1662. fied. And the earl of Midletoun and his party took no care of any business, being almost perpetually drunk by which they came in a great measure to lose the king. For though, upon a frolic, the king, with a few in whose company he took pleasure, would sometimes run into excess, yet he did it seldom, and had a very bad opinion of all that got into the habit and love of drunkenness. The new bishops came down to Scotland. The bishops came down to Scotland soon after their consecration, all in one coach. Leightoun told me, he believed they were weary of him, for he was very weary of them: but he, finding they intended to be received at Edenburgh with some pomp, left them at Morpeth, and came to Edenburgh a few days before them. He hated all the appearances of vanity. He would not have the title of lord given him by his friends, and was not easy when others forced it on him. In this I always thought him too stiff: it provoked the other bishops, and looked like singularity and affectation, and furnished those that were prejudiced against him with a specious appearance, to represent him as a man of odd notions and practices. The lord chancellor, with all the nobility and privy-counsellors, then at Edenburgh, went out, together with the magistracy of the city, and brought the bishops in, as in triumph. I looked on; and though I was thoroughly episcopal, yet I thought 143 there was somewhat in the pomp of that entry, that did not look like the humility that became their function soon after their arrival, six other bishops were consecrated, but not ordained priests and deacons. The see of Edenburgh was for some time kept vacant. Sharp hoped that Douglas might be prevailed on to accept it: but he would enter into no treaty about it. So the earl of Midletoun forced 1662. upon Sharp one Wishart, who had been the marquis of Montrose's chaplain, and had been taken prisoner, and used with so much cruelty in the gaol of Edenburgh, that it seemed but justice to advance a man in that place, where he had [been so near an advancement of another sort.] brought liament. . The session of parliament came on in April 1662: They were where the first thing that was proposed by the earl into parof Midletoun was, that since the act rescissory had annulled all the parliaments after that held in the year 1633, the former laws in favour of episcopacy were now again in force, the king had restored that function which had been so long glorious in the church, and for which his blessed father had suffered so much and though the bishops had a right to come and take their place in parliament, yet it was a piece of respect to send some of every state to invite them to come, and sit among them. This was agreed to: so upon the message, the bishops came and took their places. Leightoun went not with them, as indeed he never came to parliament but when there was something before them that related to religion or to the church. The first act that passed in this session was for restoring episcopacy, and settling the government of the church in their hands. Sharp had the framing of this act, as Primerose told me. [And it appeared to be his; for, according to the fable of the harpies, he had an art of spoiling every thing that he h (where he had suffered so much, was substituted in the printed copy. He was the author of the book De Rebus a Jacobo Marchione Montisrosa- 1662. touched.] The whole government and jurisdiction of the church in the several dioceses was declared to be lodged in the bishops, which they were to exercise with the advice and assistance of such of their clergy as were of known loyalty and prudence: all men that held any benefice in the church were required to own and submit to the government of the church, as now by law established. This was plainly the setting episcopacy on another bottom than it had been ever on in Scotland before this time: for the whole body of the presbyterians did formerly maintain such a share in the administration, that the bishops had never pretended to any more, than to be their settled presidents with a negative voice upon them. But now it was said, that the whole power was lodged simply in the bishop, who was only bound to carry along with him in the administration so many presbyters, as he thought fit to single out, as his advisers and assistants; which was the taking all power out of the body of the clergy: church judicatories were now made only the bishop's 144 assistants and the few of the clergy that must assist being to be picked out by him, that was only a matter of shew; nor had they any authority lodged with them, all that being vested only in the bishop: nor did it escape censure, that among the qualifications of those presbyters that were to be the bishop's advisers and assistants, loyalty and prudence were only named; and that piety and learning were forgot, which must always be reckoned the first qualifications of the clergy. As to the obligation to own and submit to the government thus established by law, they said, it was hard to submit to so high an authority as was now lodged with the bishops; but to require them to own it, seemed to import an an- 1662. tecedent approving, or at least a subsequent justifying, of such an authority, which carried the matter far beyond a bare obedience, even to an imposing upon conscience. These were not only the exceptions made by the presbyterians, but by the episcopal men themselves, who had never carried the argument farther in Scotland than for a precedency, with some authority in ordination, and a negative in matters of jurisdiction. They thought, the body of the clergy ought to be a check upon the bishops, and that, without the consent of the majority, they ought not to be legally empowered to act in so imperious a manner, as was warranted by this act. Many of them would never subscribe to this form of owning and submitting: and the more prudent bishops did not impose it on their clergy. The whole frame of the act was liable to great censure. It was thought an unexcusable piece of madness, that, when a government was brought in upon a nation so averse to it, the first step should carry their power so high. All the bishops, except Sharp, disowned their having any share in the penning this act; which indeed was passed in haste, without due consideration. Nor did any of the bishops, no not Sharp himself, ever carry their authority so high, as by the act they were warranted to do. But all the enemies to episcopacy had this act ever in their mouths, to excuse their not submitting to it; and said, it asserted a greater stretch of authority in bishops, than they themselves thought fit to assume. about the Soon after that act passed, some of the presby-Scruples terian preachers were summoned to answer before oath of su the parliament for some reflections made in their premacy. 1662. sermons against episcopacy. But nothing could be made of it for their words were general, and capable of different senses. So it was resolved, for a proof of their loyalty, to tender them the oath of allegiance and supremacy. That had been enacted in the former parliament, and was refused by none but the earl of Cassilis. He desired, that an explanation might be made of the supremacy: the words 145 of the oath were large: and when the oath was enacted in England, a clear explanation was given in one of the articles of the church of England, and more copiously afterwards in a discourse by archbishop Usher, published by king James's order. But the parliament would not satisfy him so far. And they were well pleased to see scruples raised about the oath, that so a colour might be put on their severities against such as should refuse it, as being men that refused to swear allegiance to the king. Upon that the earl of Cassilis left the parliament, and quitted all his employments: for he was a man of a most inflexible firmness. Many said, there was no need of an explanation, since how ambiguous soever the words might be in themselves, yet that oath, being brought to Scotland from England, ought to be understood in the same sense in which it was imposed in that kingdom. On the other hand, there was just reason for some men's being tender in so sacred a matter as an oath. The earl of Cassilis had offered to take the oath, provided he might join his explanation to it. The earl of Midletoun was contented to let him say what he pleased, but he would not suffer him to put it in writing. The ministers, to whom it was now tendered, offered to take it upon the same terms; and |