'The obstinate refusing of lawful Articles': conformity, the Articles of Perth, and the Jacobean Church of Scotland
None of the affirmatiue voters approued the Articles for knowne verities; for when wee speake of knowne verities, we vnderstand the verities defined in Scripture, such as are the points of our faith, which no man ought to call in question: but that any man did giue his voice otherwise, then his iudgement led him, yee will hardly perswade vs, much lesse, that any man would openly professe this.
This, as Lindsay has previously demonstrated, reflected the mainstream of continental Reformed thought, affirmed in the Second Helvetic Confession:
Unity consists not in outward rites and ceremonies, but rather in the truth and unity of the catholic faith. The catholic faith is not given to us by human laws, but by Holy Scriptures, of which the Apostles' Creed is a compendium. And, therefore, we read in the ancient writers that there was a manifold diversity of rites, but that they were free, and no one ever thought that the unity of the Church was thereby dissolved.
By contrast, it was those who refused to conform to the Articles of Perth, denying a legitimate "manifold diversity of rites", exalting the previous order of the Book of Discipline to a status far beyond that which should be ascribed to "outward rites and ceremonies", who stood apart from the mainstream of the continental Reformed churches. This, by the way, significantly contributed to the post-1688 Church of Scotland dramatically differing from the continental Reformed traditions.
Lindsay continues by refuting the allegation that those who supported the Articles did so from a cowardly fear. No, it was a godly fear which motived them:
As to the feare, yee so oft mention, it was a feare not contrarie to the dutifull affection we owe to the Church; nor repugnant to the iudgement which they had, that were moued therewith: but a feare commendable flowing both from their affection, and iudgement, for they feared no particular hurt to their owne persons, or punishment to haue beene inflicted vpon themselues, but to irritate so gracious a King and a Prince so carefull of the good of the Church; and to bring the Church into an vnnecessary trouble by the obstinate refusing of lawfull Articles, this wee hope all good men feared, and still feare.
Such godly fear was lacking in those who persisted in an "obstinate refusing of lawful Articles", disordering the life and peace of the Church of Scotland. Note the phrase "lawful Articles", again emphasising that the Articles of Perth were a legitimate ordering of the outward ceremonies of the national church.
What is more, opponents were refusing the guidance of the Christian magistrate, who deemed the Articles of Perth fitting for the outward ordering of the Church of Scotland.
And certainly, whosoeuer lackes this feare are not fit to serue in a Church, and more vnfit to determine of Church-matters.
It was through the General Assembly determining "Church-matters", and the support of the Christian magistrate, that the peace and good order of the Church of Scotland would be maintained. As Lindsay stated, to presume to reject such authority and order was a serious matter. Indeed, it contravened the commitment to the good order of Reformed Churches proclaimed by the Second Helvetic Confession:
by doing away with a Roman head we do not bring any confusion or disorder into the Church, since we teach that the government of the Church which the apostles handed down is sufficient to keep the Church in proper order, the Church was not disordered or in confusion.
(The picture is of a late 17th century drawing of Brechin, Lindsay's See.)
Comments
Post a Comment