xxiii, _sect._ 3, "The civil magistrate may not
assume to himself the administration of the word or the keys." And also,
by the beautiful practice of our reformers, betwixt 1638 and 1649, who
observed the scriptural order, the church always going foremost, in all
the several pieces of reformation attained to, and then the state coming
after, by exerting their authority, in ratification and defense of the
church's acts and deeds, in behalf of reformation.

3. The Erastianism of this settlement of religion, appears plain from
the act of parliament 1592, noticed above, upon which the Revolution
parliament did found it, as in _Act_ 5th, _Sess._ 2, 1690, by which the
forementioned act 1592, is ratified, revived, renewed and confirmed, in
all the heads thereof, patronage excepted. Now, in regard that act 1592
contains an invasion upon the headship of Christ, and intrinsic power of
the church, and ascribes an Erastian power to the civil magistrate over
the church, making it unlawful for the church to convocate her superior
judicatories, but in dependence upon the king for his licence and
authority; and in regard the Revolution parliament did revive and renew
this clause in foresaid act 1592, as well as other heads thereof, it
must needs follow, that this settlement of religion cannot be freed of
the charge of Erastianism. Nor is it very strange that statesmen, who
had been educated in the principles of Erastianism, should be fond of
reviving an act that robbed Christ of his crown rights, and the church
of her spiritual liberty; but most surprising, that professed
Presbyterian ministers should so greedily embrace and approve of
Erastianism, as a valuable and glorious deliverance to the church of
Christ! In agreeableness to this Erastian article of the above act the
parliament, in their act 1690, indicted and appointed the first general
assembly, as a specimen of their Erastian power over their newly
constituted church; and it has ever since been the practice of the
sovereign, to call, dissolve and adjourn her assemblies at his pleasure,
and sometimes to an indefinite time. It is further observable, that the
king's commission to his representative in assembly, runs in a style
that evidently discovers, that he looks upon the assembly's power and
right of constitution as subordinate to him. Thus it begins, "_Seeing by
our decree that an assembly is to meet_," &c. Yet notwithstanding of
this, the assembly 1690 (nor any after them, s