Chapter XXVII: The Curates
It was during Mr. Ramsay's incumbency that the saintly Leighton became Archbishop of Glasgow. [13] It was the earnest wish of this revered prelate that some compromise might be come to with the Presbyterians and peace restored to the Church. A conference between him and the non-conforming and indulged ministers took place at Paisley, [14] and one of the most interesting associations connected with the Abbey is the presence there of Leighton speaking words of conciliation and peace. A full account of the conference is given by Wodrow, [15] and by Burnet, who accompanied the Bishop, and who describes the meeting in his “History of His Time.” [16] It is amusing to read the two narratives of the meeting side by side, and to compare the account given by the Presbyterian with that given by the Episcopal historian; but they agree in this, that there was very little of a conciliatory spirit manifested on the side of the Covenanters, who were all resolute in their determination to have nothing to do with Prelacy in any shape or form. Leighton might as well have spoken to the winds as to the uncompromising men who confronted him. The conference began with prayer. “Who shall begin our conference with prayer?” said the Bishop. “Who should pray here,” said Mr. Ramsay, boldly, “but the minister of Paisley?” [17] It was in the same unyielding spirit that his friends who spoke expressed themselves. Mr. John Baird, who had become Mr. Ramsay's colleague, replied to the Bishop, [18] who had opened the conference with a speech of nearly an hour's length, which even the Presbyterian historian allows was “eloquent and elaborate.” Mr. Baird shewed that the eloquence of the prelate had produced no impression on him. “They could not,” he said, “without quitting their principles and wronging their consciences sit in judicature with a bishop, under whatsoever name he is chosen.” One minister after another spoke in the same strain, and Burnet replied. His account of the proceedings is the most trustworthy, as he was present. “Leighton,” he says, “laid out before them the obligation that lay on them to seek peace at all times, but more especially when we saw the dismal effects of our contentions. There could be no agreement unless on both sides there was some disposition to make some abatements and some step towards one another. It appeared that we were willing to make even unreasonable ones on our side, and would they abate nothing on their's? Was their opinion so mathematically certain that they could not dispense with any part of it for the peace of the Church and the saving of souls ? Many poor things were said on their side which would have made a less mild man than he was lose all patience. But he bore with all their trifling impertinences, and urged this question upon them— ‘Would they have held communion with the Church of God at the time of the Council of Nice or not ?’ If they would say nay, he would be less desirous of entering into communion with them. He must say of the Church of that time, ‘Let my soul be with theirs.’ If they said they would, then he was sure they would not regret the offers now made them, which brought Episcopacy much lower than it was at that time. One of the most learned among them had prepared a speech to give the difference between Primitive Episcopacy and ours at present. I was then full of these matters, and replied.” Burnet says he was not answered by his opponents. The Bishop was to put his proposals in writing, and the interview came to a close. It was with a sorrowful heart, though Wodrow quotes his words in ridicule, that Leighton exclaimed, “Is there no hope of peace ? Are you for war ? Is all this in vain ?” It was certainly in vain, [19] but while we honour those stern men, who were so true to their conviction, that “they endured the loss of all things,” we will not fail to pay a tribute of admiration to the man who, in that age of strife and conflict, gave his voice for peace rather than war, and who moved serene and tranquil, breathing the atmosphere of heaven across a scene of passion, turmoil, and bloodshed.
[13] 1670.
[14] December 14, 1670.
[15] Wodrow's Hist., Vol. II., p. 130.
[16] Vol. I., p. 51.
[17] Wodrow's Analecta, Vol. III., p. 65.
[18] “Mr. John Baird came to Paisley in 1659. He died in 1684, or beginning of 1685. He left a Manuscript de Magistratu, several sermons, a Treatise on Hearing the Curates. He wrote “Balm for Gilead” and ‘Violaut the Review.’”—Wodrow's Analecta, Vol. I., p. 170.
[19] I must refer the reader to the historians I have named for a fuller account of this curious meeting. Wodrow says, “Mr. Alexander Jamieson reasoned so closely with the Bishop anent the prelate's power over Presbyters that the Bishop turned a little uneasy. His nose fell a bleeding, whether from this or not I shall not determine, but he was forced to retire a while!” Wodrow says that 26, Burnet that 30 Presbyterians were present. The Bishop was accompanied by the Provost of Glasgow, Sir John Harper of Cambusnethan, Mr. James Ramsay, dean of Glasgow, and Dr. Gilbert Burnet, then Professor of Divinity in the University.