe of our Covenants in our own Way, as follows ; 
 
 That the EffecT: of an Oath, with refpecl to Matters in- 
 different and belonging to our natural Liberty, is, that iuch 
 by cur Oath ceale to be indifferent, and we become bound 
 peremptorily hi the Terms of our Oath. But, with refpec~2 
 
 tV 
 
( 33 ) 
 
 to Matters of Sm and Duty, our Oath can only be a fuper- 
 . added Ty, to puriue the Duty and avoid the Sin ; but 
 without Poffibility of making any Alteration in thele from 
 what they were before the Oath, Becauie eftabliihed by a 
 higher Authority than any Oath vvc can make. 
 
 That thele our Covenants (binding us to certain Duties, 
 and to avoid and reform certain Errors and Corruptions, as 
 therein declared) being iworn nationally, bind our Nation 
 io long as it is the fame Nation, in the lame Manner that a 
 Man's Oath binds him lo long as he is the fame Man ; con- 
 Form to that grand Inflance of it decided by God himielf, in 
 the Cafe of the Gikonites, jfofhua'vx.. 3, — 27. & 2 Sam. xxi. 
 3, — 15. where Joflma and the People of Ifirael having 
 fworn to preferve the Gibeonites, 400 Years thereafter Slid 
 attempted their Deftruclion, for which God plagued JJrael 
 with three Years Famine, until Satisfaction was made to the 
 Gibeonites. 
 
 Now, we fay, that even when our Covenants are confide- 
 red as Civil Contracts betwixt one Nation and another, or 
 nationally by one Nation to each other amongft themfelves, 
 iuch cannot be diflblved but by the Conlent of the Parties- 
 contraclers : But, when the Oath of God is interpoied, then 
 God becomes a Party invocate, becauie of his Oath. Nor 
 5s it at all fufficient for that Gentleman to lay, '' That altho 1 
 " our Solemn League was execute through the Nation by 
 7 the then publick Authority of the Nation, yet it was after- 
 " wards diffolved by the lame publick Authority." For 
 tho' fuch might dififolve it as it was a Civil Contract, yet it 
 could never diflolve the Oath of God adhibite to it, becauie 
 fuperior to our higheft national Authority j and from which 
 we can never get free, but by ihewing that the Subjedl- matter- 
 is finful. But to return, let it be oblerved, that, 
 
 urn, Chap. zt. of our Weftminfler Confeflion, Parag. 2. 
 aflerts, rfhat Saints by c ProfeffIon are bound to maintain an 
 holy Fello-zvfiip and Communion intheWorjhip of God \ and in 
 performing fitch other fpiritual Services as tend to their mu- 
 tual Edification, &c. Which Communion, as God offereth Op- 
 portunity, is to be extended to all thofe who in every Tlace 
 call on the Name of the Lord Jefus. 
 
 ido, That the great Defign of our Predecefibrs by this 
 B Solemn 
 
( 34 ) 
 
 Solemn League was to bind themfelves, and theie Nation?, 
 to the Doctrine, Worfhip, Difcipline and Government of 
 our Presbyterian Church, which they did by the firft Claufe 
 of that Oath j and, as a Confequence thereof, they, by the 
 fecond Clauie, bound themfelves to a Reformation from eve- 
 ry Thing that is contrary to the found 'TioBrine they had fe- 
 cured by the firft Clauie, and therefore became bound to 
 endeavour the Extirpation of Popery, 'Prelacy, Berejy\ 
 Schifm, &c. as contrary to this found 'BoJrine, whereby 
 this fecond Claufe, and haill other Clauies, are really as a 
 Guard to the punctual Performance of the firft. 
 
 yio, Where is or can be the IJoBrine of our Presbyterian 
 Church thus fworn to in the Solemn League, if it is not in 
 the Weflminjter Confeffion, which, by thele who had fworn 
 that Oath in their A 61 of Affembly ratifying the faid Confef- 
 fion, 27th Augufl 1 647, is declared to be the fhiefefi Tart 
 of that Uniformity in Religion, 'which by the Solemn League 
 ■we are bound to, ckc. and, after full Examination, is there 
 alfo declared to be mojl agreeable to the Word of God, and, 
 N. B. in nothing contrary to the DoBrine, Wbrjbip, 1)ifci- 
 pline and Government of this Kirk; and therefore ever fince, 
 from Time to Time, fubicribed by the feveral Members of 
 this Church, as the very Standard and Ted of her Dodtrine, 
 and ingrofled in our A6ts of Parliament as luch ? So that 
 we Hand bound to the Doclrine of the fore-cited Article of 
 our Confeffion, by this firft Claufe of our Solemn JLeague : 
 And therefore our endeavouring to extirpate Prelacy, Here- 
 fy, &c. conform to the fecond Claufe of that Oath, muft be 
 confiftent with the 'DoHrine of the forefaid Article of our 
 Confeffion 5 becauie our Oath can never contain what is in- 
 confiftent, for luch would for ever difannul the Obligation 
 of it. 
 
 4/0, That as, by the forefaid Article of our ConfeJJion, 
 we tnufi keep Communion in the Worfinp of God, with all 
 thofe who in every Place call on the Name of the Lord Je- 
 fus, and to the punctual Performance of which we are bound 
 by the Oath of God in this firft Claufe of our Solemn 
 J.eague ; it follows, that our Endeavours to extirpate Pre- 
 lacy, &c. cannoL be by refufing Communion with fuch in 
 the Worpip of God, but it muft be by all the other lawful 
 
 Means 
 
( 35 ) 
 
 Means before-mentioned, conform to the Law of God, and 
 the Laws of the Land, to endeavour the Extirpation of Pre- 
 lacy, as it is an Error, and Incroachment on the Church of 
 Chrift : But Hill our Endeavours to reform that Error, mud 
 be confident with the 2)ocJrit;e which in the fame Oath we 
 have iworn to maintain. 
 
 jto, That as we are bound by the forefaid Article of our 
 CotfeJJion of Faith, and the Oath of our Covenant, thus to 
 keep Communion in tl e JVorJJiip of God, with all thcfi who 
 in every 'Place call on the Name of the Lord Jejus ; this can 
 never be redacted to thole of our own Church : For it is 
 all thofe isoho in every 'Place, &c. whereby Epifcopah or In- 
 dependents, whether Ministers or Laicks, whether of this or 
 of any other Nation, cannot be excluded from our Commu- 
 nion. So that as loon as we are latisfied concerning the 
 Reality of a Peribn's Chrijlianity, altho' we fliould differ 
 from him in lome Points, yet, provided thele Points are con- 
 fident with the Truth and Reality of 'his Chrijlianity, we are 
 bound to keep Communion with him, as above: But if thefc 
 Points, wherein we differ, are inconfiftent with the Truth 
 of his Chrijlianity, we have nothing to do with fuch Per- 
 ibn j becaule this Communion is, by the Article, the Com- 
 munion of Saints. 
 
 6to, As it is thus evident, that we cannot fubmit to any 
 Error in TJoflrine, which is deftru&ive of the Peribn's 
 Chrijlianity with whom we hold this Communion ; fb as 
 little can we fubmit to any Idolatry in our JVorpip, or m 
 any other f,nj)dTer?n of this Communion : But then, foibon 
 as any Perlbn that is Epifcopal, or of any other Denomina- 
 tion whom we admit to be real Chrijliatjs, laying afide 
 whatever we except againft as unlawful in their Worfhip, 
 fhaH fubmit to fuch Manner of Worfhip againft which wc 
 can make no Exception - 7 we then become bound, by this 
 Article of our CoifeJ/lon, and by the Oath of our Covenant, 
 to hold Ommunion with fuch Perlbn in the JVorpip of God, 
 and in every other fpiritual Service or Exerci/e tending t>j 
 our mutual Edification, as cxpreflcd in the forelaid Article. 
 
 Vse hope by this Time Jt is evident, rhtt altho' Mr. 
 }Vhitefield has been excepted againft as being too extenlive 
 in his Charity, and on that account called lax, and of /v 
 
 E a tuiim 
 
(. 3jO -. 
 
 tftdiftarlattVtincifles $ yet, from any Thing he has laid, he 
 cannot well be more extenfive in his Charity, or latitudina- 
 rian in his Communion, than our Church is, in the forefaid 
 Article of our Confejjioti, to which we are bound by the 
 Oath of God in our Solemn League. 
 
 And now, from the whole of what is pad, it appears, that, 
 of the many Realons for refuting to hear the Curates on the 
 Restoration, none of them concern Mr. Whitcficld, except 
 the Supremacy and Epifcopacy : And altho' thefe are infert 
 amongit the foregoing Reaions, and largely infilled on, as 
 they are an Usurpation on the Church of Chrift ; yet it was 
 especially becaufe thcie Curates had lo lately abjured Epif- 
 copacy and Supremacy, and thereafter fubmitted to both not- 
 withstanding ; whereby they were become wilfully perju- 
 red, and Apoflates from the Reformation they had attained : 
 So that it was Epifcopacy and Supremacy as complicated 
 with leveral other and greater Climes, which made them 
 refule to hear, on the Restoration. But, when leparate from 
 thefe other Crimes, we find Supremacy and Epilcopacy no 
 fufflcient Ground to refufe a Man's Ministry otherwiie un- 
 exceptionable, as was the Cafe of the firft Period of Epif- 
 ropacy\ for the Reafons before given $ efpecially that their 
 Ministry was always allowed to be valid by this Church 
 from the Reformation to this Day : For, if it had not, they 
 muft have been re-ordained ; but Re-ordination was never 
 heard of in our Church, except by the Prelates in the Caie 
 before-mentioned. And when the Validity of their Mini- 
 stry was difputed by ibme particular Members of this Church, 
 it was for a particular Purpofe only, and the Queflion al- 
 ways given upas to their being Ministers ftiil; and, if Mi- 
 nisters, Surely Minifters of Chrift, provided they are other- 
 wife worthy of that Office 3" and that becaufe our Church 
 Still founded upon the Evidence of an inward Call, as before 
 defcribed, with an Indifierence by whom the external Ordi- 
 nation was performed. And that this muft nccefTarily have 
 been the Principle of our Church, appears unavoidably from 
 the Cafe of the Aflfembly 1658 : For if Epiicopal Ordina- 
 tion was not good and valid, then our whole Reformation 
 upon the 1638 muff be null, becaufe a non habente potejfa- 
 te?n, as being performed by Peribns ordained by Prelates in 
 
 the 
 
,. . ( 37 ) 
 
 the preceeding Period. So that, before we could give Va- 
 lidity to our then Reformatio^ we would be obliged to 
 prove that, at leaft, the far greater Part, if not the whole, 
 of the Aflembly 1738 were ordained by Presbyters, while 
 the contrary is true ; inibmuch, that it would be impof- 
 fible to prove, that a third, or even a fourth Part, or any 
 confiderabie Number of them, were ordained by Presbyters. 
 Wherefore it mufl be allowed, as it always was by this Church 
 from the Reformation to this Day, that Perfons Epiicopally 
 ordained are Minifters of Chrift, provided they are other- 
 wile worthy of that Office. 
 
 And as this was the Principle and Practice of our Church, 
 fo they formed our Corfeffion of Faith accordingly, as we 
 have leen from the fore-cited Article thereof ; from which, 
 and conicquently from our Covenant, we have made appear 
 evidently our Obligation to keep Communion with fuch in 
 the Worlhip of God, on the Terms and Conditions before- 
 mentioned. And as this was the Principle of our Church 
 from and fince the Time of our forelaid Confeffion and Solemn 
 League, fo, when this oxxxWeftminfter Confeffion was appro- 
 ved by Act of Aflembly, our Church therein declared, that it 
 was, N. B. in nothing contrary to the received jDoffrine, &c 
 of this Church, as well as, N. B. mofi agreeable to the Word 
 of God •• And therefore this mufl have been our Principle 
 from the Reformation to that Time, which we are fure was 
 true, becaufe it was their Practice, the befl Evidence of eve- 
 ry honefl Man's Principles 5 and which Practice could be yet 
 further made appear in many Inftances, if needful. Where- 
 fore we conclude, that this was the Principle of our Church 
 from the Reformation to this Day. 
 
 And becaufe we can have no more from any Church un- 
 der Heaven, than her Principle and Practice in that Behalf; 
 we fhall therefore conclude by obferving, that this Prin- 
 ciple and Practice of our Church is conform to the Scripture, 
 and the very Spirit of the Gofpel therein. From which t 
 appears, that, fo ibon as we are f atisfied of the Truth a^d 
 Reality of each others Chrift ianity, we ought to hold Com- 
 munion in the Worpip of God together, fo far as we a/e a- 
 greed ; or in the Apoftle's Words, Whereto we have al- 
 ready attained, we ought to walk by the fame Rule, and mind 
 
 the 
 
..< 38 ) 
 
 the fame 'Things, waiting until God reveal that, unto us 
 wherein we, or any of us, are unenlightned or other-wife 
 minded, Phil.iii, 15, 16. The Scriptures allow and autho- 
 rile an Interruption of this Communion in certain Cafes j 
 
 i7/?0, By the Texts following : 1 Cor. v. 11. If any Man 
 that is called a "Brother be a Fornicator, or Covetous, or an 
 Idolater, or a Railer, or a 'Drunkard, or an Extortioner ', 
 
 with fuch an one no not to eat. And, z Thejf. iii. 6, 14. 
 
 Now wc co?nmand you, &c. that you withdraw from every 
 brother that walketh diforderly, and not after the Tradition 
 which he received of us. Ver. 11. For there are fome 
 which walk among you diforderly, working not at all, &c. 
 Ver. 12. Such we command and exhort, &c. that with 6)ujet- 
 tiefs they work, and eat their own Bread. Ver. 1 4. Note 
 that Man, and have no Company with him, that he may be 
 itpamed. Now, as all theie Sins enumerate in the firft Text, 
 together with the Sin of Idleneis mentioned in the fecond, 
 are all Immoralities which are obvioufly fuch, even by the 
 Light of Nature without the Help of Revelation, {o they 
 are all Sins againft Light and Knowledge j or if we take in 
 theExpreffion, ver. 6. Contrary to the Tradition which he re- 
 ceived of us, to comprehend other Sins 5 yet theie, being con- 
 trary to what a Perlbn has once received, muft ftill be againft 
 his Knowledge : So that the whole Sins here mentioned, being 
 committed or perfifted in againft Light and Knowledge, they 
 are quite different from the Communion we plead for, which 
 is only in the Cafe of a Perfon's being unenlightned, or, in his 
 Enquiries and Searches afterTruth, happens to differ from us 
 In this or that Point nowiie inconfifient with his Chriflianity. 
 
 It is in vain to lay, that if we may withdraw from a Per- 
 ion on account of the Immoralities before-mentioned, much 
 more ought we to withdraw on other Accounts of more Im- 
 portance to the Church of Chrift 5 for ftill theie, what- 
 ever they are, muft be in the Circumftances of theie Texts, 
 ■by being Sins againft Light and Knowledge, before we can 
 by the Warrant of thele Texts withdraw from fuch. 
 
 Therefore it follows, that where a Perlbn is unenlightned^ 
 or, in his Searches and Enquiry afterTruth, happens to differ 
 from us in fbme Points not inconfifient with his Chriflianity^, 
 we are within the Cafe of the fore-cited Text, 'Phil. iii. 
 
 J 5, *<*< 
 
( 39 ). 
 
 15, it. bound to hold Communion with him fo far as we arc 
 agreed, or whereunto we have already attained, &c. But in 
 .the Cafe of a Peribn guilty of the Immoralities before-men- 
 w^ied, or otherwile finning wilfully againft his Light, we 
 are by the Texts laft above cited bound to withdraw from 
 fuch, that he may be ajbamed 5 and, if he periiils in iuch 
 wilful finning, he becomes the Object of Church Cenfure, 
 even to Excoinmunication. 
 
 zdo, Another Interruption of this Communion which the 
 Scripture injoins, is, when by fpiritual Tyranny, Impofttion 
 and 'Perfecution, the Truth is corrupted, and our Chriitian 
 Liberty deflroyed, as in the Times of our Forefathers -, then 
 indeed it is, in a more fpecial Manner, neceflary that we ftouli 
 contend earneftly for the Faith, and even in the leail Things 
 ft and f aft in the Liberty wherewith Chrift hath made us free, 
 without fuffering our/elves to be again int angled with the Toke 
 of "Bondage, jfude 3. Gal. v. 1. But when we are not in 
 iuch a Caie, as blefled be God we are not at prefent, then 
 the former Rule from 'Phil. iii. 15, \6. ought to take Place 
 amongft vifible Saints, as it did in the Beginning of Chrifti- 
 anity, Jlfts iv. 22. Wloere the Multitude of tloe7ii that be- 
 lieved were of one Heart and of one Soul. N. B. It is not faid, 
 of one Mind, Judgment or Opinion in all Things, which 
 we can never expect to be while in this imperfecl State, not 
 even amongft thole who are the moil cloiely connected to- 
 gether, even by Parti/hip itfelf, or otherwile. 
 
 And when, notwithftanding all thefe Differences in leffcr 
 Matters, which are not inconjiftent with our Chrift ianity, we 
 fhall, by the Blefling of God, be brought to a regular Exe- 
 cution of this Article of our Confejfion and the Scriptures be- 
 fore cited, then, and not till then, /hall that Part of our blefled 
 Lord's interceflbry Prayer have its Accomplifhment, John 
 xvii. 2 1 . T'hat they all may be One, as thou, Father, art 
 in me, and I in thee, that they alfo may be One in us : T'hat 
 the World may believe that thou haft f em me. Ver. 23.7 in 
 them, and thou in me, that they ?/2ay be made perfect in One t 
 and that the World may know that thou haft fent me. 
 Where our blefled Lord puts the Evidence of his Million 
 upon this very Unity of his Members in him, and amongft 
 th<imfolves, dmen. 
 
 FINIS.