The Moderatour said—There is a poynt in our Confession of Faith not yet cleared, and therefore it were well done to declair your judgment concerning that ye know. There was a reference in the Confession of Faith to the Generall Assembly. 1, It comends [condemns] the novations alreadie introduced; 2. Concerning the corruptions of the publict governement of the Kirk; and the 3 was concerning the civile places and power of Kirkmen. The two former are already determined. It rests now ye declair your judgment concerning the third; and for the effect, it wilt be expedient that ye heare some few thinges red to yow—as, namely, the Conference at Falkland, 1599, when the Kings Majestie was first craving to the Ministrie, voit in Parliament, he appoynted a conference for that effect, for clearing of the mater; and, lykewayes, that ye heare red to yow, the protestation and reason thereof, given in to the Parliament 1606, by Commissioners from Provinciall Assemblies and Presbitries. We deny not but it is requisit that Ministers be not far from the Parliament, that, if any case of conscience fall in Parliament, they may give their advyce from the word of God. But the question is—Whether the Ministers should voit or ryde in Parliament, as Lords and Nobles? Their pretence, at first, was to vindicat the Kirk and Kirkmen from contempt and poverty; but we neid not to doubt but our Lord will see us get honour and respect enough, if we keep ourselves within the bounds of our calling; and, I am persuadit, there is not a faithfull Minister but he will have more joy when he comes from catechising a number of landwart people, nor a Bishop hes when he comes from ryding in Parliament. And they thought to vindicat themselves from contempt and povertie; but, it is lyke, now both will come upon them.
Mr Andro Cant said—The Apostle sayeth—Who is sufficient for these thinges? And yet they will take on two offices, and jumble the civill and ecclesiasticall function throw uther, which is very incompatible.
Mr Andro Ramsay said—I have spent many sermons and treatises against it; and, therefore, with my heart, I condemn it.
Mr David Dick said—The first thing that ever brought me in disgust with the estate, was when I considerit what was the reason that Christ dischargit his disciples to be rulers of the Gentiles; and the satisfaction that I got from this, that Christ would not have his kingdome ane eyesore to the world; so my heart could never be to that course.
Moderatour said—When it was first instantlie urgit by auctoritie, there were some of the ministers had the sagacitie as a foirmell, what could come of it, which made many to protest against; and when, by so doing, they could not hinder it, to put cautions upon it. But since these cannons could not keepe them within their bounds, but they with their voit in Parliament did prejudge the Kirk, whither should not the Church be red of that which hath wrought her so great prejudice? And I thinke there is no more hertrogenius from the matter of a ministers calling, nothing setts him worse, nor nothing more contrarie to his Masters cariage, nor to be a Lord in Parliament. The question is twofold. The first is, Whither a minister of Jesus Christ, separat to the Gospell, should breuke civill place as is usit in a Councell bench or Session? And the uther is, Whether he should voit in Parliament or not? In a word, Whither their exercising in civill offices be lawfull or unlawfull?
The rolles being called, the whole Assembly most unanimouslie, all in ane voit, with the hesitation of two, allanerlie declaired, that its both inexpedient and unlawfull in this Kirk, for ministers, separat to the Gospell, to bruike any civill place or office qwhatsomever.
Moderatour said—We have reason to blesse the Lord for this harmonie—that we sing all ane song, and are led by ane spirit. I answer, where mens mynds are put to a poynt in their worldlie ambition and covetousness, they will, for their aine parte, be content to want these dignities. Thir must either belong to ministers in respect of their ministerie, or in respect they are prelats, and so are called Lords; and if as they are ministers this be unlawfull, as they are prelats it hes double unlawfulnes.
Moderatour said—There would be some considerations had concerning Ruleing Elders. It hes pleased God so to dispence with the hearts of our nobilitie, gentry, and burrowes, that they have by concurrence helped forward the caus of religion, or, as the Scripture phrase is, they have helped God; and, therefore, it becomes me, with all thankfulnes, humblie to acknowledge it; and although we have gone far on in our ecclesiasticall determinations, we must not thinke the mater endit yet; but the Kirk of Christ in this land is yet wrestling with many difficulties. Neither can we thinke ourselves secure in peace and quyetnes, till civill auctoritie ratifie what is heir done by ecclesiasticall constitutions. Therefore it were meit that these elders should still give us their assistance, especiallie in extraordinary occasions. Only ye have to consider whither or not there may be a motion made anent the restoiring of them to the integritie of their places that they had, at the first subscryving of the Confession of Faith?
Mr Robert Murray said—Truelie, when I consider the case of our Kirk as it hath beine a long tyme bygone, and the benefite it had by ruleing elders, I thinke we should be verie glad to agrie to the restoiring of them againe; for I find, ever since the reformatione, in all sorts of Assemblies where ruleing elders hath bein, that they have done great good; and I find that there hath bein many complaints for the want of them; not, never for the having of them, either in Presbitries and uther judicatories. For my pairt, if we looke simplie to the good of the common cause, which we all pretend to doe, we will be glad of their assistance at all our Assemblies; for it would be a strengthening of our weake hands.