Page:History of the Nonjurors.djvu/440

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

422

History of the Nonjurors.

took their seats. The proceedings were opened with Prayer by one of the Prelates; and, as the Book of Common Prayer was not used in Scotland, the officiating Bishop was left to his own discretion.^[1] The house, therefore, made a particular order, that "the Bishops in their Prayers should not mention or insinuate anything against their acts or proceedings." On the day on which the throne was declared vacant, "when all the business of the day was over, one of the Bishops offered to say Prayers according to custom. Upon which it was moved, that King James, being then no longer King of Scotland, that the Bishop should be admonished to pray for him at his peril. Which the Bishop observing, to avoid the incurring a penalty, very discreetly said only the Lord's Prayer: and so the house adjourned.^[2]"

↑ Tindal says the Bishop of Edinburgh, and that "he prayed for the safety and restoration of King James." vol. i. 64.
↑ History of the Late Revolution in Scotland, London, 1690. pp. 92 100. There was much management required to mould the Convention into a proper state. It is remarkable, that in 1687, when King James published his Declaration of Indulgence, very few of the gentry took advantage of it to forsake their parish Churches. For several years, in the North of Scotland, after the Revolution, the people refused to admit the Presbyterian Ministers, and set the General Assembly at defiance. Yet the Convention voted that Episcopacy was contrary to the inclinations of the people. The truth is, the Episcopalians refused to sit in the Convention, or, after attending once, declined to attend further: while some were driven away by the mob, which was with the Presbyterians. When the vote, therefore, was carried, not more than a third of the members were present: consequently, the Presbyterians were able to carry any vote they pleased. Even Tindal, partial as he generally is, gives an honest account of this matter. "But the Bishops, and those who adhered to them having left the Convention, the Presbyterians had a majority of voices to carry every thing as they pleased, how unreasonable soever, and upon this the abolishing of Episcopacy was made a necessary article of the New Settlement." vol. i. 72.

[1] Tindal says the Bishop of Edinburgh, and that "he prayed for the safety and restoration of King James." vol. i. 64.

[2] History of the Late Revolution in Scotland, London, 1690. pp. 92 100. There was much management required to mould the Convention into a proper state. It is remarkable, that in 1687, when King James published his Declaration of Indulgence, very few of the gentry took advantage of it to forsake their parish Churches. For several years, in the North of Scotland, after the Revolution, the people refused to admit the Presbyterian Ministers, and set the General Assembly at defiance. Yet the Convention voted that Episcopacy was contrary to the inclinations of the people. The truth is, the Episcopalians refused to sit in the Convention, or, after attending once, declined to attend further: while some were driven away by the mob, which was with the Presbyterians. When the vote, therefore, was carried, not more than a third of the members were present: consequently, the Presbyterians were able to carry any vote they pleased. Even Tindal, partial as he generally is, gives an honest account of this matter. "But the Bishops, and those who adhered to them having left the Convention, the Presbyterians had a majority of voices to carry every thing as they pleased, how unreasonable soever, and upon this the abolishing of Episcopacy was made a necessary article of the New Settlement." vol. i. 72.

[1]

[2]