averseness, in the hearts of many, from our course, albeit little
in countenance. D. Sibbald, Forbes, and Scroggie, were resolved to
suffer martyrdom before they subscribed anything concerning Episcopacy
and Perth articles; but we resolved to speak nothing to them of
these matters, but of far other purposes. We found them irresolute
about the canons of Dort, as things they had never seen, or at
least considered. They could say nothing against any clause of the
book of canons, liturgy, ordination, high commission. D. Forbes’s
treatises, full of a number of Popish tenets, and intending directly
reconciliation with Rome, farther than either Montacute, or Spalato,
or any I ever saw among their hands, and the hands of their young
students, together with a treatise of Bishop Wedderburn’s, and an
English priest, Barnesius, all for reconciliation. D. Sibbald, in many
points of doctrine, we found very corrupt; for the which we deposed
him, and ordained him, without quick satisfaction, to be processed.
The man was there of great fame. It was laid upon poor me to be all
their examiner, and moderator to their process. Dr Scroggie, an old
man, not very corrupt, yet perverse in the covenant and service book.
D. Forbes’s ingenuity pleased us so well, that we have given him yet
time for advisement. Poor Barron, otherwise an ornament of our nation,
we find has been much in _in multis_ the Canterburian way. Great
knavery and direct intercourse with his Grace we found among them,
and yet all was hid from us that they could. I got my cause delayed
to the next general assembly; yet Mr Robert Ramsay was ordained to
transport to Glasgow, and Mr Andrew Cant to Aberdeen, sore against
his mind; his patron Lothian will vehemently oppose it. Thir violent
transportations will at once offend many. I am like to be more than
boasted with a divinity-profession in Aberdeen. The work is so far
mistaken. Better for me to be dumb or dead than so far miserable.
Much of our ten days sitting spent in causes of transportations, and
plantations of churches, where patrons, presbyteries, and people
had their contests. All which came before us were at last peaceably
settled. Many good overtures were made, which ye will see at once in
print. That which troubled us most was a passage of Mr Henry Guthrie’s,
which, because it may be the occasion of farther din, I will relate to
you particularly, so far as I understand. Our countrymen in Ireland,
being pressed there by the bishops to countenance the liturgy and all
the ceremonies, did abstain from the publick worship, and in private,
among themselves, their ministers being all banished, did, in that time
and place of persecution, comfort themselves with prayer and reading,
and other exercises of religion, whiles in the night, whiles in the
day, as they had occasion. Sundry of them intending a voyage to New
England, inclined towards the discipline of these churches; yea, some
Brownists, insinuating themselves among them whileas their ministers
were away, did move divers towards their conceits. The most of thir
good people flying over to us, were heartily embraced of us all. Their
private meetings were overlooked. Some of their conceits, though they
were spreading, we let alone, till the Lairds of Leckie, one who had
suffered much by the bishops, was marked, using his Irish form of
private exercises in Stirling, and in his prayers, some expression
which were prejudicial to Mr Harry Guthrie, minister of the said town,
and other ministers of the land, who did not affect their ways. At once
Mr Harry, with the brethren of that presbytery, and magistrates of
that town, did begin with vehemency, and some violence, to suppress
these private meetings; and to point out in very black letters all the
singularities they knew or heard of in Leckie, or these who affected
their ways. They, on the other side, failed not to render to Mr
Harry and the brethren the like. The last assembly of Edinburgh were
perplexed with this matter. Mr Harry made very loud complaints of
their novations, both in word and writ. Sundry being conscious what in
divers parts of the country was broaching, was in some fear. Divers of
our chief ministers tendering very much the credit of these very pious
people, were loth that anything concerning them should come in publick.
We had sundry private meetings with the chief that were thought to
incline that way. Mr Henderson vented himself at many occasions,
passionately opposite to these conceits. We found among ourselves great
harmony of judgement; yea, Leckie declaring his mind in a writ, was
found to differ nothing considerable from us. Once we agreed for the
framing of an act for the preveening of such questions. Both sides
laid it on me to form it. All were pleased with the draught, only
one not liking my conclusion of precise discharging of all novations
till in a general assembly they were allowed, persuaded to leave off
making of an act, lest our adversaries should triumph in our so hasty
disputations, if not divisions; and did assure, by quiet denting, to
smother all farther reasoning of such purposes: only we concluded,
for satisfaction of all, that Mr Harry should preach for advancement
of religious exercises in every family, and Mr Robert Blair, Mr John
Maclellan, Mr John Livingston, against night meetings, and other abuses
which were complained of. Mr Blair, in his sermon, did not so much
cry down these meetings as was expected, wherefore Mr Guthrie refused
to preach at all. Some citizens of Edinburgh declared themselves
not well satisfied with Mr Henderson’s zeal against their practice.
One Livingston, a trafficker with the English who were affected to
our reformation, but withal to the discipline of New England, in
his letters to his friends abroad, did write very despitefully of
Mr Henderson. This being intercepted, did grieve, not only the man
himself, but us all, of all ranks, who had found him the powerful
instrument of God, fitted expressly much above all other, to be a
blessing to our church, in this most dangerous season. For preveening
of all farther inconvenience, it was thought meet to press, in all the
kingdom, religious exercises in families, according to a draught which
Mr Henderson, with the unanimous consent of all, gave out in print.
This family worship was expected a sufficient remedy against the feared
evils of other private meetings. But when it was not found so, these
that would have kept on foot amongst us some of the Irish novations,
foreseeing their severe condemnation by the ensuing general assembly,
thought good to flee from that discreditable stroke, and drew together
in Edinburgh, in time of the parliament, to a privy conference. On
the one side, Mr Henderson and Mr Eleazar Borthwick; on the other,
Mr Blair and Mr Dickson; these four agreed on a paper of caveats,
limiting these private meetings; which being opened to the rest of the
brethren there conveened, did please all. The report of this gladed
all the land, hoping that these disputations had been at a point. I
heard no more of them till the synod, at the beginning whereof, as
the custom is, a list being given up for preaching in the town, Mr
Guthrie was one. He finding himself, as he avowed, indisposed in body,
and unable without more books and leisure than there he could have,
and unwilling, since the provost of the town required he should be
heard, having, as he heard, a mind to get him transported to that town,
refused peremptorily to preach at all, and that with some words of
headiness more than it became to us, in the face of an assembly; those
who bare him at small good will, finding him in this snare, whether
to punish him for bygone businesses, or to dash him for attempting in
that assembly any farther matter about Leckie’s meetings, which they
suspected was his main errand to that place, urged straitly the publick
censure of his presumption. When he was removed, all those who had
relation to the Irish business, lighted so sharply upon him, that many
did think their censure was not so much for his present behaviour, as
for some bygone quarrels. He took the moderator’s reproof submissively
enough; but whether on that irritation, or preceding resolution, he
set himself with all earnestness to have these matters concluded in
the assembly, which some of us were afraid so much as publickly to
name. Privately he had solicited the whole northern ministers and
elders, putting them in a great vehemency against all these things he
complained of. It was one of my overtures for ordering the house at
the beginning of the assembly, that no motion should come in publick,
till first it was considered in private by the committee appointed for
things of that nature whereof it was, unless the committee refused to
receive it. Whereby Mr Harry his first motion in publick, though he
had alledged it had been proponed by him to the committee of overtures
and not received, was remitted again to the committee. By this means
he was holden off some days; but by no means could be gotten diverted
from proponing these questions, which we were afraid should trouble
us all. Account was taken of all the commissioners of the kingdom,
in the face of the assembly, of settling of family exercise in ilk
house of their presbytery; it was avowed to be everywhere pretty well
advanced; but this was not water for the fire in hand. It was the
advice of the committee, to propone Mr Henderson’s paper before Mr
Harry was heard. This advice, in my mind, was wholesome; for likely
all would have applauded to that paper, and no more needed for the
settling of these questions; but some, whether because they were loth,
though privily they assented to that paper, that yet it should go on
in a publick act, or being varied with a clean contrair spait, were
wilful to have Mr Harry to vent himself in publick, to the uttermost of
his passions, would not let the committee determine any thing in that
affair. Mr Harry being permitted at last to speak in the assembly, a
long discourse proclaimed what he was able to say of Leckie, and those
meetings. Truly he uttered many things very odious, if true. Mr James
Simpson of Bathgate shewed also many scandalous things of that sort
of people. A commissioner from Galloway declared a number of uncouth
passages, reflecting on Mr Samuel Rutherford, Mr John Livingstone, and
Mr Maclellan. Presently all went to a heat and confused din; the whole
north, especially the Earl of Seaforth, a well-spoken man, but whose
honesty in our cause ever has been much suspected, passionately siding
with Mr Harry; some others freting to hear pious people so shamefully,
as they thought, calumniated. In the midst of this clamour, I took
leave, sharply to regret that we did rush in a greater evil than any
was complained of: the confused misorder of a general assembly was the
spoiling of the only remedy of that and all other diseases; but no
possibility of order and silence. The moderator had neither weight in
his discourse, nor dexterity in guiding. We missed much Mr Henderson,
or some of our respected nobles. At last the confusion ended in a
committee for the preparing of overtures to remeid these evils. The
committee was for the most part of men at Mr Harry’s devotion. After
much jangling and repetition, with many evils, of odious, whether true
or fabulous, narrations, sundry of us inclined to have that forenamed
paper passed in an act. But my Lord Seaforth, and Mr Harry, by no
means could hear of that motion. They told ever, that caveats brought
in the bishops; that this paper, though never so full of limitations,
would be at least introductive of the thing limited. Mr Rutherford
all the while was dumb; only, in the midst of this jangling, he cast
in a syllogism, and required them all to answer it. “What scripture
does warrant, an assembly may not discharge; but privy meetings for
exercises of religion, scripture warrants, James v. 16. _Confess your
faults one to another, and pray one for another;_ Mal. iii. 16. _Then
they that feared the Lord, spake often one to another,_ &c.: _Ergo_,
thir things could not be done in publick meetings,” A number greedily
haunsht at the argument, Mr Andrew Ramsay, Mr J. Adamson, and others;
but came not near the matter, let be to answer formally. Mr Harry
and Seaforth would not have Mr Samuel to trouble us with his logick
syllogisms. The truth is, as I conceive, Mr Harry intended to have all
meetings private _simpliciter_ abolished; also Mr Rutherford I know,
in a treatise, defended the lawfulness of those meetings in greater
numbers, and for moe purposes than yet we have heard practised: also
Mr Dickson had written, and practised, and countenanced some things
in these meetings, that now both of them finding the inconveniences,
and seeing the great opposition they got from many good men, and
especially by Mr Henderson, were content to pass from, at least to be
silent of. We closed that night with this overture, That five of our
number should draw up every one of us our conception, by way of act,
to present to-morrow to the committee, Mr David, Mr Harry, Mr David
Lindsay, Mr Alexander Peter, and I. In my act I strove, so cunningly as
I could, to canvass Mr Henderson’s paper shortly, with some of my own
conceptions. I communicated it to the chief opposers of Mr Harry, Mr
David Dickson, Mr Samuel Rutherford, William Rig, and others, and got
them at last to acquiesce. When we came to the committee, all the five
Acts were read: the question came betwixt mine and Harry’s. Mine was
liked by all; only Mr Harry disliked it, and conceived that under every
word a dangerous serpent did lie. There was no remeid: his contentment
was the contentment of the body of the assembly. Since he misliked my
draught, I set myself to persuade that his draught might be accepted;
for truly it had nothing that was controverted. It consisted of three
articles. The 2d article was, That read prayers was not unlawful.
Mr Dick did enlarge, that it should be lawful to read prayers both
in private and publick. The 3d article was, That it should not be
permitted to any to expone scripture to people, but only ministers,
and expectants approven by Presbyteries. No man did contradict the 1st
article, which was, That family-worship should be declared to be of
persons of one family, not of divers. Here was all the question. I did
declare publickly, oft without contradiction, that the meetings whereof
he complained were not family-meetings, but another kind specially
differing from the other: so that his article of family-meetings would
never touch any abuse of these meetings, were they never so many and
foul. Yet because this was Mr Harry’s own draught, and he alledged
that the people with whom he had to do, did take their conventicles
only for family exercises, he required no more than the declaration of
the assembly, that family-meetings extended no farther than to persons
of the same family. This, though no man could refuse, yet these that
liked nothing that came from him, did question much more than they
needed, and very violently urged to have, in that article, limitations
which in my judgement were very needless, and did farther Mr Harry’s
design more than his own words. Always Mr Harry was made content to
accept of one exception, which was the practice of people’s flocking to
their minister’s family-exercise; but of any moe exceptions he would
not hear, and more they pressed upon an argument that did much amaze
my mind, that except they got another conceit, they had a written
protestation ready against that act of the synod; the thing that the
devil was seeking, and would have been sweet pastime to that town of
Aberdeen, and our small favourers in the north, who were greedily
gazing on the event of that broil. Always at last the prayers of the
land for God’s blessing to that assembly prevailed, and in a moment
God made the minds of these who differed to agree, to the great joy of
all when they heard it. There was but five of us then in private, Mr
Harry, Mr David, as parties, Belhelvie for Mr Harry, the moderator, and
I, betwixt them. Mr David at last acquiesced to my request, to let Mr
Harry’s article pass as it stood; and Mr Harry, after once and again I
had inculcate to him, that all his act was but a blephum if you put not
in that clause you see it has against novations, was at last content
to put it in; so with great difficulty, the act being agreed upon in
private, and in the committee, when it came to be voted in the assembly
it had no contrair voice. All of us did think that then the storm was
close over and gone; yet when least we expected, it does blow up again
as boisterously as ever. Some that were grieved and fretted that their
purpose should have got so much way, desiring to have some order of
him, did give in a writ, requiring, since so many vile abuses were in
the assembly alledged to have been committed by Leckie; and others, in
divers parts of the country, it were expedient that a committee were
ordained for the trial and severe punishment of all these misorders;
and that this committee should sit in Edinburgh, and consist of those
whom the assembly had appointed commissioners for the parliament, with
so many other as the assembly thought meet to join with them. This bill
was read near the end of the synod by Mr James Bonner, moderator of the
bills, as newly given to him, by whom he knew not. Upon the hearing of
it, at once there arose such an heat and universal clamour, that it was
marvellous. Mr John Maclellan was found the ingiver of it; while he
began to be hissed at, Mr Andrew Cant, and Mr D. Dickson did speak for
the reasonableness of it, and some few other ministers and gentlemen
who had been on the council of it; but they were so overwhelmed with
the multitude of criers, Away with it, Away with it, that they were
forced to be silent and let it go. I much grieved to see the tumultuous
disorder of our assembly; and had I been on Mr David’s council, I would
have dissuaded him to my power from such a motion, which, if it had
been assented to, was like to have fired our church more than any other
brand that Satan at this time, in all his wit, could have invented:
so, by God’s goodness, water was cast on that fire for the time: the
embers yet seem to smoke; but we hope God will see to the peace of our
church, which is but a brand newly taken out of the fire, or rather yet
in the midst of the flame of war and great danger.
* * * * *
11. _Laud’s Service Book, and the English Liturgy._[256]
In addition to the objections which the Scots had to various parts of
the English Liturgy, they complained of the following alterations made
on it in Laud’s Service Book, as savouring of Popery:—
1. In the order of the administration of the Lord’s Supper, instead of
the Rubrick in the English Liturgy—“The table, at the Communion time,
having a fair white linen cloth upon it, shall stand _in the body of
the church_, or in the chancel, where morning and evening prayer are
appointed to be said”—Laud’s Service Book has the following:—“The
holy table having, at the communion time, a carpet, and a fair white
linen cloth upon it, _with other decent furniture, meet for the high
mysteries there to be celebrated_, shall stand at the _uppermost part
of the chancell_ or church, where the Presbyter, standing at the north
side or end thereof, shall say,” &c.
2. Having thus removed the Priest, as far as possible, out of the
hearing of the people, (in conformity with the Romish rites,) the
Service Book, in a second Rubrick, immediately before the consecration,
orders him to turn his back to the people, which he must have done
according to the following direction:—“Then the Presbyter, standing
up, shall say the prayer of consecration, as follloweth, _but then,
during the time of consecration, he shall stand at such a part of the
holy table, where he may, with the more ease and decency use both his
hands._”
3. They objected to the phrase _consecration_, which, though it appears
in the modern editions of the English Liturgy, had no place in the
edition used at that time in England; but their chief objection to the
prayer of consecration, in Laud’s book, was the following sentence,
which never was allowed a place in the English Liturgy:—“We most humbly
beseech thee, and of thy almighty goodness vouchsafe so to blesse and
sanctifie, with thy word and holy spirit, these thy gifts and creatures
of bread and wine, _that they may be unto us the body and blood of thy
most dearly beloved Son._”
4. After the prayer of _consecration_, there follows, in Laud’s book,
the prayer of _oblation_, which two prayers the Popish writers call the
_heart_ and the _head_ of the mass, and both of which were carefully
removed by the English Reformers, the former being altered, and the
latter rendered innocent, by being placed as a thanksgiving after
receiving the communion. In the Service Book, the oblation is replaced,
under the title of a “Memoriall or Prayer of Oblation,” beginning with,
“We, thy humble servants do celebrate and make here before thy divine
Majestie, with these thy holy gifts, the memoriall which thy Son hath
willed us to make, and humbly beseeching thee, that whosoever shall
be partakers of the holy communion, _may worthilie receive the most
precious bodie and blood of thy Son_, Jesus Christ, and be fulfilled
with thy grace and heavenly benediction, and made one bodie with him,
that he may dwell in them and they in him.” After this, the Lord’s
prayer, which, in the English Liturgy, is not introduced till after
the communion has been received, is brought in with the presumptuous
preface of the missal, _Audemus dicere_—“We are bold to say.”
5. What was formerly called “the holy table,” and, in the English
Liturgy, “the Lord’s table,” is now, after the consecration, in the
Service Book, termed “God’s board.” “Then shall the Presbyter, kneeling
down at _God’s board_, say,” &c.
6. In delivering the bread, the Minister is required, by the English
Liturgy, to say—“The body of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was given
for thee, preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life. _Take
and eat this in remembrance that Christ died for thee, and feed on
him in thy heart, by faith with thanksgiving._” This last sentence,
added by the English Reformers to qualify and explain the former, is
wholly _omitted_ in Laud’s book, which gives us merely the words of
the missal—“_The body of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was given for
thee, preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life._” In like
manner, when delivering the cup, the words “Drink this in remembrance
that Christ’s blood was shed for thee, and be thankful,” are expunged
from the Service Book, as savouring too much of Protestantism; and the
Priest is simply required to “say this benediction—_The blood of our
Lord Jesus Christ, which was shed for thee, preserve thy body and soul
unto everlasting life._ Here the party receiving shall say, Amen.”
7. The fair linen cloth, with which the elements are covered, after
communicating, is called, in Laud’s book, the “corporall.”
8. Besides this, in the order for the communion, in Laud’s Liturgy, the
_Offertory_, which, it would appear, was almost wholly expunged, name
and thing, from the ancient copies of the English Liturgy, as having
been the Popish sacrifice for the quick and the dead; is introduced
in nearly all its former glory. Passages of Scripture, omitted in the
English book as identifying it with Jewish oblations, are restored; and
it was strongly suspected, from the Commentaries of Couzins, who openly
defended the practice, that prayers for the dead, and for the honour of
the saints, were insinuated under such expressions as, “We also bless
thy holy name for all those thy servants, who, having finished their
course in faith, do now rest from their labours—all thy saints, who
have been choice vessels of thy grace, and the lights of the world in
their several generations—most humbly beseeching that, at the day of
the general resurrection, we, and all they which are of the mystical
body of thy Son, may be set on his right hand,” &c, nothing like which
is to be found in the corresponding prayer in the English Liturgy.
Various other objectionable points, in the Service Book of 1637, are
noticed by Robert Baillie in his treatise “Ladensium Autokatakrisis,
the Canterburians Self-Conviction,” published without his name in 1640.
But the same writer has treated the subject at greater length, and in a
more learned and elaborate publication, entitled, “A Parallel or brief
Comparison betwixt our Scottish Booke and the Missal, the Breviarie,
and other Popish ritualls this day in use at Rome, according to the
Canons of Trent;” included in his MS. letters and journals, which are
now being printed by the Bannatyne Club. It is needless to add, that
the suspicions of the Covenanters, as to the intentions of Laud and his
Clergy, in the construction of the Service Book, to bring the Church
of England, as well that of Scotland, into closer conformity with the
Church of Rome, were greatly strengthened by the publications and
proceedings of the party in England, who wen carrying matters such a
length as to disgust and alarm the rational and sober portion of the
English Clergy. See, for example, Laud’s Consecration of St Catherine
Creed Church, which made a great noise at the time—Rushworth, vol.
ii, p. 76. See also Bennet’s Memorial of the Reformation p. 165, and
Neale’s History of the Puritans.
* * * * *
THE
GENERAL ASSEMBLY,
AT ST ANDREWS AND EDINBURGH, 1641.
In resuming our narrative of events connected with the Church of
Scotland, we may state, that Wentworth, (created Earl of Strafford in
the close of the preceding year,) was intrusted with the chief command
of the King’s forces to be employed against the Scotch; the Earl of
Northumberland, who was named General, being in a state of health
which did not admit of his taking the active charge of it. Strafford
had acquired the confidence of the King, by his zealous and energetic
services in Ireland, and proved the sincerity of his devotion to his
master’s cause, by subscribing £20,000 to the fund for carrying on the
war. Before adverting to the military movements of the English army, it
may be proper to notice those of the Scottish, who, on this occasion,
took steps in advance of their antagonists.
Early in the year 1640, (25th February,) a reinforcement of 300 men had
been sent into Edinburgh Castle, with large stores of munitions for its
defence, under General Ruthven, created Lord Ettrick. In May, however,
the Scottish Estates having mustered their forces in sufficient number,
beleaguered the Castle, and, in June and July, bombarded it with such
effect as ultimately to force its surrender. About the same time,
Argyle took the Castle of Airlie, and plundered all the tenantry on
the lands of Lord Ogilvie; scoured Athol, and apprehended the Earl,
and other leading men, whom he sent to prison; and levied most severe
contributions: and Monro carried terror into the north, by taking
prisoners a great number of persons disaffected to the Covenant at
Aberdeen, and by other severities; including, among the prisoners,
the Bishop of Moray, whose Castle of Spynie he seized and garrisoned.
He also took Strathbogie Castle, plundered the Marquis of Huntley’s
lands fearfully, and, on the 2d of Aug., “he marches to Banffe,” says
Balfour, “quher he playes the devill, and demolishes the Lord Banffes
house, which wes both fair and staitly, and an ornament to that pairt
of the Kingdome.”
Such were the preludes to the meeting of the General Assembly in the
north, which sat from the 28th of July till the 6th of August 1640,
in the midst of all these manifold desolations and ravages around
them. Meanwhile, the main army of the Covenanters was mustering in
Edinburgh, under old Leslie, as General; the Earl of Callander,
Lieutenant-General; Baillie, Major-General; Sir Alexander Hamilton,
General of Artillery; and Colonel John Leslie, Quartermaster-General.
Under the guidance of these commanders, and above a dozen of the
Nobility and their sons, and many experienced officers, the Scottish
army moved towards the Border. They returned to their old quarters at
Dunse Law, and, after about three weeks’ training and preparation, they
crossed the Tweed on the 20th or 21st of August.[257] thus deviating
from their former tactics, and assuming the aggressive course. Balfour
states it as consisting of 200 companies of foot, 4,000 cavalry, and
2,500 baggagers. We leave the pacific correspondence to be gleaned from
the documents annexed, and follow briefly the military operations.