ful, in an open contradiction to any testimony for reformation
work: the other party, _to wit, Antiburghers_, have now indeed
professedly cast off the revolution constitution of the church (at the
same time continuing to make their partial Act and Testimony the basis
of their distinguished profession); but yet, in an inconsistency
therewith, and in contradiction to the covenanted testimony of the
church of _Scotland_, continue to adopt the constitution of the State,
as being, however defective, yet agreeable to the precept and so lawful.
Hence, they are still most partial in their testimony, of which they
have given a fresh and notable proof, in forementioned warning published
by them: wherein though there are a variety of evils condescended upon,
as just grounds of the Lord's controversy with the nations, yet there is
not that faithfulness used therein, in a particular charging home of the
several sins mentioned, upon every one in their different ranks, as, in
agreeableness to the word of God, is requisite to work a conviction in
every one, that they may turn from their sins, and as might correspond
to the title given that performance. Thus, passing other instances that
might also have been observed, they justly remark, _page_ 31st, "The
glorious sovereignty of our Lord Jesus Christ, as the alone King and
Head of his church, is sadly encroached upon and opposed by the royal
supremacy, in causes ecclesiastical. The king is acknowledged as supreme
head, or governor on earth, of the churches of _England_ and _Ireland_.
The civil sovereign is thus declared to be the head or fountain of
church power, from whence all authority and ministrations in these
churches do spring, is vested with all powers of government and
discipline, and constituted the sole judge of controversies within the
same." "The established Church of _Scotland_ have also, by some
particular managements, subjected and subordinated their ecclesiastical
meetings to the civil power." But while they acknowledge this to be the
sin of the church, and an high provocation against the Lord; yet, as to
the particular sin of the civil power, in assuming and usurping this
Erastian supremacy unto itself, they are quite silent. They have not the
faithfulness to say, in their warning, to the robber of Christ, in this
matter, as once the prophet of the Lord said to the king of _Israel_, in
another case, _Thou art the man_. On the contrary (which cannot but have
a tendency to