Decreet, 3 April 1705, Edinburgh

Act, 12 March 1705, Edinburgh

Att Edinburgh the third day of Apryll Jaj vijc and fyve years

A1705/4/61

Decreet

Decreet The Agent to the Kirk against Mr James Gray and Mr2 Thomas Hall

Anent the lybell or Letters of Complaint raised and persued befor the Lords of her Majesties privie Councill at the instance of John Blair Agent to the Kirk with concourse of Sir James Steuart her Majesties Advocat for her highness interest in the matter wnderwrytten, Mentioning that wher by the fyfth act of the parliament Jajvjc nyntie, Presbiterian Church Government and discipline are ratified and confirmed to be the government of Chrysts Church; And Sicklyke by the twentie Second Act of the parliament Jajvjc nyntie fyve, It is Statute and ordained that no persone Shall intrude himselfe into any Church, or shall exercise any pairt of the Ministeriall function within any3 parish without ane orderly Call from the heretors and eldership, and legall admission from the Presbetrie within whose bounds it lyes; Lykeas by the Second Act of the parliament Jajvijc and three, all the saids acts, and other laws and Statuts for establishing presbiterian Church Government, are ratified and approven in the haill heads, articles and clauses therof; Nevertheless it is of verity that Mr James Gray late Incumbent at Muirkirk in Kyll, and Mr Thomas Hall late Incumbent at St Madois, Shakeing of all regaird to our authoritie and laws have of late intruded themselves into the Kirk of Logie Bride within the United parishes of Auchtergaven and Logie Bride, and sett up for preachers therin, and exercise all the other pairts of the Ministeriall function as baptizeing marrieing etc In manifast contempt of the forsaids Laws and acts of parliament, Notwithstanding that the said United parish and united kirks therof Is duly and legally planted, as also have intruded into the Kirk of Caputh without any orderly Call from the heretors and eldershipe therof, or legall admission from the presbetrie of the bounds: By all which it is evident that the saids Mr James Gray and Mr Thomas Hall are guilty of manifast intrusions and attempts against the present setled constitution of the Church, And of a high contempt of our Laws and authority, which being proven they ought to be punished with the pains of law, and effectuallie discharged to intrude into or molest the saids parishes, and otherwayes punished as the Lords of privie Councill Should think fitt to the example and terror of others to committ the lyke in tyme comeing: And Anent the charge given to the saids Mr James Gray and Mr Thomas Hall defenders to have Compeared befor the saids Lords of privie Councill at a certaine day bygone To have answered to the forsaid Complaint, And to have heard and Seen such order and course taken theranent as the saids Lords of privie Councill Should think fitt, wnder the paine of rebellion and putting of them to the horne, As in the said lybell or Letters of Complaint and executions therof at more length is Contained; Which Lybell being upon the day and date of thir presents Called in presence of the saids Lords, and the said perseuer Compearing personallie att the barr with Sir James Steuart her Majesties Advocat, And the defenders being oft tymes called and not compeiring (though personallie cited for that effect,) The Lords of her Majesties privie Councill Grants certification against the saids defenders, And Ordains Letters of denounciation to be direct to meacers and messengers at armes To pass to the mercat cross of […] and other places needfull, and therat in her Majesties name and authoritie duly, lawfullie and orderly denounce them her Majesties rebells, and putt them to her highness horne, Escheat and inbring all ther moveable goods and geir to her Majesties use for ther contempt and disobedience; Superceeding extract till nixt councill day being the Twentie Sixt of Apryll nixt.

At Edinburgh 3 April 1705

A1705/4/61

Decreet

Decreet the agent to the Kirk against Mr James Gray and Mr Thomas Hall

Concerning the libel or letters of complaint raised and pursued before the lords of her majesty’s privy council at the instance of John Blair, gent to the Kirk, with concourse of Sir James Stewart, her majesty’s advocate for her highness’ interest in the matter underwritten, mentioning that, where by the 5th act of the parliament [of] 1690, Presbyterian Church government and discipline are ratified and confirmed to be the government of Christ’s Church, and also by the 22nd act of the parliament [of] 1695, it is statute and ordained that no person shall intrude himself into any church, or shall exercise any part of the ministerial function within any parish without an orderly call from the heritors and eldership, and legal admission from the presbytery within whose bounds it lies. Likewise by the 2nd act of the parliament [of] 1703, all the said acts, and other laws and statutes for establishing Presbyterian Church government are ratified and approved in the whole heads, articles, and clauses thereof. Nevertheless it is of verity that Mr James Gray, late incumbent at Muirkirk in Kyle, and Mr Thomas Hall, late incumbent at St Madoes, shaking of all regard to our authority and laws, have of late intruded themselves into the kirk of Logiebride within the united parishes of Auchtergaven and Logiebride, and set up for preachers therein, and exercised all the other parts of the ministerial function, [such] as baptising, marrying, etc, in manifest contempt of the foresaid laws and acts of parliament, notwithstanding that the said united parish and united kirks thereof is duly and legally planted. As also have intruded into the kirk of Caputh without any orderly call from the heritors and eldership thereof, or legal admission from the presbytery of the bounds. By all which it is evident that the said Mr James Gray and Mr Thomas Hall are guilty of manifest intrusions and attempts against the present settled constitution of the Church, and of a high contempt of our laws and authority, which being proven they ought to be punished with the pains of law, and effectually discharged to intrude into or molest the said parishes, and otherwise punished as the lords of privy council should think fit to the example and terror of others to commit the like in time coming. And concerning the charge given to the said Mr James Gray and Mr Thomas Hall, defenders, to have appeared before the said lords of privy council at a certain day bygone to have answered to the foresaid complaint, and to have heard and seen such order and course taken therein as the said lords of privy council should think fit, under the pain of rebellion and putting of them to the horn, as in the said libel or letters of complaint and executions thereof at more length is contained. Which libel being upon the day and date of this present called in presence of the said lords, and the said pursuer appearing personally at the bar with Sir James Stewart, her majesty’s advocate, and the defenders being often called and not appearing (though personally cited for that effect), the lords of her majesty’s privy council grant certification against the said defenders, and ordain letters of denunciation to be directed to macers and messengers at arms to pass to the mercat cross of […] and other places needful, and thereat in her majesty’s name and authority, duly, lawfully, and orderly denounce them her majesty’s rebels, and put them to her highness’ horn, escheat and bring in all their moveable goods and possessions to her majesty’s use for their contempt and disobedience, superseding extract until next council day, being 26 April next.

1. NRS, PC1/53, 383-4.

2. The word ‘John’ scored out here.

3. The word ‘pairt’ scored out here.

1. NRS, PC1/53, 383-4.