'$

I.'tl'"

V'.f'

V

" ;<

W f.

%^'iiK"^

¦^^

L'^.C? /,!!?,
%.
pip :
•U 1 1
YALE
UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

An MumUe Attempt to put an
Endl to the Present Uiyision^ of
tV»e Glsurch of Scotland

. ¦« «

AN HUMBLE ATTEMPT

TO TUT AN END TO THE

PRESENT DIVISIONS

CHURCH OF SCOTLAND,

PROMOTE HER USEFULNESS.

AN APPENDIX, .
CONTAINING AT PULL LENGTH ALL THE ACTS OF ASSEMBLY ANO PARLIAMENT, AND OTHER
OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS, NECESSARY AS PROOFS AND ILLUSTRATIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION
OF THE CHURCH AS ESTABLISHED BY LAW. THE WHOLE BEING IN THE SHAPE OF
AN ADDRESS

THE MINISTERS AND PEOPLE OF SCOTLAND.

REV. LEWIS fijaSE, A.M.,
MINISTER OF DUKE STREET (JAELIC CHURCH, GLASGOW.

" He shall never have to reproach himself for his public conduct, whose sense of duty has more
influence in directing bim, than either his personal interests, or his private affections."
The Rev. Sir Hshkv Moncbiefp Weliwood, Bart.

GLASGOW:
GEORGE GALLIE, 99, BUCHANAN STREET;
A. GARDNER, PAISLEY; J.KERR, GREENOCK;
J. JOHNSTONE, EDINBURGH ; AND G. KING, ABERDEEN.

PRtCE QME SHILLING AND SIXPENCE.
:--<^

ADDENDUM ET CORRIGENDUM.
Page 17, line S2, after the words " the parish." read " This act was repealed hy 10th
queen Anne, 1712."
Page 46, last line, /or "decided " read " divided."

MV:t'f2.

GLASGOW:
EDWARD KHULL, PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY.

CONTENTS.

PAGE
Introductory observations, ...... 1
Regret expressed for the bad spirit exhibited in the present controversy, 3
Fear that we are on the way to troubles, .... 4
Plan of the Work, ....... 5
I. The circumstances that have led to our difficulties, . . 6
II. The difficulties themselves, .... 28
III. Twelve Propositions illustrative of the case, . . .43
IV. The plans proposed for restoring peace, ... 84
V. A few concluding observations, . . . .106
Conclusion, . . . . . . 114
Appendix, . . . , . . .119

HUMBLE ATTEMPT, &c.

*' He shall never have to reproach himself for his pubhc conduct, whose sense df duty has more
influence in directing him, than either his personal interests, or his private affections."
The Rev. Sra Henry Moncbieff Welmvoop, Bart.

Brethren, dearly beloved in the Lord, I heartily pray that
grace, mercy, and peace, may be multiplied to and abide with
you all.
The most of you are aware, I doubt not, of the extreme lengths
to which our divisions (relative to Non-Intrusion and Spiritual
Independence, and consequent on the decisions of the Court of
Session and House of Lords in the Auchterarder Case) have
been lately carried; and of the dangers to which our venerable
establishment is thus exposed. We have the best authority for
believing that " neither a house nor a kingdom divided against
itself can stand." Many of you feel a deep interest in the
questions at issue, as questions of great and vital importance in
themselves ; and as questions deeply affecting the spiritual char
acter of the church, the value of an establishment, and the va
lidity of our establishment. Not a few of you that fear the Lord,
not only " pray for the peace of Jerusalem, and that peace
may be within her walls, and prosperity within her palaces," but
are downcast in your minds, because of your own sins, and of
the sins of your fathers, that have procured to us our present
troubles at the hand of the Lord, and afforded an opportunity
to " th'e boar out of the wood" and to " the wild beast of the
field" to pluck and to devour the vine and the branch, which the
God of Hosts hath planted with His own right hand. Some of
you, on the other hand, may be rejoicing in our present divisions
and struggles, as tokens for good ; and as proofs of renovated
life, and ardour, and zeal, that may be considered pledges of

future triumphs to the cause of Christ. And no doubt, it is cause
of joy that the former quietness of death hath ceased, and that
we now exhibit the activity of living men, even though our first
efforts should not be so well directed, and cautiously guided, as
sober reason and matured experience would dictate. " When
the Lord turned again the captivity of Zion we were like them
that dream." Revolutions in the physical, moral, and spiritual
worlds, are commonly attended by circumstances that the be
nevolent mind cannot fail to deprecate; but the eye of faith
can sometimes see through the worst of them, and fix its attention
on the unerring hand of that wonderful king, that is Head over
all things to His church. If there be a principle of vitality in
the Church of Scotland (as I believe there is) it is not to be won
dered at, that it should occasionally produce ebullitions, and lead
to struggles for liberty and expansion, which may not always
tally with the narrowness of the swaddling-bands, in which it was
held during its slumber of a hundred years.
With the two classes which I have mentioned I deeply sym
pathize. Every godly man looks upon himself as " the chief of
sinners," and as an Achan that causes trouble to the camp of
Israel. He moreover mourns because of the sins of his fathers,
and cannot forget that our God is " a jealous God, visiting the
iniquities of the fathers upon the children unto the third and
fourth generation." And every leal-hearted christian among us
must acknowledge with pleasure, and gratitude to the God of all
grace, that there have been of late pretty evident tokens of life
and activity among ministers and people, that had been formerly
very dead and very dry. The gospel is noio more generally and
fervently preached and listened to, than it was in the generation
that is past. The standard of ministerial character, labour, and
usefulness, has been raised in practice as well as in theory. Some
of the people have been aroused to a sense of their condition.
The complexion of our General Assemblies has undergone a
change from scoffing at, to a regard for the true interests of con
gregations ; and the welfare of immortal souls, both at home and
abroad, excites emotions now, that seemed in a great measure
unfelt before, except by the faithful few, that ceased not during
even the darkest hours of the powers of darkness to hope against
hope, and to contend earnestly and prayerfully for the blessings
of a gospel ministry to all the parishes of our land.
But while I rejoice with such as do rejoice in these tokens

of Revival, it is with trembling that I do it. I "rejoice with
trembling," First, Because of the unseemly bitterness and reckless spirit,
with which our present controversies are carried on.
We rejoice in the extraordinary outpouring of the Spirit of
God upon a congregation. But while we witness what we can
not reasonably deny to be the work of the Spirit of God, we
generally fear that another spirit is at work, and that many of
those who may seem under conviction, and give promise of future
holiness and happiness, may fall back, to the dishonour of God,
and to the ruin of their own souls. The "strange fire" from
beloio may be like the fire from God's holy altar above, and their
present effects may be similar in appearance, though very different
in kind, and awfully different and opposite in their permanent
fruits. In like manner, while we would bless God for what of
His own Spirit there is manifested in our present struggles, we
should beware that we do not the devil's works, and father them
upon God and His Spirit and Word. James iv. 1. "From
whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not
hence, even of your own lusts, that war in your members?"
I Cor. iii. 3, 4. " For ye are yet carnal ; for whereas there is
among you envying and strife and divisions, are ye not carnal
and walk as men ? For while one saith, I am of Paul, and an
other, I am of ApoUos, are ye not carnal?" Gal, v. 15. " But
if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not con
sumed one of another."
Non-intrusion and spiritual independence are good or bad,
according to the degree in which they are in direct accordance
with " the law and the testimony." If they be according to, and
founded on, this standard, let them be maintained at all hazards
and at whatever cost. Prov. xxiii. 23. " Buy the truth and sell
it not." But in maintaining the best of principles, it is not
necessary, that we use any other weapons than the armour of
God. 2 Cor. x. 3 — 6. " For though we walk in the flesh, we do
not war after the flesh; (for the weapons of our warfare are notear-
nal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds)
casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth
itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity
every thought to the obedience of Christ ; and having in a readi
ness to revenge all disobedience, when your obedience is ful
filled."

Secondly, I rejoice with trembling, because I fear that our
present revival and zeal, disfigured as they are by the spirit
that is not from above, betoken the approach of much trouble.
I believe it is consistent with the experience of real christians,
that a more than ordinary sense of redeeming love, is not un-
frequently a prelude to a more than ordinary degree of trial.
Psalm XXX. 6, 7. " In my prosperity I said, I shall never be
moved. Lord, by thy favour thou hast made my mountain to
stand strong ; thou didst hide thy face, and I was troubled."
And I think that the history of the church of Christ will bear
me out in saying, that a revival in any particular section of it,
has been often found a prelude to a fiery persecution. Without
going back to the first ages of the church for any proof of this state
ment, let me direct your attention to what occurred in our own
country, in the days of the Covenanters and Puritans, two hundred
years ago. At that time the Lord raised a chosen generation
in the land. "There were giants in those days." And who, without
the prophetic spirit, could have foreseen the troubles that ensued
on the restoration of Charles the Second in 1660, and that continu
ed for twenty-eight years ? Four hundred ministers in Scotland,
and two thousand in England, were turned adrift at once ; fire and
sword followed; and gross darkness came to cover the people. Let
us therefore take heed. Trifling, apparently, was the circumstance
that led to the restoration of Charles. But there is nothing really
little or trifling in the government of God. A great country cannot
have a little war. The church of Christ cannot have a little
division or quarrel. The greatest events may depend on causes
apparently the most trivial. Children quarrel about the candle
stick. The father comes and corrects them all with the rod of
his anger. He removes the candlestick which was not theirs
but his, from before their eyes ; and leaves them in darkness to
lament their folly.
I am aware, indeed, of the exhortation (Jude 3.) to " contend
earnestly for the faith which was once delivered to the saints,"
and of the declaration of Paul (Gal. iv, 18.) that " it is good to
be zealously affected always in a good thing." And far be it
from me to give up in my own case, or to recommend to others
to give up in theirs, any scriptural principle. But before I con
tend earnestly, or be zealously affected, I must be sure that it
is a point of revealed truth which I embrace ; lest I put some
favourite notion of my own into the room of " Thus saith the

Lord." There is as great a curse denounced in Rev, xxii, 18,
19. against the man that adds to, as there is against the man
that takes away from, the words of the Book,
If there be any of you glorying in our present difficulties, as
symptoms of the approaching fall of our establishment, and as
indications that the frame-work of society is about to be broken
up, I can have no sympathy with you. Some of the first sounds
to which my ears ever listened (though I understood them not),
were probably tidings from "the reign of terror" in France, and I
have hitherto retained such a dread of revolutionary bliss, that
I cannot help questioning the prudence and humane feelings, if
not the Christianity of any man or set of men, that would fan the
flame of our present discord, or add fuel to the fire that threatens
to overwhelm us.
In laying before you some thoughts that have occurred to me
with respect to our present unseemly position, and to the most
likely means under the blessing of God, of putting an end to
ouf divisions, I mean to adopt the following order, viz.
I. Give a brief view of the circumstances that have led to
what are called our difficulties.
II. State the difficulties themselves as they appear from of
ficial documents,
III, Advance and illustrate a few propositions that are
necessary to a full understanding of the case, and that may pave
the way for pointing out
IV. The plan or plans, that I would humbly recommend for
restoring and promoting the prosperity of our Zion.
V. I would suggest a few considerations, that if properly
weighed and followed out, may have a happy effect on the cause
of Christ both at home and abroad.
And I may premise that I shall do these things with all my
leanings, and prejudices, and feelings, in favour of the people, and
of the general course of policy of what is called " the popular
party." Though I have differed with that party with respect to the
Veto Act and the measures consequent thereon, I am confident
that the ends which we pursue are the same ; and that in reality
we differ only as to the choice of the means, that ought to be
employed for attaining our ends. I may just add, however, that
though I have been generally opposed to the moderate party, I
have never sympathized with those, who by one fell swoop would
condemn them all as utterly vile. There is room for much mutual

forbearance. We are very much the creatures of circumstances.
The best of us have need of being better than we are. It is but
scarcely that even the righteous are to be saved. If any of us
be saved at all, it must be by the grace of God alone. When
we consider what that grace is, we must exclude boasting of
ourselves, and harsh judging of others. Pride and vanity often
assume the appearance of humility and principle. It is God
that judgeth I
,1. I am first then to give you a brief view of the curcum-
stances that have led to what are called our difficulties.
1. The Protestant Religion was publicly and solemnly re
cognised and ratified by the Scots Parliament in 1560. In the
course of that year, the First Protestant Confession of Faith •
was drawn up by John Knox and others, and ratified by parlia
ment on the 17th July, It contains no reference to the election
of ministers. The same individuals who wrote it, wrote hkewise
the First Book of Disciplinef at the same time, but failed to get
it recognised by the state. It received, however, the sanction
and signatures of many of the Lords of the secret council on the
27th of January, 1560,t
Now \he first principle of church government (under the fourth
head, concerning ministers and their lawful election) expressed in
this book of discipline is that, ' It appertaineth to the people,
and to every several congregation, to elect their minister." But be
cause it was considered more than probable, that in the ignorant
and popish and barbarous state of general society in Scotland at
that time, some congregations would neglect or refuse to elect
a Protestant minister of a suitable stamp, provision was made,
that in such cases, the nearest superintendent and his council
should present a suitable minister to the vacant congregation,
after his " having been examined as well in life and manners, as
in doctrine and knowledge;" and that "if his doctrine were
found wholesome and able to instruct the simple, and if the
church justly could reprehend nothing in his life, doctrine nor
utterance, then the church which before was destitute, was to be
judged unreasonable, if they were to refuse him, whom the
church did offer ; and they should be compelled by the censure
* See Appendix, No. I. This Confession of Ftuth consisting of 25 Articles
was composed in four days.
t See Appendix, No. II. It was composed in twenty-one days.
t The year then began with the month of March.

of the council and church to, receive the person appointed, and
approved by the judgment of the godly and learned," unless
they themselves brought forward a better man. Non-intrusion
was considered a secondary principle, contingent on the want or
neglect of the first. " For altogether this is to be avoided, that
any man be violently intruded or thrust in upon any congrega
tion." And while every care was to be taken that the principle
of election should be secured to the people, if they would exercise
it, it was expressly declared, that there is no " violent intrusion"
in the settlement of a minister in a place, though the people
should be "forced" to admit him as their instructor, after a just
examination of his qualifications by the proper authorities, and after
the council of the church, in the fear of God and for the salva
tion of the people, have offered him unto them as "a sufficient
man to instruct them,"
The first Book of Discipline (however excellent as a first
attempt) was hastily written in troublous times, was never rati
fied by the State, and was not even recognised by the infant
Protestant church as a standard of great authority. In 1578
it was altogether superseded by " The Second Book of Dis
cipline." 2, As endowments began to be demanded by, and granted to,
the Protestant clergy, and the infant church became established
parochially in various districts of the country, the question of
patronage occasioned a good deal of discussion. The reformed
clergy disliked patronage very much, but they required stipends,
and extended means of usefulness among the benighted people
around them ; (for in those days the Voluntary system did not
work well at all, as John Knox in his History of the Reformation
testifies,) and the ancient patrons, whether royal or laick. Popish
or Protestant, lords of the congregation or lords of the court,
were not willing to yield their former legal rights and power.
It is from a fair and dispassionate consideration of these circum
stances, that we are able to apologise for the declaration of the
General Assembly in 1 565 to the queen, that seems so incon
sistent with their own Book of Discipline. They had previously
required merely the proper exercise of patronage ; but having
been wilfully misunderstood, they now say in explanation of
the terms of their former requirement, and in answer to a com
munication from the queen on the subject — " Our mind is, not
that her majesty or any other patron should be divested of their

just patronages. But we mean whensoever her majesty or any
other patron do present any person unto a benefice, that the
person presented shall be tried and examined by the judgment
of learned men of the church; and as the presentation unto the
benefice appertaineth to the patron, so the collation by law and
reason belongs to the church ; and the church should be defraud
ed no more of the collation, than the patrons of their presenta
tion ; for otherwise if it be lawful to the patrons to present whom
they please, without trial or examination, what can abide in the
church of God, but mere ignorance?"* The reformers submit
ted to necessity.
In 1567 there was an act of parliament passed, providing that
the examination and admission of ministers be only in the power
of the Kirk ; that the presentation of laick patronages be always
reserved to the just and ancient patrons ; that unless a qualified
person be presented by the legal patron before the expiry of six
months after a vacancy has taken place, the superintendent, or
others having authority from the Kirk, shall have the appoint
ment in his or their power; and that if the superintendent of the
bounds shall refuse to receive the person presented by the patron,
it shall be lawful to the patron to appeal to the superior church
courts, by whom the matter is to be finally decided,! This act
guided patronage till 1592, It contains no specific clause
against recourse to civil courts, and yet the church virtually
acquiesced in it. Indeed it contained a full answer to the de
mand of the church in 1565, " That vacant benefices be disposed
to qualified and learned persons, able to preach God's word, and
discharge the vocation concerning the ministry, by trial and ad
mission of the superintendents and overseers."
3. In Assembly, 1570, six articles "pertaining to the juris
diction of the kirk were proponed to the regent's grace and
secret council, and sought to be appointed by them." The
second of these articles was, that " Election, examination, and
admission of them that are admitted to the ministry, or other
* The demand made by the church with respect to patronage was in these
words, viz. — " That the benefices now vacant or that have been vacant since the
month of May, or that hereafter shall happen to be vacant, be disposed to quali
fied and learned persons, able to preach God's word, and discharge the voca
tion concerning the ministry, by trial and admission of the superintendents and
overseers." Queen Mary's answer was " That her majesty thinks it no ways
reasonable, that she should defraud herself of so great a part of the patrimony
of the crown, as to put the patronage of benefices forth of her own hand."
t Sec the whole act in the Appendix, No. III.

functions of the kirk, charge of souls, and ecclesiastical benefices,
the suspension and deprivation of them therefrom from lawful
causes," belong to the kirk. Now, observe here the deviation
from the First Book of Discipline. According to this book, (as
we have already seen,) " It appertaineth to the people and to
every several congregation to elect their minister." But in 1570,
the General Assembly required " That the kirk (by which they
meant the presbytery) should have the election as well as exam
ination and admission of ministers." In the years 1564-6-7-8,
endeavours were made by the church to settle aright what was
called "the causes of the kirk and jurisdiction thereof," But
it was not till the year 1576 that "brethren were appointed to
make an overture of the policy and jurisdiction of the kirk."
These brethren set to work, and in 1578 brought forward a
thoroughly revised " Second Book of Discipline." Various
attempts were made to obtain civil sanction to it, but in vain.
In 1581, however, "it was registrate among the acts of the
assemblies;" and in 1590 the General Assembly passed .an act
requiring subscription to it by every minister, " under the pain
of excommunication." Andrew Melvil was one of the authors
of the Second Book of Discipline.*
This book differs in two points of outward form and discipline
from the First Book. According to the latter, the imposition of
hands at ordination is wrong. According to the former it is
right. According to the First Book the people should have the
election of ministers. According to the Second, not merely is
patronage popish, but contrary to God's word; and election
should be " by the judgment of the eldership (meaning the pres
bytery) and consent of the congregation,"
Now what are we to think of the consistency of those good
men that, in their zeal for the veto act and non-intrusion, found on
the First Book of Discipline, which says that " election belongs
to the people"; and upon the Second Book, which says that
patronage is Popish and contrary to God's word ; and that elec
tion should be by the judgment of the Presbytery or eldership,
and consent of the congregation ; and yet in defiance of the two
books, and their contradictions, brought forward the veto act in
1834 with the expressed and gloried-in intention of supporting
patronage, which at the time had the axe laid to its root ? The
Books of Discipline are either standards, or they are not. If
* See Appendix, No. IV.

10
they are standards, you must take them all and abide by them.
If they are not standards, why refer to them ? why found on
them? why endanger the church and violate the fundamental
rules and bonds of Christianity because of any human opinion
they may contain ? Such guides have been too long followed.
Had a Third Book of Discipline been thought necessary in 1834,
the veto leaders would have been appointed to write it, and they
would have made one of the articles as follows, viz. " Patronage
is good and not contrary to the word of God, and the people
have no business to elect a minister, neither have the Presbyteries
any judgment in the matter. But as it is bad to force a minister
on a parish, the male communicants may object ; only if a major
ity of them do not object, the presentee must be settled, though
there should not be an individual in the parish willing to receive
him," But as variety is charming, and " movement" is the order
of the day, we can suppose a Fourth Book of Discipline brought
forward in 1840 by the- same individuals, having an article in it
to the following effect, viz. " Patronage is bad, and the heritors
and elders of a vacant parish should have the appointment of the
minister." This article however is not to be considered final,
as it may so happen that in 1841 there may be a demand for a
Fifth Book of Discipline, in which there may be inserted an ar
ticle, requiring that " the election of a minister be placed in the
hands of the communicants of the parish."
The Second Book of Discipline was framed chiefly (as we
have seen) for the purpose of settling " the jurisdiction of the
Kirk." In 1578 a conference was held with king James the
Sixth at Stirling relative to it, and we have the authority of the
minutes of Assemblies, June 10th, 1578, October 29th, 1578,
July 7th, 1579, that he, and commissioners whom he had ap
pointed to meet the deputies of the Kirk on the subject, agreed
to the Book " except a few heads" that " were referred to fur
ther conference." Archbishop Spottiswood the historian says,
that he had the original minutes of the conference with the king
and his commissioners by him when he wrote, and that they bear
that the 9th article — " In this ordinary election, it is to be es
chewed, that no person be intruded in any of the offices of the
church, contrary to the will of the congregation, to whom they
are appointed, or without the voice of the eldership" — was agreed
to. And Lord Moncrieff makes this an argument to show, that
a civil sanction had been given to the principle of non-intrusion

II
as embodied in the Second Book of Discipline. But his Lord
ship seemed to forget the alternative, " or without the voice of
the eldership," contained in the article. There could have been
no settlement at ail without the voice of the eldership. There
was enough of spiritual independence then as well as now to pre
vent the induction of any presentee without the concurrence of
the church courts. The alternative, which I have quoted, goes
a certain length to save the king's honour in the matter, if he
had any. But what though he and his commissioners may have
agreed to the article, this did not constitute a civil sanction to it ;
and the best commentary on the "agreement" is the act of par
liament passed on the 20th October following, in which it is said
(in reference to, but without any mention of the Second Book
of Discipline) that " our sovereign lord, with advice of his three
estates of parliament, has declared and granted jurisdiction to
the Kirk, which consists and stands in the preaching of the true
word of Jesus Christ, correction of manners, and administration
of the holy Sacraments," These three particulars embrace the
whole jurisdiction of the Kirk according to king James and his
parliament, and forsooth they are "granted" to her by their
high mightinesses ! At the very time that they passed an act
securing the "libertie of the trew Kirke" they did away with
her jurisdiction altogether, and virtually repealed the act 1567,
already quoted,
4. In 1592, an act of parliament was passed, which is called
" the charter of the Church of Scotland."* It ratifies " the
libertie of the trew kirke," abolishes Episcopacy, recognises the
Confession of Faith of 1 560, establishes Presbytery, but takes no
notice by name of the Second Book of Discipline, which condemns
patronage as "of Popish origin, and contrary to the word of God;"
and of course could not have been agreeable to the royal and
laick patrons. This act, however, quotes verbatim and legalizes
the 11th, 12th, 13th, and 14th sections of the 7th chapter, which
treats " of the elderships, and assemblies, and discipline." But
it establishes Patronage in its conclusion, in the following
Jesuitical terms. " Provided that all presentations to benefices,
should be directed to the particular Presbyteries in all time
coming, with full power to them to give collation thereupon,
and to put order to all matters and causes ecclesiastical within
their bounds, according to the discipline of the kirk ; providing
* See the whole act in Appendix, No. V.

12
the foresaid Presbyteries be bound and astricted to receive and
admit whatsoever qualified minister presented by his majesty or
laick patrons,"
This act, while it retained patronage, considerably changed
the act 1567 already mentioned. That act left the whole case
of a disputed settlement to the judgment of the church courts.
This imposes upon Presbyteries a necessity to admit any qualified
presentee ; and upon its tenor have depended many painful and
important processes, and many contradictory opinions and judg
ments. But immediately after the passing of "the charter of the
Church of Scotland," there was another act passed, relative to
" the Deprivation of Ministers," and in it was inserted (as if it
were by stealth) a clause, "providing that in case the Presby
tery refuse to admit any qualified minister presented to them by
the patron, it shall be lawful to the patron to retain all the fruits
of the benefice in his own hands." It occurred to the patrons
that they could not compel a Presbytery to induct. They there
fore kept redress in their own power. The penalty was pointed
and distinct enough, though it was not to be paid by the Presby
tery, On this clause, the question is ere long to be tried,
whether the earl of Kinnoul has a right to retain the stipend
of Auchterarder in his own hands, as the Presbytery have refused
to admit his presentee.*
5. In 1596 the General Assembly declared against intrusion.
The presbytery-hating and bishop-loving king James, however,
soon thereafter ascended the throne of England, and "black
prelacy" was established in Scotland in 1 609, and continued till
the memorable General Assembly in Glasgow, in December, 1638,
• I am not a lawyer and I do not wish to be considered one. But it occurs
to me as a man of plain sense,
1st. That the revolution settlement extinguished all the former laws con
cerning patronage, and that the act 1712 does not go back beyond it.
2d. That supposing the act 1592 to be still in force, it gives no civil right
to the presentee. There is no act on record by which he is invested with a
civil right, ^^~~\„-^^  ^  ,. '' ~ ' —
3d. That the act 1592 gives to the patron merely a right " to retain all the
fruits of the benefice in his own hands," on the understanding that he is an
heritor, and that his estate pays stipends. He cannot retain the stipend
payable by others, as he has it not " in his own hands." I am aware that
decisions and practice have been long in opposition to this view. But I may
just observe with all deference, that the Scots acts of parliament are remarkable
for their point and precision, as well as want of unnecessary verbiage ; and that
the phrase " retain in his own hands," should be taken according to its plain
meaning.

13
This assembly declared Episcopacy to be contrary to the word of
God, and deposed all the archbishops and bishops; and excommu
nicated such of them as would not submit. But did it try to
abolish patronage ? No ! It however issued the following re
gulations against intrusion, founded on the* very words and mean
ing of the declaration of Assembly, 1596.
" Forasmuch by the too sudden admission and light trial of
persons for the ministry, it cometh to pass, that many scandals
fall out in the persons of ministers, be it ordained, that the trial
of persons to be admitted hereafter into the ministry, consist not
only in their learning and ability to preach, but also in conscience
and feeling, and spiritual wisdom, and mainly in the knowledge
of the bounds of their calling — in doctrine, discipline, and wisdom
to behave themselves accordingly, with the diverse ranks of per
sons within their flocks — as namely, with atheists, rebellious,
weak consciences, and such other, wherein the pastoral charge is
most kythed — and that they be meet to stop the mouths of
adversaries ; and such as are not qualified in these points, to be
delayed till further trial, and till they be found qualified ; — and
because men may be found meet for some places, who are not
meet for others, it would be considered, that the principal places
of the realm be provided by men of the most worthy gifts, wisdom,
and experience; and that none take the charge of a greater
number of people nor they are able to discharge."
In this document, the fitness of a minister for a particular
situation is assumed as a question for the determination of the
church courts. But acceptableness to the whole or a majority of
the congregation is not once hinted at ; though of course, it is an
element, that the Presbytery would be bound to consider in
judging of the fitness of a minister for any particular charge.
6. In 1580, there was " A national covenant or Confession of
Faith" drawn out, which obtained the subscription of king
James and his household. In 1581, 1590, 1638, 1639, 1640,
1650, and 1651, it was subscribed as a National Covenant,
In 1643, " The Solemn League and Covenant" was drawn
out, and thoroughly ratified afterwards both in England and
Scotland, In 1648, " A Solemn Acknowledgment of Public Sins and
Breaches of the Covenant" was drawn out, and publicly ratified.
Now here are three important national documents, relative to
the church, its liberty, and doctrines ; and yet it is remarkable

14
that there is not one word in any one of them that can be con
strued as referring to patronage, its use or abuse.
7. In March, 1649, an act of parliament* was passed abolish
ing patronage, as unlawful and unwarrantable by God's word,
and contrary to the doctrine and liberties of the kirk ; and as an
evil and bondage, under which the Lord's people and ministers
of this land have long groaned; and as a custom, popish and
contrary to the Second Book of Discipline. It authorized
Presbyteries to firoceed to "planting of a kirk upon the suit and
caUing, or with the consent of the congregation, on whom none
is to be obtruded against their will," " And because it is need
ful that the just and proper interest of congregations and
Presbyteries, in providing of kirks with ministers be clearly
determined by the General Assembly, and what is to be
accompted the congregation having that interest, therefore it
was seriously recommended unto the next General Assembly,
clearly to determine the same, and to condescend on a certain
standing way for being a settled rule therein for all time
coming." The General Assembly did accordingly, on the 4th day of
August following, determine as follows, viz. That the elders of
the vacant parish have the right of electing a minister under the
guidance of the minister appointed by the Presbytery to preside
at the election, and that the people have the power of stating
objections, of the validity of which the Presbyteries are to judge.
If the objections be founded on causeless prejudices, the settle
ment is not to be sisted ; but if they be, a new election is to be
appointed,! Now be it observed, that the twenty-two years intervening betwixt
the General Assembly 1638, and the Act Rescissory passed in
1661, after the restoration of Charles the Second, are considered
the golden age of the Church of Scotland, and yet that in the
very midst of this flourishing state of our church, and when the
General Assembly had every thing their own way, in so far as
the election or appointment of ministers was concerned, the
elders were to be considered the persons having a right to elect,
and the people were placed in precisely the same circumstances,
in which the revolution settlement in 1690, and lord Aberdeen's
bill in 1840, left them.
* See the whole act in Appendix, No. VI.
t See the whole act and directory of the Assembly in Appendix, No.VII.

15
Sir Henry Moncrleff's remarks with respect to this period are
well worthy of attention,
" Whatever the opinions of later times have been, the law of
Patronage was, in all the periods from the reformation to the
revolution, considered by the presbyterian church as an intoler
able grievance ; and at the revolution, their release from it was
one of the leading objects of the Presbyterian clergy. In this
point they appear to have been all agreed ; and their aversion to
patronage was so universal, and so deeply rooted, that though
king WiUiam was privately unwilling to make the concession,
his best friends convinced him of the necessity of going at least a
certain length to gratify them, on a subject which they regarded
with so much solicitude.
" On the other hand, whatever may have been said to the con
trary, patronage was certainly in use down to the latest period
before the restoration, during which there is any record of the
proceedings of General Assemblies, In the unprinted acts of
the assembly 1645, there is a proposal for applying to parliament
to allow presbyteries to plant the churches ' which are of the
patronage of forfeited and excommunicated persons' In 1647,
in an act of assembly ' for pressing and furthering the plantation
of kirks,' there is an instruction given to every presbytery, to
make a report to the assembly of ' what kirks are under patrons,
what kirks have no patrons, and who are the several patrons.'
In another act of the same year, there is a renewal of an act
of assembly at Glasgow, and another at St Andrew's, ' concern
ing lists for presentations from the king, and the trial of ex
pectants.' These acts demonstrate that patronage was, to a
certain extent, stUl in use, even at that period of the church
which has been commonly supposed most adverse to it. But
they show at the same time the solicitude of the clergy, to get
into their own hands the command of as many patronages as
possible. And the truth is, that at this time, neither the crownf
nor the subject patrons were frequently in a situation to resist
them. The presbyteries were, in a great measure, allowed to
nominate the candidates for vacant parishes, not only when
they sent lists to the crown, but in other cases. The candi
dates named by them were proposed to the kirk sessions,
who, in each case, were allowed from several persons put in
nomination to elect one who was then proposed to the congre
gation. By the directory for the election of ministers, of 1649,

16
iiamajority of the congregation dissented, they were to give their
reasons, of which the Presbytery were to judge. If the Presby
tery should find theu' dissent founded on caixseless prejudices, they
were, notwithstanding, to proceed to the settlement of the person
elected. And there is a clause subjoined, which in those times
would apply to many cases : ' That where the congregation
was disaffected or malignant, in that case, the presbytery were
{by their own authority) to provide the parish with a minister.
Though this mode seemed to give weight to the clergy, only
in the first nomination, or on extraordinary emergencies, and
more influence to the people in ordinary cases, it is evident that
the clergy had still the chief influence in the ultimate decision,
as well as in the selection of the candidates. For when the
people were divided, which very generally happened, it lay with
the church courts at last to determine between the parties ; and
it can scarcely be supposed, with all the purity which can be
ascribed to the intentions of the clergy, that the candidate who
had most favour among them was often rejected.' "
The act, 1649, was rescinded in 1661, and black prelacy was
restored. About four hundred presbyterian non-conforming
ministers were consequently ejected, persecution of the vilest
and most inexcusable kind and degree followed, and it was not
till the revolution, in 1688-9, that presbytery acquired the su
premacy once more,
8th. " The claim of right," presented to WiUiam and Mary
in 1689, bears, "that prelacy and the superiority of any office
in the church above presbyters, is and hath been a great and
insupportable grievance and trouble to this nation, and contrary
to the inclinations of the generality of the people ever since the
Reformation, (they having been reformed from Popery by pres
byters,) and therefore ought to be abolished." Along with this
claim of right, there was an offer to the crown, contained in a
letter from the estates of Scotland, in which there is the follow
ing sentence : — " We have nominated commissioners to treat the
terms of an entire and perpetual union betwixt the two kingdoms,
with reservation to us of our church government, as it shall be
estabhshed to us at the time of the union." The king and queen
acceded to the claim, accepted the crown, and swore accordingly,
in presence of the eternal God, " that they would procure, to
the uttermost of their power, to the kirk of God and whole
christian people, true and perfect peace in aU time coming."

17
111 the same year "The Confession of Faith" was ratified,
and in the act of ratification is found the following clause, viz. :
" As also they do establish, ratify, and confirm the presbyterian
church government and discipline ; that is to say, the govern
ment of the church by kirk sessions, presbyteries, provincial
synods, and general assemblies, ratified and established by the
114th Act Ja, 6, Pari. 12, anno 1592, entituled ' Ratification
of the Uberty of the trew kirk, &c.' and thereafter received by
the general consent of this nation, to be the only government of
Christ's church within this kingdom; reviving, renewing, and
confirming the foresaid act of parliament in the whole heads
thereof, except that part of it relating to patronages, which is
hereafter to be taken into consideration."
In 1690, consideration was given to patronages, and the
result was their entire abolition. This act, however, was not alto
gether the production of the presbyterian clergy, of whom there
were only about sixty in the whole country. No doubt some
of them may have been advised with ; but the king's counciUors
had the merit or demerit of it. The clergy wished to have the
act of 1649 back again, putting the election of ministers into the
hands of the elders nominally, but really into their own hands.
Sir Henry Moncrieff says, " It was thought not expedient to
give the clergy the influence, which, in whatever form it was
exercised, they reaUy possessed before the usurpation of Crom
weU, and StiU less to place any power in the great body of the
people, which could interfere with the right of election. King
WUliam's advisers followed a middle course between these ex
tremes. Though their arrangement was certainly suggested by
the former practice, it was in a great measure free from its chief
disadvantages. In place of the presbytery, it gave the original
and exclusive power of nomination to the heritors and elders of
the parish,"*
* On this act, which I give at full length in the Appendix,* I beg leave to
make the following observations, viz.: —
First.— Though I am disposed to believe that it was intended 1)ona fide to
put an end to patronage and its abuses, it could hardly have been better calcu
lated than it was to defeat its own purposes. In order to prevent any restora-
' tion of "patforiage" by a"fu't»rrT^iTttCiBeftt, it was advised and agreed to, (as
Wodrow tells us, on the authority of Sir James Stewart of Goodtrees, who
was Lord Advocate at the time, and drew out the act,) that the patrons should
be obliged to grant a renunciation for an equivalent determined by the parha
ment. The equivalent was to be 600 raerks, (about i35 sterling, equal to
* See Appendix, No. VIII.
B

18
9. The commission of the General Assembly of 1711, did all
in their power to prevent the passing of this act. In March,
1712, while the biU was in progtess, the commission met and
appointed commissioners to address the queen and parliament
£200 now-a-days,) and to be paid, two parts by the heritors, and a third part
by the life-renters, and there were only six months allowed for the doing of all
this. Now, this was too absurd, as the event has shown. The heritors at the
time of the Revolution were, like the most of heritors in our own time, not
remarkably fond of giving money for the good of the Church of Scotland ; and
besides, many of them were patrons; ai)idJs4t.supposable-that-thfiy^aauld_be
wilUng. t_o part with their own power ? But what shows the absurdity of the
act still more clearly, is the well-known circumstance, that the most of the
heritors of Scotland, at the time of the Revolution, were either papists or epis
copalians, and of course enemies to presbytery.
Secondly. — The act left the vacant stipends at the disposal of the former
patrons, for pious uses within the diflFerent parishes ; and as the pious uses
might be pretty numerous, and not well defined, there was thus a temptation
held out to the patrons to do all in their power to retain the patronages, and
likewise to keep parishes vacant a long time. In point of fact, the vacant
stipends were not unfrequently employed in making roads and bridges on the
patron's estates, and it was not till 1719 that an act was passed for preventing
the various patrons from prolonging vacancies.
Thirdly. — It appears to me that this act was merely a transference of patron
age from one to a few, and I am strengthened in this opinion by the phraseo
logy to this effect employed in the act, 1712, and by the pleadings of Mr
Dunlop before the Court of Session, and by the decision of that court this very
session in the case of Cadder, one of the three or four parishes that psud the
600 merks. I am aware that Dr M'Crie is of a different opinion, and that he
gave evidence to the committee of the House of Commons, to the efifect that
the framers of the act were particularly cautious against leaving any room for
supposing that patronage was retained under any shape or form. But opinions
are sometimes very uncertain data to go upon. The framers of the act (three
ministers and three lawyers, it is said) were not.'.it seems, able to frame it so that
the presbytery of Glasgow, and the commission of the General Assembly, and
the Court of Session, could not consider themselves bound unanimously to look
upon the appointment of the present minister of Cadder as a presentation, to
all intents and purposes. This is a remarkable illustration of the difference of
opinion held this very year with respect to lord Aberdeen's bill. His lordship
stated, that in framing his bill he had uo desire at all to prevent application to
a civil court for redress of any grievance, real or supposed. The lord chan
cellor, on the other hand, stated that his principal objection to the bill was,
that under it there was no possibility of appealing to a civil court for redress.
It would therefore appear, that the views of the framers of an act of parlia
ment are not to be much depended on as guides in judging of it afterwards.
For my own part, I take the act as I find it ; and in doing so, I have no hesi
tation to say, that patronage, by the act 1690, merely changed hands, in so far
as the mere nomination or appointment was concerned.
Fourthly. — This act does not appear to have been adhered to in practice, as
to the form or time of proposing the nominated minister to the people of the
parish. The act says expressly, " That in case of the vacancy of any particu
lar church, and for supplying the same with a minister, the heritors of the said
parish (being protestants) and the elders are to name and propose the person
to the whole congregation, to be either approven or disapproven by them ;
and if they disapprove, that the disapprovers give in their reasons, to the effect

19
against it. The General Assembly, in May foUowing, approved
of what the commission had done. The General Assembly,
1715, sent a messenger to George I, against the act 1712, but
all in vain. In 1719, however, there was an act of parliament
the affair may be cognosced upon by the presbytery of the bounds, at whose
judgment, and by whose determination, the calling and entry of a particular
minister is to be ordered and concluded." From this clause it would appear
that the heritors and elders were bound to propose the minister to the people
before coming to the presbytery at all with the matters of election and approval
or disapproval. And as the act 1712 made no change on the act 1690, except
ing in the persons authorised to present, and as it expressly left the people
and presbytery where they were before the passing of the act, it would seem
that by the strict letter of the law, our mode of procedure ought to be different
as to the moderation in the call from what it has been in times past.
Fifthly. — There is a considerable difference betwixt this act and the direc
tory of 1649, in so far as the people are concerned. On this point Sir Henry
Moncrieff says, " The person nominated by the heritors and elders was then
to be proposed to the people, who might approve or disapprove, for reasons
shown and substantiated, but who had no power of rejection, without substan
tiating reasons which the presbytery, and on appeal, the superior courts were
to pronounce sufficient. But no majority of the congregation was mentioned,
as in the directory of 1649, who might, for reasons shown, disapprove, though
they had not a right of election. Each individual parishioner might give his
reasons of dissent, for the judgment of the presbytery, a regulation which, though
apparently as popular, was in its practical effect a very different thing from
the voice of a recognised majorit-y'''
Sixthly. — Though this act gave no direct power to the people to elect their
minister, there can be no doubt that it generally wrought well. The progress
of the people in knowledge, peace, and civilization, is no bad proof of this.
But the tenacity with which the church clung to it, at the time of the union
with England, in 1706-7, is a further evidence; for though it be not mentioned
by name, there can be no doubt that it is clearly implied and comprehended
in the following clause of the " Act for securing the protestant religion and
presbyterian church government." — "And more especially her Majesty, with
the advice and consent foresaid, ratifies, approves, and for ever confirms the
fifth act of the first parliament of king William and queen Mary, intituled ' act
ratifying the Confession of Faith, and settling presbyterian church govern
ment,' with the haill other acts of parliament relating thereto, in prosecution
of the declaration of the estates of this kingdom, containing the claim of right,
bearing! date the eleventh of April, 1689." Now, the act from which this
quotation is made is quoted in the act of union itself, " and expressly declared
to be a. fundamental and essential condition of the said treaty of union in all
time coming," and " that it shall remain and continue unalterable."
Notwithstanding, however, the care taken at the time of the union to secure
the presbyterian church as then established, the act 1690 was very hurriedly
and indecently repealed in April, 1712, and patronage was restored.
Seventhly. — In passing this act the treaty of union was undoubtedly violated,
and the object in view, viz. the injury of the Church of Scotland, was hase and
dishonourable in the highest degree. It was worthy of its infidel authors.
But whatever baseness there was in the deed, and whatever moral and spiritual
evils may have resulted from it, it left the status of the presbyteries and people
just what it had previously been, and merely transferred the nomination of a
minister from the hands of the heritors and elders to the hands of the former
patrons. And as the 600 merks had not been paid to the patrons, it appears

20
passed,* that was considered at the time a virtual abolition of
patronage. The object of it appears to have been twofold.
First, as complaints had been frequently and urgently made by
the church, that patrons (because they had vacant stipends at
their disposal) presented ministers that (they knew) would not
accept, and thus kept parishes long vacant, the act provided,
that unless a presentation were accepted within six months, the
jus devolutum should belong to the presbytery. Secondly, it
implied that the church might, by its spiritual authority, either
directly or indirectly prevent the acceptance of any presentation.
And in point of fact, there wagi:iardly a presentation accepted
or acted upon before 1725. The clergy uniformly discounte
nanced presentations, and the people did the same, excepting
in those cases where the presentee was acceptable to them.
As, however, " the mystery of iniquity" began to work even in
Paul's days, though it did not show its horns for some hundred
years thereafter, so the germ of moderation began to work ere the
last of the ministers of the Revolution quitted the field, though
the " littlp horn " of this spiritual tyranny did not exhibit itself
tiU about 1725 — 1732, The revolution ministers were not more
able than were the Apostles to provide infallible successors.
They had been prevaUed on to admit into their church the con
forming episcopal ministers of the country. The scarcity of
ministers was so great, that they ordained men for the ministry
that in more favourable circumstances they would have rejected.
By degrees a new race of clergy got up. Patronage ceased to
be disrelished by them, and in 1732, violent settlements and
spiritual tyranny laid the foundation of that great Secession,
that became in 1740 a cutting off of the right arm of the church
of Scotland. In 1 752, another secession took place, which laid
the foundation of the present body called the Relief. These
two secessions have now many congregations, and even a good
deal of political influence ; and there can be no doubt that the
Church of Scotland feels the weight of that influence, however
much some individuals may affect to despise it.
to me that even without the act 1712 the former patrons would have been enti
tled to present. By the act 1690, they were bound to grant a renunciation,
on their receiving 600 merks beforehand ; but as the money had not been paid,
and the renunciation not granted, what is the fair inference but that the patrons
retained their former right of presentation ?
* See Appendix, No. IX.

21
10, In 1736, the GeneraV Assembly passed a declaratory
act,* intituled " An act against the intrusion of ministers into
vacant congregations, and recommendations to presbyteries con
cerning settlements." Now, mark what Sir Henry Moncrieff
says about this act. — " It is scarcely conceivable that it could
have done more than soothe the discontent of the people by
conciliatory language, unless more had been, attempted than
perhaps was practicable, and unless it had been followed up by
a train of authoritative decisions — which was far from being
intended^ The settlements of presentees, which had before
"been in dependence, and on which former assemblies had decided,
though their sentences had not been completely executed, appear
from 1736 to 1740, to have been foUowed out by the authority
of successive assemblies of that time, even where the opposition
made to them was most determined."
In 1734 the commission of the General Assembly sent three
ministers to London as a deputation to try to obtain the repeal of
the act 1712^r In 1735, the General Assembly appointed other
three deputies with the same object, but to no purpose. I give
the memorial of this last deputation in the Appendix.f
In our day, there is a great cry among many ministers, elders,
and others of our church, for the repeal of the act 1712 and the
restoration of the act 1690, and this is said by Dr Chalmers to
be his "maximum optimum" for the settlement of a minister. But
do these good folks know, that it was a recurrence to this act
substantially in 1732 in the cases of parishes that jure devoluto
fell into the hands of presbyteries, that occasioned the first great
secession? In the Assembly of that year, there was an act
passed^ providing that in all cases of the "jus devolutum," the
heritors and elders should have the nomination of the minister,
instead of the presbytery, and that the people should have it in
their power to state objections, to be judged of by the presby
tery. But this did not please the ministers and others, who
contended for the right of the people to elect as weU as to object;
and no sooner was the act passed than Mr Ebenezer Erskine
minister of Stirling, began to sound the tocsin of alarm against
it, as an encroachment on the rights of the people, and on the
constitution of the church and on the laws and authority of Christ,
« See this act at full length in Appendix, No. X.
f See Appendix, No. XI.
j See at full length in Appendix, No. XII,

22
And there were not wanting then popular demagogues ready
enough to sympathize with him,
11, There had been always, probably from the time of the
Reformation, ministers in the church, that favoured the doctrine of
the divine right of the people to elect their own pastors, though
they did not think it necessary to insist upon it in all circum
stances of the church ; and there had been an uniform opposition
to patronage, and intrusion, in the abstract. That patronage was
a grievance, and that intrusion was contrary to the constitution
of the church, were maxims never openly questioned, though these
maxims were not always put in practice even when the church
had the power.
There was, however, a difference of opinion entertained as to
what it was that constituted intrusion. Some maintained that
there was no intrusion, if the minister were found qualified by
the presbytery. Others on the other hand maintained, that how
ever favourable the presbytery might be to him, he was an
intruder if he had not the call of the people. From the time of
the revolution there was a form of a call requiring to be subscrib
ed by the heritors and elders ; and a day was always fixed for
the purpose. But as the act 1712 began to take effect, and
moderation became somewhat indifferent about the people, the
popular ministers insisted on the necessity of a call by the people,
before any settlement could take place ; and whatever infiuence
they may have had within the walls of the Assembly, they were
sure to have a good deal without, and to exercise it against the
presentee that was not to their taste. The moderates on the
other hand had influence within the Assembly, and with the
high tories of the empire, but seldom had much with the people.
While the popular ministers were in general evangelical in doc
trine and conduct, the moderates gradually became noted for
coldness and deadness, if not for poisonous errors in spiritual
things, as weU as for an outward disregard for the wishes of the
people. The general impression was that the popular ministers
were aU good and evangelical, and that the moderates were aU
unsound and heterodox. And probably, this impression, which
was not altogether though partly groundless, was strengthened
and encouraged by the keenness, with which the various parties
in and out of the church tried to effect their own several objects,
at the expense of their next door neighbours. That there was
a sad backsliding in the Church of Scotland during the past cen-

23
tury, both in doctrine and ministerial character, no one can deny ;
and that whatever was good and holy in it was very much con
fined to the popular party, is equaUy clear. But it is not an easy
matter to explain, how a difference of opinion with respect to an
act of parliament, relative to the induction of ministers, should
form a pretty sure criterion of the spiritual sentiments and con
duct of ministers and elders. In our day, the case is different.
The most popular and evangelical and worthy ministers in our
land are divided in opinion, as to the propriety of abolishing pa
tronage, and of giving full power of election to the people ; and I
believe, that not a few of the moderates are in reality, as tender
of the rights and feelings, as well as spiritual interests of the
people, as are many of those who are not of the moderate party,
though owing to the bad name which the party got, and perhaps
deserved, in times past, they do not get credit for any evangelical
quality, 12. In 1735, the Court of Session gave decision in a case from
Auchtermuchty in Fife, that had a great effect in separating
the church into two distinct parties, A presentee to that parish
had been rejected by the presbytery, because the people were
opposed to him, and another minister was appointed and induct
ed- by the presbytery. The rejected presentee consequently
applied to the Court of Session for a declaration of his right to
the stipend, which the court, after long pleadings, granted ; they
having found, that the presbytery were not warranted in having
rejected him, on the mere ground of his having been disliked by
the people. The presbytery, it was maintained, should have
judged of his fitness for the parish, and of the objections stated
to him ; and had they done so, and then judicially and on their
own responsibility, rejected him, the civil court eould not have
interfered. This decision afforded to ministers and elders that were not
very careful of the spiritual interests of the people, a plausible
ground for maintaining, that the church courts were bound by
the civU law to give collation to every presentee, against whom
there was no ground of hbel. And when we unite this with the
fiery zeal against the church displayed by the Seceders, and with
the disappointments constantly experienced by the good men
within the church, in their endeavours to have the pleasure of
the people consulted in all cases of vacancy, we have a clue that
leads us to the real ground of separation, betwixt those who as-

24
sumed the name of moderate, and those who either maintained
the divine right of the people to elect their minister, or at any
rate felt a strong repugnance to the exercise of unmitigated pa
tronage. Besides, the high tory or Jacobite governments of the past cen
tury uniformly supported the moderate party, as the friends of
law and order ; and the moderate party were not unwilling to
cherish, if not to create the belief, in high quarters, that the
popular ministers were fiery fanatics, and enemies to social order.
Indeed, it was not tUl after the French Revolution, that the govern
ment obtained any thing like a ray of light with respect to the
real worth and value of any of the popular ministers of Scotland,
Then, however, it was found that the moderates had very little
influence over the people, and that in the event of need, the
evangelical men, with the people on their side for war or peace,
weal or woe, would require to be looked upon as their country's
staff and support.
13. About twenty years ago, Mr George (now Sir George)
Sinclair, the late Dr Andrew Thomson, the late Dr M'Crie,
the late Dr Kidd, and other great and good men, formed an Anti-
patronage Society, which, by the speeches delivered, and reports
and addresses circulated through the country, had a considerable
effect on the public mind. The character of the men engaged
in the matter, and the general sympathy of the people with the
object in view, eould not have failed to produce an impression of
a favourable kind for the church. And though the direct in
fluence of the society may not have been very great in purchas
ing patronages, it is impossible to tell how great may have been
its indirect influence over patrons and other persons of rank, in
the way of inducing them to pay some deference to the wishes of
the people in the appointment of ministers. At any rate the
Hiimber of clerical opponents of jDa^rowa^^e, though not of clerical
accepters of presentations has wonderfully increased during the
last twenty years.
It was, however, the change in the political world, consequent
on the repeal of the test and corporation acts, and on Roman
Catholic Emancipation, and on the parliamentary and burgh re
form acts, that opened up a prospect of relief from the rigours
of patronage; and no sooner were the whigs seated in office,
than an effort was made to have patronage abolished by the
legislature.

25
14, In the General Assembly of 1832, there were eleven overtures
(three from synods, and eight from presbyteries) anent the subject
of calls {i. e. requiring, that according to the constitution of the
church as exhibited in_Jier_pi-actice, the positive subscription of
a fair proportion of the people~of a parish, to a minister's call,
should be declared necessary before his induction) and after dis
cussion, a motion was made and seconded, " That they be re
mitted to a committee with instructions to consider the same, and
report to next Assembly." A counter motion was made and
carried by a majority of 42, " That it is unnecessary and inex
pedient to adopt the measures recommended in the overtures."
About this time the dissenters in Scotland began the anti-
establishment war, and the zeal which they manifested in their
endeavour to put down the Church of Scotland, gave rise to a
great deal of zeal in her support. One consequence at any rate
was, that in 1833, there were forty-five overtures anent calls,
instead of eleven as in 1832, presented to the General Assembly.
In the course of discussion on them, Dr Chalmers moved in
effect " That a committee be appointed to prepare the best
measures for preventing the induction of a presentee, should a
majority of the people dissent, with or without reasons," Dr
Cook on the other hand, moved " That the General Assembly
declare, that in all cases, in which a person is presented to a
vacant parish, it is by the law of the church, sanctioned by the
law of the land, competent for the heads of famUies, in full and
regular communion with the church, to give in to the presbytery,
within the bounds of which the vacant parish lies, objections of
whatever nature, against the presentee, or against the settlement
taking place — that the presbytery should deliberately consider
these objections, and that if they find them unfounded, or
originating from causeless prejudices, they shall proceed to the
settlement; but if they judge that they are well founded, that
they reject the presentation, the presentee being unqualified — it
being competent to the parties to appeal from the sentence, if
they shall see cause." This latter motion was carried by a
majority of 12, the numbers being 149 to 137,
In spring 1834, numerous petitions were sent to parhament
for the aboUtion of patronage; and that true and christian friend
to the people. Sir George Sinclair, moved successfuUy in the
House of Commons, for the appointment of a committee to consider
the matter, and to report. Seven gentlemen of great name in

26
the Church of Scotland, were consequently examined. Some of
them were ministers, and some were laymen. Their evidence,
however, was so contradictory with respect to the propriety of
abolishing patronage, that it was not thought advisable to prose
cute the matter further, nor to give in any report, but the evi
dence that had been taken. Probably some secret arrangements
had been entered into by certain individuals (in whom the church
had great confidence) to save patronage, and at the same time,
give to the people something like a check upon its disagreeable
exercise. At any rate, in the assembly 1834, the Veto act was
proposed, and carried with the sanction of government and of
the crown lawyers; (such was then, and stUl is the understanding,)
and Dr Chalmers, and lord Moncrieff, and other eminent mem
bers of the Church of Scotland, who supported it, avowed their
enmity to popular election, and their desire for the continuance
of patronage, under the smallest possible check by the people,
such as the Veto act would give them. The moderates consis
tently opposed it, as unconstitutional and ultra vires of the
General Assembly ; and many who were not moderates expressed
their dislike of it. When it had passed, there was a shout heard
that they had muzzled patronage. But Dr M'Crie, who had a
little more consistency and sagacity than his neighbours, said,
"they boast that they have muzzled patronage, but I say that
they have only muffled patronage, and muzzled the people;" and
the many settlements that have taken place since, contrary to
the will of the great bulk of the people, have shown the wisdom
of his remark. I always disliked the act for many reasons.
But I confess, that had it got fair play, and been aUowed to
work, without any interference from without, it might do very
well as a check on patronage in many instances, and as a mean
of preventing the violent system of intrusion that once prevailed,
and from which a benevolent heart would recoU,
The following is the Veto act, viz, : —
Edinburgh, May 31st, 1834. "The General Assembly
declare. That it is a fundamental law of this church, that no
pastor shall be intruded on any congregation, contrary to the
wUl of the people ; and in order that this principle may be carried
into full effect, the General Assembly, with the consent of a
majority of the Presbyteries of this church, do declare, enact and
ordain, that it shall be an instruction to Presbyteries, that if at
the moderating in a caU to a vacant pastoral charge, the major

27
part of the male heads of families, members of the vacant congre
gation, and in full communion with the church, shaU disapprove
of the person, in whose favour, the call is proposed to be
moderated in, such disapproval shaU be deemed sufficient ground
for the presbytery rejecting such person, and that he shaU be
rejected accordingly, and due notice thereof forthwith given to
all concerned ; but that if the major part of the said heads of
families, shaU not disapprove of such person to be their pastor,
the Presbytery shall proceed with the settlement according to
the rules of the church : And further declare, that no person
shall be held to be entitled to disapprove as aforesaid, who shall
refuse, if required, solemnly to declare, in presence of the Pres
bytery, that he is actuated by no factious or malicious motive,
but solely by a conscientious regard to the spiritual interests of
himself or the congregation,"
15. From the premises which I have now laid before you,
the following conclusions are clearly deducible, viz. : —
First, That since the Reformation in Scotland in 1560,
patronage has been uniformly in connexion with the church,
excepting during the two short periods betwixt 1649 and 1661,
and 1690 and 1712.
Secondly, That patronage was uniformly considered a griev
ance and bondage by the church till 1784, when the commission
ceased to be instructed to apply for relief from it, should a favour
able opportunity occur.
Thirdly, That the church uniformly acted under the law of
patronage, while it was the law, and thus virtuaUy acquiesced
in it.
Fourthly, That while the church had the power of putting
the election of ministers into the hands of the people, she never
did it.
Fifthly, That the church never gave to the people till 1834,
the power of a simple veto on an appointment, she having always
reserved to the church courts the power of judging of the fitness
of the minister for the particular charge, to which he may have
been nominated.
Sixthly, That the utmost power which the church ever gave
to the people, was that of stating objections to the nomination.
Seventhly, That the Veto act was passed in support of
patronage, though there is not a principle in our standards more
clearly condemned, than patronage.

28
Eighthly, That the Veto act is a violation of the principles of
our constitution; a denuding the church courts of the powel-
which scripturally belongs to them ; and a measure not in accor
dance with the law of the land, the constitution of the church,
nor with the true interests of the people.
Ninthly, That whatever may have been the terms of civil or
ecclesiastical statutes with respect to coUation, their spirit has
been, that the edification of the people is to be consulted, and
that the presbyteries are the judges as to what is most likely to
promote it.
II. Let me now, in the second place, state the difficulties in
which the church finds herself placed. I have already stated the
circumstances that led to them.
The Veto act of 1834 was in the first instance passed as an
interim act ; and it being to all intents and purposes a new law,
there was a violation of the Barrier act of 1696, which wisely
requires, that before the passing of any new act as a standing
law of the church, it be sent as an overture to the presbyteries
for their sanction. This violation of a sound constitutional
principle was the immediate occasion of the litigation, which I
am now to state,
1st. The parish of Auchterarder in Perthshire became vacant
on the 31st of August, 1834, and on the 14th September follow
ing, the earl of KinnouU, the patron, issued a presentation in
favour of Mr Robert Young, preacher of the gospel. On the
2d day of December, the presbytery met at Auchterarder for
the purpose of moderating in a call in the usual way. But, it
having been found that the great majority of the male communi
cants, heads of famUies, dissented from Mr Young's appointment,
and that only two subscribed the call, he was ultimately rejected
by the presbytery, as disqualified, in terms of the Veto act. He
then, in conjunction with the patron, raised an action of
declarator before the Court of Session, in substance craving to
have it declared, " that the presbytery were bound to make trial
of his qualifications, and that their having rejected him, without
making trial of his qualifications, and simply in respect of a veto
of the parishioners, was iUegal."
The pleadings before the Court of Session, (there being thirteen
judges present) commenced on the 21st November, 1837. The
presbytery, under the sanction of the General Assembly,
defended their rejection of Mr Young with great abUity and

29
zeal ; and maintained in substance, that as the whole matter of
conferring the pastoral office is within the exclusive jurisdiction
of the church, as declared in the act 1592, she must have the
sole power of prescribing the mode in which it is to be conferred,
and of prescribing the requisites and conditions on which she
will bestow it. This was virtuaUy maintaining the legality of
the Veto act, and the power of the church to pass it.
On the 8th day of March, 1838, the Court of Session by a
majority of eight to five, pronounced the following judgment in
the case, — " Repel the objections as to the jurisdiction of the
court, and to the competency of the action as directed against the
presbytery; Further, repel the plea, in defence, of acquiescence:
Find that the defenders, the presbytery of Auchterarder, did
refuse and continue to refuse to take trial of the qualifications of
Robert Young, and have rejected him as presentee to the church
and parish of Auchterarder, on the sole ground (as they admit on
the record) that a majority of the male heads of families, com
municants in the said parish, have dissented, without any reason
assigned, from his admission as minister : Find that the said
presbytery in so doing, have acted to the hurt and prejudice of
the said pursuers, illegally, and in violation of their duty, and
contrary to the provisions of certain statutes libelled on, and in
particular, contrary to the provisions of the statute of 10 Anne,
c, 12 ; in so far repel the defences stated on the part of the
presbytery, and decern and declare accordingly ; and allow the
decree to go out and be extracted as an interim decree ; and with
these findings and declarations, remit the process to the lord
Ordinary to proceed further therein, as he shaU see just,"
2, The Judges, in delivering their opinions, used expressions
which many ministers and others considered derogatory to the
honour and spiritual independence of the church, and as the case
was altogether considered one of very extraordinary importance,
sanctioned the publication of all they had said in a revised and
official form. The consequence was, that at the meeting of the
General Assembly in May following, there were many overtures
by Presbyteries and Synods presented, praying the Assembly to
maintain the spiritual independence of the church. These over
tures-being considered and ably discussed on the 22d day of May,
the following resolution was passed by a considerable majority,
"That the General Assembly of the church of Scotland, while
they unqualifiedly acknowledge the exclusive jurisdiction of the

30 •
civil courts in regard to the civil rights and emoluments secured
by law to the church and ministers thereof, and wUl ever give
and inculcate implicit obedience to their decisions thereanent, do
resolve, that as is declared in the Confession of Faith of this
national established church, ' the Lord Jesus as King and Head
of this church hath therein appointed a government in the hands
of the church officers, distinct from the civil magistrate,' and
that in all matters touching the doctrine, government and dis
cipline of the church, her judicatories possess an exclusive juris
diction, founded on the word of God, ' which power ecclesiastical
(in the words of the Second Book of Discipline) flows immedi
ately from God, and the Mediator Jesus Christ, and is spiritual,
not having a temporal head on earth, but only Christ, the only
spiritual King and Governor of his Kirk' : And they do further
resolve, that the spiritual jurisdiction, and the supremacy and
sole Headship of the Lord Jesus Christ, on which it depends,
they will assert, and at all hazards defend, by the help and bless
ing of that Great God, who in the days of old, enabled their
fathers, amid manifold persecutions, to maintain a testimony even
to the death, for Christ's kingdom and crown : And finaUy, that
they will firmly enforce obedience to the same upon aU office
bearers, and members of this church, by the execution of her laws,
in the exercise of the ecclesiastical authority, wherewith they are
invested," A counter motion of the same import, with the exception of
the last clause, (containing what was caUed the sting in the taU of
the resolution) was proposed by Dr Cook and supported by the
moderate party, but lost,
3, The resolution, taken by itself, contains a declaration of
abstract principles, which no member of the church of Scotland
can hesitate to acquiesce in. But during the discussion on it,
(though there was a good deal of talent displayed) there were
such foolish boastings, and such ignorant vauntings, and such
ebullitions of fiery zeal, and such expressions of readiness to en
counter martyrdom, that the christian who knew his own weak
ness and corruption pitied the "lads" that were so heroic, whUe
there was no evidence, that in times past they had suffered any
thing for Christ, or had given any special proof of zeal for his
service and glory. WhUe nobody doubted their seriousness at
the time, there were not a few sober-minded christians, who
thought, that those who were so much in love with blood and

31
banners, and caves and rocks, would make but sorry martyrs
after all. Those who had tried their own strength and found it
weakness ; who had borne the cross and found it heavy and pain
ful ; who had looked upon death and judgment and found them to
be any thing but trifles, were of opinion, that whatever allowances
were to be made for the desire to make a good speech and to
procure applause, the heroic speakers did " not know what man
ner of spirit they were of," Indeed, there seemed to be a pretty
general conviction among sensible men, that the spirit of Christ
is of a meek and self-denying kind, and that "great swelling words
of vanity" do notcharacterize the followers of the Lamb. Besides,
the language that was used with respect to the judges of the
land seemed entirely out of place, and by no means calculated
to promote their respect for the church. Though I would be
far from insinuating, that their minds have been in the least in
fluenced by the "malicious prating" that has been employed
against them in public and in private, I cannot forget, that they
are men " of like passions with others," and that there is great
impropriety in reviling those that sit in judgment. Had the
decision in the Auchterarder case been favourable to the Veto
act, the judges would have been as much praised, as they have
been abused.
Two days after the passing of the independence resolution by
the Assembly, viz., on the 24th day of May, 1838, the decision
in the Auchterarder case was taken into consideration, and a
resolution was entered into unanimously to appeal to the house
of Lords, The following is a verbatim copy of the minute on
the occasion, viz,
" The General Assembly had transmitted to them by their
committee of bills, a reference from the Synod of Perth and
Stirling, with other papers relative to the Auchterarder case,
Mr Dempster, on the part of the Synod, stated the reference.
After reasoning, it was moved and seconded, that the General
Assembly sustain the reference, approve of the conduct of the
Presbytery of Auchterarder and the Synod of Perth and Stirling;
authorise the procurator of the church to appeal the judgment
of the Court of Session in the action at the instance of the earl
of Kinnoull and the Reverend Robert Young against the said
Presbytery, so soon as he and the other council for the Presby
tery in the said case shall think it expedient to do so. This
motion was agreed to."

32
The Auchterarder case was consequently appealed, and in the
beginning of May 1839, the house of Lords gave a final decision
by simple affirmation of the judgment of the Court of Session.
4, Now, what would have been naturally expected by honest
men in considering thS whole of this case, but that the church of
Scotland, that authorised and paid for the appeal, would have
submitted to the decision ? Indeed, the church would have done
so with great glee and good will, if the decision had been favour
able to her views and wishes; and moreover, she would have
praised the judges, and crowed over the unhappy Dean of Faculty
and his poor clients the earl of Kinnoull and Mr Robert Young,
But what did the majority of the Church of Scotland really do,
with regard to the decision by the House of Lords ? I am
ashamed to tell it. But as the matter is one of weighty consid
eration and great public importance, I must do it, " Edinburgh,
22d May, 1839  The General Assembly having heard the report
of the procurator on the Auchterarder case, and considered the
judgment of the House of Lords, affirming the decision of the
Court of Session ; and being satisfied that by the said judgment,
all questions of civU right, so far as the Presbytery of Auchter
arder is concerned, are substantiaUy decided, do now in accor
dance with the uniform practice of this church, and with the re
solution of last General Assembly, ever to give and inculcate
implicit obedience to the decisions of civil courts, in regard
to the civil rights and emoluments, secured by law to the church,
instruct the said presbytery to offer no further resistance to the
claims of Mr Young or of the patron, to the emoluments of the
benefice of Auchterarder, and to refrain from claiming the ju^
devolutum, or any other civil right or privilege connected with
the said benefice. And whereas, the principle of non-intrusion
is one coeval with the reformed Kirk of Scotland, and forms an
integral part of its constitution, embodied in its standards, and
declared in various acts of Assembly, the General Assembly re
solve that this principle cannot be abandoned, and that no pre
sentee shall be forced upon any parish, contrary to the will of the
congregation. And whereas, by the decision above referred to,
it appears that when the principle is carried into effect in any
parish, the legal provision for the sustentation of the ministry in
that parish may be thereby suspended, the General Assembly |
being deeply impressed with the unhappy consequences, which
must arise from any collision between the civil and ecclesiastical

33
authorities, and hoiding it to be their duty to use every means
in their power, not involving any dereliction of the principles
and fundamental laws of their constitution, to prevent such re
sults, do therefore appoint a committee for the purpose of con
sidering in what way the privileges of the national establishment,
and the harmony between church and state may remain unim
paired, with instructions to confer with the government of the
country, if they should see cause."
This resolution was carried by a majority of 197 to 161
against Dr Cook's motion, which was to the effect — that as the
Veto law was declared by the highest civU tribunal to be iUegal
and ultra vires, the presbytery of Auchterarder should be in
structed to take Mr Young on trials, and to proceed in the
matter according to the rules of the church, it being understood
that the presbytery are bound to consider the fitness of the pre
sentee for the charge to which he has been presented.*
5, It appeared to me then, and I have never seen any reason
to alter my opinion, that as the church did, without any qualifi
cation or reservation of any kind, appeal the judgment of the
Court of Session, she was in common honour and honesty bound
to abide by the result of the appeal ; and I have so much respect
for all the veto men, that I do not believe that any one of them
would be dishonourable enough to do the thing individually, that
all of them glory in having done collectively.
But the veto men say that they never appealed anything but
the civil rights of the benefice. Now, read the minute of Assem
bly, and then judge whether this be true ! The language there
is, " Authorise the procurator for the church to appeal the judg
ment of the Court of Session," Is there any reservation here ?
And what was the judgment that was appealed ? Read again
fAa# judgment, and you shall find that in substance it is, " That

* On this occasion, I, having been a member of Assembly, drew out a mo
tion, which I showed privately to many members, though I did not bring it
forward publicly, owing to the consternation which it produced, and the rancour
of^rty^sgirit_wJiickpie.Kailed. It was in the following words, viz.," " That'in
present circumstances it is expedient to take steps for the repeal of the Veto
act; and as the presbytery of Auchterarder have been found wrong by that
highest court, to which the church appealed the judgment of the Court of Ses-
sioUjHhat the said presbytery be instructed to take Mr Young on trials, but at
the same time, to beware that they do not induct him, unless they find that it
would be for edification that they should do so. And the General Assembly
declare, that in every case the presbytery are the proper judges of the fitness
of a presentee for the particular parish to which he may have been presented."
0

34
the Court of Session had jurisdiction in the case, and that the
presbytery had acted iUegally in having rejected Mr Young
without having themselves tried him."
Again, the Veto men say, that by their resolution of independ
ence of the 22d May, 1838, they reserved their spiritual juris
diction, and declared their determination to maintain it at aU
hazards. Now, probably I am as determined as any of them to
maintain the spiritual jurisdiction of the church courts as far as
I can ; but I am too obtuse in intellect to see that the civU courts
have, in their decision on the Auchterarder case, in the least
degree attempted to make any infringement on the spiritual
jurisdiction of our courts. They have merely declared, that we
are bound by the law by which we hold our establishment to take
a regularly Ucensed and regularly presented presentee on trial.
And does any man of sense deny that we are bound to do so,
more especially after we ourselves have appealed to the decision
of the court of supreme appellate jurisdiction ? But the pre
sentee has been tried, say they, and rejected by the people.
True ; but has he been rejected by the presbytery on their own
responsibility ? On the contrary, have they not devolved the
responsibility on the people? As to the argument so much
employed by some, that the church courts in passmg the Veto
act gave to the people the power of a veto, and that consequently
the judgment of the people is in reality the judgment of the pres
bytery, it is a mere sophistical quibble, unworthy of generous
minds, and indicative of the shifts to which minds of an inferior
mould wUl sometimes resort in order to maintain their pride, and
save, themselves from real or supposed difficulties. The jackall
fox abroad, or reynard at home, may resort to mean shifts, but
the princely lion, conscious of his strength, disdains them ; he
pounces on his prey and devours it.*
* Dr Chalmers in his recently published pamphlet, " What ought the church
and the people of Scotland to do now ?" writes as follows : — " Such, however,
was the finding in March, 1838, of the Court of Session in the case of Auch
terarder. A civil sentence of the court was obtained against that acting of the
church, by which it set aside the presentee to this parish ; and the church ac
quiesced to the full extent to which in any former cases of an adverse decision
she had ever been in the habit of doing, or which had ever been required of
her. In all bygone instances, when found that we had inducted illegally, the
civil sentence against us had civil effects alone. The temporalities were dis
severed from the cure ; nor did we in the least anticipate any effect ulterior to
this from the adverse decision in the case of Auchterarder. It is true that we
appealed from that decision to the House of Lords ; but in thus appealing from
a lower to a higher civil court, we never once imagined that we thereby made

35
6. The people have declared " that they cannot be edified by
Mr Young's ministry, and that this is their sole reason for veto
ing him ;" (and for aught I know they are right, for I know
nothing, personally or otherwise, of him,) why then cannot the
presbytery at once transfer this veto or declaration by the people
to a veto or declaration by themselves officiaUy and judicially ?
and then there is an end of the matter. Are they afraid that
they cannot do it conscientiously ? What becomes then of their
favourite extract from the Confession of Faith, bearing that " the
Lord Jesus, as sole head and king of his church, has appointed
a government in it in the hands of the office-bearers f Are not
the inembers of the presbytery of Auchterarder office-bearers ?
Why wiU they not then exercise the functions of the government
with which they are invested ? Why do they transfer the respon
sibiUty of office-bearers beyond its proper bounds? Is there
no guilt incurred by the office-bearers of a church in declin-
any change on the quality of the decision, or that the sentence of the superior
tribunal should be transformed, either in character or effect, from a thing of
authority in matters civil to a thing of authority in matters spiritual. The one
sentence may be regarded as higher in degree than the other, but still the same
in kind. We did appeal, not because we recognised the authority of the
House of Lords in things spiritual, but because, aware of their full and final
authority in things temporal, we, as the guardians of the moral interests of
the families in Auchterarder, were desirous of obtaining a reversal in their favour
of that sentence, which, by disjoining the temporalities from the ministerial
office, would bereave one of our parishes of the inestimable benefits of a
national establishment. And accordingly, when we did appeal, we, in our
highest constitutional court, the General Assembly, made solemn declaration
of our great constitutional principle, the independence of the church on the
civil power in things spiritual."
N.B. — I presume this is to be considered the ablest defence of the appeal
case that can be given, and I would make three observations on it. First.
All former cases of disseveration of the temporalities from the cure were cases
of competirig presentations, and consequently not analogous to the present case
at all. Secondly. The decision of the House of Lords was a simple affirm
ation of the judgment of the Court of Session, and made no difference on the
quality of that judgment. Thirdly. When litigants enter a court of law they
are seldom aware of what the issue may be. " The glorious uncertainty of
the law " is a proverb, but unless people be wise enough to keep free of it, they
should at any rate abide by the result.
Sir Henry Moncrieff says, " It should be considered, besides, that no greater
absurdity can be imagined, than that it could have ever been in the contem
plation of law that a benefice should, in any circumstances, be separated from
the pastoral cure to which it is attached. "The examples in which it has been
so, have risen out of peculiar circumstances, which could not be in the view of
the legislature, and are therefore to be regarded as exceptions from a general
rule, which, because they are exceptions, serve to confirm and cannot subvert
it, and which must at least be pronounced to be no precedents where the cir
cumstances are not the same."

36
ing to exercise authority, as well as in carrying that autho
rity too far ? God's heritage is not to be lorded over by the
office-bearers of the church ; but neither are the office-bearers of
the church to be lorded over by God's heritage. And here is
an exemplification of the error of which the church was guUty
in passing the Veto act. She tied up her own hands com
pletely by it, and threw the responsibility of rejecting a min
ister on the people, on whom it should not have been thrown
so absolutely. If a people declare solemnly that they object
to such a man solely because their souls cannot be edified by his
ministrations, I take opportunities of hearing him preach, so that
I may be the better able to judge in the case ; and if, after
having heard him, I find that his ministrations are not calculated
to edify, then I at once, and as a man sitting in the place of
God, reject the presentee as unqualified, and would throw to
the winds every attempt by him or any other to concuss me into
a resolution to induct him. The liberum arbitrium of a presby
tery is a favourite maxim with Dr Chalmers, and he has quoted
with great approbation the sentiment advanced by Mr Andrew
Gray of Perth, " that we have sold our services b^ut not our
liberty," But who can deny that the worthy Doctorhas been a
prime agent in throwing away the liberum arbitrium of presby
teries, and that while we have sold our services by our becoming
office-bearers in the establishment, we have, by passing the Veto
act, sold our liberty for what cannot satisfy ? sold it to those who
are entitled to our service by night and by day, but who are not
entitled to our office as rulers in the house of our God, however
much we may consider ourselves bound to defer to their opinions,
and wishes, and consciences, in every instance in which we can do
so consistently with safety and faithfulness to them, safety and
faithfulness to ourselves, and honour and faithfulness to their and
our Lord and Master. I love the people, I believe that it
was for their benefit that the ministry has been instituted, and
not to pamper a set of lordly vain priests, I have no hesitation
in affirming, that generally the communicants of Scotland have
as much of the spirit of Christ as have their ministers, and are
as good judges of a gospel sermon as are the presbyteries. But
because the communicants are not office-bearers, and conse
quently are not invested with authority as governors, I take the
scriptural rule as my guide in judging of the fitness of a minister
for any particular charge. Let the communicants electa as many

37
think they should have the power of doing, and then my prero
gative as a member of presbytery is reserved, of judging of the
fitness of the man whom they have chosen.
It appears to me, that the church, in appeaUng the Auchter
arder case from the Court of Session to the House of Lords, and
in afterwards refusing to abide by the decision, has been guilty
of a piece of great and reprehensible cruelty, in a pecuniary, as
well as in a legal and moral sense. Here is a great corporate
body, having corporate funds, putting a poor young man to the
expense of a great deal more money than he ever possessed, and
yet resolving, after he has won his cause, that he shall have no
benefit by it in any way, " Let him take the temporalities" say
they, while they know, that the widow's fund has a right to the
vacant stipend, unless the courts of law, throwing aside the act
of parliament, find, that though the presbytery of Auchterarder
have not taken him on trial, he is entitled to the temporalities of
the benefice, inasmuch as it has been already decided, that they
should have done so. Now what is this, but adding insult and
mockery to injustice ? It is true, that the people of Auchter
arder should not be sacrificed to any man. But it is equally
true, that individual injustice should not be perpetrated, for the >
sake of any public good.
7. The apostle Paul was accused by the Jews of various
crimes, before Festus the Roman governor, who, we are told,
was very " wUling to do the Jews a pleasure," (Acts xxv. 9.)
" Wilt thou go up to Jerusalem," said Festus, " and there be
judged of these things before me" ? " Then said Paul, I stand
at Caesar's judgment-seat, where I ought to be judged. I appeal
unto Caesar." Here is a case of appeal. But was Paul foolish
enough to think, that if Caesar gave judgment against him, he
could escape from that judgment? No, no, he knew too well
the character of Nero, and that it would be in vain for him to
escape from his clutches. The Roman lion's iron paws were
not easily got rid of. Are there any iron paws but Nero's ?
8. The decision by the House of Lords in the case of the
parish of Auchterarder, led to important events in other parishes,
A Mr Clark had been presented as assistant and successor to
the late incumbent of the parish of Lethendy in the presbytery
of Dunkeld, and vetoed by the people. Soon thereafter the
incumbent died, and a Mr Kessen was presented by the crown
to the vacant parish. When the presbytery began to take the

38
ordinary steps for his settlement, they and the presentee were
interdicted by the Court of Session, at the instance of Mr Clark
the vetoed presentee. The Presbytery proceeded, notwithstand
ing the interdict, and admitted Mr Kessen to the cure of the
parish. They were soon thereafter rebuked at the bar of the
Court of Session for violating the interdict, Mr Clark took
possession of the manse, glebe, &c,, and Mr Kessen is minister
of the parish. The question of stipend remains to be decided
on, A Mr John Edwards was presented to the parish of Marnoch
in the presbytery of Strathbogie, He had been for three years
previously assistant to the late incumbent, and it would appear,
that the people of the parish were by no means in love with him.
Very soon after he was presented to the parish, he was almost
unanimously vetoed, there being only one man to sign the call
out of a population of nearly 3000 souls. He was consequently
declared unqualified by the presbytery, and application was
made to the patron to present another, which he did. In the
meantime, Mr Edwards applied by petition to the Court of
Session, and threatened the presbytery of Strathbogie with heavy
pains and penalties, if they would not take him on trials with a
view to his settlement. Seven ministers of the presbytery, (there
being eleven in all,) resolved consequently at a meeting in
November last, to proceed with his trials. But the minority of
the presbytery complained to the commission of the General
Assembly, which met a few days thereafter, and the immediate
consequence was, that at an adjourned meeting of the commission
in December, the seven ministers of the presbytery, who had
resolved to proceed with the trials of Mr Edwards, in direct
opposition to an order by the General Assembly, in the preced
ing May, were suspended tUl the meeting of Assembly in the
month of May foUowing, unless they would previously give in a
declaration of submission. The doing of the commission was
merely preventive and not punitive. There was a necessity for
the preservation of order and subordination in the church, and
there can hardly be an apology for the resolution of the seven
suspended brethren. If they were threatened with pains and
penalties by the civil law, they had no reason to fear that the
General Assembly, whose orders they were bound to obey,
would have failed to protect them in so far as money was con
cerned. If their consciences required them to abide by the

39
decisions of the civil courts, what became of the consciences that
ought to have required them to submit to the orders of the
ecclesiastical courts ? If they thought it necessary to abide by
the law of patronage, they might at any rate, have exercised a
little of the royal law of brotherly love. They might have
waited till the meeting of Assembly, and not done aU in their
power to embroil more and more the church to which they
belonged, in inextricable and interminable difficulties,
9. The meeting of the commission in December last, that
suspended the seven brethren of Strathbogie, provided supplies
for the seven parishes, and did all in their power to strengthen
the hands of the minority of the presbytery, and to furnish the
people with tlie means of grace, and the ordinances of the gospel,
in as full and faithful a manner and degree as possible. The
people, however, in general, with a feeling that does them honour
and credit, clung for a while to their own ministers, under the
belief, that they had been hardly dealt with, and therefore did
not encourage the visits and ministrations of the ministers, whom
the commission had sent, and whom they considered as intruders.
Besides, the seven brethren had been considered by their
parishioners, as kind and respectable gentlemen ; and I am not
aware, there was any thing like general dissatisfaction with their
services as ministers of the gospel.
In these circumstances, the seven suspended brethren applied
to the Court of Session for an interdict against the coming into
their parishes (to dispense ordinances) of the ministers and elders
appointed by the commission ; and the interdict was granted to
the extent of preventing the parish church, church bell, church
yard, and parochial school-house from being occupied or employed
by them. The commission ministers, however, preached in the
fields, or under any covering, with which they were favoured by
the people, and dispensed ordinances to as many as applied for
them in the regular order.
The suspended brethren disregarding the sentence of suspen
sion by the commission, preached in their churches, and dis
pensed ordinances, as they had been wont to do. They even
held meetings of presbytery, and proceeded with the trials of
Mr Edwards as presentee to Marnoch, on the understanding,
however, that they were not to proceed to his induction till after the
meeting of Assembly in May, There were thus two presbyteries of
Strathbogie, the major one supported by the civU law, the minor

40
by the majority of the General Assembly, The commission of
Assembly, which met on the 4th of March, continued the sus
pension, and summoned the seven suspended brethren and Mr
Edwards, to compear before the next meeting of Assembly in May.
As I have already said, the Assembly of 1839 appointed a
committee with Dr Chalmers at its head, to endeavour to provide
means to prevent intrusion. The moderates declined to have
any thing to do with it. All the members of it therefore, were
of what is called the popular or evangelical party. They set
about the object of their appointment with extraordinary zeal
and ardour. They sent deputations to government. They
canvassed and corresponded with many influential men in and
out of parliament. They had meetings with patrons, and others
whom they thought likely to promote their object. In short, if
ardour, and zeal, and talent, and a sense of the paramount im
portance of their commission, could have achieved their object, it
would have been achieved. But the Dean of Faculty wrote a
ponderous pamphlet in the shape of a letter to the lord Chancel
lor, that had a little more weight with influential men, than had
all the activity of the non-intrusion committee. The govern
ment wisely put off doing any thing, without great consideration.
The moderates were busy, of course, in opposition to any
change on the constitution of the church. Pamphlets in abundance
were written. Meetings were held in many parts of the country.
Fiery agitations excited the people. Truth was not always
uppermost. Brotherly love seemed lost in the phrenzy of zeal
and party spirit. Non-intrusion was so common a subject of
conversation, that at last it became rather nauseous. Caricatures
took its place ; they had their day and disappeared. The non
intrusion committee had failed in their endeavours, and disappoint
ment, and rage, and threatenings of a great secession from the
church, were the consequences,
10. When parhament met, expectations were entertained that
government would bring forward a measure for the pacification
of the- church. Two or three different plans had been proposed
to them ; but they declined to adopt any of them. The first of
these plans, was the legalization of the church's Veto act, and
lords Melbourne and John RusseU had more good sense than to
accede to it. The second was the rendering of the positive call
by a majority of the male communicants necessary, before the
induction of a minister. It is understood, that a third plan was

41
hinted at, viz,, the abolition of patronage, and that this plan
would not have been altogether disagreeable to government,
provided that the nomination of a minister should be vested in
the parliamentary voters. But, whatever may have been the
personal or private views of the government leaders, they had
various weighty difficulties to contend with. First, They must
have felt the awkwardness of coming forward with a legislative
measure, for a mere party in the church, while that party acted
in disobedience to that legal decision, to which they themselves
appealed. Secondly, They were well aware, and stated that
they could not expect to carry through the House of Lords any
measure which they might think proper. Thirdly, They knew
that the dissenters were against doing any thing for the relief of
the veto men. And, Fourthly, They were bound by their oath
of office, to beware that they would not advise any measure,
likely to weaken or injure the Church of Scotland, as established
by law. Perhaps others may be ready enough to assign other
reasons for the conduct of government, than those which I have
mentioned, and I am sure, that the government gets very little
credit through the country, for the part it has acted. There is
no saying, however, but that by and- by, the government, that
has been so often branded as infidel, and popish, and radical, and
revolutionary, and every thing bad, may become the object of
our church's idolatry, A sort of beginning of the way, to such a
consummation has taken place, and there is no saying what may
happen, " Every man has his price."
11. As the government declined to bring forward any parlia
mentary measure, the earl of Aberdeen brought forward a bill
in April, His lordship had been for a long time, in frequent
and confidential intercourse, personally and by correspondence,
with the non-intrusion committee, and I have no doubt whatever,
was a sincere friend to the Church of Scotland in the part he
acted. His bill was agreeable enough to most of the veto men,
when they first saw it. But men must not think for themselves.
Two or three restless demagogues must think for you, and it
would be unmanly in you to act according to your convictions.
Party must be kept up at all hazards, and unfortunately in the '
present case, men took the alarm, whenever it became a matter
of suspicion that the Dean of Faculty had any connexion with
the bUl, Had his name been kept out of view, things might have
been different from what they are. The bill was coarsely and

42
rancorously opposed by several individuals. What one said,
all said ; the General Assembly by a great majority opposed it,
some members of both houses of parliament opposed it, without
having assigned any one reason, or stated any one objection to
any part of the bill. The bUl was wisely withdrawn by lord
Aberdeen. I say " wisely," because any bUl contrary to the
declared and great majority of the General Assembly, should
not be pressed ; and now the church is involved in difficulties,
that would have all vanished as smoke before the wind, had lord
Aberdeen's bill been treated with the courtesy that might have
been expected towards any measure, brought forward as this
was, by a nobleman of worth and character, and talent, and
attachment to the church, and zeal for her interest, far
above any merits that can be exhibited by some of those indi
viduals, that now receive the plaudits and fulsome adulation of
the veto leaders. Dr Chalmers says, that it was expected that
the seven suspended brethren of Strathbogie would have made
some sort of submission to the last General Assembly, and that
as there was no desire to deal rigorously with them, matters
might have been easily settled, had they done so. My own
opinion is, that the Strathbogie men would have submitted,
had lord Aberdeen's bill been even courteously rejected. But
the Strathbogie men did not submit ; they have stood firm
to their principles and plans, and are now under libel for
deposition. The Strathbogie ministers have since the Assembly appUed
for, and obtained a new interdict against the dispensation of
gospel ordinances within their bounds, by any of the ministers
or elders, whom the General Assembly appointed to assist the
minority of the presbytery, in giving pastoral ministrations to the
people of the seven parishes of the seven contumacious brethren.
I have not heard any one advocate the propriety of such an in
terdict. It does not appear very consonant with fair play, that
the people of the seven parishes should be debarred from hear
ing the gospel of salvation, merely because the judges of the
Court of Session have been of the opinion that the majority of
the General Assembly have done wrong in suspending the seven
brethren. Let the real offenders be punished as much as law and
justice demand ; (and I am very much of the opinion, that the
wisest plan for punishing them would have been the very reverse
of the one adopted) but what have the poor people done, to de-

43
serve the heaviest spiritual punishment that man can inflict  the
want of gospel ordinances ?
12. The present difficulties, then, of the Church of Scotland
are the foUowing : —
First. Seven ministers of one presbytery are under suspension,
and threatened with deposition by the General Assembly, for
refusing obedience to a law of the church, that has been declared
by the House of Lords to have been ultra vires of the church,
and consequently illegal. Unless these seven submit in some
degree, they must be deposed according to the resolution of the
Assembly ; and if they be deposed, the civil law wUl retain them
in their benefices while they live. Besides these seven parishes,
the parish of Marnoch in the same presbytery is without a min
ister, and though Mr Edwards can never be inducted by the
church, the civil law wiU, it is thought, find that he has a right
to the temporalities of the benefice. Here then are eight par
ishes in one presbytery, in which the temporalities are threatened
to be for a time severed from the pastoral charge of the people.
Secondly. The parishes of Auchterarder and Lethendy are in
nearly the same state with that of Marnoch ; and in the case of
Auchterarder, a prosecution has been raised against the members
of presbytery by the patron, for a large an\ount of damages.
And if the presentee to Auchterarder can claim damages, why
not the other vetoed presentees ?
Thirdly. The General Assembly have resolved that they shall
not go back. The decisions by civU courts are against them,
and it would appear must continue so for a time, as it is not
Ukely, that parliament can be prevailed on to alter the law, while
the church continues to set the present law at defiance.
Fourthly. The civil law of the country seems perfectly power
less against the church in the present case, for it would be infa
tuation to attempt to inflict punishment on those, who have refused
to proceed with the trials of presentees, or on those who have
violated the various interdicts of the Court of Session. And as
the civil law is powerless, so is the ecclesiastical law. For though
the church courts can pass sentences of various kinds againstcon-
tumacious ministers, the civil courts can render them of no avail,
in so far as the temporalities of benefices are concerned.
III. Let me now in the third place, state and illustrate
various propositions, that are necessary to a proper understand
ing of our present difficulties.

44
1. The question at issue is not " What ought to be the con
stitution or privileges of our church, if we were forming a new
constitution, and framing the most unexceptionable laws possi
ble, in a state of perfect freedom from all pressure from without
or within ?" But the question is " What has been the constitu
tion of our church as recognised by the state, and not denied in
fact and practice by ourselves, since the period of our first estab
lishment, and more especially since the era of the revolution ?"
It appears to me (after having read and heard a great deal
on the subject) that this view of the matter has not been sufficient
ly adverted to in our discussions, and that by many well-mean
ing people, it has been altogether lost sight of. The zeal of
some benevolent and ardent minds sometimes goes far a-head of
the dictates of that uncommon faculty, commonly called " com
mon sense." Far-sightedness and short-sightedness are each of
them inconvenient effects of malconformations of the organs of
vision. The true and well formed organ of vision sees far and
near, and all the intervening space or distance. The man who
has it physically, is not so much in danger of mistaking his way,
as is the man who wants it; The man who has it morally, is
the safest guide for another to follow, in matters that require
much practical wisdom. The benevolent theorist, who is far but
not true sighted, is so full of enthusiasm in prosecuting his schemes
of benevolence, that he is likely to fall into fits of monomania in
connexion with them, and at last to become disappointed and
disgusted by the blindness and stupidity of the world around
him, because all men cannot see with his eyes, and sympathize
with his plans of theoretically attainable, but practically unat
tainable perfection. The cold unfeeling formalist on the other
hand, who is short but not true sighted, is contented with tread
ing the beaten path of heartless routine without reaUzing any of
the lofty aspirations of phUanthropy, and makes no effort for im
proving the morals or increasing the happiness of his fellow men.
The man that is always pleading for change is wrong, and so is
the man that is always hostile to it. The vetoists of our day, in
the plenitude of their regard for popular interests, have been
found to transgress the boundaries of ecclesiastical power. Their
opponents on the other hand, have been charged with too much
disregard for popular interests, and with too much readiness to
sacrifice the ecclesiastical to the civil power. Both parties may
have been unintentionally and conscientiously in the wrong. But

45
whatever truth there may be in the charges advanced against
their opponents, there can be no doubt that the vetoists have been
pursuing praiseworthy objects, by means which plain good sense
cannot approve of.
The church and state entered many years ago into partner
ship on terms, which, whether mutually agreeable or not, were
mutually and really acceded to. The concern was carried on
for a whUe with various ups and downs to both the partners ;
but in reality the benefit of both was promoted in times past, and
so it is to this day. The one cannot say to the other, " I have
no need of thee," There 1$ not indeed any desire on either side
to break up the copartnery!,' and there is no wisdom nor truth in
saying, that there is a qtiarrel betwixt the church and state in
the matter of our present divisions. The state as a state is
favourable to the church, and the church is favourable to the
state. They have been put together (I would fain trust) by that
Lord, who is Head of both, and I do not envy the men, that
would even try to put asunder what He hath put together, or
that for the sake of a mere human opinion or resolution, unsup
ported by the infallible oracles of truth, would endanger the
continuance of the union. The whole quarrel just now is be
tween a few individuals of the church on the one side, and a few
on the other ; and if men would but for a little lay aside their
pride and other passions, and consider coolly and calmly, under
the influence of the Spirit of Christ, what is the real ground of
quarrel and what ought to be done to remove it, they would soon
see, that molehiUs are not mountains, and that peace might be
restored without any concession of principle. Party prejudice
may deny this, but an unprejudiced spectator cannot deny it.
It is true, indeed, that certain decisions given of late by state
courts have been felt by many worthy men, as an infringement
of " the liberty of the Kirk," and as an invasion of the ecclesias
tical prerogative ; and the feeling may not be groundless. But
who were the suitors before the courts ? They were two or
three preachers of the Church of Scotland with one patron on
the one side, and two or three presbyteries on the other. And
is Robert Young or John Edwards become so great as to be
able to piersecute the Church of Scotland, and to threaten it
with its overthrow as an estabhshment ? If either of them be so,
it is marveUous indeed. Were the lord-advocate, at the instance
of parliament or the crown, to prosecute the church courts, then

46
I would at once allow that a quarrel had arisen betwixt the state
and the church. But how stands the fact ? The lord-advocate
is favourable personally and officially to the church, and both
houses of parliament and the crown are equaUy so, though aU of
them may not approve of the resistance shown by the majority of
the General Assembly, to the solemn decisions of the supreme
civil courts, given in cases that were pleaded in those courts, under
the sanction, and by the authority and instructions of the Gen
eral Assembly.
Neither is the quarrel or collision (properly speaking) between
the civil courts and the ecclesiastical. A great deal has been
written and spoken about supreme civil and supreme ecclesias
tical courts having co-ordinate jurisdiction, and I am far from
disputing the correctness of the language that has been used on
this point, by gentlemen learned in the law. But surely the
merest tyro in legal knowledge knows, that while the judges of
the Court of Session may err like other fallible men in their
interpretation of the laws, which they are called upon to expound
and administer, they can expect neither honour nor power. from
travelling beyond their proper province. They can expect no
honour, for there is something so odious in the epithet " unjust
judge" that an honourable mind would instinctively revolt from
it. And they can expect no power, for it is well known, that
they cannot enforce any one of their decisions or decrees, except
ing in so far as they are petitioned by the suitor at their bar.
The plain question at issue, then, is " How ought the two par
ties at the bar of the civil courts to settle their differences, in
consequence of the decisions that have been given (rightly or
wrongly) by those courts according to their views of the laws,
which we have, and which they were required to expound and
administer ? Now the shortest way of answering this question
is to put another, viz., " What ought two private litigants to do
in similar circumstances ?" Let common sense answer.
2. Many worthy persons seem to forget that the Church of
Scotland is a church established by law, and that consequently
it has a mixed constitution, which in theory is beautiful, and
in practice has been generally found to work tolerably well, but
which, Uke all human institutions and devices, is apt occasionally
to go wrong through its own innate imperfection, or through the
mismanagement of those who try to work it. There is in it a
sort of imperium in imperio, a decided sovereignty, each impe-

47
rium jealous of its neighbour, and yet ready to make encroach
ments beyond the almost, if not altogether undefinable line of
boundary, and ruUng over subjects, and by statutes that may some
times appear adverse to the subjects and statutes of its generaUy
favourable neighbour. Though, properiy speaking, there are no
antagonist principles in our constitution, yet, owing to the igno
rance, pride, or waywardness of men, both in church and state,
the principle that is considered to be of a civil nature cannot
always be found to coalesce with that which is considered spi
ritual. As in the compound constitution of man, it is impossible
for the greatest adept in physiology to trace the precise line of
demarcation betwixt body and spirit, or to state with unfailing
accuracy the infiuence, for good or evU, which the one exercises
over the other, so it may be said with truth, that there is an
almost insurmountable difficulty (at least to ordinary minds) in
stating with precision what it is that peculiarly belongs to the
civU, and what to the ecclesiastical judicatories of our country,
in the matter of jurisdiction, when the civU and ecclesiastical
laws seem to come into collision with one another. As, how
ever, in the body human, the body cannot say of the spirit, nor
the spirit of the body, " I have no need of thee," but both are
helpful to one another, so should the matter be between the laws
civU and the laws ecclesiastical. The object of both is the same ;
viz,, the welfare of the whole body, civil and spiritual ; and men
should therefore learn mutual sympathy, forbearance, and sup
port. It is true that, according to the first sentence of the 30th
Ch. of the Westminster Confession of Faith, " The Lord Jesus, as
king and head of his church, hath therein appointed a government
in the hand of church officers, distinct from the civil magistrate,"
but it is equally true, that that chapter is intituled, " Of church
censures," and that the special object of the whole chapter* is to
# Ch. XXX.— Of Church Censures:—
I. The Lord Jesus, as king and head of his church, hath therein appointed
a government in the hand of church officers, distinct from the civil magistrate.
II. To these officers the keys of the kingdom of heaven are committed, by
virtue whereof they have power respectively to retain and remit sins, to shut
that kingdom against the impenitent, both by the word and censures, and to
open it unto penitent sinners by the ministry of the gospel, and by absolution
from censures, as occasion shall require.
III. Church censures are necessary for the reclaiming and gaining of offend
ing brethren, for the deterring of others from the like offences, for purging out
of that leaven which might infect the whole lump, for vindicating the honour
of Christ and the holy profession of the gospel, and for preventing the wrath
of God, which might justly fall upon the church, if they should suffer his

48
point out the inherent and inalienable power of the church to
infiict or absolve from spiritual censures on the offending members
of its own body, without any hostUe interference in such matters
by the civil magistrate. In illustration of this I may suppose a
case : — A man of my congregation or parish applies to me for
baptism to his child, or for admission to the Lord's table. I
examine him, and find him quite ignorant of the first principles of
Christianity ; besides, I am aware that he is a drunkard, or a
thief, or something else that is very bad. I therefore desire him
to go to the first meeting of the kirk session, and apply there for
the spiritual privilege he requires. The man goes, and the kirk
session refuses to give him what he wants. He then prosecutes
me as minister of the parish, or as moderator of the kirk session,
for refusing to give him sealing ordinances. The judge, how
ever, if he be an inteUigent and judicious man, will at once de
cline to entertain the prosecution. But let him be ignorant and
injudicious, and what then ? He perhaps orders me to dispense
ordinances to the plaintiff. But I will not do it. Supposing,
however, that I had refused to examine the man as to his know
ledge or character, the case would be different. I might then
weU be found fault with by the civil magistrate, and there would
be nothing illegal in his laying his commands on me to examine
the plaintiff as to his fitness for receiving ordinances. The ma
gistrate can insist on my doing my duty, but I would spurn away
from me the idea that he has " the power of the keys," and has
a right to instruct me as to the manner of my doing it, beyond
the recognised standards of my own church, I refuse the man
on my own responsibility, and do not devolve the responsibility
on others, that are not duly recognised guardians of the morals
and ordinances of God in the parish. And had this view of the
matter been taken in the cases that have of late agitated and
divided the church, as it ought to have been, our struggles
would have come to an end ere now, with honour to the church,
and with the prospect of great benefit to our establishment,
3, Be it observed, that the question of jurisdiction, that has
given rise to so much angry discussion, and occasioned so much
covenant and the seals thereof to be profaned by notorious and obstinate
offenders. IV. For the better obtaining of those ends, the officers of the church are to
proceed by admonition, suspension from the sacrament of the Lord's Supper
for a season, and by excommunication from the church, according to the nature
of the crime and demerit of the person.

49
bad feeling among us, is at best but a matter of doubt. The
boastings of many eminent individuals on both sides, that there
is no room for doubt or difficulty in the matter, go far to prove
(if, alas I proof were needed) that keen partizanship in the pro
secution of some favourite object is apt to pervert the judgment
and stupify the conscience. If the matter were so clear as it has
been represented, how is it possible to account for the circum
stance, that the greatest men in the church and state in the land
have been, and still are, about equally divided in opinion about
it? Neither worldly politics, nor differences of religious belief,
seem to have swayed their minds, Whigs and tories, infidels
and believers, are on the side of the majority of the General
Assembly, and the same descriptions of men may be found in
abundance on the side of the minority. It must be then a matter
of doubt, though a matter of great practical importance. And
is the Lord to be dishonoured, is the peace of His church to be
broken, is the stability of our establishment to be endangered for
a matter of doubt ? That the matter is important no one can deny,
and that every lawful endeavour should be made to have it pro
perly settled is equaUy clear. But we should beware, that the
violence of our own proceedings do not throw an insuperable
barrier in the way of a settlement. " The servants of the Lord
must not strive, but be gentle unto all men ;" and it is only by
the cultivation of the spirit of Christ, that any hope of a proper
settlement can be reasonably entertained, " The Lord will be
with you only while ye are with him," The difficulties that have
already occurred have been created entirely by ourselves ; we
need not blame the state, for it has been favourable ; we need
not blame the law, for it is good, if a man use it lawfully ; and if
it be not good, the legislators of our land cannot lend a deaf ear
to the respectful petitions of the people for an amendment of
it ; we need not blame the Court of Session or House of Lords,
for it would be unrighteous to speak evil of these dignities, though
they have given decision against the majority of the General
Assembly, We need not blame the Dean of Faculty, for he has
been pursuing a course which (I am persuaded) he and many
others think right ; we need not blame the earl of Aberdeen, for
that noble lord is more entitled to our thanks than he is to un
christian contumely, for the friendly part he has acted ; we need
not blame her Majesty's government, for they have acted a pru
dent, a very prudent part, in having hitherto declined to come
D

50
forward with a measure for a party of the church ; and it must
be borne in mind, that they are sworn to advise her Majesty
" that she shall inviolably maintain and preserve the foresaid
settlement (viz, the Revolution settlement) of the true protestant
religion, with the government, worship, discipline, rights, and
privileges of this church, as above established by the laws of this
kingdom, in prosecution of the claim of right," and that as wise
and conscientious men, they cannot consider it a light thing to
propose a measure that has even the semblance of a change of
the government of our church. We may just blame ourselves,
and having found out our errors in times past, we may, by the help
of the Lord, learn to be wiser in time to come, and thus obtain
a greater benefit than the Veto act — the immediate occasion of
all our difficulties, could have conferred. The legalizing of the
Veto act would have introduced a new element into our ecclesi
astical government, as did the Roman CathoUc Relief bill into
our civil government and constitution. The placing of the elec
tion of a minister on a more popular footing, which is the very first
principle of our Books of Discipline, would be no infringement on
our government. It would be like the reform act, a mere exten
sion of the elective franchise, a going back to first principles.
4. The "spiritual independence," that has been so much
claimed of late by some of the office-bearers of our church in
their public discussions, does not appear warranted by the word
of God, the standards of our church, or the authority of good
government. If I understand at all the meaning which they
attach to the phrase, it is, " that church courts may, by virtue
of delegated power from the Lord Jesus Christ, speak, and
legislate, and act, as they may be pleased to think right, without
their being in the least amenable to the civil power." Now, this
is an independence which no wise government would grant to
any voluntary church ; and as to its being granted to an estab
lished church, the very idea is preposterous. No doubt, if I
were happily less conversant than I am, with the spirit that too
frequently prevaUs in our church courts, my views might be con
siderably modified, and I might be led to argue for the abstract
principle. But experience, though often a painful, is not unfre
quently a faithful teacher ; and the many opportunities of obser
vation which I have had, have led me to believe, that some of
the more eminent courts of the Church of Scotland would re
quire to exhibit a great deal more of the presence and spirit of

51
their master, than they generally do, before it would be safe to
entrust them with complete independence. The stranger at a
distance may fancy to himself the solemnity and seriousness of
a coUege of apostles, and the self-denial and meekness and love
of a company of the devoted followers of the meek and lowly
Jesus, He may in imagination paint to himself the spiritual
glories of such assembUes, and in his blissful ignorance wish that he
were among them, that he might inhale some of the pure celestial
atm^phere that is there. But as the weary traveUer is deceived
and disappointed by the distant and deceitful mirage of the
wUderness, in which he hopes to quench his thirst and refresh
his weary limbs; so should our spiritual pilgrim be, that expects
to bathe and refresh his soul in the promising and placid waters
of our assemblies. No doubt, he may reaUy meet with an oasis
now and then amid the wild barrenness of the surrounding
wilderness ; and refreshing to his weary soul it must be ; but he
cannot, even while partaking of the refreshing coolness of its
shade, forget that this small spot is but a speck, and stands in
fearful contrast with the magnitude of the bleak and inhospitable
scene that encompasses it.
There appears to me and to many others something extremely
contemptible and absurd, in the conduct of those who boastingly
resolve* that be the consequences what they may, they shall not
move an inch, nor a hair's-breadth from the ground of their
groundless spiritual independence, while they support and
advocate patronage, and know that according to the constitution
of the Church of Scotland, as established by law, they are fettered
hand and foot, so that they cannot do any one thing, in the way
of settling a minister in a vacant parish, till a certain patron, be
he good or bad, an infidel or believer, a member of the Church of
Scotland, or of no church, be pleased to give them leave before
the expiry of six months. f But supposing patronage abolished
* In the meeting of the Commission, on the 4th of March last, I heard a
namely reverend gentleman say, " the consequences of our procedure may be
the fall of our Church, the fall of the Church of England, the fall of the
monarchy, the fall of every institution civil and religious in the country, but
we shall not move an inch !" Ah ! what reckless boasting !
•[• Since writing the above paragraph, I have been gratified by a perusal of
the following quotation from the late Rev. Dr M'Crie : — " It is unnecessary
for me to demonstrate, that the continuance of this servitude is inconsistent
with the inherent freedom of a church, and that the long boasted liberty, and
independence of tho Church of Scotland, must be in a strict measure nominal,
so long as a sentinel is placed at the door of each one of her 900 churches,

52
to-day, and a more popular system of election adopted, we should
have no more spiritual independence than we have. Any in
dividual elector, or any disappointed candidate, or the elected
candidate, might give as much trouble to the church courts,
by means of prosecutions, and decisions, and interdicts, and law
expenses and damages, as we are subjected to under our present
system. The parish of Cadder in the presbytery of Glasgow,
has no patronage. The election is in the hands of the heritors
and elders, (about 130 in number) and yet within the last two
years, the presbytery have been served with interdicts, and
threatenings of actions of damages, by a disappointed candidate.
Of course those who claim spiritual independence, and who
urge the aboUtion of patronage, do not at all contemplate the
withdrawal of the endowments. Now, are they blind enough to
suppose for a moment, that a considerable share of the landed
property of the country would be left in the hands of the church,
without any responsibility to the state for the manner in which
she would act in regard to it? Let any voluntary body of chris
tians become possessed of a few hundred thousand pounds, and
the state will soon be found interfering with the manner in which
the money is disposed of, and some voluntary Young or Edwards
wUl get up to annoy the spiritually independent bodies with
which they may be connected. Did not the spiritual inde
pendents* of our own church rejoice in the decision given by
without whose permission no minister can enter, and so long as a power
chiefly foreign and extraneous has the right of directly or indirectly filling
her judicatories, and directing her councils."
N.B. — Verily spiritual independence, without the sentinel at the door to
keep out a minister, did little in favour of this venerable man ! If there was
no sentinel to keep out, there was power enough in spiritual independence to
change from one testimony to another, and to put out of a church the most
eminent man connected with it ! Learn ! learn !
* I was present in the beginning of March last, at a meeting in Edinburgh,
of the General Assembly's educational committee, of which I was a member,
and heard a discussion there on the question, " How far it was expedient to
accept the government offer of a grant of money, and of an inspector for
schools ?" The moderates were keen and eloquent against accepting, because
(they said) allowing any inspection by a parliamentary or government agent
would do away with the independence of presbyteries, and in short do a great
deal of evil. Mr William Cunningham was equally determined against
accepting, but for a very different reason. His reason (he said) was, that
there is in the country, an infidel, or a semi-infidel conspiracy against scriptural
education, and therefore, he would have no connexion whatever with the men
that were concerned in the conspiracy. I did not approve or admire any one
of these arguments. On the contrary, I would accept the grant for the
answers that were given to them. But I approved of Mr Cunningham's
honesty, in leaving and opposing his party on the occasion, when he thought

53
the lord Chancellor, in the case of lady Hewley's charity, the
other year ? And did not that decision turn on the question of
spiritual doctrine? The plain question was, "Were the trustees
evangelical presbyterians ?" Did not our spiritual independents
give a helping hand in the recent Campbelton case ? And did
not that case depend on the construction that ought to be put
on certain points of doctrine and government? Spiritual in
dependence is a very good thing, but it must not be carried too
far, John Knox* entertained very different sentiments from those
that are now advanced. Spiritual independence opened the way,
in the course of the past century, for Arianism among the presby
terians of Ireland and North America, for Socinianism among
the presbyterians of England, and more lately, for the divisions
and changes among the seceders in Scotland. Had the Church
of Scotland been spirituaUy independent, she would have become
professedly heterodox, as many of her office-bearers were practi
cally, and the proposal that was made in 1780, to do away
with Confessions of Faith and with Calls, would most probably
have been acceded to. If such, however, had been the case,
good men now-a-days would be less clamant than they are for
" spiritual independence," As we have the protection of the law
against ourselves and others, it is but right that others should
have the same protection against us ; and I am not quicksighted
enough to see the consistency (which others say they see,) be
twixt our condemning the priestly domination of popery, and our
seeking the "spiritual independence" that most probably would
lead ourselves to dominate. The moderates did lord over God's
heritage a few years ago. Let us beware that we do not cultivate
the same lordly spirit under a different form and aspect. The
" spiritual independence" men, however say, that it is for the
good of the christian people, that they plead as they do. But
they seem to forget that the civil magistrate is as much an ordi
nance of God, as a church court is, and that it is for their good,
he has been appointed. They seem to forget that the civil
magistrates in this country are at least nominally christian
magistrates, and that some of them who are office-bearers in our
them wrong. The Veto party, on the other hand, who are so fierce and
determined against the civil magistrate's interference in church matters, main
tained stoutly, that the government had a right to employ an inspector, and to
see that the state money was well laid out. Parties changed sides !
N.B. Should not this note teach men a little mutual forbearance ?
* See Appendix, No. XIIL

54
own and other churches, may have as much of the spirit of
Christ, and His glory as much in view, as have the most noisy of
the claimants of spiritual independence. And they seem to
forget, that it was professedly for the goOd of the people, that
Caiaphas the high priest of old gave sentence that Jesus should
be put to death ; and that it was from a wiUingness " to content
the people," that Pilate the Roman governor gave Jesus up to
them to be crucified. " We have a law," said the people, or
rather the " spiritually independent" church of the Jews, " and
by our law, he ought to die, because he made himself the Son
of God," Verily in this case, the Roman law and magistrate
were better and wiser than the interpretation of the Jewish law,
which the chief priests and scribes gave of it. We cannot crucify
ChviBt personally. But we may do it spirituaUy ; and we do it when
we give up the office which He has assigned to us, the authority
with which He has invested us, the precepts by which we ought to
be guided, and the meek, and lowly, and holy, and loving, and
forgiving spirit, by which we ought to be characterized. The
good of the people is always a favourite object with me, and
hitherto I have endeavoured (though alas ! very faintly and un
worthily,) to attain that object. But it is because I love the
people and the Saviour, who died for them and me, that I act
as I do, I am their servant, but it is for Christ's sake, I
cannot say boastingly (as some have done) that I would wUlingly
lay down my life for them, as the Good Shepherd hath done ;
but I can say, (unless my heart deceive me) that I am wilUng
with Paul, " to spend and be spent for their sake,''
I have been for many a year specially their minister, and tried
to fight their battles and promote their interest, I never yet
owed any thing directly to patrons or civil magistrates. Any
churches I have had I got through the petitions of the people.
But I am not therefore blind to the usefulness of the civil
magistrate, though he may go wrong. Neither am I blind to
the dangers of error on the part of the people ; and surely the
protestant ministers of Scotland have not yet come the length
of claiming infallibUity to themselves. Let me then warn you,
that it is not by unseemly and unholy contests about spiritual
independence, by abuse of the civU magistrate, and by fiery
declamation about the rights of the christian people, that the
real welfare of the people is to be promoted. It is by the
preaching of the word in season and out of season, it is by the

55
out-pouring of the Holy Spirit, and by the influence of christian
principle, and precept, and example. It is thus that the whole
lump is to be leavened. It is thus that the glory of the latter
days is to be ushered in. Then for ought I know, (for I
am not told,) kings may wear their crowns, and nobles their
coronets. But I am sure I cannot see to what purpose. All
are to be united in one holy bond of brotherhood under Christ
the only king ; and the strife of every one will be, not who shall
be greatest? but who shall be most self-denied, and lowly, and
holy, and loving, and generous, and kind, and Uke unto Jesus
their King? The contest wUl be very different then from what
it is now. But ere that period arrives, there must be troublous
times. Perhaps we may see a commencement of them. But
let none of us seek temptation. Perhaps too, some of those
who are now so loud in their condemnation of the interference of
the civil power, and so peremptory in their demands for popular
rights, may, ere they go hence, have to regret that they have
given an example of disregard for the civU power, which has
taught the people to despise every authority ecclesiastical as
well as civU ; and who knows but, that should persecution arise,
some of the vaunting heroes of our church may come to quail
before the spirit, which they are now conjuring and unconsciously
cherishing? Men may often learn what their sins are, in the
punishments which they suffer. The movement leaders may
learn their sin of despising civil authority, in the insubordination
and persevering contumacy of the Strathbogie brethren ; and
before they exhort or command these disobedient and undutiful
sons of the church to return to their duty, they should put them
selves into the moral position that would command the respectful
homage of considerate and God-fearing men ; and not depart
from the standards,* which they have vowed to maintain, nor
despise the laws by which they have their living,
5. Intrusion is very bad, and so bad, that you can hardly
find one callous or cruel enough to justify it. It is against one
of the fundamental principles of our church, and has done in
calculable evil in practice in many instances. It has separated
from our communion many of the best people of our country.
It has stirred up a host of foes to the Church of Scotland, that
otherwise would prove her most strenuous defenders. It has
* See Appendix, No. XIV,

56
separated brethren that ought to be united ; and what are the
spiritual and eternal evUs it has done to souls, no living man can
tell. But bad as intrusion is, and much evil as it has done, I
am persuaded that it has not done nearly so much in the way of
loosening the stakes of our establishment, as has been done by the
crooked, tortuous course of policy pursued by the leaders of the
non-intrusion party, during the past eighteen months. Many
of our people, high and low, have become disgusted with that
course, and left the church, or become thoroughly indifferent
about it. No doubt, the wise leaders say, " Let them go, the
church is better without them," But they seem to forget, that
this is the very language that was used by the moderates in the
zenith of their power, with respect to those that left the church,
or were threatening to leave it in consequence of intrusion. And
they seem to forget too, that if all who are now disgusted with
the non-intrusion controversy, were to leave the church, the
number that would be left would prove but small, however
excellent in quality. There is no division in Scotland about in
trusion, but there is a very decided division about the most suit
able means of preventing it; and it is nothing short of the very
reverse of truth, to say, that almost all the people approve
earnestly and heartily of the proceedings of the majority of the
General Assembly. Of course this statement is very different
indeed from what ye are accustomed to get from the party news
papers, that are as reckless of truth as any infidel papers can be,
and many of whose worst paragraphs may be written by intruders.
But as assertions on either side are no proof of what is truth or
falsehood, and as legal proof in the present case cannot be com
manded just now, let me appeal to the people of Glasgow and
Edinburgh, and to a very few years for the correctness of my
statement. That the great bulk of the people of Scotland would
join in a movement for the abolition of patronage, there can be
uo doubt, if the matter were properly managed ; and that they
think this the most rational and likely cure for the evil that is
so much wished to be avoided, is equaUy true. But the more
sensible of them are tired of agitation. Their enthusiasm is
gone, and the offensive boastings, and morbid waywardness, and
insolent defiances, and unbecoming neglect of ministerial duties
by too many ministers, have disgusted them. The Church of
Scotland may have got an accession of members, from a closer
junction with other churches, but her strength as an establish-

57
ment has been wealiened ; and the eye of a prophet is not
necessary to foresee, that what all her outward enemies were
not able to accomplish, may be easUy and speedily accomplished
by a few of her own well-meaning but injudicious sons.
There has been too much said about intrusion in the wrong
way. It is remarkable enough that the last instances of what is
called intrusion were perpetrated by many of those, who are
now very loud in their condemnation of the thing, and that they
were acting on the intrusion system of the moderates at the very
time they were making laws to check it. One instance of check
to it in the General Assembly a few years ago, foUowed up by
a series of righteous decisions would have secured the object
without any difficulty or danger. But that simple plan did not
suit the morbid restlessness, and desire of new legislation, which
characterized the popular party after they acquired the ascend
ancy iu the church. It is remarkable too, that some of the most
noisy agitators against intrusion now-a-days were in reality in
truders themselves. No doubt intrusion is bad ; but those that
have been guUty of it should give evidence of their sincerity in
condemning it, by walking out. If they came in by the wrong
door, let them just walk out, and come in again (if they can) by
the right one, and then sensible men will believe them to be single-
hearted. Thus Zaccheus would have acted.
I have seen enough and more than enough of the evils of in
trusion, I have seen many a poor parish made utterly unhappy
for many a year, by the forced settlement in them of ministers
that never seemed qualified by God or man for the office of the
ministry, and the loftiest and holiest feelings of the people
trampled on by a lordly junto, that were paid for feeding the
sheep and lambs, that Jesus the good Shepherd hath purchased
by his blood. Into a certain parish with which I am well
acquainted, there was a minister forcibly intruded, so infidel, that
he stated in the course of conversation in his patron's house, that
he would prefer being the author of such a book (referring to
one that had been recently published) to having the honour of
sitting at the right hand of the Son of Mary ! This intruder,
however, whatever may have been his creed or no creed, had
finer feelings than are possessed by the generality of intruders.
For, finding (after a trial of twelve months) that he stUl continu
ed obnoxious and troublesome to the people, (hardly one of whom
would hear him) he took his staff in his hand and waUced off.

58
though he had no other situation provided. Truly the infidel
intruder of the past century has given an example, that some of
the intruders of the present century might imitate, to the great
honour of themselves and great comfort and happiness of their
parishioners. I know some parishes in which the military were employed at
the settlement of their present ministers. I know other parishes
in which press-gangs were employed to kidnap any men that
might interfere to prevent the induction of the presentees. Some
of the presentees whom I have in view were of one party, and
some of another in the church, and generaUy they were fully as
excellent men as their more popular neighbours. But I must
do the moderates that reigned a few years ago in the church,
the justice to say, that they never showed any partiality in the
matter of a contested settlement, when it came before them in
the General Assembly. They had the same law for all presen
tees, to whatever party they belonged.
Were not those parishes then objects of pity, into which min
isters were intruded ? They were indeed. And if patrons were
but personally conversant with the misery even in a temporal
sense (keeping apart from the spiritual and eternal view of the
matter), which an unsuitable appointment of a minister causes in
a parish, they would instinctively shrink (as men of feeUng and
benevolence,) from the very suggestion to present persons, that
do not give promise of usefulness and comfort to the people. But
if ministers be always wrong in intruding, parishes are sometimes
wrong in opposing them. Under the influence of one or two
men, who have their likings and dislikings, (as all men have,)
the people occasionally oppose a very worthy presentee, because
they prefer another man that probably is very far inferior. Many
instances of the kind have occurred and might be named,*

* I have no apology to make for intrusion under any shape or pretence.
But that well known book called " Scots Worthies " tells me that the celebra
ted John Welch, son-in-law of John Knox, and minister of Ayr, was such an
intruder into the parish of Ayr and so obnoxious to the people, that (there
having been no Manse in those days in the parish) they conspired to refuse
him a house, and there was only one man in the parish, that would afford him
shelter. The same book tells me, that the great Alexander Henderson, who
was moderator of the General Assembly in Glasgow in 1638, was so obnoxious
lo the parish of Leuchars in Fife, at the time of his appointment to it about the
year 1614, that the doors and windows of the church were barricaded against
him on the day of his induction. These two cases show what weight was at
tached of old in practice to the principle of non-intrusion. Yet, it is probable

59
The violent intrusions, however, in various parts of Scotland,
with which I am weU acquainted, served in not a few instances,
like the hurricane and the tempest, to purify the atmosphere.
No doubt they caused much misery and sorrow. The Lord's
chosen people were oppressed and grieved, and the members of
His flock were left to pine anay in the solitary places of Jacob,
unless they were able to go to some distant one of the gates of
Zion, for that pasture which they could not find in the gate
where they formerly met their shepherd ; or to build a seceding
tabernacle for themselves, in which to worship with the pastor of
their choice the God of their fathers. But such cases opened
the eyes of patrons and people of influence to the evils of intrusion,
and led them to a more humane and christian course. To my own
former parish of Nigg, my immediate predecessor, who was one
of the greatest, though least known men of his day, (beyond a
comparatively small district of country,) was appointed by the
crown in 1788, not because he had famUy or political influence,
but because he was deservedly popular, and because his appoint
ment was considered likely to heal the division that a former ap
pointment had caused in the parish. I could name various
similar instances of good, resulting from a sense and view of the
evils of forced settlements. May the eyes of patrons and pres
byteries be opened more and more ! and let me trust that the day
is gone, and gone for ever from the Church of Scotland, in which
even one instance of violent intrusion could be tolerated.
6. But bad as violent intrusion is, and determined enemy as
I am to it, candour requires me to state, that there is another
sort of intrusion that has done much more real evU, and that is
going on quietly and triumphantly now under the reign and
patronage of men that are not of the moderate party. There
is a moral intrusion, that has been from time immemorial in the
church, and that shall continue to go on while men continue
selfish corrupt beings, whatever be the laws, and however excel
lent in themselves to prevent intrusion. Violent intrusion has
slain its thousands ; moral intrusion its tens of thousands. The
enough that if these two great men were alive in Scotland now, they would be
leaders in the non-intrusion agitation.
Other hooks tell me that James Sharp the notorious Archbishop of St An
drews, was so very popular during the first years of his ministry as a Presby
terian, that the people of Ceres in Fife elected him. He was a first rate man
with the covenanting ministers of his day, and there can be no doubt that he
would be a stjjrdy and boasting non-inlrusionist.

60
number of instances of violent intrusion has been small ; the in
stances of moral intrusion have been beyond calculation, I
never knew any ministers put into parishes by the moderates at
the point of the bayonet, so contemptible and worthless as have
been many that have been put in quietly by the honeyed per
suasions of the evangelicals. And let patronage be done away
with to-morrow, and you shall have as much real intrusion as
ever you had.* Violent intrusion (I have said already) is like
the hurricane or tempest ; but, when it does come, it purifies the
atmosphere. The moderates f of old, that were the spirits of
the storm, were heroes. They went openly to work, like the
destroying angels of whom we read in sacred writ. They did
not conceal their presence and character. Moral intrusion, on
the other hand, is a sugared but often poisonous pill. It is like
" the pestUence that walketh quietly in darkness," but bringeth
death on all who inhale its atmosphere. It may be compared to
the pale horse, that the Apostle John saw, with death sitting on
him, and hell foUowing. Lords and ladies, lairds and factors,
ministers, and others of influence, have used their influence, and

* About twenty years ago, there was a meeting in a parish in the west of
England, for the purpose of petitioning parliament to do away with tithes. All
had apparently agreed with great unanimity and zeal to the petition proposed ;
but one farmer, more sagacious than his brethren, got up, and expressed a de
sire to know who were to get the tithes if the parsons were to be deprived of
them ? Some answered one thing, and some another ; but all agreed at last
that they could not get them, and that if the landlords were to have tithes by
the new plan, it would be as well to leave them with the parsons. " We can
make something of the parsons, but nothing of the landlords," was the feeling.
The petition was given up.
f It was not till about the year 1740, that this designation was assumed by
the then rulers of the church. Before that time they in general held strictly
by the Revolution settlement of 1690, which gave the power of election to the
protestant heritors and to the elders of a parish, with a right to the people to
state objections, and to the presbytery to cognosce and determine on their
validity. Though patronage was restored in 1712, it was very seldom exer
cised before 1726. About this latter period, a party got up in the church that
were dissatisfied not merely with the act 1712, but with the Revolution settle
ment itself, and claimed for the householders a greater right than that of merely
otijecting. They maintained that the people had a divine right of electing,
and that without a call by the people there could be no pastoral relation.
These notions intemperately urged and acted on, led to the Secession in 1732
— 1740. The ruling or constitutional party having been placed in difficult
times and circumstances, wished to maintain the call by the heritors and elders,
and at the same time to please the people, by softening the asperities of eccle
siastical authority. It was from their desire to conciliate the people, while
they stoutly opposed the divine right of election men, that they assumed the
designation of the moderate party. They afterwards became fierce for unli
mited patronage, and seemed to disregard the people.

61
that successfuUy, too, times and ways without number, to get
their favourites settled quietly in those parishes where they can
impose on the people ; and these settlements, which have been
called agreeable and harmonious, have never been branded with
the name of intrusion. Far from it. But look around you, and
tell me, if ye can, whether your quiet intruders be better and
more useful as ministers in general than their neighbours ? TeU
me whether those ministers that have been recommended to your
acceptance by the namely non-intrusionists, have done better in
general than those that have wanted such a high sanction ? Tell
me, even, whether those ministers that have been chosen by the
people are in the great majority of instances far superior to those
that have been chosen by patrons ? Ah ! my friends, be not de
ceived by the confident and reckless assertion of the opinions, that
if this or that plan were adopted things would be right ; and that if
patronage were aboUshed, and the people had the choosing of a
minister in their own hands, or the good men of the non-intru
sion party were to recommend one, the gospel would necessarUy
flourish among you. Let each one of you remember that he has
an immortal soul, and that your own welfare, and that of your
chUdren, and of your children's chUdren, through eternity, may
depend on the preaching and conduct of the minister with whom
ye have to do. Fond as I am of popular and harmonious set
tlements, and determinedly hostUe as I have been all my days
to settlements of a different kind, I must here state what must
be known to many of you, viz., that they are no sure criterion
of the real excellence of the minister, and that they not unfre
quently turn out ill,* Even my respected brethren of the evan
gelical party, some of whom have much influence with vacant
congregations in general, (though sad experience has taught us
how little dependence ought to be placed on the flatulent recom-

* The writer of one of tho non-inlrusion tracts, (who is not a minister, but
the talented sledge-hammer of the non-intrusion clique,) in which mention is
made of the heroic and successful conduct of Roderick of the Hill, should have
told not merely about the election, but about the subsequent history of the
minister. He knew it well; but telling the whole truth would not have suited
the purpose. No doubt, Roderick judged b}' appearances, and it is God's
prerogative to judge the heart; but candour is a manly virtue — a Christian
grace. The popish priests are accused of quotiug Rev. xxii. 8, as authority
for worshipping of angels. They are said to keep out of sight and hearing the
words immediately following, " See thou do it not."
N.B. — Are there any protestant priests that use pious frauds? I could
name some that have very lately tried to promote their pets hy false stories.

62
mendatlons of some of them,) are very apt to mislead you, though,
of course, unintentionally, in this matter,* They, like other
fallible men, have their likings and dislikings, their vanity, and
their jealousies, and their prejudices, their self-seeking and their
self-glorying. They wish to provide for their young friends and
flatterers, and are not always very nice or " scrupulous " as to
the means they employ. They perhaps entertain a good opinion
of them; they have heard them read or preach an orthodox
sermon or two ; they know that they speak against intrusion, and
this wUl make up for various defects. It matters not that they
want the cardinal point of regeneration, it has never been in
quired into ; it matters not that they have never experienced the
grace of God in truth, it has not been inquired into; it matters not
that they are novices as to the spirit's teaching, their having it
is taken for granted; it matters not that they are ignorant expe
rimentally of Christ, and of themselves, and of the Christian
life ; it matters not that they cannot sympathize with the mourner
in Zion, nor with the Christian soldier that is attacked by Satan's
fiery darts, and beset by his wiles; it matters not that they want
the holy unction, which all the Veto men cannot lay claim to —
they are friends of theirs; they are outwardly decent in their
conduct; they have a form of sound though tasteless words ; they
admire and praise their clerical patrons ; non-intrusion or some
other ephemeral hobby is their Shibboleth ; and these qualifica
tions are sufficient to procure them certificates and recommenda
tions so good that holy angels would be ashamed to take them.
The parishes may have one thousand or ten thousand souls ; it
matters not. They receive the preachers recommended by the
namely men, that figure so much in the newspapers and on the
* The Christian Instructor for August last, says, " Some of the most pitiful
appointments that were ever made in Scotland have been made within these
few weeks, and to places of value and importance, too, and through the bribed
influence of clerical men also. Is this to be tolerated? Will the people of
those parishes silently acquiesce? That the presbyteries will look on and say
nothing we are very sure ; but are tho people of Scotland so dead to every
noble sentiment, and so insensible to their true interests and those of their
families, as to be perfectly pleased that for bread they should receive a stone,
and for a fish they should be complimented with a scorpion?"
N.B. — I know not what the appointments have been to which the editor
refers, but I know that what he says about the matter is true, and that some
of the leading non-intrusionists are just as ready as any moderate men to pro
mote unworthy appointments. The appointments may not suit the people of
the parishes and the cause of Christ, but they may suit the benevolent, and, of
course, unselfish wishes of the new " friends of the people."

63
platform ; they hear two or three sermons, and have nothing to
say ; the presentees are quietly settled ; the lying newspapers
represent the settlements as a seal of God for good to the par
ishes; by and bye the good sermons are exhausted, and others
cannot be got up; they will not come, perhaps for a good
reason; there is a formal routine of duty, souls pine away, and
death reigns !
And let it not be said that In writing thus I not merely Ubel
the venerable men whose praise is in the churches, but likewise
the young men that are the rising hopes of the church, " Am I
then your enemy," said Paul, "because I tell you the truth?"
No ! young men have not a warmer or stancher friend on earth
than /am. I have beeti rather marked as their friend. But it
is because I love them, and wish them and the church well, that
I thus write, in order to direct their attention to the infinitely im
portant things that all of us are too prone to overlook. Let me
tell those who are so ready to use their influence with patrons
or congregations, in favour of their pets, that they are incurring
a responsibiUty which they would shudder from incurring if they
thought aright ; and let me tell my young friends who are so
anxious to get parishes, that it is one thing to get a parish from
men, and another thing to give an account of it to the Lord, I
libel no man, old or young, I leave that filthy work to others
that dehght in it ; but I may, as a minister of Christ, point out
flagrant errors in my brethren that are doing incalculable injury.
In the present case I have pointed out the public errors of men
whom I love, and with whom I hope to enjoy an eternity of har
mony and bUss, when we shall all be " without fault before the
throne of God,"
7, The statements that have been so eloquently put forth,
about the inability of the people, in many instances, to specify
objections to the settlement of presentees whom they do not
relish, are a libel on the people, and more especially on the com
municants of Scotland,* I know the poor and ignorant among
* It cannot surely be considered necessary that each individual should state
his objections, if he has any to offer. The Westminster Divines, in their
" Directions for the Ordination of Ministers" appended to the Confession of
Faith, say that "a competent number of the members of the Congregation,
nominated by themselves, shall appear before the Presbytery, to give their
consent and approbation to such a man to be their Minister, or otherwise to
put in, with all christian discretion and meekness, what exceptions they have
against him ; and if upon the day appointed there be no just exception against

64
you as well as any man does, I have been for many years the
minister of the poor in various parts of the country, I have
probably preached to more people and in a greater number of
places, than it has faUen to the lot of many to do, I have times
without number associated with the poor in private ; and my
long continued and constant experience has led me to beUeve, that
the best judges of a gospel sermon and of a minister's character,
are to be found among those that are commonly called poor and
ignorant, 1 Cor, i, 25 — 29, " Because the foolishness of God
is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than
men. For ye see your caUing, brethren, how that not many wise
men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble are caUed:
But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound
the wise ; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to
confound the things which are mighty ; and base things of the
world, and things which are despised hath God chosen ; yea and
things which are not, to bring to nought things that are, that
no flesh should glory in his presence." There is a divine teach
ing, that all the Divinity Professors* may have, but cannot give.
A form of sound words is not enough. There must be heart
experience of the grace of God, before a preacher can preach
to God's people, and there must be heart experience of the same
grace in the hearer before he can understand the Spirit's teach
ing. The gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ is not borrowed from
Socrates or Seneca. It is for the heart as well as for the under
standing and conduct, " My son give me thine heart," is its
sweet, and persuasive, and overpowering demand. Let God get
the heart and he gets the whole man. Let the poor and illiterate
be found who have given their hearts to Him, and they can judge
pretty well of a gospel sermon and of the gospel requirements
him, but the people give their consent, then the Presbytery shall proceed to
Ordination." N. B. — The General Assembly of 1645, in approving of the Westminster
Assembly's " Form of Church Government," left the above extract for further
consideration. * Since writing the above, the Divinity chair in the University of Glasgow
has become vacant by the death of Dr Stevenson M'Gill ; and surely the cause
of Christ, and of the Church, and of the University, requires that the best man
that can be got should be appointed to fill it. Many candidates have been
named, all of them of course respectable men. But has the man been named
that is possessed of the learning, and vigour, and ardent piety, and holy unction,
and unaffected humility, and prudence, and singleness of aim, that should char
acterize the prophet at the head of the school of the sons of the prophets ? May
the Lord himself influence the electors 1

65
in its preacher. The best judges that I have met with were per
sons that were not able to read a word of the Bible, though they
knew its contents better than some of their teachers did. Per
haps I have not often pleased such persons in my own preaching.
It may be so. The fault was mine. I never yet pleased myself
by any sermon that I have preached. I have been frequently
much pleased, and humbled, and edified, and elevated by ser
mons that I have heard some of my honoured fathers and breth
ren preach, I have admired and adored the grace that enabled
them to preach so well.
The men of the north (as they are sometimes termed by way
of approbation, and sometimes by way of reproach), are persons
whom I have in general honoured much, and whom I still hon
our. They are the elders, and catechists, and leaders of the
congregations. Go and ask them why they like one minister's
sermon, and dislike another's ; and you wiU find them able enough
to give an answer to a presbytery. And are there no men in
the south, and in the east, and west, as well as in the north able
to do the same ? Go and ask the only men that should be com
municants, why they object to the settlement of such a minister
among them, and they probably answer to the effect, that it is
because there is a want of spiritual unction, a want of the sim
plicity of the gospel, a want of the breaking of the bread of
life, a want of adaptation to the heart and conscience, a want of
discrimination, a want of individuality, a want of searching, a
want of mile-stones to show what progress has been made, a want
of Christ as the centre, and head, and fountain of all saving life
and light, and influences, characterizing his sermons. Ask them
again, why they do not approve of his conduct, and they will at
once tell you, that he may be a decent gentleman, but that as a
minister, he is too much in the company of the great to the ne
glect of the poor ; too often at public meetings, to the neglect of
his more important and private duties ; too much in love with
himself, and with the praise of men to the neglect of secret com
munion with God, and of the holy and self-denying exercises that
are necessary to qualify him for the services of the sanctuary.
Ask them again, whether they have any other objections ? and
they wUl not hesitate to answer, that they cannot put up with
the minister's reading his sermons; they could read better sermons
at home. They will tell you, that though such a man be very
learned, they cannot think that he understands " the simplicity

66
that is in Christ," and the adaptation of His gospel in language
to the capacities, as well as in subject-matter to the guilt and
misery of the poor and unlearned, of the babe and the suck
ling. They cannot understand him. Ask them further, and
they will perhaps tell you plainly, that such a lad does not seem
to have had his own bones broken, and that he is not fit to be a
journeyman, letting alone his being a master- workman.
And may I not now put the question (as Sir George Clerk
did in his admirable, christian speech in the last General Assem
bly) is there now a presbytery in Scotland (whatever may have
been the case in the hey-days of moderation,) so lost to all chris
tian feeling and decency, as not to consider such objections worthy
of solemn consideration ; and if they be deemed well founded,
sufficient to justify any presbytery in rejecting the presentee on
their own responsibility ? People may blame the law of patron
age as much as they please ; (and no favour have I for it,) but it
was the mal-administration of the law in the days of the moder
ates, that caused the intrusions that have been so hurtful to the
Church of Scotland, for the presbyteries had always the power
of preventing them; and it was the highly proper, but injudiciously
directed desire of the popular party (when they acquired the
ascendancy in 1834,) to popularize the church, that led to the
manifold difficulties, in which many good men among us find them
selves placed ; though (as I mean to show by and by,) these dif
ficulties are more imaginary than real, and require only a little
self-denial on the part of a few individuals to remove them all.
Let presbyteries even still (on their own responsibUity as judges,
both according to holy writ, and to the civil and ecclesiastical
laws of our land,) declare any man unqualified for the parish, to
which he has been presented, and it will be found that there is
no adverse law or decision to interfere with their judgment, not
withstanding the various and confident opinions to the contrary
that have been advanced by men, that profess to be skUled in the
law. But if presbyteries by foUowing the Veto act choose to
throw aside their judicial functions, and to cast the responsibiUty
of judging on others, after having bound themselves hand and foot
so that they cannot even deal or reason with those others about
the matter, however causeless the prejudices may be that operate
to the rejection of the presentee, then assuredly the law of pat
ronage has a clear right to interfere in favour of the patron and
presentee. And supposing the present law of patronage abolish-

67
ed, and the revolution settlement restored, the elected minister
or any one of the electors might interfere legally enough with the
presbytery, should they (the presbytery) reject the minister on
the simple Veto of a majority of the male communicants. For,
the act 1690* provides, " That in case of the vacancy of any
particular church, and for supplying the same with a minister,
the heritors of the parish (being protestants,) and the elders are
to name and propose a person to the whole congregation, to be
either approved or disapproved by them ; and if they disapprove,,
that the disapprovers give in their reasons, to the effect that the
affair may be cognosced upon by the presbytery of the bounds,
at whose judgement, and by whose determination, the caUing and
entry of a particular minister is to be ordered and concluded."
And here be it observed, that the act 1712t restoring patron
age, repeals the act 1690, only "in so far as the same relates
to the presentation of ministers, by heritors and others therein
mentioned," and that it expressly provides " That nothing in
it contained, shall extend or be construed to extend, to repeal
and make void the aforesaid twenty-third act of the second
session of the first parliament, of the late king William and
queen Mary, excepting so far as relates to the caUing and pre
senting of ministers, and to the disposing of vacant stipends in
prejudice of the patrons only." The people are left just where
they were, and so are the presbyteries. Indeed, the constitu
tional maxim of the Church of Scotland relative to this point has
always been, that the people have power to state objections, and
presbyteries power to determine on their validity,
8. It is quite needless to expect perfection in any system we
can adopt for the proper settlement of ministers, though we should
aim at it as a matter of great consequence to the church and
cause of Christ.
The proper way of forming the pastoral relation is an impor
tant point of investigation, and seems one of the most difficult
problems in the science of legislation. Many good and sensible
men, both in and out of the Church of Scotland, have maintained,
that we have come as near it in Scotland in times past, as can
be reasonably expected in the present imperfect state of man ;
and that if the perfection of an ecclesiastical system is to be
measured by the benefits it confers on the people, then the sys-
* See Appendix, No. XV.
f See Appendix, No. XVI.

68
tern of the Church of Scotland is entitled to precedence over every
other, with which we are acquainted. Sir Henry Moncrieff
(whose testimony is valuable on the subject, as that of a staid,
sensible, inteUigent man,) says that, "amid the diversities of
opinion and the division of parties on particular subjects, which
appear in our church, it cannot be denied by those who are com
petent to judge on the subject, that the practical effect of the
Church Establishment in Scotland, on the general information
of the people, on their private morals, and on their religious
character, equals, if it does not surpass, whatever can be imput
ed in the same points to any other church in the world. This
is the most important fact which can be stated ; and in comparison
with this fact, every other feature in the laws or practice of any
ecclesiastical body, is equaUy unimportant and uninteresting."*
No doubt, many of us think, (and I may be one of them,) that
if patronage had not been in the way, much more real good
would have been done, than we have yet seen. It is said, that
if so much good has been done in spite of patronage, how much
more would have been done, had we not been clogged by this
millstone about our necks ? Now, my friends, all this may be
true, but how do we know that it is so ? We have had experience
of a patronage and state church, and of its good and ills. But
we have not had experience of the good and iUs resulting from
the want of patronage and state endowments ; and I am far from
depending on . theories, that have not been proved good by the
test of long continued experience. I know full well that every
change is not an improvement, and anxious as I am for the pu
rity and increased usefulness of our church, I am not wUling to
conceal from myself or others the dangers that threaten our
establishment, in the event of our recklessly and hastUy insisting
on organic changes in the constitution of our church. Patronage
and intrusion I have always considered great evils. But I wish
to beware that in my desire to get rid of them, I do not bring
on greater evUs. If the times were peaceful, and the minds of
men in a fit state for considering aright the various pros and cons
of a great legislative reform, I might pei'haps be among the
foremost in pleading for some of the good measures, that have
been proposed for the popularizing of our church. No man is
• Whoever reads Sir Robert Gordon's History of the Earls of Sutherland,
written upwards of 200 years ago, and compares the Scotland that was with
jlhe Scotland that is, will see this remark fully illustri^ted.

69
less indebted to patronage than I am, though I once got a crown
presentation ; and no man has less reason to fear its total aboli
tion. Could it be aboUshed at once and with safety to the church
as an estabhshment, I would greatly rejoice, and I have the
vanity to think it probable from the favour I have hitherto had
with the people, that my worldly circumstances might be much
ameliorated. But I trust I have a higher aim than personal in
terest or glory. My past life has in some measure warranted
me to say and the people to believe this. And I am not for the
sake of any ephemeral advantage or personal notoriety, to join
hastily in kindling a torch that is to set on fire and to consume
that beautiful temple, that has been reared by the prayers, and
the tears, and the sweat, and the blood of our reformers, and
of our Covenanters, and of our other men of God, in the ages
that are past. No doubt it may be said, that our good men of
old were hostile to patronage, and that the erection of this court
of the Gentiles in connexion with our temple, was not their do
ing ; and that the buUding would have been more beautiful and
holy without it. True ; but the court of the GentUes may have
added to the stabUity of the temple ; and it cannot be denied by
any one acquainted with the history of the different sieges and
sackings of Jerusalem, recorded by Josephus and other historians,
that the fall of the literal sanctuaries took place almost simul
taneously with that of the outer courts.
While we should endeavour by all means to have the frame
work of our church as perfect as possible, we should bear in
mind, that in making a new law, which expediency may seem to
require, and the laws we have may seem to authorize, we are not
precisely in the same situation and circumstances with Moses,
and Bezaleel, and Aholiab, in framing the tabernacle of the con
gregation of old. They had a " pattern shown on the mount" to
guide them in every iota of their work, and in every step of their
progress. We on the other hand, though having a more perfect
revelation than they had of the anti-type of the tabernacle, have
no precise or definite rules of divine authority, to guide us in
providing the convenient but non-essential furnishings of our
house. The general principles of our constitution and govern
ment are revealed. Their particular application to particular
circumstances is left to the mysterious agency of the Spirit of
Truth, influencing the minds and hearts of the Lord's servants
and people in all ages, even unto the end of the world.

70
It is remarkable, and worthy of peculiar attention, that the
Westminster assembly of divines have not, in " the Directory
for the Ordination of Ministers,"* (which they have given us,
and which is appended to the Confession of Faith,) even in one
instance referred to scripture as their authority. They were
not unwilling to do so, but they were unable. Their willingness
and abUity in other cases, were apparent enough. In what they
say, " touching the doctrine of ordination," and " touching the
power of ordination," and "concerning the doctrinal part of
ordination of ministers," they were at no loss for Bible authority.
But when they came to the application of their general principles
to particular cases, they found themselves without a written rule
to guide them. And it is worthy of special attention too, that
the "act of the General Assembly of the kirk of Scotland, (dated
February 10th 1645), approving the propositions concerning
kirk government and ordination of ministers," advanced by the
Westminster assembly, expressly provides in its conclusion,
" That this act be no ways prejudicial to the further discussion
and examination of the article, regarding the distinct rights and
interests of presbyteries and people, in the caUing of ministers ;
but that it shall be free to debate and discuss that point, as
God shall be pleased to give further light."
I may here add, before leaving this point, that the first
direction given in " the directory for the ordination of ministers,"
begins as follows, viz. : " He that is to be ordained, being either
nominated by the people, or otherivise commended to the pres
bytery for any place, must address himself to the presbytery."
Now, from the terms of this direction, as well as from the subse
quent rules, I would infer that the two assembUes, (Westminster
and Church of Scotland,) one in framing, and the other in
approving, contemplated patronage, as a likely ingredient in the
constitution of a church. At any rate, there is no recognition
of a divine right of the people to elect, nor any reprobation of
any particular mode of appointment, whether by patronage or
otherwise. It was reserved for the General Assembly of the
Church of Scotland in 1834, to recognise patronage in the
church, and at the same time, to put it into the power of a few
individuals in a parish, to render a presentation null and void,
however excellent the presentee might be.
The second direction is in these words, viz., "Which being
* See this Directory at full length in Appendix, No. XVII,

71
considered by the presbytery, they are to proceed to inquire
touching the grace of God in him, and whether he be of such
holiness of life as is required in a minister of the gospel; and to
examine him touching his learning and sufficiency, and touching
the evidences of his calling to the holy ministry, and in particu
lar his fair and direct caUing to that place," The General
Assembly should have adverted to this wise regulation of their
oivn, before they passed the Veto act. It is not enough to say,
that the veto of a few individuals in a parish, after having heard
a presentee preach once or twice, is a sufficient proof that he
has not a fair and direct calling to that place ; any more than
the quiet indifference of the people, is a proof that he has. What
it is that constitutes "a fair and direct calling" in the providence
of God, is a question extremely difficult of solution in many
instances ; and to lay down any one specific rule, by which the
question may be solved, is absurd. The great Thomas Boston,
whUe minister of Etterick, had apparently, as " fair and direct a
calling" to become minister of Closeburn, as ever a minister had,
and yet the good and holy man believed, that he had no call
from God to leave Etterick ; he therefore remained. Few of
our vetoists, and still fewer perhaps of our moderates, have had
such fair and direct callings as Thomas Boston had, and yet
they accepted. Indeed, most ministers in our country seem to
think a presentation from a patron " a fair and direct calling,"
when the matter comes home to themselves, though of course
they believe that something more is desirable for themselves, and
absolutely necessary for others, unless these others be special
favourites ; and if they be so, perhaps the most unfair and in
direct caUing may suffice. But ah! my friends ! the sooner this
evil is remedied the better. And the best way ye can take to
remedy it, is to treat properly those ministers that went to you,
without " a fair and direct calling," and yet are now, preaching
doctrines, which they never practised. Look around you I (
I have always considered a positive call, by at least a respect
able representation of the moral and spiritual interests of a
parish, a necessary element in thc^jresbyterial consideration of
the fitness of the presentee for the parish. iSut it is only one
of the many elements that should be taken into account. In
like manner, I would consider the positive dissent of even a. few
of the godly people, a strong objection to the presentee. But it
is not the only circumstance, that I would consider in the case.

72
There may be a variety of strong objections to him, who has the
positive call of the people; and there may be, on the other hand,
a great many circumstances in favour of him that is dissented
against. Let the presbytery then judge in all cases, as men
that must give an account, not merely to men, but unto God.
But be the system what it may ; be it as perfect as can be
expected in any case on earth, its working depends on sinful,
selfish, ignorant men — men of Uke passions with others. And
therefore it is vain to expect perfection of operation from it. The
days of the apostles, and of the two or three succeeding genera
tions, are commonly, (though very erroneously,) supposed and
even believed, to have been the most perfect period of the church
of Christ in the ages that are past. Yet how many errors, and
heresies, and divisions were there then ? The Puseyites and the
Papists may defer as much to the christian fathers as they please.
I am far from despising these fathers ; but I am not ignorant
altogether of the corruptions in doctrine and conduct that pre
vailed among them. And I have read the New Testament with
very Uttle care indeed, if I have not learned from it, how apt
men are to go wrong, even in the most favourable circumstances.
Besides, no system within the reach of human wisdom and
power can raise up such ministers as we would like to see. It
is our business and duty to make our system as perfect as possi
ble. But we must confess that, Uke Adam, when formed a
perfect model of human symmetry, it must continue lifeless and
useless, till the Lord the Creator be pleased to breathe into it
the breath of life. It is only then, that it can become a Uving
soul. And alas ! even then, like Adam, it becomes dead again,
and requires the constant breathing of the Spirit of the Lord to
keep it alive, and invigorate it for the service of its God.
It appears to me, (though I pay much deference to the great,
and learned, and good men, who are of a different opinion,) that
the Holy Ghost has not been pleased to give us a definite rule
to guide us in the matter of induction, or the formation of the
pastoral relation ; and surely, when we cannot find a " Thus
saith the Lord," we should be very careful as to what opinions
we form, and after we have formed opinions, we should be very ,
tender in maintaining them. There is a may be that we are
wrong. At any rate, differences in matters of mere human
opinion, should not separate brethren ; far less should they lead us
to persecute and anathematize our brethren. We see but in part iu

73
our present imperfect state. How unbecoming then is it, that
we should fight like enemies, and dishonour the name which we
have the honour to bear, and thus risk the stabUity and per
petuity of our establishment, the most perfect framework of a
church, that has ever been seen on earth I Let me tell my
honoured brethren, that trifling is the hand that may set a town
or forest on fire, but that it is no easy matter to extinguish the
conflagration. Trifling is the instrument, and vUe the passion,
that may endanger our establishment, but awful is the guUt of
the man that tries to overthrow it. Let none then be like
the incendiary of the Alexandrian library, or of the Ephesian
temple, or of the York minster, courting immortal renown in the
world, at too great an expense. Let none be like the silly boy
Edward Oxford, seeking notoriety. / derive no benefit from
the estabhshment ; I have no endowment. The leaders of the
non-intrusion agitation have the happiness and honour of having
kept that from me. I am but the minister of a poor Gaelic con
gregation. But in the name of my Lord and Master, and of
my country and posterity, I say, oh! people of Scotland, do not
throw away your privUeges; be not seeking some ideal un
attainable good ; improve the good ye have ; rally round your
Zion ; throw away all the dross, but do not throw away the gold
with it. If patronage be bad, get rid of it as soon as ye can,
but beware that ye do not throw away something else, which
some of our non-intrusionists could not well afford to want, as
many of their half empty churches testify. Remember that
christians are not to be manufactured by systems, as so many
webs of cotton cloth.
9. Let me here state to you some curious facts in the history
of our church, as illustrative of the operations of different systems
of ministerial appointments.
First. — At the time of the revolution (1688,) there were only
about sixty alive of the presbyterian ministers, that had been
ousted in 1661, soon after the restoration of Charles the Second,
in 1660. There were many ministers in Scotland then, but they
were episcopals. In 1695, there was an act of parliament passed,
putting it into the power of these episcopal ministers, to retain
their pastoral charge within their respective parishes, on the
condition of their taking the oath of allegiance, and the assurance
prescribed by the act of parliament 1693. Soon after, there
was an act of the General Assembly passed, admitting into the

74
presbyterian church courts, such episcopal ministers as were
wiUing to come, after having taken these oaths. Now, who of
us could suppose, (without having the historical fact clearly
made known to us,) that the good presbyterian ministers of the
time of the revolution, would have done such a thing ? But they
just conformed to circumstances. I am sure that they did not
think that they were sacrificing any scriptural principle.
Secondly. — Patronage was abolished in 1690, and the nomina
tion of ministers was vested in the heritors (being protestants,)
and elders, on the condition, that the heritors and life-renters
should pay to the former patrons 600 merks Scots, about £35
sterling. Now there were only three or four parishes in Scotland
that paid the money, small as it was. No doubt, this apparent
indifference may be well accounted for in many cases. But how
to account for the almost universal indifference may be more
difficult. Thirdly. — Though all the elections of ministers after 1690, were
by the heritors and elders, or by the presbyteries after the
heritors and elders had neglected to elect, there was an act of
parliament passed in 1698, "for preventing of disorders in the
supplying and planting of vacant churches,"* Now, what could
have caused parliament to pass this act, but the necessity there
was for it?
Fourthly, — Though notwithstanding the act 1712, all the
ministers (with very few exceptions,) that were appointed betwixt
1690 and 1725, were appointed by the heritors and elders, or
by the presbyteries, and sometimes by the people at large, yet
these ministers in 1732, commenced the ecclesiastical tyranny
that sealed the secession in 1740, Thus ye may see that it. was
not patronage that raised up the ministers, who commenced the
evUs of intrusion in Scotland.
Fifthly. — Almost all the ministers that were in the Assembly
1834, were put into their parishes by patronage, and yet they
passed the Veto act, muzzling patronage as they thought ; and
now many of the ministers that got their livings by patronage,
are bent on abolishing it altogether, and I think they are right.
Some of those that spoke eloquently and fervently in favour of
patronage in 1833 and 1834, and as eloquently and fervently
against popular election, are now engaged heart and hand against
the former, and in favour of the latter.
» See Appendix, No. XVIII,

75
All these are remarkable circumstances, calculated to teach
us important lessons. But alas ! we are bad scholars and slow
to learn. After a thousand disappointments we follow the ignis
fatuus that we cannot catch,
10, In the fervour of our zeal to root out the moderate party,
we should take care that we do not raise up another party, that
may become equally dangerous.
No one can justly accuse me of being a moderate, be the party
good or bad. Many a mUe have I travelled, and many a pound
have I spent to oppose them ; and sure I am, that they would
not be in the least vain of numbering me among them. I respect
them generally, as kind, sensible and gentlemanly men; and some
of those I am well acquainted with, as faithful and useful minis
ters of the gospel. On the other hand, I respect very much many
of the vetoists, as men full of zeal and fervour for the interests
of the people, and as men of a devotional spirit. There are
good and bad men on both sides, and it does not become a sinful
man like me, to judge any individual, or body of individuals. Our
master the Lord Jesus Christ, whUe on earth, was despised and
hated by the Pharisees, because he was the friend of publicans
and sinners. But did this make him a bad man ? " Stand by
thyself, I am holier than thou," is the language of the heart and
conduct of many now. There can be no such sentiment or feel
ing in heaven. The language there is more Ukely to be " Stand
by thyself, I have been a greater sinner than thou."* The
* It would be unfair and unchristian to charge all the vetoists with enter
taining such sentiments, as are contained in the following precious extract from
an editorial article in the Witness newspaper of the 13th of August last. But
some of the more namely leaders of the veto party, are proprietors of that
paper, and therefore cannot be considered guiltless. I give it merely as a
specimen of the extreme length, to which even good men may be led, when
they are not under the direct influence of the Spirit of Christ.
" The earl of Aberdeen had withdrawn his measure, sorely baffled and
chagrined, — his very character recognised as a part of his diplomacy, — and hy
much a smaller and a meaner man in the estimate of his countrymen, than any
other statesman of the day. The declaration of Dr Muir had shown but the
weakness of the party — its weakness numerically even, — and much more
emphatically its weakness in a moral point of view. The document was wide
ly spread, nor could the bitterest enemy of the party have injured them more.
Every district of Scotland recognised in it, its worst ministers, the rubbish, the
dust, the chaff, the husks of the church ; all within her that was utterly effete
and useless, — nay more, her plague spots and running sores, — all that was
utterly mean and disreputable, — her men put into the priest's office to eat a bit
of bread, — her 'heads that cannot teach and will not learn,' — her pastors
forced on reclaiming parishes by the military, — her preachers to bare walls and
empty benches ; — all that constituted at once her weakness and her shame.

76
moderates have been compared to the tares, (a very suitable
comparison no doubt,) and as such, should be rooted out. Mat.
xin. 24 — 30. " Another parable put he forth unto them, saying.
The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man, which sowed
good seed in his field; but while men slept, his enemies came and
sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way. But when
the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared
the tares also. So the servants of the householder came and
said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field ?
From whence then hath it tares ? He said unto them. An enemy
hath done this. The servants said unto him, WUt thou then
that we go and gather them up ? But he said, nay; lest whUe ye
gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. Let
both grow together until the harvest ; and in the time of harvest,
I wUl say to the reapers. Gather ye together first the tares, and
bind them in bundles to burn ; but gather the wheat into my
barn." Does not this parable teach us, that in our anxiety to root
out the tares, we should beware that we do not root out likewise
the precious wheat ?
In the course of a few years, the moderates vvill be almost
unknown in the country, excepting in recoUection. One of
them will be indeed a rara avis in terris. And this dwindling
away of the party is likely enough to happen without any violence.
The tide is completely turned against them. Whatever be the
private sentiments of individuals, few can be found possessed of
sufficient moral courage to try to stem it. Popularity, popularity,
is to be the order of the day ! Vox populi is to be vox Dei with
many ; and to what extremes this desire of popularity may be
carried, it is not pleasant to contemplate. Dr Chalmers thinks
differently, and maintains, that the clergy are to be the break
waters to resist the tumults of the people. But the worthy man
is reckoning without his host. If all clergymen were as honest
and single-hearted as himself, he would be right in his opinion.
gathered by the first breath of persecution into one miserable heap." Now all
this is very plain and easily understood, and I have no doubt, has been believed
by many, because they saw it in the Witness. Dr Muir's declaration was
subscribed by 260 ministers and about 800 elders. There are ministers whom
I know to be favourable to it, but that did not subscribe it. Now there is a
certain town in Scotland, in which there are four ministers that are favourable
to lord Aberdeen's bill in present circumstances, and that have been cliosen by
their congregations. Their congregations united, are equal to at least 12 other
congregations around them. Is there any more information wanted on this
point ?

77
I have such an affectionate admiration of him, and so much con
fidence in his integrity, that I have no doubt, he would be as
ready to withstand the frowns of a mob, as to set at defiance
either the blandishments or scowls of a court. But all ministers
are not Uke Dr Chalmers, either in single-heartedness or in
talent and prodigiousness of imagination ; and he should beware
that he do not unconsciously foster under his warm and expanded
wings, a brood that may even in his own day give evidence that
they are not of the Chalmerian species. He has already some
proof that all his foster-children have not realized the expecta
tions, which he entertained concerning them, and which he
encouraged others to entertain. Have not some, even according
to his own account, sunk into the grossness of the temporalities?
The men that are just now contending for the spiritual inde
pendence of the church, and for the rights of the Christian
people, may be all good men : I am far from even insinuating
that they are not, for I have the charity that thinketh no evil,
and that rejoiceth not in iniquity. But I have likewise the
charity that rejoiceth in the truth, and 1 have the candour and
courage to proclaim that I fear the lengths to which the ardour
and zeal of your good men may lead them. Orthodoxy may
run wUd. I recollect well, that during the discussion of the
Row heresy in the General Assembly, a few years ago, it was
stated by the advocates of the heresy, and not denied by any
one, that they were the best, and most amiable, and religi
ous persons that embraced it. But what was the answer given
to this argument by the good men who opposed the heresy, and
are now zealous in promoting the objects of the church ? It was,
that the better the people who were misled by the heresy, and
engaged in propagating it, the greater the danger to be appre
hended. The answer was sufficient. Does it suit the present
purpose ?
The present Puseyites of the Church of England, who are
turning very numerous and influential, much more so than is
generally supposed in this country, were considered a few years
ago, the most pious, and devoted, and orthodox ministers to be
found in their church, and there was great rejoicing among the good
men of Scotland that such men were raised by God in the sister
establishment. Perhaps none rejoiced more than /did; for I
like to see the appearance of spiritual life, and cannot put up
with coldness or deadness about the things that are of eternal

78
importance, as the things of the gospel of the grace of God are.
But mark the disappointment we have met with in the case of
the Puseyites. The sacraments seem now to be of more impor
tance in their estimation than is Christ Jesus, the only Lord and
Saviour; the apostolical succession of their bishops, and ordination,
is valued more highly than is the preaching of the truth as it is in
Jesus ; the popish apostacy is their sister Samaria ; the clergy of
Scotland have no apostolical succession, (according to their ac
count,) and therefore are not clergy at all. The people of Scotland
are left to the uncovenanted mercies of God. We are no church at
all ; and yet the British Critic, (Magazine,) which is the official
organ of the Puseyites, is zealous and powerful in urging on the
Church of Scotland in her present career. Timeo Danaos.
Why are they doing so ? Is it because the Puseyites love and
admire the Church of Scotland ? No ! but because they see a
good deal of propinquity between their own objects and the sen
timents that are advanced by the spiritual independents.
Some of the more talented dissenting newspapers in England
(the Morning Advertiser in particular,) are loud in their praises
of the noble heroes and martvrs of our church, and most elevat-
ing are their predictions concerning their steadfastness and per
severance, and readiness to go to the stake or scaffold in support
of their principles. Now, I can easUy understand how there may
be a mutual sympathy among good men on some important
points, though they may be of different parties, and have different
objects in view. But while I give full credit to the writers of
the Morning Advertiser for talent and piety, I cannot conceal
that it is very much because they see the downfal of our estab
lishment as a consequence likely to result from our present pro
ceedings, that they trumpet us on in our headlong career.
Even the popish priests, who cannot be supposed to enjoy, or
even to desire spiritual independence, and who have never in
general shown much regard to the rights of the people, are now
prosecuting their own objects on the same ground with ours. Who
more ardent than they now for the rights of the people ? They
know full well that they can tyrannize over nations through the
people as well as through princes. No doubt, our spiritual in-.
dependents have no desire to tyrannize over the people, I acquit
them most fully of any such feeling ; but the desire of power is
a very deceitful principle. " What, is thy servant a dog that he
should do this ?" said Hazael to the prophet. He had not the

79
least idea that he would oppress Israel, and yet he did it. Little
thought had Oliver CromweU, when he first took up arms in
defence of the people's rights, that he should become the sove
reign lord protector of the commonwealth. I would not on any
account refer to the-French Revolution; all I mean to maintain
is, that the clergy of Scotland are just like other men ; and that by
and bye their praiseworthy exertions may be rewarded, by our
seeing a coterie of them in Edinburgh exercise all the power of
archbishops and patrons united.
11. What our vetoists want is a new law. They passed the
Veto act, believing it to have been in their power to do so. At
the same time, they gave sufficient evidence that they considered
it a new laiv, though some of them may have believed that it was
merely giving a practical form and substance to the spirit of the
former laws or declaration against intrusion. There is a de
claration appended to the Veto act and regulations by the Gene
ral Assembly, 1834, sufficiently indicative of the opinion enter
tained  " The General Assembly further declare, that cases in
which the vacancies have taken place before the rising of the
present Assembly, shall not fall under the operation of the regu
lations in this and the relative acts of Assembly, but shall be
proceeded in according to the general laws of the church." And
the actings of the leading Veto men in Assembly, 1835, in the
case of Dreghorn, prove what meaning they attached to their own
declaration. The principal argument used by them in favour of
the presentee to that parish was, that it would be unfair and
unjust to apply to him the new law that had been enacted, and
that his case must be decided according to the old and general
laws of the church; thus plainly and practically teUing us, that
while by the former general laws and practice of the church, the
ecclesiastical courts were (by the civil, and ecclesiastical laws of
the land) the proper and recognised judges of the qualification
and fitness of a man for any particular charge, the Veto act was
an innovation to all intents and purposes.
Now, this innovation might have done very well had it been
left unchallenged, and had not the progress of its operation been
interrupted by a decision of the House of Peers, given on an
appeal case carried on under the sanction and by the direct au
thority of the General Assembly, But to insist on maintaining
this specific law after such a decision, and to require from par-

80
liament a ratification of it, or some new law tantamount to it,
before we have placed ourselves in the proper position for a re
spectful application to the legislature, appears to me at least
very inexpedient. To a new law, or some improvement of the
old law, if it be necessary, no wise man can object; for, notwith
standing our respect for the old constitution of the Church of
Scotland, it would be absurd to say, that (as it is a matter of
merely human device) it is not susceptible of improvement. Let
it be by all means improved to the highest possible pitch of per
fection, and let it be as much as possible accommodated to the
reasonable and Christian wishes of the people, for whose benefit
the Lord Jesus Christ has instituted a church on earth ; but let
everything be done decently and in order. We have already
seen that the Veto act has been found (whether justly or not is
not the question,) ultra vires of the church as an established church
under the laws of patronage. We have seen, Ukewise, that our
legislators in parliament cannot see with the eyes of Veto men,
and are unable to comprehend how we can be so much under the
influence of delusion as to suppose that we can extort from them
their legislative sanction to our views and purposes. They are
perfectly ready to listen to our petitions, and to attend to our
prayers for a civil sanction to any improvement of our constitu
tion about which we ourselves may agree, and that shall not be
at variance with the rights of other parties in the state ; but as
wise men, invested with the guardianship of all the interests of
the state, they must be convinced that we have made a good use
of the laws we have, and obeyed them aright, and found them
inefficient for our great purposes, before they can be supposed
capable of agreeing to any innovation on our civil or ecclesiasti
cal constitution. And the language of ridicule or contempt is
not the language that is most likely to win the favour or reason of
high and noble minds. Contemptuous comparisons (such as that
of the cockney lady who inquired, which of the cows gave the nice
butter-piUk?) must be avoided. Nothing can be gained, much may
be lost by them. Such is the moral depravity of our nature, that
we would prefer being considered rogues rather than fools ; but
there is nothing dignified or wise in considering all our legislators as
either rogues or fools. They have as fine inteUects and as high
notions of rectitude as we have, and the freedom of the most of
them from aU personal interest or feeUng in the matters that have

, 81
of late agitated our country so much, gives to their opinions and
judgment a weight and a dignity that should have some effect in
the way of calming the perturbations of our partial spirits.
No doubt, some members of the legislature, who may feel a
greater interest in our Scottish church than others do, and who
may have personal or political objects in view, may espouse the
cause of the Veto men, just as others may have espoused that of
the moderates. But what have we to do with their motives or
purposes ? What we want is a sound, cool. Christian, practical
consideration of our state as an established church of Christ in the
land, and if we shall get that, their answer must assuredly be,
" Submit to the decision to which you yourselves have appealed ;
agree among yourselves as to what measures ye may think neces
sary for preventing intrusion; then come to us with that measure,
and as we are bound, and have every desire to promote the wel
fare of the Church of Scotland, (which is established by law,
and forms part of the constitution of Great Britain, as well as
does the House of Commons or House of Lords,) we will do what
we can to meet your wishes ; but do not apply to us for a law to
please a party, neither expect from us any countenance to violent
measures, that the highest law authorities of the land have pro
nounced iUegal."
If men of understanding were left to act on the dictates of
reason, uninfluenced by any pressure from without, such would
be the answer which our Veto men would get. But our Veto
men are very active and zealous, and believing their cause to be
a high and holy one, they are not at all indifferent about its suc
cess. Neither are all of them anxious for that state of collapse,
into which men are apt to fall after a long continued excitement.
Besides, many minds have a positive pleasure in maintaining the
agitation, that would be a burden and pain to other minds. They
therefore, mean to try a hand at politics, and it is likely enough,
that candidates, at the approaching elections for counties and
burghs, may throw themselves on their favour. On such
occasions, experience has proved, that men are not remarkably
fastidious as to the pledges they give, or the means they employ
to carry an election ; and the Veto men may have to boast of
a political triumph in some instances, and to lament a faUure in
others. It is even possible, and not improbable that a zealous
and arduous perseverance in the struggle may have the effect
of inducing parliament (the most of whose members care not a

82
straw about the matter,) to grant whatever the Veto men may
propose. Two or three zealous advocates may do the business.
For the real friends of the Church of Scotland,in parliament, are
men of too much wisdom and good feeling, to use their influence
in opposing zealously any measure, that would be likely to re
store peace and harmony. And besides, they would prefer
sacrificing their own views of expediency, to the maintenance of
a system of agitation, that, if long protracted, must endanger the
stability of the church, and perhaps of the other great institu
tions of the country.
Now before I leave this point, let me warn such as may be
pleased to read my observations, that a civil sanction to the Veto
act would not give long continued peace or satisfaction ; that a
civU sanction to the necessity of a positive call would equally faU
of its object ; that the liberum arbitrium of the presbytery would
not succeed; that the simple repeal of the 10th of queen Anne
would be insufficient; and that the most likely measure for securing
permanent peace to the church, and gathering in many worthy
persons, who are now estranged from her, must recognise the
communicants as electors. How far parliament may magnani
mously overlook the crooked ways, that have been taken by some
to effect their objects, I cannot tell. But I am sure, that it
would be a wise and a noble piece of policy to throw contempt on
the puny efforts, that some Veto men are making to cause a stir
in the world ; and by one sweeping act of reform to deprive them
of the power of procuring any notoriety for themselves, unless
they do it by their total devotedness to the spiritual instruction,
guidance and comfort of their parishes. It would even be good
worldly policy in parliament to do what I thus suggest. For,
if politicians wish to be free of the influence of churchmen, the
surest way of effecting the object, is to deprive them of every
show of reason for declaiming about oppression, and tyranny, and
the rights of the christian people. While there remains any show
of reason for complaint, declaimers will not be wanting ; and as
priestly power is sometimes considerable, and not easily borne,
it would be wise to prevent its illegitimate exercise. Ministers
of the gospel must always possess much power for good or evil.
They cannot fail to exercise that power, if they meddle with poli
tics. Let parhament, then, settle the church affairs for the
benefit of the people, and the troublesome intermeddUng of the
clergy must cease.

83
12. Whatever mode of settling the present disputes may be
adopted, it is the bounden duty of the church courts to retain
.and exercise their scriptural office of judging of the fitness of an
individual (by whomsoever named), for any spiritual charge.
By the Veto act, the church courts have so far denuded them
selves of this prerogative, that however high may be their opin
ion of the fitness of a presentee, they cannot in the least degree
exercise their office of judging. According to lord Aberdeen's
biU, their spiritual and scriptural prerogative would have been
secured to them by civil enactment, without any danger what
ever of the least interference by the civU courts as to the mode
of exercising it; and a calm, dispassionate perusal of it, will
convince any one that is open to conviction, and has sufficient
understanding for such matters, that in so far as the power of the
church courts and of the people is concerned, it gives a very cor
rect view of what previously to 1834, was always understood to
be the constitution of the Church of Scotland.
But for proof of my proposition, that it is the prerogative and
duty of the presbytery, to judge of the fitness of an individual
for any particular charge, I must go to scripture itself, as the
infallible guide,
1 Tim, iii, 2, " A bishop must be — apt to teach." 1 Tim,
V. 22, " Lay hands suddenly on no man," 2 Tim, ii. 2. " And
the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the
same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach
others also."
These three quotations prove clearly (in my opinion), that to
the presbytery it belongs to try and judge the qualifications of
any candidate for a spiritual charge, involving the cure of souls,
by whomsoever he may have been named. Let him have been
named by patron or people, still it rests with the presbytery to
try and ascertain his aptness to teach, his ability for doing it ;
his faithfulness, and in short his suitableness for the charge in
view. Supposing him to have been elected by the people after
they had heard him many times, stUl he must come to the pres
bytery to be tried, and unless they declare him qualified on their
own responsibUity, he cannot be inducted. Now what wisdom
would there be in applying the Veto act, or as it is called,
" the law anent calls," in a case of popular election ? But aUow-
ing that there is a popular election, and that there is a call
moderated in favour of the person elected, and that there is no

84
dissent by any individual, the presbytery may stUl find him dis
qualified on various accounts. Here then is a thwarting of the
people's wishes. And are they well pleased ? No ! they ap
peal to the superior courts and there are defeated. But they go
to the civil court (just as a patron does,) and seek redress. And
what answer do the presbytery give ? They at once say, that
they are the proper judges of the qualifications of a minister, and
that as a court of the church of Christ, they cannot part with
their divine prerogative of judging in cases of ordination or col
lation. Now may not people learn how circumstances affect men's
minds and views, and how certain it is, that were the people of
a parish to attempt to coerce a presbytery into their plans, as
patrons and presentees have lately done, every independent and
conscientious member of presbytery would at once see the neces
sity of keeping aU parties in their own proper places ? For my
own part, there is nothing more remote from my heart or feel
ings, than a desire to lord over God's heritage. There is noth
ing lawful so low, that I would not stoop to it, in order to pro
mote the good of saints and sinners. I have no higher ambition
than to be serviceable in preaching the gospel to the poor. With
the poor and the friends of the poor I wish to live and die. But
while I honour them as the chosen of God and the redeemed of
my Lord, I must magnify mine office, and beware that I do not
by any inconsiderate effort to obtain popularity, or to avoid giv
ing oflFence, give up that high and holy office with which I am
invested, and for the proper discharge of the duties of which, I
am accountable not to man, but to that Lord and Master, whose
I am, and whom it is my honour to serve in the gospel of His
grace. May I be found faithful to Him and His cause, what
ever odium or misrepresentation I may suffer in a present evU
world ! The servant is not to expect better treatment than his
Lord,* and I think (if my heart deceive me not), that / would
count it an honour to suffer for His sake. The duty of examin
ing and judging in each case, that comes before me, I cannot
properly devolve on others. My prerogative in this respect
is a talent committed to me by Heaven's great Lord, and for
the use or abuse, the exercise or neglect of that talent I must
render an account,
IV, I come now to the main point, viz., to state what I think
ought to be done, in order that we may be extricated from our

85
difficulties. And in doing so, let me premise again, as I have
formerly done, that I have but one object in view, and that no
thing can be more remote from my intention than to disparage
the exceUence and worth of any one of the parties, of whose
doings in the present matter I may disapprove.
1 . Let steps be taken for constitutionally repealing the Veto
act. Its operation in so far as the rejection of a presentee by
a presbytery is concerned, has been virtuaUy suspended already
by the General Assembly, and why should this act be retained on
our statute book, while we know that in many instances it does
not answer the purpose intended, and while we know further,
that its continuance is a great bar to an amicable settlement of
our difficulties ? Dr Chalmers long ago acknowledged, that the
passing of this act was a blunder, inasmuch as we should first
have gone to parliament for a civil sanction to it, considering the
positive opinion advanced by some, and the doubts entertained
by others, that we had not constitutional power to enact it.
How much greater is the blunder then to retain it, after our want
of constitutional power to enact it, has been declared by the
highest judicial authority in the land ? This last blunder is much
more inexcusable than the first. Its promoters at first believed
that they had the power to pass it, otherwise they would not
have passed it at all. They now know with the greatest possible
certainty, that whether they had the power or not, according to a
fair construction of the laws and practice relative to patronage,
the House of Lords has judicially declared that they had it not.
But say some, don't give up the Veto law tUl you get a better ;
keep what you have, and get as much more as you can. Now
this is an advice that I cannot approve of. I would alter the
advice to this effect, viz., give up the Veto act, that you may
get a better ; give up what you had no right to take, and get
honestly what you have a right to have, and what you cannot
fail to get for the benefit of the church of Christ, if you go to
work with one half the zeal, and ardour, and trouble, that re
taining the worthless Veto act has cost you.
Again, it is said. What ! would you settle Mr Young in Auch
terarder and Mr Edwards in Marnoch, against the will of all the
christian people of these parishes ? Now my answer to this tri
umphant question is this, I would take them on trial, and if I
found that their settlement would not be likely to pr'omote the
spiritual edification of the people, no power on earth could in-

\

86
duce me to agree to it, I believe I may say with humility and de
ference, that that minister cannot be found in the Church of Scot
land, that has been so determined, and consistent, and out-and-
out a non-intrusionistj as I have been during twenty-two years;
and that if verbal and noisy professions of a regard to the rights
of the christian people, made by many non-intrusionists of the
present day, were contrasted with my actual conduct as a real
non-intrusionist, / would get a good share of the credit, which
they get; and perhaps impartial judges would be apt to say, that
I have a right to it, whatever be the case with some others.
But it is said, if you try the presentees, you must induct them.
Now this is a very gratuitous assertion, I am sure, that there
is no statute, no decision to this effect. What is the use or
meaning of a trial, if it be a matter of course, that every presentee
whom we try is to be settled? The civU courts have not presumed
to dictate to us what standard of qualification or fitness we are to
be guided by. They have merely declared it to be illegal in us to
refuse to take a presentee on trial. But say some, the speeches
of the judges tell you so and so. And what of that ? . I have
nothing to do with their speeches. What I have to do with is
their sentence or decision ; and judging by it, I consider myself
bound to take a presentee on trial. But any interference beyond
this, by the civil courts, appears to me altogether preposterous
and unwarrantable ; and much attached as I am to the Church
of Scotland, I would rather leave her, than be under a civU
direction in a matter that exclusively and scripturally belongs to
the office-bearers of the church in their collective and judicial
capacity. Besides, I have seldom met in private with any minis
ters, that expressed themselves satisfied with the Veto act. It
is so defective and imperfect, so unworthy in every way, that it
gives satisfaction to few. Why then retain it to the injury of
the church, and to the danger of her stabUity ? Why insist on
maintaining it at all hazards? Would repeaUng it infer any
dereliction of principle ? No ! For it is perfectly easy for us,
without it or any other new law, to prevent intrusion more
effectually by the powers which we have all along unquestioTi-
ably possessed, than by the Veto act. Would the repeal of it
infer disgrace ? Far from it. We are not papists. We do not
profess infallibility. We incur more disgrace in the sight of
God and men, by maintaining what we cannot declare to be
altogether right, than we should incur by repenting and doing

87
our first works, I am ashamed of having done what is wrong.
But I am not ashamed of acknowledging my error. Humanum
est errare. But it is the part of a Uttle mind to maintain the error,
and to refuse to repair it. And the law or principle that applies
to the individual, applies equaUy to the society or corporate
body. If there were not within our reach a more effectual and scrip
tural and constitutional mode of preventing intrusion than the
Veto act, I would not thus write, I am such a determined and
consistent enemy to intrusion, that no consideration could induce
me to sanction it. But it is partly because I know, that the
Veto act does not prevent intrusion, and that during its opera
tion many ministers have been inducted, who would not have
been inducted, had not the Veto law been passed, that I am so
zealous for its repeal, I have been numbered among the intru-
sionists (as they are called very erroneously,) because I have been
opposed to the Veto act, and have subscribed the declaration in
favour of lord Aberdeen's bill. But those who thus characterize
me, know that what they say is untrue, and that it is a matter of
newspaper notoriety, that I have been strenuous for many years
in favour of the positive call, and in favour of the total abolition
of patronage, whUe I have been advocating the repeal of the
paltry, inefficient, and unsatisfactory Veto aCt,
2, Deal wisely and gently with the Strathbogie ministers,
I have already stated my opinion of the unbrotherly and un
dutiful conduct of these gentlemen, I cannot sympathize with
them in their long-continued and contumacious course of insub
ordination. But all the circumstances of their case must be con
sidered, and weighed gravely and in a christian spirit, before we
proceed to pass a judicial sentence of condemnation against them.
They have been brought up in the very lap of moderation ; they
have been placed in a novel position; they have been encouraged
in their conduct by the patronage and caresses of influential men;
their education and other circumstances may have swayed their
minds so far, as to have made them believe, that they have been
doing God service by their disobedience. The spirit of popu
larity may not have reached them. The Veto act they may have
considered as not merely an infringement on the rights of patrons,
but as a violation of the good old constitutional laws of the
church. They may have conscientiously mistaken the path of
duty. Indeed a great variety of extenuating considerations

88
might be named, calculated to make wise men pause before pro
ceeding to extremities against the suspended brethren.
But I would especially request attention to the following con
siderations : —
First, — The law, for the violation of which they have been
libelled, was declared Ulegal by the highest civil tribunal on an
appeal by the church, before they gave the least indication of
unwillingness to abide by its requirements.
Secondly  The Court of Session, in carrying out the principle
of the decision in the Auchterarder case, has countenanced them
in every part of their conduct. And though this be no proof
that they are morally or spirituaUy right, it is a presumption,
that they are not legally wrong.
Thirdly, — The very men that are most zealous against the
Strathbogie brethren, are the loudest in their condemnation of
the General Assemblies 1732 and 1740, that deposed the first
seceders, and 1752 that deposed Mr GiUespie. Now wherein
consists the difference between those cases and that of the
Strathbogie men ? Let it not be said, that the assemblies of the
past century were against and that the present assembly are for
the people. The end cannot justify the means. The deposed min
isters of the past century were deposed for disobedience to the
supreme court of the church. But our veto men venerate them
as martyrs. The Strathbogie men are guilty of disobedience to
the same court, and their disobedience has the sanction of civil
law, and the approbation of not a few of their brethren. Would
it then be consistent in the admirers of the Erskines and GiUes
pie to treat the present undutiful sons of the church in the way
that is proposed ?
Fourthly. — -The committee of last Assembly, that had been
appointed to confer with the suspended brethren, gave in a most
agreeable and christian report of their conference with them, and
stated it to be their opinion, that the suspended brethren were
acting conscientiously, however mistakenly ; that they exhibited
a truly christian spirit ; that they expressed the greatest possible
respect for the Assembly, and their desire to conform to its
wishes ; and in short, that they made so favourable an impression
on the minds of the committee, that it can never be obliterated
nor forgotten. Now, is it wise to perU the authority of the
church by deposing these men after the General Assembly has
received and approved such a report by their own committee?

89
Fifthly — The country is far from being unanimous in opinion
against the brethren ; and though the opinions of men be no rule
for us, still it is no proof of wisdom to disregard them, more
especiaUy when the path of duty is not clearly revealed in the law
and the testimony. Even many of those, who are now opposed
to the Strathbogie men, would soon come to sympathize with
them, were the church to proceed to extremities in their case.
There is a feeUng in a generous heart, that leads a man to take
part with the weak, and with those that may be ranked among
the persecuted and oppressed. And this is a feeling that I
would not be disposed to overlook in the present case. It may
lead to results that some of our friends do not calculate upon.
The circumstance of the Strathbogie men being moderates, is
no proof or security that they may not meet with many sympa
thizers. Whatever professions men may make of zeal for country
and public principles, experience and the foul history of human
nature show, that private or personal feelings and interests are
in reality the mainsprings of human conduct in general. There
are such things as patriotism and public virtue. But the pro
fession of them in public is not to be depended on. And the
holy, retired man, that shrinks from public notoriety, may have
more of the self-denying and catholic spirit of Christ, than have
those that unfurl on the mountain tops their banners of zeal for
Christ and his crown. An archbishop Leighton, the son of a
sturdy and persecuted presbyterian, may be as humble and
devoted a servant of the Lord Jesus Christ, as any one of the
covenanting remnant. There may be a hidden church of seven
thousand in the land of Israel, though the prophet Elijah knows
it not, and considers himself the only witness for God.
Sixthly, — It is quite a mistake to suppose, that lenity towards
the Strathbogie men, or an altogether overlooking of their long-
continued disobedience and contumacy, would have a bad effect
on the spiritual authority of the church. My own opinion,
founded on some knowledge of human nature, and of the word of
God, is that the very reverse would be the case. Does divine
goodness or grace towards us lessen the divine authority? Does
not the grace of God estabUsh the law? What can win a sinner's
heart and disobedience, unless the love of Christ and the un
searchable riches of his grace do it ? And what can gain an
erring brother, unless heaping coals of fire on his head can do
it ? The Strathbogie brethren may be wrong, far wrong in their
long-continued course of disregard for ecclesiastical authority ;

90
but it would appear, that they are conscientiously so. They
may not be the spiritual and perfect ministers that we would like
them to be. But let them not be harshly dealt with by the
church, while credit can be given to them for sincerity of purpose.
Their peculiar circumstances may blind their minds, as our cir
cumstances may blind ours. If the moderate party were just now the
ruling one, and we were under a moral and conscientious necessity
of disobeying their authority, would we not consider ourselves
as oppressed and persecuted, were we libelled for deposition on
account of our conscientious disobedience ? " Whatsoever ye
would, then, that others should do unto you, do ye even so to
them," Change places or sides, and your views, opinions, and
feelings, will change with them.
Seventhly  The scriptural rule in cases of this kind ought to
be our only rule, if there be a scriptural rule bearing on the
point. Now let me here quote the leading scriptures that appear
to have a reference to cases of disobedience to the church.
Matt, xviu. 17, 18. " If he neglect to hear the church, let
him be unto thee as an heathen man and a pubUcan. VerUy I
say unto you, whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound
in heaven ; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed
in heaven,"
Rom, xvi, 17, "Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them
which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which
ye have learned ; and avoid them,"
Matt, xvi. 19, "And I will give unto thee the keys of the
kingdom of heaven : and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth
shall be bound in heaven ; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on
earth shall be loosed in heaven,"
1 Tim, i, 18, 19, 20, " This charge I commit unto thee, son
Timothy, according to the prophecies which went before on thee,
that thou by them mightest war a good warfare ; holding faith
and a good conscience ; which some having put away concern
ing faith have made shipwreck: of whom is Hymeneus and
Alexander ; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may
learn not to blaspheme,"
Titus iu, 10, 11, "A man that is an heretic, after the first and
second admonition reject ; knowing that he that is such is sub
verted and sinneth, being condemned by himself,"
1 Cor, V, 7, " Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may
be a new lump, as ye are unleavened,"
These quotations I have given as the chief, that are founded

upon by the Confession of Faith, with respect to the discipline
and government of the office-bearers of the church. And it does
not appear to me, that any more explicit quotations can be given
from the Bible,
Are, then, the passages which I have quoted, sufficiently ex
plicit to justify the General Assembly, in deposing or excommu
nicating the seven suspended brethren of Strathbogie? It does
not appear to me that they are, and it must be clear to every
candid reader, that they refer to heresy of doctrine or immoral
ity of conduct, with neither of which the brethren are charged.
Eighthly. — The directory for church government agreed upon
by the Westminster Assembly, says, " It belongeth unto clas
sical presbyteries, to admonish or further to censure, scandalous
ministers whether in life or doctrine, according to the nature of
the offence ; and that not only for such offences, for which any
other member of the congregation shall incur any censure of the
church, (in which case he is to be censured by the classis, with
the like censure for the like offence,) but likewise particularly
for simony, entering into any ministerial charge without aUow
ance of authority, false doctrine, affected lightness and vanity in
preaching, wilful neglect of preaching, or shght performance of
it, wilful non-residence from his charge without call or cause ap
proved by the classis, neglect of administration of the sacraments,
or other ministerial duties required of him in the directory of
worship, depraving and speaking reproachfully against the whole
some orders, by authority settled in the church, casting reproach
upon the power of godliness, which he by his office ought chiefly
to promote ; yet so as that no minister be deposed but by the
resolution of a synod,"
This directory may be considered a part of our constitution,
and the conduct of the Strathbogie men may be implied in the
phrase, "depraving and speaking reproachfully against the whole
some orders, by authority settled in the church." But however
much I may regret and even reprobate the disobedience of these
brethren, I would like something more explicit than a doubtful
implication, before I would proceed to extremities with them.
Indeed, I have come to the resolution, that they must be dealt
with according to one or all of the six foUowing rules, viz,
(1,) The absolute necessity of subordination in all members
of a society, according to the celebrated reasons of Principal
Robertson in 1752, and acted on in the case of Mr GiUespie,

92
(2.) The declarations in the Confession of Faith, that " The
Lord Jesus Christ as head and King of his Church, hath there
in appointed a government, in the hand of church officers,
distinct from the civil magistrate ;" and in the Second Book of
Discipline that " the Assembly hath power to depose the office
bearers of that province, for good and just causes deserving de
privation," (3.) The declaration in the 31st chapter of the Confession of
Faith, that " All synods and councUs since the Apostles' times,
whether general or particular, may err, and many have erred."
(4.) The degree of certainty we have that the law, which the
Strathbogie brethren have transgressed, is according to the word
of God and to the constitution of our church, as an established
church under the laws of patronage,
(5.) The explanation, which they may give of their conduct,
though it should not amount to a direct acknowledgment of
their error.
(6.) The probable effects on the church of whatever measure
may be proposed. For all things should be done for edification.
Ninthly  Previously to a man's receiving license, the follow
ing question is publicly put to him, and answered in the affirma
tive  " Do you promise that you will subject yourself to the
several judicatories of this church?" And before ordination,
the following question is likewise put, and must be answered in
Uke manner  " Do you promise to submit yourself willingly and
humbly, in the spirit of meekness, unto the admonitions of the
brethren of this presbytery, and to be subject to them and all
other presbyteries and superior judicatories of this church, where
God in his providence may cast your lot ; and that, according to
your power, you shall maintain the unity and peace of this church
against error and schism, notwithstanding of whatever trouble or
persecution may arise, and that you shall follow no divisive
courses from the present established doctrine, worship, discipline,
and government of this church ?" It is true, that along with
these vows there is an oath of aUegiance, not merely to the sove
reign, but by implication to the sovereign's laws ; and that, differ
ently constituted as men's minds are, and influenced by circum
stances, as they may well be supposed to be, an honest, consci
entious minister may consider himself more bound to the state
than to the church, or to the church than to the state. But as
he forfeits his rights to the protection of the state, by violating

93
its laws, so he forfeits his riglits to the favour and protection of
the church by violating her laws. Both the church and the
state may be wrong, and the God-fearing man may consequently
be at a loss what to do. He may even suffer through his inte
grity ; but if he believe that upon the whole (though in his opinion
the church has erred in a minor and not essentially scriptural point
of discipline,) the church is a church of the living God, he should
cast in his lot with his brethren, and take up the resolution of
Ruth, " Whither thou goest, I will go, and where thou lodgest, I
wUl lodge ; thy people shaU be my people, and thy God my God,"
And let it not be said that the Strathbogie brethren would
incur disgrace by yielding now. In my opinion, they would ob
tain honour, " Blessed are the peace-makers," The noblest
victory they can obtain is a victory over themselves ; and the
most splendid triumph is reserved for them, if they surrender their
views for the peace of the church of which they are office-bearers,
/ may think that the church, in the matter of the Veto act, has
gone very far wrong, and that her noblest duty in the meantime
is to retrieve her error, and decline to proceed to extremities
with the Strathbogie men, even though they should not submit.
But in a matter of error, and I think there is error on both sides,
the contest should be — not who can hold out longest and gain
the victory, but who will make the most haste to exemplify the
spirit of Christ and to promote His glory. The church may go
wrong and do injustice in punishing the Strathbogie men for the
breach of a law which she had no power to make ; but, on the
other hand, they may go far wrong in perpetuating the discord
that threatens the very existence of our church as an establish
ment. Were they but to yield obedience now, and promise it
for the time to come, though they should not express any regret
for their conduct in times past, (and no honourable man would
wish them to express regret that they do not feel,) they would
open up a way of escape for us from our difficulties, and find
many men ready to meet them. There is no personal feeling of
ill-will infiuencing members of Assembly in the matter, and I am
sure that there is a desire on all hands to see an end put to our
unhappy differences. " Woe unto the world because of offences,
but woe especially to that man by whom they come !"
3, Let the church and people of Scotland respectfully but
earnestly petition parliament for the total aboUtion of patronage.
Dr Chalmers recommends that the Veto act be now repealed.

94
that the Assembly take a step in advance and go to the positive
call; and that the people of Scotland (if they see it proper,) peti
tion against patronage. The Veto act should have been repealed
long ago ; indeed, it should never have been passed. The posi
tive-call plan should never have been departed from ; and had
it been adhered to, however stringently, the Auchterarder case
would not have given us any trouble. But to attempt to go
now to the positive-call plan, after the decisions that have been
given by the civil courts, without getting first a parliamentary
sanction to it, appears to me to be nothing short of infatuation.
Indeed, the worthy Doctor who makes the proposal, acknowledges
that this step would subject us to the interference of the civil
court as much as does the Veto act, and there is no possibility
of denying it. /have been always in favour of the positive call, and
in times past did every thing in my power to maintain it in oppo
sition to the Veto plan ; but I cannot recommend it now, with
out our first getting parliamentary authority to it, and that is
more than can be reasonably expected. Indeed, it appears to
me, that the greatest boon we can desire, viz,, the abolition of
patronage, may more reasonably be expected from parliament,
than any of the minor ones that we have been proposing. It is
true that the present state of the church is any thing but favour
able to our wishes. She has refused obedience to the decision
to which she herself has appealed ; she continues and resolves to
continue her disobedience. She is divided within herself; she
has lost many of her best friends. The sayings and doings of
some of her namely champions have disgusted men of honour
able minds. The government has discovered how weak the ultra
non-intrusion men are. The conservatives have no reason to
fear any great loss of numerical or moral strength, by the mighty
enmity of a few quondam friends and supporters. The Church
of Scotland is not one half so powerful to-day as it was two years
ago. The enthusiasm of the non-intrusion agitation has eva
porated. And parhament may, under a sense of its own dignity,
and of our childish weakness, sit unmoved and unterrified by all
Commissioner Lin's denunciations against the ignorant foreigners
and barbarians. But what our power cannot extort, and what
our conduct may not deserve, the wisdom and the grace of patrons
may bestow for the peace and welfare of Scotland. And if there
were a respectful and united appeal made to them through
parliament, there can be little doubt that it would meet the most

95
respectful and considerate attention. Patrons, in general, are
not the monsters that violent demagogues have represented them
to be. I have no doubt that some of them feel their responsi
biUty for the manner in which they exercise the important trust
that belongs to them by law, and I am pretty certain that the
most of them would rather do good than ill to the people with
whom they are connected, by the important link of patronage.
No doubt, they are often imposed upon and disappointed. But
I believe that the non-intrusion agitators have been the most
successful persons of late years in imposing on the simplicity of
patrons. The principal difficulties in the way of the abolition of patronage
are the following, viz. : —
First. — The unwillingness which men naturally feel to part
with power. This is a feeling common to all men; but its
secret motives are not the same in all. Pride or ambition may
be the motive in one ; a sense of responsibiUty for the proper
use of a great talent may be the motive in another. A serious
mind may consider it as sinful to part with a talent, as it is to
make an improper use of it.
Secondly, — Compensation for the civU right. Some patrons
might despise taking any compensation ; but this cannot be con
sidered the generg,l rule. In many cases, large sums of money
have been paid for patronage, and it would be too much to ex
pect that the patrons would consent to be denuded of their right
without compensation. Who then is to pay ? The parishes ?
No ! few of them are able or wiUing. Who then ? The plain
answer must be, that as the British parliament by the act 1 0th
of queen Anne, violated the act of union by restoring patronage,
the British parliament should pay the compensation. And if it
come to be a matter of calculation how much should be paid for
each parish, perhaps the teinds that have been enjoyed since
1690 by the patrons in Ueu of their right of patronage, may form
an important item in way of subtraction.
Thirdly  In whose hands ought the election of a minister to
be placed. Some say, that there should be no provision made
on this point, and that as patronage is a deformity or excrescence,
its removal without providing any substitute for it, would leave
the body ecclesiastical in its pristine symmetry and beauty.
Others say, that care must be taken that we do not get clerical
in the room of lay patronage. And indeed, the greatest possible

96
caution ought to be used to prevent this; for assuredly the church
would soon degenerate, if the clergy were to be patrons ; and
patrons of all the parishes of the land, they would soon become,
unless the number of electors were too great, and of a character
too independent for their management. By the act of Assembly
1649, the elders were constituted the electors under the direction
of the presbytery, and the clergy at the time of the revolution wished
to have the same system. But wiser heads than theirs thwarted
their wishes, and combined the protestant heritors with the elders
in the matter. For my own part, I think that even this last
plan would not suit in our day, and that (if any change at all be
made on our present system) the change should be so complete
as to embrace the communicants, or even the heads of famiUes
as electors. Though this change might appear too great and
alarming at first, I am convinced that it is the only one that
would give permanent satisfaction. Again, it is said, that the
law of patronage might be so modified and explained by an act
of parliament, as to retain all its advantages, without any of its
disadvantages. And this I conceive practicable enough, if men
were single-hearted enough in the matter. But the views of
men are so different, and the motives of conduct so various, that
whatever satisfaction a modified system of patronage might have
been expected to give some years since, nothing can do now,
short of a Uberal plan of election, suited to the spirit of the times,
and to the efforts that have been made for popularizing our
church. Besides, circumstances have so far biassed the minds
of many of us, that it is now quite a common thing to fall
in with ministers, who maintain the scriptural right of the
people to elect their ministers, though a few years ago, it would
have been rather a difficult matter to meet persons of this opinion.
And is it to be supposed that such persons (and their number
is daily on the increase,) are to be satisfied with a modified
patronage ? No ! no I The power of leprosy must be thrown
down. Raze it, raze it to the dust ! And let the fate of Hiel
the Bethelite give warning to the man that will attempt to re
build it.
But zealous and anxious as I am for the abolition of patronage
in the proper way, I would advise you against an unbecoming
manner of trying to obtain the object. Argument and christian
demeanour on your part, are the most likely weapons for gaining
the victory, and the most suitable for securing the divine favour.

97
Prayer should not be neglected in the case ; neither should the
spirit of love and forbearance. Morbid excitement under the
harangues of questionable churchmen or patriots must be avoided.
It is an easy matter for a few fiery spirits to fly through the
length and breadth of the land, declaiming against the tyranny of
patrons, and the ungodliness of moderates, and the numberless
evUs of intrusion. It is an easy matter for them to declaim in
favour of the rights of the christian people, and to laud the non
intrusion leaders as patriots, and as christians, and as heroes
worthy of eternal gratitude and admiration. These things are
easUy done, and may be very agreeable amid the plaudits of
assembled multitudes. It is equally easy to predict the millennium
of peace, and happiness, and prosperity, that we should have,
were patronage abolished and the moderates rooted out ; but let
me tell you, that whatever weight parliament might have some
years ago attached to petitions got up under such circumstances,
it wUl attach none now. There have been of late such disgusting
displays of unchristian zeal and disappointment, that petitioners
to parliament must show themselves worthy of the boon they ask,
before wise and considerate legislators can consistently agree to
grant the prayers of their petitions. Your non-intrusion leaders
have thrown great obstacles in the way of your success ; and I
fear that the Veto act is an insurmountable obstacle at present.
Fourthly, — The probable effect on the Church of England,
which the aboUtion of patronage in Scotland might have, is a
grave consideration with parliament. It is true that the two
countries are very different from one another, and that Scotland,
by the act of union, has a claim which England cannot advance.
But we know very well that it was the revolution of the three
glorious days in France that drave on the reform bill in Britain ;
Snd we need not doubt that if the proceedings of & foreign naition
exercised so much influence over our own nation in such a case,
the parliamentary repeal of the laws of patronage in Scotland,
would necessarily lead to agitation in the Church of England,
But let me here state my decided conviction, that the best way
of preventing agitation in that church, is to grant to us at once
what we respectfuUy ask. The longer it is delayed, the surer
the effect on the Church of England, Petitions and discussions
in parliament cannot fail, if long continued, to produce the very
effect, that is wished to be guarded against. The young men of
Scotlanjl have sworn eternal war against patronage, and they are

98
sympathized with by multitudes in Ireland and England as well
as in Scotland. They have even bound themselves by a solemn
bond and engagement, to God and to one another, to carry on
the anti-patronage war. I do not approve of what they have
done in this respect, for they have violated a positive act of
Assembly, which says, " much more are such ministers to be
censured with deposition from their ministry, who subscribe any
bands or take any oaths, not approved by the General Assembly
or their commissioners ; or by their counsel, countenance, or
approbation, make themselves accessory to the taking such bands
and oaths by others ?"
Besides the illegality of this solemn bond and obligation, the
policy oi it appears to me very questionable. It almost prevents
the possibility of a cordial union among churchmen in favour of
any one particular measure for healing our present divisions :
the thorough abolitionists cannot go back, and the modified
patronage men cannot be expected to join them. The movement
is too determined to ensure success to its scheme, with safety
to our establishment. Politicians, though often blind, are not
always so ; and in the present case, they do not require much
penetration to discover, that a variety of unworthy motives may
influence the anti-patronage-bond men. They can find here and
there grey-headed ministers who have sons preachers, whom
they wish to have appointed assistants and successors to them
selves, but whose appointment they cannot secure under patron
age, because they have quarrelled with the patrons. They can
find many to whom they cannot give much credit for sincerity,
inasmuch as they were lately keen supporters of patronage, and
are now in opposition to it, solely because they have been dis
appointed in the Veto affair. At any rate, the solemn engage
ment evidently indicates a division among the non-intrusion men,
and the supporters of patronage cannot be accused of intoler
ance or injustice in taking advantage of that real or supposed
division. Besides, a division on this subject increases the diffi
culty of parliament to find out what the church and people of
Scotland really wish to have. It is an easy matter for us to say
that we want non-intrusion, or that we want the abolition of patron
age. But when we find that a respectable number of us would
be satisfied with one kind of non-intrusion, and that an equally
respectable number on the other side have pledged themselves
not to halt till they get patronage abolished, without having

99
agreed as to the hands in which they would place the election
of a minister, what should parliament do but calmly and deter
minedly wait, tiU we come to something like an agreement among
ourselves ? Lord Melbourne's advice was that of a sage senator,
when he said, in the House of Lords, that the wisest plan would
be to allow the people of Scotland to settle their differences at
home. My own wish is fervent for the abolition of patronage.
But the Church of Scotland has not yet applied for this boon ;
and I cannot understand the consistency of the spiritual-indepen
dence men, that desire the interference of parliament to heal our
divisions, whUe they have not yet agreed among themselves as to
the measure most likely to effect the object. The duke of Welling
ton's note to lord Aberdeen has been highly extolled by the Veto
men as the essence of wisdom. And what does that note say? "Let
the church state what it is she would have, and then come to us
for our civU sanction," This would be practical wisdom. But
has the church done this in any one form or other ? We yield
our boasted spiritual independence, when we apply to parliament,
to come to our rescue. We maintain it on the duke's plan,*
• On the 5th of February last, I proposed in the presbytery of Glasgow a
petition to parhament, in which I pointed out a plan for preventing intrusion,
that was much commended by some and sneered at by others. The sneerers
proposed and supported a petition against intrusion, without telling what they
wanted. The following is the last parae;raph oi my petition : —
" That in order to prevent any partial or capricious exercise of power on
the part of presbyteries, in judging of the dispositions of a people towards a
presentee, or his fitness to be their minister, it is necessary that there be a defi
nite law or code of regulations to guide presbyteries in the matter ; and that as
this law or code of regulations would form a very important part of the internal
discipline of the church, it should be enacted by the united wisdom of the
church without any external aid, interference, or control. And that though from
the general character and growing excellence of the ministers and licentiates of
the Church of Scotland, as well as from the kindly and considerate dispositions
and conduct of patrons in general, whether royal or lay, there is not much
reason to apprehend the multiplication to any very great extent, of presenta
tions in favour of unacceptable or unsuitable preachers ; yet in consequence
of the decisions by the civil courts already mentioned, and of the encroach
ments which those decisions are felt to make on the right and ' liberty of the
Kirk' to manage all her own internal concerns, it has become necessary for
the peace and order of the church and of society at large, and in conformity
with what have been always considered inherent and essential principles of the
church as a church of Christ, that an act of parliament be passed, explaining
or modifying the act of the Scottish parliament 1592, and the 10th queen
Anne, so far as to provide, that if a presbytery (subject of course to the superior
ecclesiastical judicatories) shall declare a presentee disqualified, on the ground
that the opposition of the people, judicially made known to them in presbyterj',
is too great and general to afford any reasonable hope of his being useful among
them, that presentee shall, by virtue of the sentence of disqualification, cease

100
4. We should try what we ourselves can do with the unques
tionable powers we have for effectually preventing intrusion.
Now there are four things, any one or all of which might be tried
with good effect.
First  According to the act 1719, (5th act Geo, I. ch. 29 —
58) civU provision has been made that " If any patron shall pre
sent a person to any vacancy, who is then or shall be pastor or
minister of any other church or parish, or any person, who shall
not accept or declare his willingness to accept of the presentation
and charge to which he is presented within the said time,* such
presentation shall not be accounted any interruption of the course
of time allowed to the patron for presenting ; but the jus devo
lutum shall take place, as if no such presentation had been
offered." I have already stated, that the object of this extremely UI ex
pressed enactment, was two-fold, ^iz. the prevention of protracting
vacancies for the sake of the vacant stipends ; and the putting it
into the power of the church itself to get rid of the grievance of
patronage by a refusal to accept presentations. With respect to
the latter of these objects, Mr WiUison of Dundee, in his, " Fair
and Impartial Testimony," written in 1742, says, "The parlia
ment put it (as it were) in the church's power to ease herself of
the great grievance of patronage ; which was grouiid of joy to
many ; for at that time, it was generally thought that this limi
tation was equivalent to plain repealing of the patronage act, and
that no Presbyterian would ever expressly declare his accepting
of a presentation, or go so far to approve or comply with patron
age, which presbyterians had always declared a heavy yoke and
burden on the church of God, And accordingly there was no
man that presumed to take, accept, or make use of a presentation
to a church for several years after this act was passed ; and so
the church was easy, and continued to settle vacant churches
upon the call of congregations, without any molestation from
patrons," Perhaps the principal evil to be dreaded from an ecclesiastical
law against accepting presentations, would be the jus devolutum
to have any interest in the benefice ; and to provide further that it shall not
be competent for him nor for the patron to sue the members of presbytery by
an action at law, nor for any civil court to sustain any action for damages on
account of the rejection of the presentee,"
* Meaning, of course, six months after the vacancy has taken place.

101
of the presbytery. But this evil, which ought to be avoided by
all means, might be effectually prevented by another law provide
ing, that in every case of jus devolutum, the presbyteries should
consult the wishes of the people before they would issue a presen
tation. Of course according to the present civil law of patro
nage, the Presbyteries must issue presentations in exercising
the jus devolutum; and though under the act 1719, it may be
lawful for the church to make a law against the acceptance of
presentations from patrons, it might be necessary to allow their
acceptance from presbyteries.
Secondly  It would be an easy matter, without any law on
the subject, to induce the young men, before entering the divin
ity haUs, to subscribe an engagement that they will not on any
account whatever accept a presentation. The non-intrusion and
anti-patronage discussions have of late been so keen, that our
young men find it necessary to go with the tide, in order to avoid
the odium of being considered leagued in the least degree with
moderatism ; and some of our frantic non-intrusionists are not
over scrupulous as to the means they employ to blast the reputa
tion of better men than themselves, whether these men be young
or old. According to them, supporting the unlawful proceedings
of a party is a sufficient passport to favour; opposing them is
sufficient proof of unrighteousness. Now might not this excessive
zeal be tempered with a little discretion, and directed to the
attainment of a plain, practical eradication of the evil so much
complained of? There is nothing immoral, nothing Ulegal,
nothing unconstitutional, nothing unscriptural, and let me add,
nothing unprecedented in the Church of Scotland, in our young
men's resolving that they shall not accept presentations. By
an act of Assembly 1643, every minister before his admission,
and every student of philosophy before his laureation, was re
quired to subscribe the covenant. Surely then there can be
nothing wrong in the young men's voluntarily resolving to abstain
from accepting presentations. And if we look at the act 1596,
re-enacted by the Assembly 1638, we shall find it provided in
it, that "because by presentations, many forcibly are thrust
into the ministry, and upon congregations, that utter thereafter
that they were not called by God, it should be provided that
none seek presentations to benefices without advice of the pres
byteries, within the bounds whereof the benefice is, and if any
do in the contrary, they to be repelled as rei ambitus."

102
Thirdly, — The greatest possible care should be taken, that
the young men who come forward as candidates for the ministry,
be examined as to " the grace of God in them." Our present
laws are good enough, if they be but enforced ; and perhaps it
is impossible to make better laws, than our fathers have made.
But some of the best of them are overlooked in practice.* The
act 1596, re-enacted in 1638, provides " that the intrant shall be
posed upon his conscience before the great God (and that in
most grave manner), what moveth him to accept the office and
charge of the ministry?" The Westminster Directory for the
Ordination of ministers, ratified by the General Assembly 1645,
provides that the presbytery "are to proceed to inquire touching
the grace of God in him," i. e. in the candidate for the ministry ;
and the acts 1711 and 1798 are virtuaUy to the same effect,
though not in precisely the same language. Why then should
this most wholesome and scriptural rule be so much neglected
by our presbyteries in their examinations of young men ? I am
aware, that after we shall have taken the greatest possible care,
we may be deceived and disappointed ; and that it is easy enough
for the hypocrite to steal the words of God's people and to give
enough of cant about the grace of God in his heart, so as to
impose on the most pious and discerning ministers that can be
found, I have no doubt that James Sharp did so, when he im
posed so long on, and enjoyed the extraordinary confidence of
the good men by whom he was so long surrounded and caressed.
But what of that ? Let us do our duty in this respect, and then
we shall hear less of intrusion than we do.
Fourthly, — It is undoubtedly in the power of presbyteries,
both according to the constitution of the church and to the
scriptural rule, to take heed that none be licensed, but such as
are in the language of Paul, already quoted, " apt and able to
teach." Every learned man is not a good teacher. Experience
proves this. But we have been dealing with our young men
upon the supposition, that if they have knowledge they are fit
for being teachers of others. Now, no greater mistake can be
* I. was once present at a meeting of a Synod, at which a clergyman brought
forward an overture relative to the laws anent intrants into the ministry.
Among other observations he made, he stated, that he did not believe there is
a presbytery in Scotland that inquires into the grace of God in the heart of a
young candidate. I asked him "Do not you yourself do it?'' And his
answer was a sneer and a scowl, not indicative of the grace of God in his own
heart.

103
committed. It was on the same supposition that our schools
were for ages provided with masters. But how stands the matter
now ? We have normal schools for teaching how to teach ; and if
candidates for schools do not get certificates that they are qualified
to teach, they get no appointment. The aptness and abUity of
our young men to teach should be tested before they be licensed.
They were of old called probationers, and the name indicates its
meaning. They were sent round the presbytery to give speci
mens of their aptness and abiUty to teach ; and I think we might
with advantage recur in some measure to the old practice. If
young men were refused licence, tUl they should give proof of
their aptness and ability to teach, we should hear less than we
do of the evils of intrusion. Of course no patron could present
a man that had not received licence.
5. The B's, and C's, and D's of the Veto party should not be
members of next Assembly, They have been of late years too
keenly engaged as controversialists in the Veto affair, and too
much under the influence of party and personal feeling to be
fit judges for deciding our present quarrels. It is from the very
reverse of disrespect for them that I say so. The Veto cause
is very much their own. Now, it is a proverb founded on truth
and experience, that a man is a bad judge in his own cause.
Why then should not the letters of the alphabet that I have men
tioned deny themselves so far as to decline being present as
members of next Assembly ? They need not fear that matters
wUl fare the worse for their absence ; and I would fain hope that
not one of them is vain enough to suppose that he is fit for every
thing, and that the weight of the Church of Scotland hangs on
Ms shoulders.
The more highly I respect men as servants of the Lord Jesus,
the more am I filled with regret, when I find them meddling with
and trying to direct everything pertaining to the house of God.
I believe that the saints shall judge the world, and that they shall
judge angels, and that there is no honour too high for the sons
of God; but I believe, on the other hand, that the more holy and
conformed to the image of Jesus they are, the more unfit for the
management of things that partake of a worldly or secular nature
or character. According to Paul, (1 Cor, vi,) those who are least
esteemed in the church should be set to judge in things that per
tain to this life. And have we not had sufficient Ulustration of
the wisdom of this arrangement in the history of our own church

104
during the last hundred years ? What boon did the moderates
try in vain to secure for our church ? They were not much
esteemed by the people as evangelical ministers or spiritual
Christians, but they were men of talent, and sense, and prudence;
and they were gentlemen. And what boon have your much-
esteemed Veto men secured to our church? Contempt, and
division, and disappointment must be the answer. If the mode
rates of old sent deputations to government or parliament for
any particular object, did they faU? No! But how many de
putations have been sent by the Veto men during the last six
years? I cannot count them; but I know that not one of them
has succeeded, and that our deputations have not tended to exalt
our church in the estimation of the British metropolis. Indeed,
a few more such deputations would bring us low enough ; let us
then have no more of them. Let our worthy non-intrusion men
betake themselves to the high offices of preaching the gospel to
the poor, and administering consolation to the dying ; let them
betake themselves to the word of God and to prayer, as Paul
and Barnabas did ; let them remember how many precious days,
and weeks, and months, they have spent in doing positive evil
during the past few years, that might have been profitably em
ployed in the service of Christ ; let them give up the management
of the outward affairs of the church to men of practical wisdom,
and let them act on the principle, that if they be men of God
they cannot enjoy the friendship of the world, and should not
seek it. They commenced their ascendancy with a blunder ; they
have been blundering ever since, and the sooner they learn that
true greatness is the reverse of worldly greatness, and that the
love of the praise of men is no part of the character of a regene
rated soul, the better for themselves, and the better for the future
destinies of the Church of Scotland. Benevolent visionaries may
be very useful in suggesting plans of usefulness, and zealous re
formers may be no less useful in stemming the tide of corruption :
but guiding the helm of a state or church requires the practised
hand and eye of a master ; and experience shows, that as there are
diversities of gifts bestowed by the Spirit of all grace on the church,
there may be a^ spirit of government bestowed on some, and a
spirit of prophecy on others, while not one individual possesses
all the gifts of the Spirit in his own person. The Spirit distri-
buteth to all severally as he pleaseth. Why then should not we
submit to his sovereignty, and be guided by his disposals?

105
The B's, C's, and D's of the Veto party should remember
that the majus bonum ecclesice requires their retirement from the
place they have occupied for some years in the General Assem
bly, They may think, no doubt, that this consideration requires
their remaining in it ; and this may be the opinion of many be
sides them. But with all due deference, I must say that their
opinion is erroneous ; for, let it not be forgotten that there are
several very important questions besides the non-intrusion one,
to be settled before the church can be placed in a healthful posi
tion, and that the indiscreet and wayward violence of the Veto
leaders has placed an almost insuperable barrier in the way of
their settlement. Their treatment of the voluntaries has been
unworthy of Christian men ; their open enmity to the government
of the country has been highly imprudent, to say the least of it ;
their going from one political party to another for help, has been
anything but an indication of greatness ; their employing avowed
enemies to the government to seek favours from that government,
looks like infatuation ; their resistance to the law, to which they
themselves appealed, appears to many altogether indefensible.
First  There is the question of endowments.
Now, there can be no doubt that the government were dis
posed some years ago to grant endowments to the Church of
Scotland, and that the unseemly conduct of many of the clergy
was the real cause of their having been withheld. The influence
of voluntaries and papists may have been considerable in the
matter ; but that influence would have weighed little with states
men and men of honour in oppcsition to the pledge given — that
if a commission should ascertain that there is a want of church
accommodation, that want should be supplied, unless the conduct
of our leaders had been such as to give plausibility to the argu
ments of our opponents. Indeed, so much has their conduct
been reprobated by men of all parties except their own, that it
is believed that even the conservatives would now oppose any
grant of money to the Church of Scotland, while that church
continues under its present mismanagement.
Secondly  There is the question of the right of our unen
dowed ministers to sit as members of our church courts ; and
is it likely that parliament will come forward to legalise our re
ceiving these ministers, while we continue our present course of
conduct ?
Thirdly. — There is the question of the funds collected at the

106
doors of the unendowed 6hurches. At present these funds be
long (according to a decision of the Court of Session) to the
heritors of the parish for behoof of the poor. Now, is it to be
supposed that any alteration of the law can be procured, while
we provoke the enmity of the law-makers ? We should remem
ber that " wisdom is better than weapons of war,"
Had lord Aberdeen's bill been silently acquiesced in, or cour
teously rejected, all these questions, together with the Strathbogie
affair, might have been settled to the satisfaction of the church,
in a short time and without much difficulty. But present circum
stances do not indicate their speedy settlement ; and what new
question may soon arise to increase our difficulties, and to be a
hobby for the day, and to throw all the former questions into the
grave of forgetfulness, I cannot tell. We seem wonderfully suc
cessful in getting into difficulties. Facilis descensus Averni.
How do we get out of them ? Hie labor, hoc opus est. But
one thing is certain in the case, viz., that our present worthy
leaders are not in circumstances favourable for the settlement of
our difficulties. They have too much personal feeling engaged;
they have been too vituperative, and coarse, and disrespectful to
their opponents ; and they have too much pride and selfishness
for any further negotiations with respect to that church whose
interests (I have no doubt) they wish to promote. Let them then
retire ; the sooner they do it the better. This is the true way to
obtain honour and to effect the objects they have in view. Let
them go back to their high and holy duties among their flocks,
and remember that a Jesus or a Paul would not have pursued
the course which our high and ambitious churchmen have been
pursuing, to the neglect of their more spiritual duties, and to the
injury of the very cause which all of us have sincerely at heart,
V. Let me now, in the last place, address to you a few con
siderations, giving heed to which may have a good effect on the
cause of Christ, both at home and abroad,
1, Be not imposed on any longer by the false and calumnious
statements that some newspapers give you with respect to the
character, and views, and objects, of those that are honest and in
dependent enough to think and act for themselves. Sure I am
that all virtue is not confined to the Veto men, any more than
it is to their opponents ; and that if the spirit of Christ were pre
valent in our hearts, we would exercise more mutual forbearance
than we do, and a regard to truth could never be absent from

107
our minds. The cause of non-intrusion is an excellent one ; but
nothing can be more calculated to injure it with God, and with
honest men that have an eye to His glory, than the unchristian spirit
and conduct of some, if not of many, of those that seem anxious
to promote it. According to them and their newspapers all the
ministers and people that do not enter into their nasty plans, are
worthless and unsound, and enemies to the gospel and to godli
ness; and they are by no means "over-scrupulous" as to the
means they employ to blast men's characters and usefulness.
They praise and fiatter one another, so as to make you believe
that they are far above others in purity of purpose and conduct.
" If you side with them, you are sure to have a passport to the
Veto paradise ; but if you think or act differently from them, your
doom is sealed, and there is no trick so base as not to be resorted
to, in order to be revenged of you for daring to refuse your
homage to the wise and good men, with whom all wisdom and
goodness are to perish. And as to some of the Veto newspapers,
their disregard to truth is so well known, that it is abetting' false
hood to support them.* There are Veto cliques that have their
own trumpeters. Don't believe them.
2. When you find great advocates of non-intrusion leave their
parishes for weeks or months, in order to agitate the country and
cut a figure in the world, be sure that things are not right at
home ; and when you find non-intrusion leaders use all their in
fluence in private against the ministers that vacant parishes want,
and in favour of trifling vain laddies that the said parishes do not;
want, you may take it for granted that the loud professions of
men are not to be depended on, and that there may be more real
regard for the welfare of the people where there is little of it
professed, than there is among those flatulent creatures that live
like Ephraim, on the wind.
Patrons generally get Uttle credit for their regard to the wel
fare of parishes, and if they consult an anti-Veto minister in the
settlement of a minister, they are the vilest of the vUe, and threat
ened with aU the anathemas that the Pope and his cardinals can
hurl against them. But if they consult a Veto doctor, then they
are true Christians and friends of the people; and though their
* Some of the Veto doctors of divinity have acknowledged this to me in pri
vate ; but, at the same time, said, that they could not get the necessary infor
mation in other papers. Other doctors of divinity have acknowledged to me
that they paid for certain papers in order to escape from their false vituperations.

108
character should be a combination of all that is bad, there cannot
be better Christian men than they are, for they have asked the
opinion of Doctor this or that, and thus some sUly son, or nephew,
or flatterer of a namely Veto man has been provided for — perhaps
even an intended son-in-law.
Now, patrons are just like other men, some of them good and
some of them bad. I owe no gratitude to any one of them ;
perhaps I may owe a grudge to some of them ; but be they what
they may, I am sure that patronage is as safe in their hands as
it would be in the hands of any clergy, and that if they were to
consult the welfare of the church, they would not be so much
swayed as some of them have been by namely ministers. I '
would be clear for their consulting the people of tbe vacant par
ishes in almost every case. But I know ministers' ways too well,
and deprecate clerical patronage under whatever shape or form.
3. It is lamentable to see men that profess to be office-bearers*^
in the church of Christ, and to have received His spirit, wrangling
as many of our ministers and elders have been doing for years,
like men full of an opposite spirit. Had the time, and talents,
and zeal, that have been employed in doing positive evU since
our present controversies commenced, been employed in fulfilling
our duties to our flocks, the moral and spiritual aspect of our
country would be now far more agreeable than it is, non-intrusion
would have been more effectually secured, and the Lord Jesus
Christ would have been less dishonoured. Popery and infidelity
are certainly not a little obliged to, the disunion and unholy dis
putes that have for some time distinguished our church ; and let
it not be forgotten, that one necessary effect of our wranglings
is the moral lowering of the clerical character in the estimation
of the public, and that this lamentable effect can nowhere be
found unproductive of other effects prejudicial to Christianity,
and favourable to the enemies I have mentioned. Moderation
of old, with all its fierceness and Sadducean infidelity, did not in
reality reduce the clerical character so low as Pharisaic zeal has
done of late ; and I fear that the busy intermeddUng of non-intru
sion men (as they call themselves) with the municipal elections
that are now going on, and the parliamentary elections that are in
prospect, wUl tend to bring it still lower. The last Perthshire
election was a small specimen of how little real weight the ultra
Veto men and their notions have with other people, and of how
little dependence ambitious and cunning politicians should place

109
on their professions of influence a>;id disinterestedness. There
are certain great and leading principles which the most of our
electors can comprehend and take as their guides in the votes
they give; but to seek or give pledges lyith respect to some un
definable and impracticable question of ecclesiastical policy, ap
pears to me unreasonable on either hand. Non-intrusion is a
general principle, which I am determined to abide by ; but when
Dr Chalmers tells you that he can name nineteen or twenty
ways in which that principle can be carried into effect, it would
be unwise to insist on one particular way to the exclusion of all
the rest. In like manner, the abolition of patronage is a principle
which I can follow with all my heart ; but when we come to the
question. In whose hands is the election of ministers to be placed?
we must pause before we insist on some particular hands to the
exclusion of all others. Candidates whose principles are anything
that may suit the occasion, are not the candidates that I would
like to support ; and I would prefer the honest unbending man
of principle, though on many points he should be opposed to me,
to the man that would turn his sails to catch every breath of
wind that a fickle and inconsiderate race of electors may blow
into them. PoUtical partizanship I detest in ministers of the
gospel, Christ's kingdom is not of this world ; his subjects are
not of this world. The less then that they meddle with the poli
tics of this world the better ; and if they want to be useful to the
world, let them be so by leavening their congregations with the
humble, self-denying, unworldly spirit of the gospel,
4, If ministers and elders were to consider aright the state of
the world that lieth in wickedness, and the infinite importance of
the gospel message to perishing sinners, they would direct their
energies, more than they do, to the missionary work both at
home and abroad, and have less time than they seem to have for
squabbles among themselves. There are seven hundred unpro-
vided-for preachers in' Scotland, and yet it is difficult to get suit
able ministers for our countrymen in our colonies. There are
probably twenty thousand ministers in Great Britain, and the cry
is that there are too few ministers and churches for the popula
tion. What then becomes of the rest of the world, to which this
smaU isle of the sea is but a mere speck ? If faith in the Lord
Jesus Christ be necessary to salvation, (as we profess to believe,)
and if there be no other name given under heaven whereby men
¦ can be saved, is it not unseemly and unchristian that we should

110
occupy our time and talents, as too many of us do, in creating
and fomenting discord among ourselves ? Little are some of us
aware of what hand it is that guides us in our divisions. For
my own part, I desire tp bless God for the revival we have had
of late years in our church, and for the efforts that have been
made for our perishing feUow-men abroad; but I cannot help
th'inking that the enemy of God and man has been the prime
mover and agent in our voluntary and non-intrusion wars, and
that his object has been the thwarting of that holy missionary
enterprise, on which our church had entered with a zeal and a
fervour in some degree becoming the magnitude of our duty and
privUeges. Neither can I help thinking, that the many holy men
among us, who are so intemperate and reckless with respect to
a law to prevent intrusion, are unconsciously diminishing the
stabihty of our church, and sowing the seeds of a dispersion, that
no doubt under God's hand may be beneficial to the world, but
that shall leave our country a barren and desolate waste, suffer
ing a famine of the bread of life.
5. Whatever be the immediate issue of our present struggles,
we should bear in mind, that however desirable it may be to have
ministers very acceptable to the people, there is no little danger,
that " love of the praise of men," or a strong desire to please men
for the sake of getting a living, may influence preachers and min
isters so far as to make them unfaithful, and mean, and fawning,
and deceitful, should their success in life and their respectabUity
in society depend altogether on their favour with the people.
Dr Chalmers seems to lay great weight on the text, " The com
mon people heard him gladly ;" and no one can with truth deny
that there is a divine adaptation in the gospel scheme of salvation
to the guilt and misery of all men, that should meet with the
cordial welcome of men whether rich or poor, high or low. But
we must not forget that " the carnal mind is enmity against God;'"
that the people who at one time heard Jesus gladly, at another
time cried " Crucify him, crucify him ;'' and that Paul says, " If
I were to please men I should not be the servant Christ."
Popularity is highly valuable to a minister as a mean of useful
ness, and without some portion of it he cannot get access to
those whose good it is his business to promote. But is it not to
be feared that with many ministers, popularity is the object and
not the mean ? And is there not some danger that our present
discussions are calculated to foster that love of human praise in

Ill
Christ's servants, that all of them have need to fight and to pray
as well as to preach against ? Some of the most popular minis
ters that I know are remarkable for their vanity and love of
approbation ; and though I am far from judging them, I cannot
help fearing that the gratification of their personal vanity is the
mainspring of their zeal for what they call the rights of the chris
tian people. If the tables were turned, and they themselves were
to become obnoxious to the people, then the people would be
considered " cursed," as the Pharisees (John vii, 49) considered
the people that believed in Christ. "The rascal multUude"
was the ordinary term appUed by John Knox to the people,
when their conduct did not taUy with his wishes. It is aU very
weU in this world to talk loudly in favour of the people, and to
make them a stalking horse whereon to ride to preferment, and
honour, and wealth ; but in reality, self is the great Diana that
aU the world worshippeth. Even in Paul's days the glory of
Christ and the welfare of the church, were so far out of the
view of those who professed to be the servants of the Lord Jesus,
that the Apostle, in writing to the PhUippians (ch, ii. 20, 21.)
bitterly complains, "For I have no man like-minded, who will
naturaUy care for your state. For all seek their own, not the
things which are Jesus Christ's," But however much decep
tion and hyprocrisy may succeed in a present state, the Goti
with whom we have to do is not to be mocked with impunity ;
and it becomes us to inquire solemnly in His presence, what is
really and truly the object which we have in view ?
6, The high professions that are made by many, of regard for
the spiritual interests of the people, should not be credited, un
less their attention to the temporal wants of the poor give strong
evidence that their professions are well founded. Jesus the great
pattern of excellence never refused to relieve the poor. Instead
of hardening his heart against their wants, he had compassion
on the multitude and wrought miracles for their present comfort,
even though the most of them foUowed him for the sake of the
loaves and fishes, and not for the sake of spiritual blessings.
How far a regard for the spiritual interests of a people may be
consistent with a total disregard of their temporal comfort, it does
not require much wisdom or penetration to decide. I cannot,
however, help stating, that if I see landed proprietors stand forth
conspicuously for the principle of non-intrusion as essential to the
well-being of the church, and at the same time mercilessly turn-

112
ing away from their estates hundreds if not thousands of the poor,
that were born and bred on them, in order to make room for
sheep or deer, or county voters, I must, with the Bible before
me, conclude that such proprietors (whatever praise they may
get from churchmen) are anything but friends to the spiritual
interests of the people. And when I find clergymen use all
their influence and eloquence against a legal and suitable pro
vision for the poor, I cannot help questioning their right to be
considered the friends of the people. If you go to the estates of
the duke of Buccleuch, or of the marquis of Bute, or of the earl
of Aberdeen, or of various other noblemen and gentlemen that
are on what is called the intrusion sid% of the church question,
you shall find comfort among their poor. There is no driving
them away like so many crows from the corn fields. But if you
go to some other estates that could be mentioned, what shall you
find but cruelty and oppression ? And in like manner if you go
to some parishes, that have what are called intrusion ministers,
you shall find those ministers attend to the temporal and spirit
ual wants of the people. And the same is the case with parishes
that have non-intrusion ministers. But alas ! there are minis
ters that would almost prefer seeing the poor starve to seeing
them supported by a legal assessment. A few years ago some
Voluntary ministers in Glasgow published a statement to the
effect, that there were fifty thousand individuals, in and around
Glasgow, that were utterly without the means of grace ; and some
time thereafter other Voluntary ministers stated, that they would
prefer seeing these poor souls going to eternal ruin, to seeing
them furnished with the means of grace and salvation by a state
endowment. No doubt the statement was too unworthy of any
man of sense to excite any pubhc feeling but one of pity and
contempt; but why should these Voluntary ministers meet with
contempt for their tenets, while others are highly honoured for
doing all they can to starve the poor ?
The theory that the infiuence of christian principle is suffi
cient to provide for the poor is an absurd one, in the present state
of society. Let society be christianized as we would like to see
it, and then there will be no occasion for assessments for the
poor; but till that desirable consummation be obtained, let us
do what we can for the poor in every lawful way. Four or five
shiUings in the year to a poor creature in a country parish is
but miserable aliment ; and no very favourable specimen of the

113
benevolence or christian spirit of intrusion or non-intrusion heri
tors, ministers and elders. And four or five shillings in the month
to a poor family, consisting perhaps of a widow and orphans, must
be considered poor aliment in Glasgow, where house rent alone
requires more than this pitiful allowance. England is of course
a stupid, unchristian country ; non-intrusion is unknown and un
intelligible in it. But the poor of that country are treated in a
christian manner ; and I fear that whatever be our vain-glory in
Scotland, on account of our intelligence and spiritual privUeges,
we must take shame to ourselves for our being in fact the most
unchristian Protestant nation in Europe, in so far as kindness to
the poor is concerned. And be it remembered, that, this is the
rule whereby men are to be in a great measure judged at last.
Matt, xxv. 41—46,
Dr Alison of Edinburgh is entitled to the gratitude of the
country for his manly, judicious, and christian efforts in behalf of
the poor ; and knowing as I do personally the state of the poor
in town and country parishes, and the miserable pittances that are
aUowed to them by those who profess to be their friends, 1 can
not help giving expression to my approbation of the poor man's
friend, in the person of the worthy Doctor. Neither can I re
frain from stating my conviction, that those who try to thwart
his benevolent purposes, are very imperfect guides in matters
that require practical wisdom. By their imprudence they have
thrown lofty if not insuperable barriers, in the way of spiritual
provision for the poor; and by their theoretical but impracti
cable notions of what is right, they are guilty of benevolent cruelty
to those whom the Saviour came from heaven to relieve.
7. If men were, in a christian spirit, to throw away their pride,
and their prejudices, and their preconceived notions of utUity,
and to meet as brethren in the name of the Lord Jesus, to con
sult as to what is best to be done for our church in her present
difficulties, our dangers would soon pass away. There are holy
and judicious men on both sides of the Veto question, that are
perfectly wiUing and able to meet, and to manage matters in a
way consistent with peace, and at the same time without any
sacrifice of principle. And why do not such men free themselves
from the trammels of party, and come forward to the rescue ?
Why do they permit themselves to be hurried headlong by the
recklessness of a. few, to the destruction of that church of which
it is their glory to be members. Cannot a meeting of christian
H

114
men (however small in number,) be held in Edinburgh, or Glas
gow, or Perth, or Dundee, or Aberdeen, to form a nucleus to a
great gathering of the judicious friends of the church ? Sure I am
that these questions meet with suitable answers in many bosoms.
Why then not have the moral courage, in the strength of the Lord,
to stand forth as the humble but honoured instruments of our
church's deliverance? Why not have an eye to the account
they have to render of their talents ? Why not discard the fear
of man, and prove themselves witnesses for God ? Is talent, or
worth, or zeal, confined to a few namely leaders ? Is the Pres
byterian Church of Scotland (of which it is a favourite maxim,
that there is no disparity of rank among its ministers), to be so
episcopalized in fact, that nothing can be done in it excepting at
the bidding of our bishops ? Is Scotland become so low, and
cringing, and heartless, as to yield implicit obedience to the bulls
of Popes that profess to be Protestant ? Is our beautiful tem
ple to be laid waste for the sake of notions, that must appear
light as air, when we come to the borders of that other world,
•whence the question is to be heard " Wliat have ye been doing?"

Conclusion,

To me " who am less than the least of all saints," it is a matter
of serious and even painful consideration, that I should be found
differing in opinion, and in course of ecclesiastical policy, (with
respect to the present distracted state of our church,) from so
many dear and respected fathers and brethren, with whom I hope
to enjoy hereafter an eternity of agreement and uninterrupted
harmony in celebrating the praises of redeeming love, after we
shall have put off our tabernacles of clay, and joined "the general
assembly and church of the first-born, whose names are written
in heaven," and all whose members "are without fault before the
throne of God," For it is not possible that a christian man can
at one and the same time be earnestly seeking the right way for
himself, and indifferent about the way that beloved and honoured
brethren may be led to take. If / be right, (and I am far from
maintaining that I am so, with the positive and authoritative
confidence with which I would maintain any point of revealed
truth,) it is no consolation to me, that my brethren with whom I

115
differ are lurong. On the other hand, if they be right, it can
be no easy matter to me to feel that / am wrong, and thus
dishonouring God. To be in the wrong indicates a lack of the
spirit of truth and wisdom, that hath been promised to guide the
Lord's servants and people into all truth. If / lack that spirit,
what can compensate for it ? Am I then bold enough to say
that I have it, and that so many of my respected fathers and
brethren want it ? Far from it. But with Paul I may say, that
" I think I have the mind of Christ," and that " every man
should be fully persuaded in his own mind," To arrogate to
myself a monopoly of wisdom, is not one of my characteristics;
I have been taught some measure of humUity in the painful class
that Christ keeps in his school for teaching proud sinners. There
I have been taught to place no confidence in myself, and no con
fidence in others. There I have been likewise taught to cherish
and exercise forgiveness, and forbearance, and brotherly love,
towai-ds those with whom I differ in opinion. But I have never
learned to call any man on earth master. A leader I have
never desired to be ; for leadership in the present state of our
church impUes a greater pliancy of conscience than I can afford,
or a greater degree of talent and tact than I can exhibit. An
earthly leader or party I have never yet uniformly and implicitly
followed. The Lord Jesus is the only one whom I wish to be
my "leader and commander;" and though His "people be my
people," and I desire to " foUow their footsteps," and to " know
where he maketh his flock to rest at noon," I cannot think of
foUowing them further than they appear to me to follow Christ.
Long as I have been a member of church courts, I have never
yet given a party vote.
" Do I then boast?" No ! before God or men I have nothing
whereof to boast, I am ashamed of the best action I have ever
performed, for sin has mingled with it. " It is not expedient for
me doubtless to glory ;" but some of you " have compeUed me "
to state thus publicly the reasons of my conduct in the present
case, "that the ministry be not blamed," and that "causeless
prejudices " may not operate to the rejection of that glorious
gospel which I am honoured with a command to preach.* I
* In April last, at a meeting of the Synod of Glasgow and Ayr, I supported
an overture, having for its object a repeal of the Veto act, with a view to a
measure for more (factually preventing intrusion. Dr Burns made a speech
m favour of the Veto act and of its maintenance, in the course of which he

116
have uniformly acted on the principle, that every man must give
an account for himself before the judgment-seat of Christ, and
the nearer that I approach to that dread tribunal, the more ne
cessary do I consider it to give heed to my ways. I am aware
that my straight-forward conduct has provoked the ire of many,
and that most unchristian means have been employed to injure
me. I am likewise fully aware that my present publication is not
likely to escape the venom and enmity of those who prefer party
to principle ; but my record is on high. " To me it is a small
matter to be judged of men'' " Of GocCs righteous judgment
my soul is much afraid," So far as I know myself, I have only
one object in view. Not the least desire have I to offend one of
my brethren, I have already suffered by my straight-forward
ness, and I may suffer again; but " who or what shall separate
me from the love of Christ ?" I am weary of the discordant
society of this world. May I be prepared for the rest that re-
maineth to the people of God !
Note.
It is rather gratifying to me to find in a review of the life of
Dr M'Crie, in the Christian Instructor for June last, the fol
lowing remarks : — " We are not quite sure, however, whether he
would have cordially approved of the church's present movements.
Of the struggle itself he could not but approve, as one which
involved in it all that is truly valuable in our ecclesiastical estab
lishment. But as he never approved of the Veto, we are not
quite certain whether, on that act having been declared illegal, he
expressed his surprise that J should be deluded as I was, more especially con
sidering my high anti-patronage notions. I had four years before, in the same
place, seconded a motion oi his against patronage.
Dr Burns stated at the time of the passing of the Veto act, that if its legality
were to be tried in a civil court, he had no doubt that decision would be given
against it. Now, how he and others who were convinced of the incompetency
of the church to pass that act, should support it at first, and still cling to it after
its illegality has been decided on by the House of Peers, I cannot well com
prehend. But mark what account the Christian Instructor for May last gives of the
proceedings of the synod in the case of the non-intrusion discussion. It men
tions me as a speaker in favour of intrusion. The writer knew the very
reverse ; and as some proof of this, the Witness newspaper, in giving an
account of the discussion, gloried in the victory that the non-intrusion party had
gained, " notwithstanding Mr Lewis Rose's vehement demand for the posi
tive call."
Ah ! what deception is practised by some folks I

117
would not at once have advised the church to go back upon her
inherent right to judge of all such cases as that of Auchterarder
on her own principles, and with a regard to the majus bonum ec
clesice. At; all events, of one thing we are certain, that disapprov
ing as he did of the conduct of the Assembly in not petitioning
for the abolition of patronage in 1834-5, he would have addressed
us instantly to hoist the standard of anti-patronage, and at all
hazards contend at once for the spiritual independence of her
courts, and for the rights of the Christian people,"
The course of procedure here mentioned as the one likely to
have been followed by Dr M'Crie, had he lived till now, is the
one which I have followed in every iota, and I am pleased to find
myself in some measure supported by such high authority, I
could agree with Dr Thomson, and Dr M'Crie, and Dr Erskine,
and Sir Henry Moncrieff,

APPENDIX.

No. I.— Page 6.
The "Confession of Faith," professed and believed by the protestants within
the realm of Scotland, published by them in parliament, and by the estates
thereof ratified and approved as wholesome and sound doctrine, grounded on
the infallible truth of God.
Article XXIV. — 0/<Ae Civil Magistrate.
" We confess and acknowledge empires, kingdoms, dominions and cities to
be destinated and ordained by God ; the powers and authorities in the same
(be it of emperors in their empires, of kings in their realms, dukes and princes
in their dominions, or of other magistrates in free cities,) to be God's holy or
dinance, ordained for manifestation of His own glory, and for the singular
profit and commodity of mankind. So that whosoever goeth about to take
away or to confound the holy state of civil policies now long established, we
affirm the same men not only to be enemies to mankind, but also wickedly to
fight against God's express will. We further confess and acknowledge, that
such persons as are placed in authority are to be loved, honoured, feared,
and holden in most reverend estimation, because they are the lieutenants of
God, in whose session God himself doth sit and judge, (yea even the judges
and princes themselves,) to whom by God is given the sword, to the praise and
defence of good men, and to revenge and punish all open malefactors. To
kings, moreover, princes, rulers, and magistrates, we affirm that chiefly and
most principally the reformation and purgation of religion appertaineth, so that
not only they are appointed for civil policy, but also for maintenance of the
true religion, and for suppressing of idolatry and superstition whatsoever, as in
David, Jehoshaphat, Ezekias, Josias, and others, highly commended for their
zeal in the cause, may be espied. And therefore we confess and avow, that
such as resist the supreme powers (doing that which appertaineth to their
charge) do resist God's ordinance, and therefore cannot be guiltless. And fur- i
ther we affirm, that whosoever deny unto them their aid, counsel, and comfort, J
while the princes and rulers vigilantly travail in the executing of their office, J
that the same men deny their help, support and counsel to God, who by the i
presence of his lieutenant craveth it of them."
This^ri^ protestant Confession of Faith (consisting of twenty-five Articles),
was drawn up in four days by John Knox and others, and read in face of par
liament, and ratified by the three estates of this realm, at Edinburgh, the ] 7th
day of July, 1560. It was ratified a second time in the first pariiament of
king James VI., during the regency of the earl of Murray, in the pariiament
held in 1567. It was frequently afterwards ratified by Jung James in succes
sive parliaments, in 1579, 1581, 1592, ko. ^f-^^ . 'T^^ \ ' ^i  f*]

y

120
No. II  Page 6.
The First Book of Discipline. — The fourth head. — Concerning Ministers
and their lawful election.
" In a church reformed, or tending to reformation, none ought to presume
either to preach, either yet to minister the sacraments, till that orderly they be
called to the same. Ordinary vocation consisteth in election, examination, and
admission. And because that election of ministers in this cursed papistry hath
altogether been abused, we think expedient to intreat it more largely. It ap
pertaineth to the people, and to every several congregation, to elect their min
ister. And in case that they be found negligent therein the space of forty
days, the best reformed church, viz., the church of the superintendent with his
council, may present unto them a man whom they judge apt, to feed the flock
of Christ Jesus, who must be examined as well in life and manners, as in doc
trine and knowledge. And as this may be done with more exact diligence,
the persons that are to be examined must be commanded to appear before men
of soundest judgment, remaining in some principal town next adjacent unto them,
as they that be in Fife, Angus, Mearns, or Stratheam, to present themselves
in St Andrews ; these that be in Lothian, Merse, or Teviotdale, to Edinburgh ;
and likewise those that be in other countries must resort to the best reformed
city and town, that is, to the town of the superintendent, where first in the
schools, or failing thereof, in open Assembly, and before the congregation, they
must give declaration of their gifts, utterance, and knowledge, by interpreting
some place of scripture appointed by the ministry; which being ended, the
person that is presented, or that offereth himself to the administration of the
church, must be examined by the ministers and elders of the church, and that
openly, and before all that list to hear, in all the chief points that now be in
controversy betwixt us and the papists,anabaptists, Arians, or other such enemies
to the Christian religion. In which, if he be found sound, able to persuade
by wholesome doctrine, and to convince the gainsayer, then must he be directed
to the church and congregation where he should serve, that there in open
audience of his flock, in diverse public sermons, he may give confession of his
faith in the article of justification, in the office of Christ Jesus ; of the number,
eflTect, and use of the sacraments ; and finally, of the whole religion, which
heretofore hath been corrupted by the papists. If his doctrine be found whole
some and able to instruct the simple, and if the church justly can reprehend
nothing in his life, doctrine nor utterance, then we judge the church, which
before was destitute, unreasonable, if they refuse him whom the church did
offer, and they should be compelled by the censure of the council and church
to receive the person appointed, and approved by the judgment of the godly
and learned, unless that the same church have presented a man,better, or as
well qualified to the examination, before that this foreFaid' trial was taken of
the person presented by the council of the whole church. As for example,
the council of the church presents to any church a man to be their minister,
not knowing that they are otherwise provided ; in the meantime the church is
provided of another, sufficient in their judgment for that charge, whom they
present to the learned ministers and next reformed church, to be examined.
In this case the presentation of the people, to whom he should be appointed
pastor, must be preferred to the presentation of the council or greater church,
unless the person presented by thp inferior jihurch be judged unable for the
government by the learned. For altogether this is to be avoided, that any
man be violently intruded or thrust in upon any congregation. But this liberty
must be reserved with all care to every several church to have their votes and
sufl'rages in election of their ministers. But violent intrusion we call not,
when the council of the church in the fear of God, and for the salvation of the
people, oflTereth unto them a sufficient man to instruct them, whom they shall
not be forced to admit before just examination, as before is said."

121
The First Book of Discipline was drawn up by John Winram, sub-prior of
St Andrews, John Spotiswood, John Willock, John Douglas, rector of St
Andrews, John Row, and John Knox, at the desire of some of the nobility,
betwixt 29th April and 20th May, 1560. It was never ratified by parliament,
but it was subscribed by many of the nobility and others, members of the
secret council, on the 27th of January, 1560,* with the following attestation,
viz. : —
" We who have subscribed these presents having advised with the articles
herein specified, and as is above-mentioned from the beginning of this book,
think the same good, and conform to God's word in all points, conform to the
notes and additions thereto, asked and promised to set the same forward at the
uttermost of our powers, providing that the bishops, abbots, priors, and other
prelates and beneficed men, which else have adjoined themselves to us, bruik
the revenues of their benefices during their lifetimes, they sustaining and up
holding the ministry, and ministers as is herein specified for preaching of the
word, and ministering of the sacraments."

No. III.— Pages.
Act of Parliament {King James) 1567. — Admission of Ministers. — Of Laick
Patronages.
Item, it is statute and ordained be our soveraine lord, with advise of his dearest
regent, and three estaitis of this present parliament, that the examination and ad
mission of ministers within this realm, be only in the power of the Kirk, now
openlie and publickly professed within the samin. The presentation of laick pa
tronages alwaies reserved to the just and ancient patrons: and that the patron
present ane qualified persone, within sex monethes (after it may come to his knaw-
ledge of the deceese of him quha bruiked the benefice of before) to the super
intendent of thay partis quhair the benefice lyes, or uthers havand commission
of the Kirk to that efliect, utherwaies the Kirk to have power to dispone the
samin to ane qualifyed persoun for the time.
Providing that the patron present ane persoun qualifyed to his understanding,
and failzeing of ane, ane uther within the said six moneths, and the said superin
tendent or commissioner of the Kirk refuses to receive and admit the person
presented be the patron, as said is ; it sail be lesum to the patron to appeale
to the superintendent, and ministers of that province quhair the benefice lyis,
and desire the person presented to be admitted, quhilk gif they refuse, to ap
peale to the General Assemblie of this haill real me, be quhome the cause beand
decyded, sail take end as they decerne and declair.

No. IV.— Page 9.
The Second Book of Discipline.
Chapter I.
This power and policy ecclesiastical is dififerent and distinct in its own nature
from that power and policy which is called civil power, and appertaineth to the
civil government of the commonwealth ; albeit they be both of God, and tend
to one end, if they be rightly used, viz., to advance the glory of God, and to
have godly and good subjects.
For this power ecclesiastical floweth immediately from God, and the Medi-
* At this time the year hegan with March. ¦
N.B — I never knew one of the agitators give anything hut garhUd extracts from
this fourth head of the First Book of Discipline— just what suits them.lllThe whole
is nearly unintelligible. I can understand what is said about the election of ministers ;
but cannot understand John Knox's notions of non-Intrusion. He was too great an
Intrusionist for mc.

122
ator Jesus Christ, and is spiritual, not having a temporal head in the earth,
but only Christ, the only spiritual King and Governor of his Kirk. Therefore
this power and policy of the Kirk should lean upon the word immediately, as
the only ground thereof, and should be taken from the pure fountain of the
scriptures, the Kirk hearing the voice of Christ the only spiritual King, and
being ruled by his laws.
It is proper to kings, princes and magistrates to be called lords and domina-
tors over their subjects, whom they govern civilly, but it is proper to Christ
only to be called Lord and Master in the spiritual government of the Kirk, and
all others that bear office therein, ought not to usurp dominion therein, nor
be called lords, but only ministers, disciples and servants. For it is Christ's
proper office to command and rule his Kirk universally, and every particular
Kirk through his Spirit and word by the tninistry of men.
Notwithstanding, as the ministers and others of'nie ecclesiastical estate are
subject to the civil magistrate, so ought the person of tbe magistrate be subject
to the Kirk spiritual and in ecclesiastical government. And the exercise of
both these jurisdictions cannot stand in one person ordinary.
The civil power is called the power of the sword, and the other the power
of the keys.
The civil power should command the spiritual to exercise, and do their
office according to the word of God ; the spiritual rulers should require the
Christian magistrate to minister justice and punish vice, and to maintain the
liberty and quietness of the Kirk within their bounds.
The magistrate commandeth external things for external peace and quietness
among the subjects ; the minister handleth external things only for conscience'
cause. The magistrate handleth external things only, and actions done before men,
but the spiritual ruler judgeth both inward afiisctions, and external actions in
respect of conscience by the word of God.
The civil magistrate craves and gets obedience by the sword and other ex
ternal means, but the ministry by the spiritual sword and spiritual means.
The magistrate neither ought to preach, minister the sacraments, nor execute
the censures of the Kirk, nor yet prescribe any rule, how it should be done,
but command the minister to observe the rule commanded in the word, and
punish the transgressor by civil means. The 'tninisfer? exercise not tbe civil
jurisdiction, but teach the magistrate how it should be exercised according to
the word.
The magistrate ought to assist, maintain and fortify the jurisdiction of
the Kirk. The ministers should assist their princes in all things agreeable to
the word, providing they neglect not their own charge by involving themselves
in civil affairs.
Finally, as ministers are subject to the judgment and punishment of the
magistrate in external things, if they offend ; so ought the magistrates to submit
themselves to the discipline of the Kirk, if they transgress in matters of con
science and religion. Chapter III.
How the persons that bear ecclesiastical functions are to he admitted to
their office.
Ordinary and outward calling hath two parts, election and ordination. Elec
tion is the choosing out of a person or persons most able to the office that
vakes by the judgment of the eldership and consent of the congregation, to
which the person or persons shall be appointed.
The qualities in general requisite in all them, who should bear charge in
the Kirk, consist in soundness of religion, and godliness of life, according as
they are sufficiently set forth in the word.

123
In the order of Election, it is to be eschewed that any person be intruded
in any offices of the Kirk, contrary to the will of the congregation, to which
they are appointed, or without the voice of the eldership.
None ought to be intruded, or placed in the places already planted, or in
any room that vakes not, for any worldly respect, and that which is called the
benefice ought to be nothing else but the stipend of the ministers that are
lawfully called.
The ceremonies of ordination are fasting, earnest prayer and imposition of
hands of the eldership." Of the Elderships, Assemblies and Discipline.
The final end of Assemblies is first to keep the religion and doctrine in pu
rity without error and corruption. Next, to keep comeliness and good order
in the Kirk.
For this order's cause, they may make certain rules and constitutions apper
taining to the good behaviours of all the members of the Kirk in their vocation.
They have power also to abrogate and abolish all statutes and ordinances
concerning ecclesiastical matters, that are found noisome and unprofitable, and
agree not with the time or are abused by the people.
They have power to execute ecclesiastical discipline and punishment upon
all transgressors, and proud contemners of the good order and policy of the
Kirk, and so the whole discipline is in their hands.
The power of election of them who bear ecclesiastical charges, pertains to
this kind of Assembly within their own bounds, being well erected, and con
stituted of many pastors and elders of sufficient ability.
By the like reason, their deposition belongs to this kind of assembly, as of
them that teach erroneous and corrupt doctrine, that be of slanderous life, and
after admonition desist not, that be given to schism, or rebellion against the
Kirk, manifest blasphemy, simony, corruption of bribes, falsehood, perjury,
whoredom, theft, drunkenness, fighting worthy of punishment by the law, usury,
dancing, infamy, and all others that deserve separation from the Kirk.
The National Assembly should take heed that the spiritual jurisdiction and
ciiiil be not confounded ia-thfi_hiiijLQ£.tilia.Kjj^i2_Jhat the patrimony of the
Kirk be not consumed or abused, and generally concerning all weighty matters
that concern the weal and good order of the whole Kirks of the realm, it
ought to interpone authority thereto. Chapter XII.
The National Assemblies of this country called commonly the General
Assemblies, ought always to be retained in their own liberty and have their
own place.
With power to the Kirk to appoint times and places convenient for the same,
and all men, as well magistrates as inferiors to be subject to the judgment of
the same in ecclesiastical causes without any reclamation or appellation to any
judge, civil or ecclesiastical within the realm.
The liberty of the elections of persons called to the ecclesiastical functions,
and observed without interruption, so long as the Kirk was not corrupted by
antichrist, we desire to be restored and retained within this realm.
So that none be intruded upon any congregation, either by the prince or
any inferior person, without lawful election, and thqjissent of the pep.ple over
whom the person is placed, as the practice of the apostolical and primitj^ve
Kirk, and good order craves. ^  -x.
And because this order, which God's word craves, cannot stand with patron
ages and presentation to benefices, used in the pope's Kirk, we desire all them
that truly fear God, earnestly to consider, that forasmuch as the names of
patronages and benefices, together with the effect thereof have flowed from the

124
pope, and corruption of the canon law only, in so far as any person was intru
ded or placed over Kirks having curam animarum.
And forasmuch as that manner of proceeding hath no ground in the word
of God, but is contrary to the same, and to the said liberty of election, they
ought not now to have place in this light of reformation. And therefore,
whosoever will embrace God's word, and desire the kingdom of his Son Christ
Jesus to be advanced, they will also embrace and receive that policy and order,
which the word of God, and upright estate of His Kirk craves, otherwise it is
in vain that theyliave professed the same.
Chapter X,
Of the Office of a Christian Magistrate in the Kirk.
Although all the members of the Kirk be holden every one in their vocation,
and according thereto, to advance the kingdom of Jesus Christ, so far as lieth
in their power, yet chiefly Christian princes, and other magistrates are holden
to do the same.
For they are called in the Scripture nourishers of the Kirk, for so much as
by them it is, or at least ought to be maintained, fostered, upholden, and de
fended against all that would procure the hurt thereof.
So it pertains to the office of a Christian magistrate, to assist and fortify the
godly proceedings of the Kirk in all its behalfs ; and namely to see that the
public estate and ministry thereof be maintained and sustained, as it appertains,
according to God's word.
To see that the Kirk be not invaded nor hurt by false teachers and hirelings,
nor the rooms thereof be occupied by dumb dogs or idle bellies.
To assist and maintain the discipline of the Kirk, and punish them civilly,
that will not obey the censure of the same, without confounding always the
one jurisdiction with the other.
To see that sufficient provision be made for the ministry, the schools and
the poor ; and if they have not sufficient to wait on their charges, to supply
their indigence even with their own rents, if need require.
To make laws and constitutions agreeable to God's word, for advancement
of the Kirk and policy thereof, without usurping any thing that pertains not
to the civil sword, but belongs to the offices that are merely ecclesiastical, as
is the ministry of the word and sacraments, using ecclesiastical discipline and
the spiritual execution thereof, or any part of the power of the spiritual keys,
which our Master gave to the Apostles and their true successorsr -
And although kings and princes that be godly, sometimes by their own
authority, when the Kirk is corrupted and all things out of order, place
ministers and restore the true service of the Lord, after the example of some
godly kings of Judah, and diverse godly emperors, and kings also in the light
of the New Testament. Yet where the ministry of the Kirk is once lawfully
constituted, and thej' that are placed do their office faithfully, all godly princes
and magistrates ought to hear and obey their voice, and reverence the majesty
of the Son of God speaking in them."
Note  The Second Book of Discipline consisting of Thirteen Chapters
was composed by vajious persons named by the General Assembly, 1576.
It was finally "reviewed and overseen by .^Messrs Robert Pont, James
Lawson," &c. '  ,'
No. v.— Page U.
Act {James'), 1592. Ratificators of the liberty of the trew Kirk. — Of
General and Synodal Assemblies. — Of Presbyteries; of Disciplin : — All
laws of idolatry are abrogate ; — Of presentation to benefices.
Our soveraine lord, and estates of this present parliament, following the
lovabil and gude example of their predecessours has ratified and appreeved, and

125
be the tenor of this present act ratifies and appreeves all liberties, previleges, im
munities and freedomes quatsumever, given and granted be his hienesse, his
regentes in his name, or any of his predecessours, to the trew and halie Kirk
presently established within this realme ; and declared in the first act of his
hienesse parliament the twenty day of October, the zeir of God, ane thousand
five hundreth three scoir nineteen zeires ; and all and quhatsumevcr acts of
parliament and statutes made of before, be his hienesse and his regents anent
the liberty and freedom of the said Kirk ; and specially the first act of the par
liament, balden at Edinburgh, the twenty-four day of October, the zeir of God,
1581, with the haill particular acts there mentioned; qnhilk sail be also
sufficient, as gif the samin were here expressed And all uther acts of parlia
ment maid sensive in favour of the trew Kirk ; and siklike ratifies and appreeves
the General AssembUes appointed be the said Kirk ; and declares that it .aalL.
be lauchful to the Kirk and minister, every zeir at the least, and aftener pro re
nata, as occasion and necessity sail require, to halde and keep General As
semblies: providing that the king's majesty, or his commissioners with them
to be appointed be his hienesse be present at ilk General Assembly before the
dissolving therof, nominateand appoint time and place, quhen and quhair the
next General Assembly sail be halderi ; and in caise neither his majesty nor
his said commissioners bees present for the time in that town quhair the said
General Assembly bees balden ; Then, and in that case, it sail be lesum to
the said General Assembly, be themselves to nominate time and place, quhair
the next General Assembly of the Kirk sail be keiped and balden as they have
been in use to do thir times by past. And als ratifies and appreives the synod-
icall and provincial Assemblies, to be halden be the said Kirk and ministers,
twise ilk zeir, as they have bene and presently are in use to do, within every
province of this realm ; and ratifies and appreves the presbyteries, and parti
cular sessiones, appointed be the said Kirk, with the haill jurisdiction and
discipline of the same Kirk, agreedjipon beJlis majestic, in conference had be
his hienesse with certaine ot the'ramisters, conveened to that effect. Of the
quhilkes articles the tenour follows ; Matters to be entreated of in the provincial
Assembhes : thir Assemblies are constitute for weichty matters, necessar to
be intreated of be mutual consent, and assistance of brethren within the province
as need requires. This Assembly has power to handle, ordour, and redresse
aU things omitted or done amiss in particular Assemblies. It has power to
depone the office-bearers of that province, for gude and just cause deserving
deprevation; and generally thir Assemblies hes the haiU power of particular
cidershippes quhairof they are collected. Matters to be entreated in the pres
byteries. The power of the presbyteries is to give diligent labourers in the
boundes committed to their charge ; that the Kirks be keeped iu gude ordour ;
to inquire diligently of naughty and ungodly persons, and to travel to bring
them in the way again be admonition or threatning of God's judgments, or be
correction. It appertains to the eldershippe to take heede that the word of
God be purely preached within their bounds, the sacraments rightly adminis
tered, the discipline interteined, and ecclesiasticale guddes uncorruptly dis
tributed. It belonges to this kinde of Assemblies to cause the ordinances maid
be the Assemblies, provencialles, nationals and generals, to be keeped and put
in execution, to make constitutions, quhilk concerns to propon in the Kirk, for
decent ordour in the Kirk quhair they governe, provided they alter na rules
maid be the provincial or General Assemblies ; and that they make the pro
vincial Assemblies foresaids privy of the rules that they sail make ; and to
abolish constitutions tending to the hurt of the samin. It hes power to excom-
niunicate the obstinate, formal proces being led, and dew interval of times beand
observed. Anent particular Kirks gif they be lauchfully ruled, be sufficient
ministry and session. They have power and jurisdiction in their awin con
gregation, in maters ecclesiastical. And decernis and declairs the saids As-
sembhes, presbyteries and sessions, jurisdiction and disciplin thereof foresaid,
_ tojbe in all time eumming, maist just and godly in the selfe, notwithstandin of

126
quhatsumever statutes, acts, canon, civil or municipal laws, made in the contrar.
To the quhilkes and every one of them thir presents sail make expresse
derogation ; and because there are diverse acts of parliament maid in favour
of the Papistical Kirk, tending to the prejudice of the liberty of the trew Kirk
of God, presently professed within this realm, jurisdiction and disciplin thereof;
quhilk stands zet in the buikes of the acts of parliament, nocht abrogated, nor
annulled; therefore hes hienesse and estaites foresaids, hes abrogated, cassed and
annulled, and be the tenour hereof abrogatis, cassis and annullis all acts of
parliament maid be ony of his hienesse predecessoures, for- maintenance of
superstition and idolatry, with all and quhatsumever acts, laws and statutes
maid at ony time before the day and date hereof, against the liberty of the
trew Kirk, jurisdiction and disciplin thereof, as the samin is used and exercis
ed within the realme.
And in speciall, that part of the act of parliament halden at Striveling,
the fourth day of November, the zeir of God, 1443 zeirs, commanding obe
dience to be given to Eugenius the paipe for the time ; the act maid be king
James the third, in his parliament halden at Edinburgh, the twenty-four day
of Februar, the zeir of God 1480 zeirs ; and all utheris acts quhairby the
paipe's authoritie is established ; the act of king James the third, in his par
liament halden at Edinburgh the twenty day of November, the zeir of God
1469 zeires, anent the Satterday, and uther vigiles to be halie days, from even
sang to even sang.
Item, that part of the act, made be the queene regente, in the parliament
halden at Edinburgh, tbe first day of Februar, the zeir of God, 1551 zeires,
giving speciall licence for holding of Pasche and zule. Item, the kingis
majestie and estates foresaids declares that the 129 act of the parliament, halden
at Edinburgh the 22d day of Maij, the zeir of God 1584 zeires, sail nawaies
be prejudiciall, nor derogate ony thing to the privilege that God hes given to
the spirituall office-bearers in the Kirk, concerning heads of religion, maters of
heresie, excommunication, collation or deprivation of ministers, or ony siklike
essential! censours, specially grounded, and havand warrand of the word ofU
figd^ Item, our soveraitie lord, and estaitis of parliament foresaids, abrogatis,
cassis and annullis the act of the same parliament halden at Edinburgh the
same zeir 1580 zeires, granting commission to bischoppes and utheris judges,
constitute in ecclesiasticall causes to receive his hienesse presentations to bene
fices, to give collation thereupon, and to put ordour in all causes ecclesiastical,
quhilk his majestie and estaitis foresaids declares to be expired in the selfe,
and to be null in time eumming, and of nane avail, force nor effect; and there
fore ordaines all presentations to benefices to be direct to the particular pres
byteries, in all time eumming, with full power to give collation thereupon, and
to put ordour to all maters and causes ecclesiasticall, within their boundes, ac>-
cording to the disciplin of the kirk ; providing the foresaids presbyteries be
bound and astricted to receive and admitt quhatsumever qualified minister,
presented be his majesty or laick patrones.

No. VI.— Page 14.
Act of Parliament, March, 1649, Abolishing the Patronages of Kirks.
The estates of parliament being sensible of the great obligation that layes
upon them by the Nationall Covenant, and by the Solemn League and Cove
nant, and by many deliverances and mercies from God, and by the late solemn
engagement unto duties, to preserve the doctrine and maintain and vindicate
the liberties of the Kirk of Scotland, and to advance the work of reformation
therein, to the utmost of their power ; and considering that patronages and
presentations of kirks is an evill and bondage, under which the Lord's people
and ministers of this land have long groaned, and that it hath no warrant in
God's word, but is founded onely on the canon law, and is a custom meerly

127
popish, and brought into the Kirk in time of ignorance and superstition, and
that the same is contrary to the Second Book of Discipline, in which upon
solid and good ground, it is reckoned among abuses, that are desired to be re
formed, and unto several acts of General Assemblies, and that it is prejudicial
to the liberty of the people, and planting of kirks, and unto the free calling
and entrie of ministers unto their charge. And the said estates being wiUing
and desirous to promove and advance the reformation foresaid, that everie
thing in the house of God may be ordered according to His word and com
mandment, doe therefore from the sense of the former obligations, and upon the
former grounds and reasons discharge for ever hereafter, all patronages and
presentations of kirks, whither belonging to the king or to any laie patrone,
presbyteries or others within this kingdom, as being unlawful and unwarrantable
by God's word, and contrary to the doctrine and liberties of this Kirk ; and do
repeal, rescind, make voyd, and annul all gifts and rights granted thereanent,
and all former acts made in parliament, or in any inferior judicatory in favours
of any patrone or patrones whatsoever, so far as the same doth or may relate
unto the presentation of kirks, and doth statute and ordain, that no person
or persons whatsomever shall at any time hereafter take upon them under pre
text of any title, infeftment, act of parliament, possession, or warrant whatso
ever, which are hereby repealed to give, subscrive, or seal any presentation to
any kirk within this kingdom : and discharges the passing of any infeftments here
after bearing a right to patronages to be granted in favours of these for whom the
infeftments are presented : And that no person or persons .shall either in the
behalfe of themselves or others, procure, receive, or make use of any presenta
tion to any kirk within this kingdome : And it is further declared and ordained,
that if any presentation shall hereafter be given, procured or received, that the
same is null and of no effect, and that it is lawful! for presbyteries to reject the
same, and to refuse to admit anj' to tryalls thereupon, and notwithstanding
thereof to proceed to the planting of the Kirk upon the sute and calling, or
with the consent of the congregation, on whom none is to be obtruded against
their will. And it is decerned, statute, and ordained, that whosoever hereafter
shall upon the suit and calling of the congregation, after due examination of their
literature and conversation, be admitted by the presbytery unto the exercise
and function of the ministry in any paroch within this kingdom, that the said
person or persons without a presentation, by vertue of their admission, hath suffi
cient right and title to possesse and enjoy the manse and gleib, and the whole
rents, profits and stipends, which the ministers of that burgh had formerly possest
and enjoyed, or that hereafter shall be modified by the commission for the plan
tation of kirks : And decerns all titulars and taksmenof tythes,heretors,liferenters,
or others subject and lyable in payment of ministers' stipends, to make payment
of the same, notwithstanding the minister his want of a presentation : And or
dains tbe lords of Session and other judges competent to give out decreets and
sentences, letters conform, horning inhibition, and all others executorials upon
the said admission of ministers by presbytries, as they were formerly in use to
doe upon collation and institution following, upon presentations from patrons.
Declaring always that where ministers are already admitted upon presentation,
and have obtained decreets conform thereupon, that the said decreets and exe
cutorials following thereupon, shall be good and valid rights to the ministers for
suiting and obtaining payment of their stipend, and the presentation and de
creet conform, obtained before the date hereof, shall be a valid ground and right
for that effect : Notwithstanding the annulUng of presentations by vertue of
this present act, and because it is needfull that the just and proper interest of
congregations and presbyteries in providing of kirks with ministers be clearly
determined by the Generall Assembly, and what is to be accompted the con
gregation having that interest : Therefore it is hereby seriously recommended
unto the next Generall Assembly, cicariy to determine the same, and to con-
discend upon a certain standing way for being a setled rule therein, for all time
coming. And it is hereby provided, declared and ordained, that the taking away

128
of patronages and presentations off kirks shall import nor inforce no hurt nor
prejudice unto the title and right that any patrone hath unto the tythes of the
paroch, nor weaken his infeftment, wherein the same is contained, but that the
said title, right and infeftment, shall in every respect (so farre as doth concern
the tythes) be as valid and strong as when presentations were in use. It is
further statute and ordained, that the tythes of these kirks, whereof the pre
sentations are hereby abolished, shal belong heretably unto the saids patrons
and be secured unto them, and inserted in their rights and infeftments in place
of the patronage. Likeas the estates of parliament declare the said patrons
their right thereunto to be good and valid, hereby granting full power to them
to possesse, sell, annulzie and dispone the same in manner after specified, as
fully and freely as the minister and patrone might have done before the making
of these presents. Excepting always therefrom these tythes, which the heretors
have had and possest by vertue of taks set to them by the ministers, without
any deed or consent of the patrones, concerning which it is provided, that the
said tythes at the issue and outrunning of the present taks, shall belong unto
the heretors respective, these said heretors and the patrons above-mentioned,
each of them for their interest, being always liable to the payment of the pre
sent stipends to the ministers, and to such augmentation and provision of new
stipends to one or more ministers, and such as the parliament or commission
for plantation of kirks shall think fit and appoint, excepting also such tythes as
are and have been possest, anduplifted by the minister as their proper stipends ;
concerning which it is hereby declared, that the minister shall enjoy the same
without any impediment as formerly, it being hereby provided also, that this
act shall prejudge no person of the right, title and possession of their tythes by
infeftments, taks and other lawful rights acquired by them, and their predeces
sors and authors, as accords of the law. Likeas the estates of parlia
ment renew the former acts granted in favour of heretors, for valuing, leading
and buying of their tythes: Hereby ordaining any patrone, having right to these
tythes made to them by this act, and having no right thereunto of before, to
accept the value of six years' rents, according to the prices of valued bolls re
spective, injoyned and set down in the former acts thereanent, and that for the
heretable right of the saids tythes, and for all title, interest or claim that the
saids patrons can have or pretend thereunto by vertue of this act.

No. VII.— Page 14.
Assembly at Edinburgh, 4th August, 1649. — Sess. 40.
XL V. — Directory for Election of Ministers.
1 . When any place of the ministry in a congregation is vacant, it is incumbent
to the presbytery, with all diligence, to send one of their number to preach to
that congregation, who in his doctrine, is to present to them the necessity of
providing the place with a quahfied pastor ; and to exhort them to fervent
prayer and supplication to the Lord, that he would send them a pastor accord
ing to his own heart : as also, he is to signify, that the presbytery out of their
care of that flock, will send unto them preachers, whom they may hear ; and
if they have a desire to hear any other, they will endeavour to procure them
an hearing of that person or persons, upon the suit of the elders to the pres
bytery. 2. Within some competent time thereafter, the presbytery is again to send
one or more of their number to the said vacant congregation, on a certain day
appointed before for that effect, who are to conveen and hear sermon the fore
said day ; which being ended, and intimation being made by the minister, that
they are to go about the election of a pastor for that congregation, the session
of the congregation shall meet and proceed to the election, the action being
moderated by him that preached : and if the people shall, upon the intimation
of the person agreed upon by the session, acquiesce and consent to the said

1-29
person, then the matter being reported to the presbytery by commissioners sent
from the session, they are to proceed to the trial of the person thus elected ;
and, finding him quahfied, to admit him to the ministry in the said congre
gation. 3. But if it happen, that the major part of the congregation dissent from the
person agreed upon by the session ; in that case, the matter shall be brought
unto the presbytery, who shall judge of the same ; and, if they do not find their
dissent to be grounded on causeless prejudices, they are to appoint a new elec
tion, in manner above specified.
4. But if a lesser part of the session or congregation shew their dissent from
the election, without exceptions relevant and verified to the presbytery ; not
withstanding thereof the presbytery shall go on to the trials and ordination of
the pferson elected ; yet all possible dilii>ence and tenderness must be used, to
bring all parties to an harmonious agreement.
5. It is to be understood that no person under the censure of the kirk, be
cause of any scandalous offence, is to be admitted to have hand in the election
of a minister.
6. Where the congregation is disaffected and malignant, in that case the
presbytery is to provide them with a minister.

No. Vlll.-Page 17.
Act 1690 of King William and Queen Mary. — Concerning Patronages.
Our sovereign lord and lady, the king and queen's Majesties, considering that
the power of presenting ministers to vacant churches, of late exercised by pa
trons, hath been greatly abused, and is inconvenient to be continued within this
realm, do therefore, with advice and consent of the estates of parliament, hereby
discharge, cass, annull, and make void the foresaid power, heretofore exercised
by any patron of presenting ministers to any kirk now vacant, or that shall
hereafter happen to vaick within this kingdom, with all exercise of the said
power ; and also all rights, gifts, and infeftments, acts, statutes and customs, in
so far as they may be extended or understood to establish the said right of pre
sentation ; but prejudice always of such ministers as are duly entered by the
foresaid presentators, (while in use) their right to the manse, gleib, benefice,
stipend, and other profits of their respective churches, as accords ; and but pre
judice to the patrons, of their right to employ the vacant stipends on pious uses,
within the respective parishes, except where the patron is popish, in which case
he is to employ the same on pious uses, by the advice and appointment of pres.
bytery ; and in case the patron shall fail in applying the vacant stipend for the
uses foresaid, that he shall lose his right of administration of the vacant stipend,
for that and the next vacancy, and the same shall be disposed on by the pres
bytery to the uses foresaid ; Excepting always the vacant stipends in the bounds
of the synod of Argile ; and to the effect the calling and entering ministers, in
all time coming may be orderly and regularly performed, their Majesties, with
consent of the estates of pariiament, do statute and declare, that, in case of the
vacancy of any particular church, and for supplying the same with a minister ;
the heritors of the said parish (being protestants) and the elders are to name and
propose the person to the whole congregation, to be either approven or disap
proven by them ; and if they disapprove, that the disapprovers, to the eff'eet the
aflair may be cognosced upon by the presbytery of the bounds, at whose judg
ment, and by whose determination, the calling and entry of a particular minister
is to be ordered and concluded ; and it is hereby enacted, that if application be
not made by the eldership and heritors of the parish to the presbytery for the call
and choice of a minister, within the space of six months after the vacancy, that
then the presbytery may proceed to provide the said parish, and plant a minis
ter in the church, tanquam jure devoluto. It is always hereby declared that
I

130
this act shall be but prejudice of the calling of ministers to the royal burghs
by the magistrates, town council, and kirk session of the burgh where there is
no landward parish, as they have been in use before the year 1660. And
where there is a considerable part of the parish in landward, that the call shall
be by magistrates, town council, kirk session, and the heritors of the landward
parish. And in lieu of the said right of presentation, hereby taken away, their
Majesties, with advice and consent foresaid, statute and ordain the heritors and
life-renters of each parish, and the town councils for the burgh, to pay to the
said patrons, betwixt and Martinmas next, the sum of six hundred merks, pro
portionally eflfeirinir to their valued rents, viz., two parts by the heritors, and a
third part by the life-renters, deducing always the patron's own part, effeiring
to his proportion as an heritor, and that upon the said patron his granting a
sufficient and formal renunciation of the said right of presentation in favours of
the said heritors, town council for the burgh, and kirk session ; and it is hereby
declared, that as to the parishes to which their Majesties have right to present,
upon payment of six hundred merks to the clerk of the treasury, their Majesties
shall be fully denuded of the right of presentation, as to that parish ; and as to
other patrons, if they refuse to accept the said 600 merks, the same is to be
consigned in the hands of a responsible person in the parish, upon the hazard
of the consigners, not to be given up to the patron, until! he grant the said re
nunciation, allowing, in the meantime, the heritors and kirk session to call the
minister conform to this act ; and ordains letters of horning to be direct, at the
instance of tbe patron, against the heritors and others, who shall not make paj'-
ment of the said 600 merks, after the said term of Martinmas next, and likewise
at the instance of the heritors and others willing to pay, against those who are
unwiUing. And in case the patron be unwilling to accept the said sum, or the
heritors and others aforesaid unwilling to pay, ordains letters of horning to be di
rect, at the instance of their Majesties' solicitor, against either of them : And fur
ther, their Majesties, with advice and consent foresaid, statute, enact,and declare,
that the right of the teinds of the said parish, which are not heritably disponed,
shall by virtue of this present act belong to the patrons, with the burden always
of the ministers' stipends, tacks and prorogations already granted of the said
teinds, and of such augmentations of stipends, future prorogations, and erections
of new kirks, as shall be found just and expedient, providing the said patrons
getting rijrht to the teinds, by virtue of this present act, and who had no right
thereto of before, shall be ; likeas they are hereby obliged to sell to each heritor
the teinds of his own lands, at the rate of six years' purchase, as the same shall
be valued by a commissioner for the valuation of teinds ; and whereas there are
certain lands and annual rents holden of the said benefices, and beneficed
persons, from which the patrons might have some benefit arising to them ; it is
hereby ordained, that the right of superiority of the said lands and annual rents
shall belong to their Majesties in all lime coming, with all the whole casualities
and emoluments thereof, notwithstanding of any former act of parliament in the
contrar ; reserving notwithstanding to the patrons the feu-farms and feu-mails
of the said superiorities, aye and while they receive payment and satisfaction
from their Majesties of the price thereof, at the rate of 100 merks for each
cbalder of victual overhead, and for each 100 merks of feu-mail, except where
tho said feu-farms are a part of the minister's modified stipend, or where the
minister is, and has been in possession thereof by the space of ten years, or
where he has the full benefice, in which cases they are to be irredeemable ; ex
cepting likewise from this act the superiorities belonging to the deanery of
Hamilton, and the provostry of Bothwell, whereunto the duke of Hamilton has
right, which are noways hereby prejudged.

131
No. IX.— Page 20.
Act 5th, George L c. 29—58.
If any patron shall present a person to any vacancy, who is then, or shall
be, pastor or minister of any other church or parish, or any person, who shall
not accept or declare his willingne.ss to accept of the presentation and charge
to which he is presented, within the said time, such presentation shall not be
accounted any interruption of the course of time allowed to the patron for
presenting ; but the jus devolutum shall take place as if no such presentation
had been offered.

No. X  Page 21.
Act against tlie Intrusion of Ministers into vacant Congregations: — Ke-
cornmendation to Presbyteries concerning Settlements.
Edinburgh, May 25th, 1736,
The General Assembly considering from Act of Assembly, August 6th,
1575, Second Book of Discipline, ch. 3, Par. 4, 6, and 8, registrate in the
Assembly books, and appointed to be subscribed by all ministers, ratified by
acts of parliament, likewise the act of Assembly 1638, December 17th and
18th, and Assembly 1715 act 9tb, That it is and has been since the Reforma
tion the principle of this church, that no minister shall be intruded into any
parish contrary to the will of the congregation, do therefore seriously recom
mend to all judicatories of this church, to have a due regard to the said princi
ple in planting vacant congregations, and that all presbyteries be at pains
to bring about harmony and unanimity in congregations, and to avoid every
thing that may excite or encourage unreasonable exceptions against a worthy
person, that may be proposed to be their minister in tho present situation and
circumstances of the church, so as none be intruded into such parishes, as they
regard the glory of God, and edification of the body of Christ.

No. XI.— Page 21.
To the King's most Excellent Majesty.
The humble address of Mr Alexander Anderson, Moderator of the
last General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, Mr James
Gordon, minister, and Colonel John Erskine of Carnock, ruling
elder, commissioners appointed for that Church by the said Assem
bly, 1735.
May it please your Majesty,
The Church of Scotland after great sufferings, was at the late happy
Revolution restored by the gracious providence of Almighty God to the
possession of her former rights and privileges so long contended for. His
majesty king William of immortal memory, was then the glorious instrument
of her deliverance, and at the same time of delivering Great Britain from
Popery and Slavery.
Amongst other great and worthy things done at that memorable juncture for
the church and people of Scotland, the power of patrons to present minislersto
vacant churches was abolished by an 'act of pariiament, in consequence of the
Scots claim of right, in the year 1690, for which the patrons obtained a recom
pense, and were also allowed to retain all the temporal benefits of patronage.
which they had formeriy enjoyed.

132
By the same act of parliament, another method of settling ministers in
churches was established, in the exercise of which, that great point in the con
stitution of a church, viz., the establishing of a just relation between pastor and
people was managed with much calmness, decency and order. And the min
isters thus established, by the Divine blessing on their labour, were successful
in the work of thegospel, and religion and loyalty daily gained ground against
profane principles and practices, and against disaffection to the civil govern
ment. By the act of Union which passed by the parliaments of both the British
nations, and was made the fundamental constitution of the kingdom of Great
Britain, this freedom from the presentations of patrons, and the said method
appointed for settling ministers in churches, did with the other rights and
privileges of the church and people of Scotland, become an essential and
fundamental part of the foresaid constitution of Great Britain.
Notwithstanding whereof, certain disaffected persons, at a time when the
most valuable rights and interests of Britain were thought to be in imminent
danger, had the address to procure an act of parliament in the 10th year of the
late queen Anne, rescinding the foresaid act of parliament 1690, that abolished
the power of patrons to present ministers, and established the method of their
settlement in churches ; and that this was done in resentment against the
Church of Scotland, and that further threatenings were breathed out against
her, for her firm and loyal adherence to the Revolution interest, and especially
to the succession to the crown in your majesty's royal Protestant family, was
not then denied but boasted of, and is still remembered by all, who observe
these times.
The bad effects which have thence proceeded to the interests of religion
and loyalty, none but an utter stranger to Scotland can be unacquainted with,
nor with the grounds of fear, that these evils may mightily increase till the
cause be removed.
The Church of Scotland having long waited for redress of this heavy griev
ance, and not having as yet obtained the same, did humbly believe it to be her
duty now again to lay the case with the utmost dutifuluess before your majes
ty, and to implore your most gracious and royal favour and justice for relieving
her from these hardships, which are the more affecting because of the lament
able consequences thereof, that seem to multiply and increase. Discontents
and division appear to be growing on the one hand, as does disafi'ection on
the other, whereby irrehgion and licentiousness are likely to prevail.
As no act of parliament can be made or repealed but by your majesty and
parliament, we as commissioned by your majesty's subjects of the Church of
Scotland (whose unshaken loyalty is testified even by her enemies) do with
hearts zealous for your royal person, family and government, and zealous also,
we hope, for the glory of God and the success of the gospel, presume most
dutifully to approach yoiir sacred person as the nursing father of the Church
of Scotland, and the guardian of your people's rights, and in name and behalf
of our constituents, most humbly to implore,
That it may please your most excellent majesty to favour the repeal of the
foresaid act of the lOth of queen Anne, that so the church and people of
Scotland, may be restored to their just right and privileges as to the settling
of ministers, secured to them by the above mentioned act of union.
And that Almighty God may greatly bless and prosper your majesty's royal
person and family, and may remarkably countenance your government, and
direct the same to His own glory, your majesty's honour and the welfare of
your people, is the hearty prayer of.
May it please your Majesty,
Your Majesty's most dutiful and most loyal subjects,
Alexander Anderson.
James Gordon.
John Erskine.

133

No. XII.— Page 21.
May 15th, 1732. In cases oi jure devoluto, if application be made to the
presbytery by two or more of the heritors and elders, jointly or separately for
the moderation of a call, a day is to be appointed, and one or more of the
presbytery are to meet after sermon with the heritors and elders, in presence
of the congregation, to moderate in a call to one to be minister of the vacant
parish, who is to be^^elected and called by the heritors and elders in a conjunct
meeting. That after the finishing of the election, tbe person so elected to be
minister, shall be proposed to the congregation to be either approven or dis
approven by them. That the disapprovers shall offer their reasons to the
presbytery of the bounds, at whose judgment, and by whose determination the
calling and entry of the minister shall be ordered and concluded according to
the rules of the church.

No. XIIL— Page 53.
The Appellation of John Knox.
But, because this is not my chief ground, I will stand content for this present
to show, that it is lawful to God's prophets, and to preachers of Christ Jesus,
to appeal from the sentence and judgment of the visible church, to the know
ledge of the temporal magistrate, who by God's law is bound to hear their
causes, and to defend them from tyranny.
The prophet Jeremy was commanded by God to stand in the court of the
house of the Lord, and to preach this sermon, in effect that Jerusalem should
be destroyed, and be exposed in opprobry to all nations of the earth ; and that
also that famous temple of God should be made desolate, like unto Shiloh,
because the priests, the prophets and the people, did not walk in the law which
God hath proposed unto them, neither would they obey the voices of the
prophets, whom God sent to call them to repentance.
For this sermon, was Jeremy apprehended, and a sentence of death pro
nounced against him, and that by the priests, by the prophets and by the
people : which things being reported in the ears of the princes of Judah, they
passed up to the king's house, to the temple of the Lord, and sat down in
judgment for further knowledge of the cause : but the priests and prophets
continued in their cruel sentence, which before they had pronounced, saying,
" This man is worthy of death, for he hath prophesied against this city as your
ears have heard." But Jeremy, so moved by the Holy Ghost, began his
defence against that their tyrannous sentence, in these words : " The Lord
(saith he) hath sent me to prophesy against this house, and against this city,
all the words which you have heard. Now therefore make good your ways,
and hear the voice of the Lord your God, and then shall he repent of the evil
which he hath spoken against you. And as for me, behold, I am in your
hands (so doth he speak to the princes) do to me as you think good and
right ; nevertheless, know you this most assuredly, that if ye murder or slay
me, ye shall make yourselves, this city, and the inhabitants of the same, criminal
and guilty of innocent blood ; for of a truth the Lord hath sent me to speak in
your ears all these words."
" Then the princes and the people (saith the text) said, This man is not
worthy of death, for he hath spoken to us in the name of the Lord our God."
And so, after some contention, was the prophet delivered from that danger.
This fact and history manifestly proveth whatsoever before I have affirmed,
to wit, that it is lawful for the servants of God to call for the help of the civil
magistrate, against the sentence of death, if it be unjust, by whomsoever it is
pronounced ; and also, that the civil sword hath power to repress the fury

134
of the priests, and to absolve whom they have condemned : for the prophet of
God was condemned by those, who then only in earth were known to be the
visible church, to wit, the priests and prophets who were in Jerusalem, the
successors of Aaron, to whom was given a charge to speak to the people in
the name of God, and a precept given to the people to hear the law from their
mouths ; to the which, if any should be rebellious or inobedient, he should die
the death without mercy. These men, I say, thus authorized by God, first
did excommunicate Jeremy, for that he did preach otherwise than did the
common sort of the prophets in Jerusalem ; and last, apprehended him, as you
have heard, pronouncing against him this sentence above written ; from the
which, nevertheless the prophet appealed, that is, sought help and defence
against the same, and that most earnestly did he crave of the princes : for
albeit he saith, " I am in your hands, do with me as ye think righteous," he
doth not contemn or neglect his life, as though he regarded not what should
become of him ; but in those his words most vehemently did he admonish the
princes and rulers of the people, giving them to understand what God should
require of them ; as if he should say, ye princes of Judah, and rulers of the
people, to whom appertaineth indifferently to judge betwixt party and party,
to justify the just man, and to condemn the malefactor, you have heard a sen
tence of death pronounced against me, by those whose lips ought not to speak
deceit, because they are sanctified and appointed by God himself, to speak his
law, and to pronounce judgment with equity ; but as they have left the living
God, and have taught the people vanity, so are they become mortal enemies to
all God's true servants, of whom I am one, rebuking their iniquity, apostasy,
¦and defection from God, which is the only cause they seek my life. But a
thing most contrary to all equity, law, and justice it is, that I, a man sent of
<5od, to call them his people, and you again to the true service of God, from
the which you are all declined, shall suffer the death, because that my enemies
do so pronounce sentence. I stand in your presence, whom God hath made
princes, your power is above their tyranny, before you do I expose my cause, I
am in your hands, and cannot resist to suffer what ye think just : but, lest that
my lenity and patience should either make you negligent in the defence of me,
in my just cause, appealing to your judgment, either yet encourage my enemies
in seeking my blood, this one thing I dare not conceal, that if ye murder me
(which thing ye do, if ye defend me not,) ye make not only my enemies guilty
of my blood, but also yourselves, and this whole city.
By these words, I say, it is evident, that the prophet of God, being con
demned by the priests, and by the prophets of the visible church, did seek aid,
support and defence at the princes and temporal magistrates threatening his
blood to be required at their hands, if they, by their authority, did not defend
him from the fury of his enemies ; alledging also just causes of his appellation,
and why he ought to have been defended, to wit, that he was sent of God to
rebuke their vices and defection from God ; that he taught no doctrine which
God before had not pronounced in his law ; that he desired their conversion
to God, continually calling upon them to walk in the ways which God had
approved : and therefore doth he boldly crave of the princes, as of God's
lieutenants, to be defended from the blind rage and tyranny of the priests,
notwithstanding that they claimed to themselves authority to judge all matters
of religion. And the same did he when he was cast in prison, and thereafter
was brought to the presence of king Zedekiah. After, I say, he had defended
his innocency, affirming, that he neither had offended against the king, against
his servants, nor against the people, at last he made intercession to the king
for his life, saying, " But now my lord the king, take heed, I beseech thee, let
my prayer fall into thy presence, command me not to be carried again into the
house of Jonathan the scribe, that I die not there."
And the text witnesseth, that the king commanded the place of his imprison
ment to be changed. Whereof it is evident, that the prophet did ofter than
once seek help at the civil power ; and that first the princes, and thereafter the

135
king, did acknowlegc. That it appertained to their office to deliver him from
the unjust sentence which was pronounced against him. If any man think
that Jeremy did not appeal, because he only declared the wrong done unto
him, and did but crave defence according to his innocency ; let the same man
understand, that none otherwise do I appeal from that false and cruel sentence,
which your bishops pronounced against me ; neither yet can there be anyjjust
cause of appellation, but innocency, or suspicion to be had, whether it be by
ignorance of a judge, or by malice and corruption of those, who, under the title
of justice, do exercise tyranny. If 1 were a thief, murderer, blasphemer,
open adulterer, or any offender whom God's word commandeth to suffer for a
crime committed, my appellation were vain, and to be rejected : but I, being
innocent, yea, the doctrine which your bishops have condemned in me, being
God's eternal verity, have no less liberty to crave your defence against that
cruelty, than had the prophet Jeremy to seek aid of the princes and kings of
Judah. But this shall more plainly appear in the fact of St Paul, who, after that he
was apprehended in Jerusalem, did first claim the liberty of the Roman citizens,
for avoiding torment, when the captain would have examined him by questions ;
thereafter in the council, where no righteous judgment was to be hoped for, he
affirmed, that he was a Pharisee, and that he was accused of the resurrection
of the dead ; and last, in the presence of Festus, he appealed from all know-
lege and judgment of the priests at Jerusalem, to the emperor : of which last
point, because it doth chiefly appertain to this my cause, I will somewhat
speak. After that Paul had divers times been accused, as in the Acts of the Apostles
is manifest, at the last the chief priests and their faction came to Cesarea,
with Festus the president, who presented unto them Paul in judgment, whom
they accused of horrid crimes, which nevertheless they could not prove ; the
apostle maintaining, that he had offended neither against the law, neither
against the temple, neither yet against the emperor.
" But Festus willing to gratity the Jews, said to Paul, Wilt thou go up to
Jerusalem, and there be judged of these things in my presence ? But Paul
said, I stand at the justice-seat of the emperor, where it behoveth me to be
judged ; I have done no wrong to the Jews, as thou better knowest : if I have
done any thing unjustlj', or yet committed any crime worthy of death, I refuse
not to die : but if there be nothing of these things true whereof they accuse me,
no man may give me to them : I appeal to Cesar." It may appear at the
first sight, that Paul did great injury to Festus the judge, and to the whole
order of the priesthood, who did hope greater equity in a cruel tyrant, than in
all that session and learned company ; which thing, no doubt, Festus did
understand, pronouncing these words, " Hast ihou appealed to Cesar? thou
shalt go to Cesar." As if he would say, I, as a man willing to understand the
truth, before I pronounce sentence, have required of thee to go to Jerusalem,
where the learned of thine own nation may hear thy cause, and decern in the
same. The controversy standeth in matters of religion ; thou art accused
as an apostate from the law, as a violater of the temple, and a transgressor of
the traditions of their fathers, in which matters I am ignorant; and therefore
desire information by those that be learned in the same religion, whereof the
question is ; and dost thou refuse so many godly fathers to hear thy cause, and
dost appeal to the emperor, preferring him to all our judgments, of no purpose,
belike, but to delay time ? Thus, I say, it might have appeared that Paul did
not only injury to the judge and to the priests, but also that the cause was
greatly lo be suspected, partly for that he did refuse the judgment of those
that had most knowledge (as all men supposed,) of God's will and religion ;
and partly, because he appealed to the emperor, who then was at Rome, far
absent from Jerusalem, a man ignorant of God, and enemy to all virtue. But
the apostle considering the nature of his enemies, and what things they had
intended against him, even from the first day he began freely to speak in the

136
name of Christ, did not fear to appeal from them, and from the judge that
would have gratified them. They had professed themselves plain enemies to
Christ Jesus, and to his blessed gospel, and sought the death of Paul, yea, even
by factions and treasonable conspiracy ; and therefore by no means would he
admit them either as judges in his cause, or auditors of the same, as Festus
required ; but grounding himself upon strong reasons, to wit, that he had not
offended the Jews, neither against the law, but that he was innocent ; there
fore that no judge ought to give him into the hands of his enemies ; grounding
I say, his appellation upon these reasons, he neither regarded the displeasure of
Festus, neither yet the report of the ignorant multitude, but boldly did appeal
from all cognoscence of them to the judgment of the emperor, as said is.
By these two examples, I doubt not but your honours do understand, that
it is lawful to the servants of God, oppressed by tyrants, to seek remedy against
the same, be it by appellation from their sentence, or by imploring the help of
civil magistrates ; for what God hath approved in Jeremy and Paul, he can
condemn in none that are so dealt withal. I might alledge some history of
the primitive church serving to the same purpose ; as of Ambrose and
Athanasius, of whom, the one would not be judged but at Millain, where that
his doctrine was heard of all his church, and received and approved by many ;
and the other would in no ways give place to those councils, where he knew
that men conspiring against the truth of God, should sit in judgment and con
sultation : but, because the scriptures of God are my only foundation and
assurance in all matters of weight and importance, I have thought the two
former testimonies sufficient, as well to approve my appellation reasonable and
just, as to declare to your honours, that with safe conscience ye cannot refuse
to admit the same.
# # # # #
I am not ignorant that Satan of old time, for maintenance of his darkness,
hath obtained of the blind world two chief points ; the former, he hath persuaded
to princes, rulers, and magistrates. That the feeding of Christ's flock apper
taineth nothing to their charge, but that it is rejected upon the bishops, and
state ecclesiastical. And, Secondly, That the reformation of religion, be it
never so corrupt, and the punishment of such as be sworn soldiers in their
kingdom, are exempted from all civil power, and are reserved to themselves,
and to their cognizance. But that no offender may justly be exempted from
punishment ; and that the ordering and reformation of religion, with the instruc
tion of subjects, doth especially appertain to the civil magistrate, God's per
fect ordinance, his plain word, and the facts and examples of those that of God
are highly praised, most evidently declare.
When God did establish his law, statutes and ceremonies in the midst of Israel,
he did not exempt the matters of religion from the power of Moses ; but, as
he gave him charge over the civil policy, so he put in his mouth and his hand ;
That is, he first revealed to him, and thereafter commanded to put in practice,
whatsoever was to be taught or done in matters of religion. Nothing did God
reveal particularly to Aaron, but altogether was he commanded to depend from
the mouth of Moses ; yea, nothing was he permitted to do to himself, or to his
children, either in his or their inauguration and sanctification to the priesthood,
but all was committed to the care of Moses : and therefore were these words
so frequently repeated to Moses, " Thou shalt separate Aaron and his sons from
the midst of the people of Israel, that they may execute the office of the priest
hood ; thou shalt make them garments, thou shalt anoint them, thou shalt wash
them, thou shalt fill their hands with sacrifice :" and so forth of every rite and
ceremony, that was to be done unto them, especial commandment was given
unto Moses, that he should do it.
Now, if Aaron and bis sons were subject to Moses that they did nothing
but at his commandment ; who dare be so bold as to affirm, that the civil
magistrate hath nothing to do in matters of religion ? For seeing that then
God did so strailly require that even those who did bear the figure of Christ,

137
should receive from the civil power, as it were, their sanctification, and entrance
into their office ; and seeing also that Moses was so far preferred to Aaron,
that the one commanded and the other did obey ; who dare esteem that the
civil power is now become so profane in God's eyes, that it is sequestered from
all intromission with the matters of religion ? the Holy Ghost in divers places
declareth the contrary. For one of the chief precepts commanded to the
king, when that he should he placed in his throne, was to write the example
of the book of the Lord's law, that it should be with him, that he might read
in it all the days of his Ufe, that he might learn to fear the Lord his God, and
to keep aU the words of his law and his statutes to do them. This precept he
requireth, not only that the king should himself fear God, keep his law and
statutes ; but that also he, as the chief ruler, should provide that God's true
religion should be kept inviolated of the people and flock which by God was
committed to his charge.

No. XIV.— Page 55.
Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter XXIII. Of the Civil Magistrate.
I. God the supreme Lord and King of all the world, hath ordained civil
magistrates to be under him over the people for his own glory, and the public
good ; and to this end, hath armed them with the power of the sword, for the
defence and encouragement of them that are good, and for the punishment of
evil-doers. II. It is lawful for Christians to accept and execute the office of a Magis
trate, when called thereunto ; in the managing whereof, as they ought especially
to maintain piety, justice and peace, according to the wholesome laws of each
commonwealth ; so for that end, they may lawfully, now under the New Tes
tament, wage war upon just and necessary occasions.
III. The civil magistrate may not assume to himself the administration of
the word and sacraments, or the power of the keys of the kingdom of heaven ;
yet he hath authority, and it is his duty to take order, that unity and peace be
preserved in the church, that the truth of God be kept pure and entire, that
all blasphemies and heresies be suppressed, all corruptions and abuses in wor
ship and disciphne prevented or reformed ; and all the ordinances of God
duly settled, administered and observed ; for the better effecting whereof he
hath power to call synods, to be present at them, and to provide that whatso
ever is transacted in them be.-a<icqrding to the mind of God.
IV. It is the duty of people to pray for magistrates, to honour their persons,
to pay them tribute and other dues, to obey their lawful commands, and to be
subject to their authority for concience' sake. Infidelity or indifference in re
ligion doth not make void the magistrate's just and legal authority, nor free
the people from their due obedience to him ; from which ecclesiastical persons
are not exempted ; much less hath the Pope any power or jurisdiction over
them in their dominions or over any of their people ; and least of all to deprive
them of their dominions or Hves, if he shall judge them to be heretics, or upon
any other pretence whatsoever.

No. XV.— Page^67.
See No. VIIL— Page 129 of Appendix.

138

No. XVL— Page 67.
Act lOth Queen Anne, Chap. 12, 1712, restoring Patronage.
" Whereas by the ancient laws and constitution of that part of Great Bri-
tain called Scotland, the presenting of ministers to vacant churches did of right
belong to the patronsj until by the twenty-third act of the second session of the
first pariiament of the late king William and queen Mar}', held in the year
1690 (intituled, act concerning patronages) the presentation was taken from
the patrons, and given to the heritors and elders of the respective parishes ; and
in place of the right of presentation, the heritors and liferenters of every parish
were to pay to the respective patrons a small and inconsiderable sum of money,
for which the patrons were to renounce their right of presentation in all times
thereafter: And whereas by the fifteenth act of the fifth session, and by the
thirteenth act of the sixth session of the first parliament of the said king William,
the one intituled An act for encouraging of preachers at vacant churches benorth
Forth, and the other intituled Act in favours of preachers benorth Forth, there
are several burdens imposed on vacant stipends to the prejudice of the patron's
right of disposing thereof: And whereas that way of calling ministers has
proved inconvenient, and has not only occasioned great heats and divisions
among those, who by the aforesaid act were entitled and authorized to call
ministers, but likewise has been a great hardship upon the patrons, whose prede
cessors had founded and endowed those churches, and who have not received
payment or satisfaction for their right of patronage, from the aforesaid heritors
or liferenters of the respective parishes, nor have granted renunciations of their
said rights on that account; be it therefore enacted by the queen's most excellent
majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the lords spiritual and temporal,
and commons in this present parliament assembled, and by the authority of the
same. That the aforesaid act made in the year 1690, (intituled. Act concerning
patronages) in so far as the same relates to the presentation of ministers by
heritors and others therein mentioned, be and is hereby repealed and made
void ; and that the aforesaid fifteenth act of the fifth session, and thirteenth
act of the sixth session of the first parliament of king William, be and are here
by likewise repealed and made void ; and that in all time coming, the right of all
and every patron or patrons to the presentation of ministers to churches and
benefices,and the disposing of the vacant stipends for pious uses within the parish,
be restored, settled and confirmed to them, the aforesaid acts, or any other act,
statute or custom to the contrary in any wise notwithstanding ; and that from
and after the first day of Ma/ 1712, it shall and may be lawful for her majes
ty, her heirs and successors, and for every other person or persons who have
right to any patronage or patronages of any church or churches whatsoever,
in that part of Great Britain called Scotland, (and who have not made and
subscribed a formal renuniciation thereof under their hands) to present a quali
fied minister or ministers to any church or churches, whereof they are patrons,
which shall at any time after the said 1st day of May, happen to be vacant ;
and the presbytery of the respective bounds shall be and is hereby oblidged to
receive and admit in the same manner such qualified person or persons, minis
ter or ministers as shall be presented by the respective patrons, as the persons
or ministers presented before the making of this act ought to have been ad
mitted. Provided always. That in case any patron or patrons have accepted of and
received any sum or sums of money from the heritors or liferenters of any
parish, or from the magistrates or town council of any borough, in satisfaction
of their right of presentation, and have discharged or renounced the same un
der their hand, that nothing herein shall be construed to restore such patron
or patrons to their right of presentation, any thing in this present act to the
contrary notwithstanding.
Provided also, and it is hereby enacted by the authority aforesaid ; That in

139
case the patron of any church aforesaid shall neglect or refuse to present any
quahfied minister to such parish that shall be vacant the said 1st day of May,
or shall happen to be vacant at any time thereafter for the space of six months
after the said 1st day of May, or after such vacancy shall happen, that the
right of presentation shall accrue and belong for that time to the presbytery of
the bounds where such is, who are to present a qualified person for that vacancy
tanquam jure devoluto.
And be it further enacted and declared by the authority aforesaid. That the
patronageandright of presentations of ministers to all churches, which belonged
to archbishops, bishops, or other dignified persons in the year 1689 before
episcopacy was abolished, as well as those which formerly belonged to the
crown, shall and do of right belong to her majesty, her heirs and successors,
who may present quahfied ministers to such church or churches, and dispose
of the vacant stipends thereof for pious uses, in the same way and manner as
her majesty, her heirs and successors, may do in the case of other patronages
belonging to the crown.
Declaring always. That nothing in this present act contained shall extend,
or be constrtied to extend to repeal and make void the aforesaid twenty-third
act of the second session of the first parliament of the late kinir William and
<iueen Mary, excepting so far as relates to the calling and presenting of minis
ters, and to the disposing of vacant stipends in prejudice of the patrons only.
And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid. That all and every
patron and patrons, who have not taken, or shall not take at any time before his
or their presenting a minister or ministers to any church or churches aforesaid, the
oath appointed to be taken by persons in public trust, by an act made in the sixth
year of her majesty's reign (intituled. An act for the better security of her
majesty's person and government) shall and are hereby oblidged at their signing
such presentation, to take and subscribe the aforesaid oath before the sheriff' of
the shire, Stewart of the stewartry, or before any two or more justices of the
peace of the county or place where such patron resides ; and in case such patron
or patrons, who have not formeriy taken the aforesaid oath, refuse or neglect
to take the same at the signing of such presentation, that the same shall be
and is hereby declared to be void, and the right of presentation, and of the
disposing the vacant stipends for that time, shall belong to her majesty, her
heirs and successors, who may present a qualified person to such church or
benefice at any time within the space of six months after such neglect or re
fusal ; any thing in this present act, or in any other act to the contrary not
withstanding. And whereas the right of patronage of churches may belong to papists;
be it therefore enacted by the authority aforesaid. That any person or persons,
known or suspected to be papists, and who have a right of presenting minis
ters, shal! be oblidged at or before his or their signing any presentation, to purge
himself of popery, by taking and signing the Formula contained in the Third
act of the pariiament of Scotland held in the year 1700, (intituled. Act for
preventing the growth of Popery); and in case such popish patron or patrons
shall refuse to take and subscribe the Formula aforesaid, the same being ten
dered to him or them by the sheriff of the shire, Stewart of the stewartry, or
any two or more justices of the peace within their respective jurisdiction, who
are hereby empowered to administer the same, the presentation, and the right
of disposing the vacant stipends, shall for that time belong to her majesty, her
heirs and successors, who may present any qualified person or persons within
SIX months after such neglect or refusal ; any thing in this present act, or any
other act, to the contrary notwithstanding.'

140

No. XVIL— Page 70,
The Directory for the Ordination of Ministers, composed by the West
minster Assembly. .
It being manifest by the word of God, that no man ought to take upon him
the office of a minister of the gospel, until he be lawfully called and ordained
thereunto ; and that the work of ordination is to be performed with all due
care, wisdom, gravity, and solemnity, we humbly tender these directions, as
requisite to be observed.
I. — He that is to be ordained, being either nominated by the people, or
otherwise commended to the presbytery for any place, must address himself
to the presbytery, and bring with him a testimonial of his taking the covenant
of the three kingdoms, of his diligence and proficiency in his studies ; what
degrees he bath taken in the university, and what hath been the time of his
abode there ; and withal of his age, which is to be twenty-four years ; but
especially of his life and conversation.
II. — Which being considered by the presbytery, they are to proceed
to enquire touching the grace of God in him, and whether he be of such holi
ness of life as is required in a minister of the gospel ; and to examine him touch
ing his learning and sufficiency, and touching the evidences of his calling to
the holy ministry, and in particular his fair and direct calling to that place.
The rules for examination are these : —
1. That the party examined be dealt withal in a brotherly way, with mild
ness of spirit, and with special respect to the gravity, modesty, and quality of
every one.
2. He shall be examined touching his skill in the original tongues, and his
trial to be made by reading the Hebrew and Greek Testaments, and rendering
some portion of same into Latin ; and if he be defective in them, enquiry shall
be made more strictly after his other learning, and whether he has skill in Logic
and Philosophy.
3. What authors in divinity he hath read and is best acquainted with ; and
trial shall be made in his knowledge of the grounds of religion, and of his abi
lity to defend the orthodox doctrine contained in them, against all unsound and
erroneous opinions, especially these of the present age ; of his skill in the sense
and meaning of such places of Scripture as shall be proposed unto him, in cases
of conscience, and in the chronology of the Scripture, and the ecclesiastical
history. 4. If he hath not before preached in public with approbation of such as are
able to judge, he shall at a competent time assigned to him, expound before
the presbytery such a portion of scripture as shall be given him.
5. He shall also within a competent time frame a discourse in Latin, upon
such a common place or controversy in divinity as shall be assigned to him, and
exhibit to the presbytery such theses as express the sum thereof, and main
tain a dispute upon them.
6. He shall preach before the people, the presbytery, or some of the minis
ters of the word appointed by them being present.
7. The proportion of his gifts in relation to the place unto which he is called
shall be considered.
8. Beside the trial of his gifts in preaching, he shall undergo an examination
in the premisses two several days, and more if the presbytery shall judge it
necessary. 9. And as for him that hath.formerly been ordained a minister, and is to be
removed to another charge, he shall bring a testimonial of his ordination, and
of his abilities and observation, whereupon his fitness for that place shall be
tried by his preaching there, and (if it shall be judged necessary) by a further
examination of him.
III. — In all which he being approved, ho is to be sent to the church where he
is to serve, there to preach three several days, and to converse with the people,

141
that they may ha-fe trial of his gifts for their edification, and may have time
and occasion to enquire into, and the better to know his life and conversation.
IV. — In the last of these three days appointed for the trial of his gifts in preach
ing, there shall be sent from the presbytery to the congregation, a public inti
mation in writing, which shall be publicly read before the people, and after
affixed to the church door, to signify that such a day, a competent number of
the members of the congregation, nominated by themselves, shall appear before
the presbytery, to give their consent and approbation to such a man to be their
minister ; or otherwise to put in, with all Christian discretion and meekness,
what exceptions they have against him ; and if upon the day appointed, there
be no just exception against him, but the people give their consent, then the
presbytery shall proceed to ordination.

No. XVIIL-Page 74.
Act {King William) 1698, for Preventing of Disorders in the Supplying
and Planting of Vacant Churches.
Our sovereign lord, with advise and consent of the estates of parliament, for
remeiding the godless abuse of rabbling, that of late hath so frequently hap
pened in opposition to ministers orderly sent to supply vacant churches, and
removing all impediments and disorders that may obstruct the same, siraitly
prohibits and discharges all persons whatsomever, to make any opposition by
rabbling, tumult, or any other manner of violence, to any minister lawfully
authorized and sent to preach at any vacant church within the kingdom, either
for supplying of the said vacancy, or to exerce the ministerial function as fixed
minister of the parish, and that under the pains of one hundred pounds upon
every heritor or life-renter, and of fifty merks upon any other unlanded person
toties quoties ; and for such delinquents as are not able to pay, that they shall
be punished in their persons, as the lords of the privy council shall see cause.
And further, for the better repressing of the foresaid opposition by rabbling,
tumult, or any other manner of violence, his Majesty, with advice and consent
foresaid, ratifies, and extends to the case thereof the seventh act of parliament
1633, intituled ' Act anent invading of ministers,' and that in manner and with
the alterations following : And therefore statutes and ordains, that wherever
any such rabbling or tumult happens, the herUors and life-renters, in whose
bounds, whether within or without the parish, any of the persons delated and ac
cused or guilty of, or accessary to the same, dwells or resides, shall be holden,
upon intimation made to them by the minister injured, or by any in name of the
presbytery who sent him, to produce the foresaid persons guilty, and that they
he convened before the lords of his Majesty's privy council for that effect.
Certifying the said heritors and life-renters, that if they either failzie to produce
the said persons, if residing within their bounds when the foresaid intimation
shall be made, or if they shall siifl'er the said persons withdrawing or absenting
the time of the said intimation, thereafter to reside and haunt openly within
their bounds by the space of twenty days ; then and in these cases, the said
heritors and life-renters, shall be esteemed commovers with the delinquents,
and liable as guilty, art and part with them in their foresaid delinquency. And
because, notwithstanding the act and proclamation of council made in the year
1690, for the delivering of the keys of vacant churches to the presbyteries, or
the persons having their order, the persons havers thereof do shift the same
from hand to hand; therefore his Majesty with advise and consent foresaid,
statutes and ordains, that where and whenever after requisition made by the
presbytery to the beddal and havers of the same keys, the same are refused
and not given up, then the next magistrate, sheriff, lord of regality, or bailie,
and their deputies, or any justice of peace, when required by the presbytery,
or any from them shall repair to the said kirk, and there make open and pa-

142
tent the doors thereof, and put new locks upon the same, and deliver the keys
to the said presbytery, or their order, for their free use making of the same ;
Certifying the said inferior magistrate, who shall refuse when required, to make
the church patent in manner foresaid, he shall be liable in the fine of one hun
dred pound Scots, to be inflicted upon him by the lords of the privy council,
for the use of the poor of the parish, by and attour the expenses of the presby
tery. 
The following acts have a direct bearing on the subject of the preced
ing Pamphlet, though the order in which they stand is not specially men
tioned in its pages. 
No. XIX.
Act 1690 ch. 5. Act ratifying the Corfession of Faith, and settling
Presbyterian Church Government.
Our sovereign lord and lad}', the king and queen's majesties, and three
estates of parliament, conceiving it to be their bounden duty, after the great
deliverence that God hath lately wrought for this church and kingdom, in the
first place to settle and secure therein the true protestant religion, according
to the truth of God's word, as it hath for a long time been professed within this
land ; as also the government of Christ's church within this nation, agreeable
to the word of God, and most conducive to the advancement of true piety and
godliness, and the establisliing of peace and tranquillity within this realm : And
that by an article of the claim of right, it is declared ' That Prelacy and the
superiority of any office in the church above Presbyters, is and hath been a great
and insupportable grievance and trouble to this nation, and contrary to the
inclinations of the generality of the people ever since the Reformation, they
having reformed from Popery by Presbyters, and therefore ought to be abo
lished : Likeas, by an act of the last session of this parliament. Prelacy is abo
lished : Therefore their majesties with advice and consent of the said three
estates, do hereby revive, ratify and perpetually confirm all laws, statutes and
acts of parliament, made against Popery and Papists, and for the maintenance
and preservation of the true reformed Protestant religion, and for the true
church of Christ within this kingdom, in so far as they confirm the same, or
are made in favours thereof. Likeas, they by these presents, ratify and estab
lish the Confession of Faith, now read in their presence ; and voted and ap
proven by them, as the public and avowed Confession of this Church contain
ing the sum and substance of the doctrine of the reformed churches ; (which
Confession of Faith is subjoined to this present act.) As also they do establish,
ratify and confirm tbe Presbyterian church government and discipline: that is
to say, the government of the Church by Kirk Sessions, Presbyteries, Pro
vincial Synods and General Assemblies, ratified and established by the 114
act Ja. VI. Pari. 12, anno 1592, intituled " Ratification of the true Kirk, &c.,"
and thereafter received by the general consent of this nation, to be the only
government of Christ's church within this kingdom ; reviving, renewing and
confirming the foresaid act of parliament, in the whole heads thereof, except
that part of it, relating to patronages, which is hereafter to be taken into con-
sideralion : And rescinding, annulling, and making void the acts of pariiament
following, viz.; Act anent restitution of Bishops, Ja. VI. Pari. 18, cap. 2 ; act
ratifying the acts of Assembly 1610, Ja. VI. Pari. 21, cap. 1; act anent the
election of Archbishops and Bishops, Ja. VI. Pari. 2-2, cap. 1; act entituled.
Ratification of the Five Articles of the General Assembly at Perth, Ja.VI.Parl.
23. cap. 1; act intituled. For the restitution and re-establishment of the ancient
government of the church by Archbishops and Bishops, ch. 2, Pari. 1, Sess. 2,
act 1; anent the constitution of a National Synod, ch. 2, Pari. 1, Sess. 3, act
5 ; act against such as refuse to depone against delinquents, ch. 2, Pari. 2,
Sess. 2, act 2; act intituled. Act acknowledging and asserting the right of suc
cession to the imperial crown of Scotland, ch. 2, Pari. 3, act '2; act intituled,

143
Act anent Religion and the Test, ch. 2, Pari. 3, act 6; with all other acts,
laws, statutes, ordinances and proclamations, and that in so far allenarly as the
said acts, and others generally and particularly above mentioned, are contrary
or prejudicial to, inconsistent with, or derogatory from the Protestant Religion
and Presbyterian government now established, and allowing and declaring, that
the church government be established in the hands of, and exercised by these
Presbyterian ministers, who were outed since 1st January, 1661, for noncon
formity to Prelacy, or not complying with the courses of the times', and are
now restored by the late act of parliament, and such ministers and elders only
as they have admitted or received, or shall hereafter admit or receive: And
also, that all the said Presbyterian ministers have, and shall have right to the
maintenance, rights, and other privileges by law provided to the ministers of
Christ's church within this kingdom, as they are or shall be, legally admitted
to particular churches. Likeas, in pursuance of the premises, their majesties
do hereby appoint the first meeting of the General Assembly of this church,
as above established, to be at Edinburgh, the third Thursday of October next
to come, in this instant year 1690. And because many conform ministers
either have deserted, or were removed from preaching in their churches, pre
ceding the 13th day of April, 1689, and others were deprived for not giving
obedience to the act of the estates made in the said 13th of April, 1689, in
tituled proclamation against the owning of the late king James, and appointing
public prayers for king WiUiam and queen Mary : Therefore their majesties,
with advise and consent foresaid, do hereby declare all the churches, either
deserted, or from which the conform ministers were removed or deprived as
said is, to be vacant ; and that the presbyterian ministers exercising their min
istry within any of these paroches ; (or where the last incumbent is dead) by
the desire or consent of the paroch, shall continue their possession, and have
right to the benefices and stipends, according to their entry in the year 1689 ;
and in time coming, ay, and while the church, as now established, take further
course therewith. And to the effect the disorders that have happened in this
church may be redressed ; their majesties with advise and consent foresaid,
do hereby allow the general meeting and tbe representatives of the foresaid
presbyterian ministers and elders, in whose hands, the exercise of the church
government is established, either by themselves, or by such ministers and elders
as shall be appointed and authorized visitors by them, according to the custom
and practice of Presbyterian government throughout the whole kingdom, and
several parts thereof, to try and purge out all insufficient, negligent, scandalous,
and erroneous ministers, by due course of ecclesiasUcal process and censures ;
and likwise for redressing aU other church disorders. And further, it is here
by provided, that whatsoever minister, being convened before the said general
meeting and representatives of the presbyterian ministers and elders, or the
visitors to be appointed by them, shall euher prove contumacious in not appear
ing, or be found guilty, and shall be therefore censured, whether by suspension
or deposition, they shall ipso facto be suspended from, or deprived of their
stipends and benefices.

No. XX.
Lord Aberdeen's Bill, 1840.
I. Whereas certain acts of the pariiament of Scotland and of the United
Kingdom of Great Britain have declared that the right of collation in regard
to the settlement of ministers in the parishes to which they may be presented
belongs to the church established by law in that part of the United Kingdom
called Scotland: And whereas provision has been made by these statutes for
securing to the church the exclusive right of examining and admitting any person
who may be presented to a benefice having cure by the patron of such bene
fice ; and in particular by an act passed in the pariiament of Scotland in the

144
year one thousand five hundred and sixty-seven, (1567, c. 7.) intituled Ad
mission of Ministers of Laick Patronages, it is statute and ordained, " that
the examination and admission of ministers within this realme be only in the
power of the Kirk now openlie and publickly professed within the samin, the
presentation of laick patronages alwaies reserved to the just and auncient pat
rones ;" and by an act passed in the parliament of Scotland in the year one thou
sand five hundred and ninety-two, intituled Ratification of the Liberty of the
trew Kirk, (1592. c. 116.) the government of the church by presbyteries, synods,
and general assemblies was ratified and established, and it was ordained that all
presentations to benefices " be directed to the particular presbyteries in all time
eumming, with full power to give collation thereupon, and to put ordour to all
matters and causes ecclesiastical within their boundes, according to the disci
pline of the Kirk ; providing the foresaids presbyteries be bound and astricted
to receive and admitt whatsumever qualified minister presented be his Majesty
or laick patrones :" And by an act of the parliament of Great Britain, passed
in the tenth year of the reign of her Majesty queen Anne, intituled (10 Ann.
c. 12.) an act to restore the Patrons to their antient rights of presenting min
isters to the Churches vacant in that part of Great Britain called Scotland,
the right of the Church to receive and admit persons presented to benefices was
again recognised and secured ; and by an act of the parliament of Great Bri
tain, passed in the fifth year of the reign of his Majesty King Geo?-ge the first,
intituled (5 G. i. c. 29.) an act for making more effectual the laws appointing
the oaths for security of the government to be takenby ministers and preach
ers in Churches in Scotland, providing that certain oaths should be taken by
ministers and preachers of the Church of Scotland, aild for preventing delays
in the supplying, filling up of vacant churches in Scotland, it is also declared and
enacted "that nothing herein contained shall prejudice or diminish the right of
the church, as the same now stands by law established, as to the trying of the
qualities of any person presented to any church or benefice :" And whereas it
is expedient to remove any doubt which may exist as to the powers and juris
diction of the church as by law established in Scotland in the matter of colla
tion, and to declare the right of the church to decide that no person be settled
in any parish or benefice having cure against whom or whose settlement in
such parish or benefice there exists any just cause of exception: May it there
fore please your Majesty that it may be declared and enacted ; and be it de
clared and enacted by the queen's most excellent Majesty, by and with the ad
vice and consent of the lords spiritual and temporal, and commons, in this pre
sent parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, that when a
presentation to any benefice within that part of the United Kingdom called
Scotland by the undoubted patron has been laid before the presbytery of the
bounds, it shall and may be lawful for the presbytery, as part and as the com
mencement of the proceedings in the examination and admission of the person
so presented for the cure of that parish, to appoint bim to preach in the church
of the said parish at such times and in such manner as the presbytery may
direct, or as may be directed by any regulations of the General Assembly to
that effect ; and after the presentee shall have preached in the parish church
according to the directions of the presbytery, the presbytery or a committee of
their number shall meet, after due notice at the said church, and shall intimate
that if any one or more persons being in regular communion with the church,
and of full age, and standing upon the communion roll of the parish, to be
made up in such manner as the church may direct, have any objection of any
kind to the individual so presented, or any reason to state against his settle
ment in that parish, and against his gifts and qualities for the cure of the said
parish, but which objections or reasons do not infer matter of charge against
the presentee to be prosecuted and followed out according to the forms and
discipline of the church, the presbytery are ready, either then or at their next
meeting, to receive the same in writing, or to write down the same in their
minutes, in the form and manner which such communicants may desire; which

145
objections or reasons shall without delay be fully considered and disposed of by
the presbytery by whom they are to be cognosced and determined, or shall be
referred by the presbytery to the superior church courts for decision, as the
presbytery may see cause, the presentee and all parties having interest being
heard in either case on the same.
II. And be it further enacted, that if the presbytery or other church court
shall be of opinion, due regard being had to the whole circumstances and con
dition of the parish and to the spiritual welfare and edification of the people,
tliat, in respect of any of the said objections or reasons, the individual presented
ought not to be settled in the said parish, the presbytery or other church court
shall set forth and specify in their deUverance the special ground or grounds
on which it is founded, and in respect of which they find that the presentee is
not qualified for that charge, in which event they shall intimate their deliverance
respecting the presentee to the patron, who shall thereupon have power to issue
another presentation within the period prescribed by law.
III. Provided always, and be it enacted, that it shall be in the power of the
presentee, patron, or communicants to appeal from any deliverance pronounced
as aforesaid, which appeal shal! lie exclusively to the superior ecclesiastical
courts, according to the forms and government of the Church of Scotland as
by law established.
IV. And be it further enacted, that if the presbytery or other church court,
after considering all the objections to the presentee and aU the reasons which
may be stated against his settlement in that particular parish, are satisfied in
the discharge of their functions and in the exercise of their authority and duty
as ministers of the gospel and as office-bearers in the church, that no good ob
jection against the individual, or no good reason against his settlement, has been
stated as aforesaid, or that the objections and reasons stated are not truly
founded in any objection personal to the presentee in regard to his ministerial gifts
and quaUties, either in general or with reference -to that particular parish, or
arise from causeless prejudices, the presbytery shall then repel the same, and,
subject to the right of appeal as aforesaid, shall proceed to the further trials and
examination of the presentee, and, if found by them to be qualified for the min
istry in that parish, shall admit and receive him into the benefice, as by law
provided.

No. XXI.

Act for Securing the Protestant Religion and Presbyterian Church
Government.
Our Sovereign Lady and the estates of parliament considering, that by the
late act of parliament for a treaty with England, for an union of both kingdoms,
it is provided, that the commissioners for that treaty should not treat of, or
concerning any alteration of the worship, discipline, and government of this
kingdom, as now by law established. Which treaty being now reported to
the pariiament, and it being reasonable and necessary, that the true protestant
religion, as presently professed within this kingdom, with the worship, discip
hne and government of this church, should be eff'ectually and unalterably
secured ; Therefore her majesty with advice and consent of the said estates of
pariiament doth hereby estabUsh and confirm the said true protestant religion, and
the worship, discipline, and government of this church, to continue without any
alteration to the people of this land in aU succeeding generations. And more
especially, her majesty with advice and consent aforesaid, ratifies, approves, and
for ever confirms the fifth act of the first parhament of king WilUam and queen
Mary, intituled. Act Ratifying the Confession of Faith, and Settling Presby
terian Church Government, with the haill other acts of parliament relating
thereto, in prosecution of the declaration of the estates of this kingdom, con-

146
taining, the Claim of Right, bearing date the eleventh of April, one thousand
six hundred and eighty-nine. And her majesty with advice and consent fore
said, expressly provides and declares, that tlie foresaid true protestant religion
contained in the above mentioned Confession of Faith, with the form and
purity of worship presently in use within this church, and its presbyterian
church government and discipline ; that is to say, the government of the
church by kirk-sessions, presbyteries, provincial synods, and General Assem
blies, all established by the foresaid acts of parliament, pursuant to the Claim
of Rights, shall remain and continue ]unalterable ; and that the said presbyterian
government shall be the only government of the church within the kingdom of
Scotland. And further, for the greater security of the foresaid protestant
religion, and of the worship, discipline, and government of this church as above
established, her majesty, with advice and consent foresaid, statutes and ordains,
that the universities of St Andrews, Glasgow, Aberdeen, and Edinburgh, as
now established by law, shall continue within this kingdom for ever. And
that, in all time coming, no professors, principals, regents, masters or others
bearing office in any university, college or school within this kingdom, be
capable, or be admitted or allowed to continue in the exercise of their said func
tions, but such as shall own and acknowledge the civil government in manner
prescribed or to be prescribed by the acts of parliament. As also that before or
at their admissions, they do and shall acknowledge and profess, and shaU sub
scribe to the foresaid Confession of Faith, as the confession of their faith, and
that they will practise and conform themselves to theworship presently in use in
this church, and submit themselves to the government and discipline thereof, and
never endeavour, directly or indirectly, the prejudice or subversion of the same ;
and that before the respective presbyteries of their bounds, by whatsoever gift,
presentation or provision, they may be thereto provided. And further, her
Majesty with advice foresaid, expressly declares and statutes, that none of the
subjects of this kingdom shall be liable to, but all and every one of them for
ever freed of any oath, test, or subscription within this kingdom, contrary to
or inconsistent with the foresaid true protestant religion, and presbyterian
church government, worship and discipline as above established : And that the
same within the bounds of this church and kingdom, shall never be imposed
upon, or required of them in any sort. And lastly, that, after the decease of
her present Majesty, (whom God long preserve,) tbe sovereign succeeding to
her in the royal government of the kingdom of Great Britain, shall in all
time coming, at his or her accession to the crown, swear and subscribe, that
they shall inviolably maintain and preserve the foresaid settlement of the true
protestant reUgion, with the government, worship, discipline, right and privileges
of this church, as above established by the laws of this kingdom, in prosecution
of the Claim of Right. And it is hereby statute and ordained, that this act
of parliament with the establishment therein contained, shall be held and
observed in all time coming, as a fundamental and essential condition of any
treaty or union to be concluded betwixt the two kingdoms, without any altera
tion thereof, or derogation thereto,in any sort, for ever. As also, that this act
of parliament, and settlement therein contained, shall be insert and repeated in
any act of parliament that shall pass for agreeing and concluding the foresaid
treaty or union betwixt the two kingdoms ; and that the same shall be therein
expressly declared to be a fundamental and essential condition of the said
treaty or union in all time, coming.

No. XXIL
Act 132, 8<A parliament King James, 1584.— TAe Causes and Manner of
Deprivation of Ministers.
Our soveraine lord, and his three estaites, assembled in this present parlia
ment, willing that the word of God sail be preached, and sacramentes adminis-

147
trat in puritie and sinceritie : and that the rentes, quharon the ministers aucht
to be susteined, sail not be possessed be unworthie persones, neglecting to do
the dueties, for quhilkis they accepted their benefices, being utherwaies pol
luted with the fraill and enorme crimes, and vices after specified. It is there
fore statute, and ordained be his hieness, with advise of the saidis three estaites :
That all persones, ministers or readers, or utheris provided to benefices, sen
his hienes coronation (not having vote in his hienes parliament) suspected cul
pable of heresie, papistrie, fals and erroneous doctrine, common blasphemie,
fornication, eommoun drunkennes, non-residence, plurality of benefices having
cure, quhairunto they are provided sen the said coronation, simonie and dilapi
dation of the rentes of benefices, contrare the lait act of parhament, being law
fully, and ordourly called, tryed, and adjudged culpable, in the vices and
causes abono written, or onie of them, be the ordinar bishope of the dio
cese, or utheris the kings Majesties commissioners, to be constitute in ecclesi
astical causes, sail be deprived alsvrell fra their function in the ministrie, as from
their benefices, quhilkis sail be thereby declared to be vacand, to be presented
and conferred of new, as gif the persones possessors theirof, were naturally
dead : And that it sail be esteemed, and judged non-residence, quhair the
person being in the function of the ministry, provided to ane benefice, sen the
kings Majesties coronation makis not residence at his manse, gif he ony hes :
And failzeing therof, at sum uther dwelling place vrithin the parochin, bot
remains absent theirfra, and from his kirk, and using of his office, be the space
of four Sabboth dayes in the haill zeir, without lauchful cause and impediment,
allowed be his ordinar. And quhair onie person, is admitted to maa benefices,
havand cure, sen our soveraine lordis coronation, the acceptation of the last
sail be sufficient cause of deprivation from the remanent, swa that he be pro
vided to twa, or maa benefices havand cure, sen the time of the said corona
tion. And neverthelesse this present act sail not extend to any person, pro
vided to his benefice befoir the said coronation, neither sail the bruiking of that
office, quhairunto he was provided of befoir, induce pluralitie of benefices in
this case, bot he sail allanerly tine his richt of the benefice, quhairunto he was
provided sen the said coronation allanerly : And union of kirks to ane benefice,
not to be judged pluralitie, quhill farder ordour be established and provided in
that behalfe : Like as alswa, the persones being in the function of the ministrie,
that sail happen to be lawfullie and ordourly convict befoir our soveraine lordis
justice general, or utheris their judges competent, of capital crimes, sik as trea
son, slauchter, mutilation, adulterie, incest, theft, eommoun oppression, usurie
against the lawes of this realme, perjurie, or falsed : They being likewaies law
fullie and ordouriie deprived fra their function in the ministrie, be their ordinar,
or the kingis commissioners in ecclesiastical causes. The benefices possessed
be the saidis persons to vaik, be reason of the said conviction, and deprivation.
And this to have effect and execution, onlie for crimes, vices, faultes, and of
fences, that sail happen to be committed after the dait heirof.

No. XXIII.
Act 117, 12th parliament King James. — Unqualified persons being de
prived, the benefice becomes vacant, and the patron not presenting, the
right of presentation belongs to the Presbytery, but prejudice of the tacks
set by the person deprived.
Our soveraine lord considering the great abuses quhilkis ar laitly croppen in
the Kirk, throw the misbehaviour of sik persones, as ar provided to ecclesias
ticall functions : sik as parsonages and vicarages, within ony parochin, and there
after neglecting their charge, ather leave their cure, or els committis sik crimes,
faultes, or enormities, that they ar found worthy of the sentence of deprivation,
ather before their awn presbyterie, or else before the synodall or generall

148
assemblies. Quhilk sentence is the lesse regarded be them, because albeit
they be deprived of their function and cure within the Kirk : zit they thinke
they may braike lawfully the profites and rentes of their saids benefices, indnr-
ing their Kfe-rentes ; notwithstanding th&'said sentence of deprivation : There-
fore,our soveraine lord, with advise of the staites of this present- parliament,
deelaris, that all arid quhatsumever sentences of deprivation, ather pronounced
already, or that happens to be pronoiinced hereafter, be ony presbytery, syno
dall, or generall assemblies, against ony parson or vicar, within their jurisdiei
tion, provided sen his hienesse coronation : All parsones, provided to parson
ages and vicarages, quha hes voitin parliambnt, secreit councell, and session,
or provided thereto of auld, befiarethe kingis coronation, (and Maister George
Young, avch-Aeaii oS Saint-Ahdrewes^h'emg specially excepted)'is, -and sail be
repute in all judgementes, ane just esiuse to seeludethe person before provided,
and then deprived from,- aH profites, commodities, rentes and dewties of the-said
parsonage and vicarage, or benefice of cure : And that ather be wayof action,
exception or reply. And that the said sentence of deprivation, sail be ane
sufficient' cause to make the said benefice to vaike thereby. And the said sen
tence being extracted, and presented -to the patron, the said patrone sail be
bound to, present ane qualified person of new to the kirk, within the space of
sex moneths thereafter : And gif he failzie. to do the same, the said patron?
sail tine the right of presentation, for that time allanerly : And the richt of
presentation to be devdlved in the handes of the prfesbytery, within the quhilk
the benefice lies : to the effect that they may dispone the same, and give coU
lation thereof,! to sik an qualified person ^as they sail think expedient. Pro
viding allwayes, in case the presbytery refuses to admit ony qualified minister,
presented to them be the patrone : It sail be lauchful! to the patrone, to reteine
the haill fruites of the said benefice in his awin hands. And furder his hienesse
and estaites foresaides, dedairis that tbe deprivation already pronounced, or to
be pronounced, be ony presbyterie, synodall, or general assemblies, against ony
cf the parsones or vicars foresaids, sail nawayes hur.t, or be prejudiciall to ony
tacks, lawfully sett be that person deprived, before his deprivation, to quhat-!
sumever persones.

OiAscuw :— Edward Khull, Printer to the University.

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 04077 4003

' 'A-:>-
•> • "l
'W'W'r
J v» '

•].i'.W,i.,i

V

ii

iiM'^

Kw, ,1(1 ¦; ,1 ''.'0)>a:>

JS'-

R^

\ M

0 ^0 i

IN^

Mm '

¦'I \>\