1662. whofe company he took pleafure, would fometimes run into excefs, yet he did it feldom, and had a very bad opinion of all that got into the habit and love of drunkenness. The new Bishops came down to The Bishops came down to Scotland foon after their confecration, all in one coach. Leightoun told me, he believed they were weary of him, for Scotland, he was very weary of them: But he, finding they intended to be received at Edinburgh with fome pomp, left them at Morpeth, and came to Edinburgh 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 eafy when others forced it on him. In this I always thought him too ftiff: It provoked the other Bishops, and looked like fingularity and affectation, and furnished thofe that were prejudiced against him with a fpecious appearance, to reprefent him as a man of odd notions and practices. The Lord Chancellour, with all the Nobility and Privy Councellours, then at Edinburgh, went out, together with the Magiftracy of the city, and brought the Bishops in, as in triumph. I looked on: And tho' I was thoroughly Epifcopal, yet I thought there was fomewhat in the pomp of that entry, that did not look like the humility that became their function: Soon after their arrival, fix other Bishops were confecrated, but not ordained Priests and Deacons. The See of Edinburgh was for fome 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 upon Sharp one Wifhart, who had been the Marquis of Montrofe's chaplain, and had been taken prifoner, and ufed with fo much cruelty in the jayl of Edinburgh, that it feem'd but juftice to advance a man in that place, where he had fuffer'd fo much. The Tacy were The feffion of Parliament came on in April 1662. 1662: Where the first thing that was propofed by the Earl of Midletoun was, that fince the act refciffory had annulled all the Parliaments after brought that held in the year 1633, the former laws in into Parfavour of Epifcopacy were now again in force, liament. the King had reftored that function which had been fo long glorious in the Church, and for which his bleffed father had fuffered fo much: And tho' the Bishops had a right to come and take their place in Parliament, yet it was a piece of refpect to fend fome of every ftate to invite them to come, and fit among them. This was agreed to: So upon the meffage the Bishops came and took their places. Leightoun went, not with them, as indeed he never came to Parliament but when there was fomething before them that related to religion, or to the Church. The first act that paffed in this feffion was for reftoring Epifcopacy, and fettling the government of the Church in their hands. Sharp had the framing of this act, as Primrofe told me. The whole government and jurifdiction of the Church in the feveral diocefes was declared to be lodged in the Bifhops, which they were to exercife with the advice and affiftance of fuch of their clergy, as were of known loyalty and prudence: All men that held any benefice in the Church were required to own and fubmit to the government of the Church, as now by law eftablifhed. This was plainly the fetting Epifcopacy on another bottom, than it had been ever on in Scotland before this time: For the whole body of the Prefbyterians did formerly maintain fuch a fhare in the adminiftration, that the Bishops had never pretended to any more, than to be their fettled Prefidents with a negative voice upon them. But now it was faid, that the whole power was lodged fimply in the Bishop, who was only bound to carry along with him in the adminiftration fo many Prefbyters, 1662. as he thought fit to fingle out, as his advisers and affiftants; which was the taking all power out of the body of the Clergy: Church judicatories were now made only the Bishop's affiftants: And the few of the Clergy that muft affift being to be pickt out by him, that was only a matter of fhew; ncr had they any authority lodged with them, all that being vefted only in the Bithop: Nor did it escape centure, that among the qualifications of those Prefbyters that were to be the Bishop's advisers and affiftants, 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 eftablished by law, they faid, it was hard to fubmit to fo high an authority as was now lodged with the Bishops; but to require them to own it, feemed to import an antecedent approving, or at least a fubfequent juftifying of fuch an authority, which carried the matter far beyond a bare obedience, even to an impofing upon confcience. Thefe were not only the exceptions made by the Prefbyterians, but by the Epifcopal men themfelves, who had never carried the argument farther in Scotland, than for a precedency, with fome authority in ordination, and a negative in matters of jurifdiction. They thought, the body of the Clergy ought to be a check upon the Bishops, and that, withɔut the confent of the majority, they ought not to be legally impowered to act in fo imperious a manner, as was warranted by this act. Many of them would never fubfcribe to this form of owning and fubmitting: And the more prudent Bifhops did not impofe it on their Clergy. The whole frame of the aft was liable to great cen fure. It was thought an inexcufable piece of madnefs, that, when a government was brought in upon a nation fo averfe to it, the first step should curry their power fo high, All the Bishops, ex cept Sharp, difowned their having any fhare in 1662. the penning this act; which indeed was pafs'd in hafte, without due confideration. Nor did any of the Bishops, no not Sharp himself, ever carry their authority fo high, as by the act they were warranted to do. But all the enemies to Epifcopacy had this act ever in their mouths, to excufe their not fubmitting to it; and faid, it afferted a greater ftretch of authority in Bishops, than they themselves thought fit to affume. oath of fu premacy. Soon after that act pafs'd, fome of the Prefby- Scruples terian preachers were fummoned to answer before about the the Parliament, for fome reflections made in their fermons against Epifcopacy. But nothing could be made of it: For their words were general, and capable of different fenfes. So it was refolved, for a proof of their loyalty, to tender them the oath of allegiance and fupremacy. That had been enacted in the former Parliament, and was refused by none, but the Earl of Caffilis. He defired, that an explanation might be made of the fupremacy: The words 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 difcourfe by Archbishop Ufher, published by King James's order. But the Parliament would not fatisfy him fo far. And they were well pleased to fe fcruples raised about the oath, that fo a colour might be put on their severities against fuch as fhould refuse it, as being men that refufed to fwear allegiance to the King. Upon that the Earl of Caffilis left the Parliament, and quitted all his employments: For he was a man of a moft inflexible firmness. Many faid, there was no need of an explanation, fince how ambiguous foever the words might be in themselves, yet that oath, being brought from Scotland to England, ought to be understood in the fame fenfe in which it was imposed in that Kingdom, On the other hand, there was 1662. was just reafon for fome mens being tender in fa facred a matter as an oath. The Earl of Cafilis had offered to take the oath, provided he might join his explanation to it. The Earl of Midletoun was contented to let him fay what he pleafed, buɛ he would not fuffer him to put it in writing. The Ministers, to whom it was now tendred, offered to take it upon the fame terms; and in a petition to the Lords of the articles they offered their explanation. Upon that a debate arofe, whether an act explanatory of the oath fhould be offered to the Parliament, or not. This was the first time that Leightoun appeared in Parliament. He preffed, it might be done, with much zeal. He faid, the land mourned by reafon of the many oaths that had been taken: The words of this oath were certainly capable of a bad fenfe: In compaffion to Papifts a limited fenfe had been put on them in England: And he thought there fhould be a like tenderness fhewed to Proteftants, especially when the fcruple was juft, and there was an oath in the cafe, in which the matter ought certainly to be made clear: To act otherwise looked like the laying fnares for people, and the making men offenders for a word. Sharp took this ill from him, and replied upon him with great bitternefs: And faid, it was below the dignity of government to make acts to fatisfy the weak fcruples of peevish men: It ill became them, who had impofed their, Covenant on all people without any explanation, and had forced all to take it, now to expect fuch extraordinary favours. Leightoun infifted, that it ought to be done for that very reafon, that all people might fee a difference between the mild proceedings of the government now, and their feverity: And that it ill became the very fame perfons, who had complained of that rigour, now to practise it themselves; for thus it may be faid, the world goes mad by turns. mad by turns. This was ill taken, by the Earl of Midletoun, and all his party: For they |