At the special meeting of
Presbytery called to consider his paper he asked to have it back,
apparently because he now thought its terms were not strong enough, and
meanwhile a committee was appointed not to deal but to confer with him
"until he should get full satisfaction of everything that was his
scruple." He refused, however, to meet the Committee or attend the
Presbytery, on the ground that he had {198} not "clearness" as to the
authority and constitution of a semi-prelatic Court. The Bishop and
Presbytery thereupon suspended him, and he was summoned before the
Synod in April, 1679, but did not attend, on account of "ane aguish
distemper which had seized on him." A Synodal Committee with full
powers was then appointed, before which he compeared in May, but spite
of earnest entreaties of the Bishop he would withdraw nothing, and even
added that he did not think the present Church government agreeable to
Scriptural rules--a view shared by some of the Episcopalian bishops
themselves. The Bishop and Committee recorded their opinion that the
paper was contrived and adhered to for advancing some private interest
against the unity and peace of the Church, and rather unfairly
insinuated that Mr Spence was the more hardened therein by the late
execrable murder of the Bishop of St. Andrews and the expectation of a
Revolution to follow thereupon, and unanimously resolved that this
unruly and unreasonable member be deposed. Mr Spence was quite
prepared for this, and, "with some signs of choler in his countenance,"
handed a second paper to the Bishop, which turned out to {199} be a
protest against the sentence of the "pretended" Bishop and Synod of
Dunblane passed on him. He was asked to retire for a little till they
should consult, but he scornfully replied that he did not own their
jurisdiction, and was making for the church-door when the Bishop
ordered the beadle to lay hold of him, and carry him to his house, and
desire the Baillie to keep him safely until he should find caution to
answer before a competent judicatory. This was Mr Spence's first taste
of imprisonment, of which he was to have a very large supply, of very
different quality, too, later on. The good Bishop on his own
responsibility sent three of the brethren that night to reason with
him, but Mr Spence would not yield, and was let out on bail. He
appeared at the next meeting of Synod, but, spite of the threat of
excommunication, stuck to his guns and