passed from the year 1633 to 1660, including of course those for the extirpation of episcopacy. Next it was declared that the power of establishing the model of church-government was vested in the crown, whereby, according to Kirkton, they erected the king into a sort of pope. This last statute purports to be 'An Explanation of the King's Prerogative of Supremacy over all Estates, as ratified by Act 129, 8 King James VI.'-It certainly gave the king a degree of power inconsistent with both episcopacy and presbytery, since he might have abolished both, and established any other model by his own immediate authority.-Accordingly the statute was rescinded in the first parliament after the Revolution. The act rescissory of 1660, and that of supremacy, though the first inferred the destruction of the presbyterian church-government, and the second contained an acknowledgment of the king's supremacy fatal to the very principle on which presbytery rests, passed without the shadow of opposition. The appointment of bishops by Charles, and the confirmation of that office by an act of parliament, were carried through with the same ease and unanimity. Viewing the matter therefore as an act of the legislature, it cannot be denied that episcopacy was restored with the same formality wherewith it had been taken away; and that the lamentations of Kirkton and other authors of his party, are only just so far as they may happen to be correct or otherwise in their notions of the divine right of prelacy. Nor had men of tender consciences among the presbyterians to complain of the same ceremonial observances being anew forced upon them, which were enjoined by the canons of Perth. These obnoxious points were tacitly abandoned, and the mode of worship used in the episcopal establishment was, in all material parts, the same which the presbyterians used, excepting that the former read the doxology, the Lord's prayer, and, in baptism, the apostles' creed. To the matter of these additions to daily worship, the most rigid fanatic could be hardly supposed to object; and nothing was added of those ceremonials, such as surplices, altars, or the cross in baptism, which are disputed by English dissenters. The communion tables were placed according to convenience, without any principle of uniform position; they had no chancels, and they used no bells saving that for the convocation to divine worship. In a word, the episcopal church of Scotland in her ceremonial was so tender of offence to the presbyterians, that she could scarcely be said to differ from their own forms. The clergy wore gowns and cassocks, but did not venture to shock the eyes of their congregation with the abhorred surplice. There were therefore no doctrinal and scarcely any ceremonial points in controversy betwixt the Scottish presbyterians and episcopalians,―on the contrary, the best and most moderate of either party KK 3 held held church communion together without reluctance, neither charging error, far less schism or heresy, against the others. Neither could the revenue of the Scottish episcopal church be justly objected to as exorbitant, or unequally divided. The primate had 1000l. yearly; the bishops from 300l. to 500l.; and the inferior clergy a greater equality of benefices than in England, few exceeding 1001. or falling beneath 201. of annual income: even the last sum afforded a decent livelihood in that remote age and cheap country.— But if there was no dispute concerning the doctrines, and nothing to object to the endowments, of the new-modelled church, her. discipline and outward government were the subject of much complaint to the presbyterians. Upon their own principles these men were not perhaps entitled to be heard against the establishment of a moderate episcopacy, such as had prevailed in the church of Scotland from 1612 to 1639, and indeed had never been altogether discontinued for any considerable length of time. Episcopacy was now restored by the legislature as formally and effectually as it had been formerly abolished, and presbytery had for the time lost all authority, except what the votaries of that form of church-government claimed for it ex jure divino, an argument set up by divines of both churches. But the presbyterians complained, and not without reason, that a larger and more formidable authority was allowed to the bishops under this new model than their predecessors had been admitted to; and they had speedy reason to add that their faculties were less meekly born, and their power, as it was more extensive, was also much more severely and harshly exercised. Lauderdale, as already noticed, had begun with advising the king to tolerate presbytery some time longer as the national form of worship: but when he found that his rival Middleton was gaining ground on him, by encouraging the king's predilection for episcopacy, he resolved to out-manœuvre him, by carrying the authority of the bishops to a pitch higher than the other had proposed, and thereby placing them in a more equal balance against the power of the nobility. On this subject Kirkton has an interesting anecdote:-Glencairn, who had taken Middleton's side in the discussions before his majesty, endeavoured, when in private with Lauderdale, to qualify his opinion by saying, that 'tho' the other day he hade declared himself for bishops, he desired not to be mistaken, for he was only for a sort of sober modern bishops, such as they were in the primitive times, but not for the lordly prelats, such as were in Scotland before. Lauderdale answered him with ane oath, that since they hade chosen bishops, bishops they should have, higher than any that ever were in Scotland, and that he should find.'-pp. 133, 134. They They retained indeed, in the new order of things, those forms and names which from the very beginning of the Reformation, and under all the former varieties of church government, had given the colour of a classical or presbyterian model to the kirk of Scotland, even when most episcopal. They had monthly presbyteries, provincial synods, and general assemblies. But with reference to these consistorial judicatures, Kirkton points out the infinite difference in extent of power assigned to the bishops on the revival of their order. Whoso shall compare this sett of bishops with the old bishops established in the year 1612, shall find that these were but a sort of pigmeys, compared with our new bishops; for, first, the presbyteries were standing judicatories, using the power of the keyes in the time of the former bishops; but in the time of the new bishops there was no shadow of church power in Scotland, except what resided or flowed from the bishop in person; and as presbyteries were discharged before ever our new prelates entered upon their throne, so it was a considerable time, even some years, before ever ministers were permitted to meet together, so much as for the exercise of their ministerial gifts; and when they first mett, they were constitute a meeting for such and such effects, by virtue of the bishop's commission allowing the ministers of the precinct secluding the ruling elders. Moreover, the first bishops were, in effect, allowed no more but a sort of negative vote, and great were the conflicts betwixt some stout presbyteries and the encroaching bishops; but the new bishops had not only a negative, but a positive vote, having the full power of government lodged upon their solitary person, their assistants being only their arbitrary attendants, or shaddows. However, men said the bishops grumbled because they were not reponed to all that the popish bishops enjoyed.'-pp. 141, 142. Unfortunately this great increase of jurisdiction and power was conferred on men who had former injuries to avenge, and immediate contempt and insult to repel and to subdue. It was not to be expected that the presbyterian clergy should have so soon forgot the supremacy which they had so lately enjoyed; or, proud as most of them had reason to be of their influence over their audiences, that they should endure, without a sense of pain and mortification, the triumphof those over whom they had very recently exercised no lenient measure of authority. Something had been done to intimidate opposers by the trial and execution of Argyle, whose death was well deserved by many acts of falsehood and cruelty; and of Guthrie, whom even Sharp interceded for in vain. These were the only men of note who died to atone for the lives of so many loyalists as had suffered under the pretended judicatures of the interregnum, Argyle richly merited his fate; his character, however gilded over by Kirkton, is shown by his editor, p. 104, to be one of the least dubious of modern times. His cruelty, fraud, and ambition were notorious; his signal hypocrisy had, at length, ceased to deceive even the lowest of the puritans. But as we conceive it a sacred principle, that punishment cannot be morally inflicted for the mere purposes of vengeance, and that it is a heinous crime to pervert and strain the laws even to destroy those who are really deserving of death, we cannot acquit Charles's Scottish government of transgressing both principles, even in the case of Argyle, and still more in that of Guthrie. Several ministers were exiled to Holland, where they formed a sort of Scottish dissenting church, and, much at their ease themselves, encouraged by books and messages the non-conforming ministers in Scotland to follow such measures as necessarily exposed them to the severities of the government. It is, indeed, singular, but not unamusing, to see that-those farthest removed from the danger appear to have been the most scrupulously zealous in the cause. Neither did the rulers neglect such means as in their opinion were calculated to bring into public contempt the opinions of the presbyterians, and particularly that solemn league and covenant which had been át once the cause of their success, their idol when in prosperity, and their subject of regret and mourning during their adversity. Kirkton gives us a curious scene which took place at Lithgow upon the anniversary of the King's restoration. 'I cannot omit to mention one example of the madness of the people at that time. Upon the first 29th of May, 1661, the town of Lithgow, Robert Mill being chief author, and Mr. James Ramsey (who afterword ascended the height of the pitifull bishoprick of Dumblane) being minister, after they hade filled their streets with bonfires very throng, and made their crosse run wine, added also this ridiculous pageant: They framed ane arch upon four pillars, and upon one side the picture of ane old hagge with the Covenant in her hand, and this inscription above: A GLORIOUS REFORMATION. On the other side of the arch was a whigge with the Remonstrance in his hand, and this inscription, NO ASSOCIATION WITH MALIGNANTS. On the other side was the Committee of Estates, with this inscription, ANE ACT FOR DELIVERING UP THE KING. On the fourth side was the Commission of the Kirk, with this inscription, THE ACT OF THE WEST KIRK. On the top of the arch stood the Devil, with this inscription, STAND TO THE CAUSE. In the midst of the arch was a litany: From Covenants with uplifted hands, From Remonstrators with associate bands, From Church Commissioners and their protestation, Good Lord deliver us. 'They hade also the picture of Rebellion in religious habit, with the book Lex Rex in one hand, and the causes of God's wrath in the other, and this in midst of rocks, and reels, and kirk stools, logs of wood, and spurs, and covenants, acts of assembly, protestations, with this inscription, REBELLION IS THE MOTHER OF WITCHCRAFT. Then after the minister minister hade sanctified the debauch with a goodly prayer, and while they were drinking the king's health, they put fire to the whole frame, which quickly turned it to ashes. Lastly, in place of this there appeared a table supported by four Angels with a sonnet to the king's praise, and so with drunkenness enough they concluded the day. This was not required by any law, but they would outrun the law. All these men some twelve years before hade renewed the covenant with uplifted hands, but single perjury could not satisfie them, except they boasted in their sin with a triumph.'-pp. 126, 127. cess. Having thus tried the means of terror and of ridicule, the bishops seemed to conceive themselves strong enough to attempt to exercise the high powers entrusted to them. They proclaimed diocesan meetings, and the privy council enjoined the attendance of all ministers on these occasions. This was the touchstone which first brought to a precise test the temper of the Scottish clergy, and few of them, excepting in the north, gave attendance upon the prelates. Middleton (still royal commissioner) was at this time engaged in a solemn tour through Scotland, in the course of which he was feasted and banquetted with the most licentious profusion. A quorum of the council attended him, that in the intervals of riot they might transact public business. Those who would receive him agreeably, provided not only the ordinary room for banquetting, but separate apartments for each of the beastly consequences which ensue upon unlimited exWhile the commissioner and most of his council were in this course of revel, a complaint was made to him by Fairfowl, the bishop of Glasgow, that the ministers had refused to acknowledge his authority and attend his diocesan meetings. Middleton required the prelate to suggest a remedy. With extraordinary rashness, Fairfowl proposed that a proclamation should be issued expelling from their cures and parishes all ministers appointed since the year 1649 who should not receive collation from the bishop of their diocese against a term assigned. Hot with wine, and impatient of contradiction, Middleton, without waiting either to consult the whole privy council, or pausing upon a measure so violent, or regarding the remonstrances of Sir James Lockhart of Lee, who foresaw the confusion which so rash an injunction was certain to occasion, consented to issue this ill-judged proclamation. Even the Primate Sharp complained of the folly of Fairfowl in precipitating a measure of such consequence, and the council took some imperfect steps to mitigate its rigour. But the deed was done, and the schism in the church, which that act of council introduced, was destined never to be ended but by the downfall of episcopacy. The effect was so extensive that it could not but prepare materials for a national convulsion. Of six hundred ministers two hundred resigned their livings rather than submit to collation, and as they were banished to the north |