commentandi, omniaque id genus alia præstandi, quæ hic aut alibi uspiam SS. Th. Doctoribus concedi solent, omnibusque honoribus, dignitatibus, et privilegiis affecisse et ornâsse quibus affici et ornari solent, qui ad istum Dignitatis gradum ullibi terrarum legitimâ ratione conscendunt; quod ut fœlix faustumque sit Deum ter opt: max: precor. In cujus rei testimonium et fidem, præsentes hasce literas meo et aliorum dictæ Universitatis Doctorum et Professorum chirographis confirmatas, publicoque ejusdem sigillo munitas dedi, apud dictum Collegium, Die Nono Mensis Maii, A. Æ. C. MD.CCIX. GEO. MIDDLETON, S.T.D. PRIMARIUS.* J. GORDON, JURIS CIVILIS PROfessor. GEO. FRASER, P.P. et SUBPRIMARIUS.† ALEX. GORDON, H.L.P. JA. URQUHART, M.D. et P.P. GUL. BLAIR, S.T.D. RECTOR DE ST. NICHOLAS. GUL. BLAK, P.P. GEO. GORDON, LL. OO. PR. H. FRASER, P.P. THOMAS BOWER, M.D. et MATH. P. R. No. 4. (Supra, p. 212.) DIPLOMA FOR A DOCTORATE FROM GLASGOW. SENATUS ACADEMIE GLASGUENSIS, CHRISTIANO LECTORI SALUTEM. Cum artes omnes alat honos; utilissimo sanè instituto, ii quorum in Manu fuit Res Christiana, Academias harum Rerum optimas arbitras, eâ præditas voluerunt Potestate, quâ qui liberalibus artibus, præ aliis diligentem et felicem navassent operam, eos idoneis honoribus afficerent. Ex his præcipuum, Theologia, nempe Doctoratum, quum meritissimo, tribuente inclytâ Academiâ Abredonensi, consecutus sit VIR REVERENDUS EDMUNDUS CALAMY, Christiani cujusdam apud Westmonasteri+ See supra, p. 203.-ED. See supra, p. 202.-ED. enses gregis Pastor fidelissimus: Nos etiam, quibus de ejus vitæ integritate, ingenio, prudentiâ, et Sacrarum Literarum cognitione, aliis quoque certis constat indiciis, dictum V. Cl. EDMUNDUM CALAMY, ad eundem Doctoralis in S. S. Theologia Dignitatis Gradum, in hac nostra Academia admittendum censuimus: eumque pro potestate ab antiquis retro Principibus nobis concessâ, his literis, Theologiæ Doctorem declaramus et renunciamus; eumque cunctis privilegiis et immunitatibus, quæ Theologiæ Doctoribus usquam Gentium conceduntur, vel concedi solent, nobis etiam tribuentibus gaudere volumus. In quorum omnium fidem Literas hasce majore Academiæ Sigillo munitas, dabamus Glasguæ 16to Cal. Junias, Anno Æræ Christianæ millesimo septingentesimo nono. Jo. MAXWELL, RECTOR. Jo. STIRLING, VICE CANCEL. ET PRÆF. ACAD. JA. BROWN, DECANUS FACULTATIS. Jo. SIMSON, S. S. THEOLOGIE PROFESSOR. Jo. LAW, PHILOSOPHIE PROF. GERS. CARMICHAELL, PHIL. PROF. Jo. LOWDOUNE, PHIL. PROF. AL. DUNLOP, GR. LINGUE PROF. AND. ROSSE, H. L. P. No. 5. (Supra, p. 284.) QUERIES ON THE SCHISM BILL. I. How Schism can be undertaken to be effectually prevented, before it is clearly determined what it is? And whether those men can justly be charged with it, who are united to the common head of the Christian Church by faith, and to all its members by a hearty love? And whether the Dissenters are not within the Church, as that is described by the nineteenth article of the "Church of England," as a Society that has "the pure Word of God preached" amongst them, " and the Sacraments duly administered, according to Christ's Ordinance, in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same?" II. How any national church, as far as it is favoured or warranted by the Holy Scriptures, which all Protestants own for their rule, can be in any real danger from such persons as those described, or from their being left at liberty to educate their children in their own way? III. Whether it be not a piece of wisdom to learn from our enemies? And when even in the Romish Communion, notwithstanding their high pretensions to unity and uniformity, there is yet a great diversity admitted amongst their religious orders, why should not Protestants enlarge and strengthen themselves, by inclosing all they can, in a way of forbearance; especially when they heartily fall in with the same civil government? IV. Are not the French and Dutch Protestant Churches (to our great satisfaction) allowed to educate their own children,* without dishonour or damage either to the Church or State? And shall this privilege, which is freely granted to foreigners, be denied to natives, that are faithful and peaceable, merely because they are Dissenters ? V. Was not the treating such as Schismatics, in the reign of King Charles II. (to look no farther back,) very sensibly found to promote the growth of Popery? And may it not reasonably be expected, that a like cause should have a like effect? VI. Was it not owned in the reign that succeeded, by some eminent prelates of the Church, with Archbishop Sancroft at their head, as well as by the noble Marquis of Halifax, in his "Letter to the Dissenters," (in which so many eminent persons concurred, and which all at that time applauded,) that too much rigour had been used towards persons of the same religion, for differing in smaller matters. And were not promises then freely made, of a different treatment, and a better temper for the future, from the pulpit and the press, and in all conversation? VIII. Have not the Bishops that have been advanced to that honour since the Revolution, (who have generally been persons of the greatest eminence for their worth and moderation,) met with more respect from the Dissenters, than from many who pretended to be zealous members of their own Church? And is it a suitable return for persons of their lordships' candour, to *See supra, p. 294. note.-ED. deal more hardly by us, as to our children, than their predecessors ever attempted to do, by our fathers, as to their descendants? VIII. Could any thing be instanced in, that more tenderly affected the Protestants in France, than denying them liberty to educate their children in their own principles? And can that method, which has all along been represented as so severe in a Popish Prince, ever be fit to be countenanced by Protestant Bishops, in a Protestant country? IX. Should Popery once more prevail among us, (which some who are ornaments to the bench of Bishops have owned to be no very remote supposition,) would it not be a most grating reflection, in case the legislators should demand the education of the children of all Protestants, to hear them insinuate, that their lordships had set them the pattern, by demanding the education of the children of Dissenters ? X. Is it a thing that can reasonably be expected, that they should ever have the courage to endure the fiery trial, (which is what, according to the supposition foregoing, they may be called to,) who, by any political considerations, should be kept from sheltering the innocent? And, upon the supposition that any members of their own Church should threaten them, if they acted according to the principles by which they obtained their preferments, would it not be more becoming to inform them better, and yield more comfort to set them an example of steadiness, than to harden and embolden them, by yielding to them in a method of treating brethren, that is neither scriptural nor rational? XI. Is it a seemly thing for guides of the Church, to pass such a censure upon the Assembly's Catechism, as if it were not fit to be taught, when there is nothing to be found in it, but what agrees with the doctrine, and nothing that is opposite to the government, of their own Church? And how can it be reconciled with the veracity and honour of their lordships, to * See Long Parliament, supra, p. 294, note.-ED. allow no other Catechism than that which cannot be answered to with truth by the children of Dissenters, who had no godfathers or god-mothers to give them their names, or promise for them when they were baptized? XII. Have not the Ecclesiastical Courts from the first Reformation been owned a great grievance by the best prelates and members of the Church of England? Nay, have they not, upon occasion, been freely inveighed against by some, who at present sit on the Bishops' bench? And is there any such evidence of their amendment, as can justify their now concurring to support and encourage them? And lastly, will not the passing such a Bill into a law be more likely to spread animosity, increase uncharitableness, and perpetuate division, than prevent the growth of schism? And is not this as evident, as that the publicly branding a body of men will inflame the populace against then? And has not severity, on the other hand, a natural tendency to exasperate the sufferers? My Lords the Bishops are earnestly desired to take these things into their serious consideration, by several of the descendants of those very Presbyterians, who earnestly (though in vain) implored the compassion of their predecessors in 1661; and by many that have joined with them in waiting for the fulfilling their promises in 1687, and 1688: and who most heartily beseech Almighty God, they may never fall into the same extremities, or worse, by having our common hopes, which depend upon the Protestant succession in the illustrious House of Hanover, defeated, according to some men's desires and wishes, which we pray may never take effect. Warburton, not yet seated " on the Bishops' bench," (where, I believe, he never agitated the question of ecclesiastical reform,) thus writes from "Prior Park, Aug. 31, 1755," to his friend Hurd. "Could any thing be more absurd than that, when the yoke of Rome was thrown off, they should govern the new church, erected in opposition to it, by the laws of the old. The pretence was, that this was only by way of interim, till a body of ecclesiastical laws could be formed. But, whoever considers that the Canon Laws proceeded from, and had perpetual reference |