[
111]
to proceed to this extremity on their own authority, made application for advice to certain ministers in
London.
It is not much to the credit of these ministers, that, without making any further inquiries, or consulting the parties against whom the complaint was made, they proceeded immediately to give an opinion upon an
ex-parte statement.
Their advice was to call in some of the neighbouring ministers who might best judge of these matters on the spot.
Accordingly, seven ministers were applied to, who may have been selected, as residing at no great distance, but who happen, nevertheless, to have been among those who took the most prominent part in the late violent proceedings in the Assembly, and who were, therefore, least of all likely to exercise an impartial judgment on the case.
In fact, it does not appear to have been for the purpose of judging between the parties, or of reconciling differences, that they were assembled; but to assist one of the parties in the most effectual mode of accomplishing the object they were already determined on.
These seven, as was, in fact, expected and intended, set their names to a declaration to the following effect; ‘that there are some errors in doctrine that are a sufficient foundation for the people to withdraw from the communion of their ministers holding such errors; and that the denying the true and proper divinity of the Son of God, namely, that he is one God with the Father, is an error of that nature, contrary to the holy scripture, and to the doctrine of the reformed churches.’
Shortly afterwards, the four ministers were requested to meet these gentlemen, when the above declaration was read to them, and they
