into a standing law of the Church, in | nation of the judicatures of the Church, direct violation of the Barrier Act, it not and good order therein." By this act having received the sanction of a majority the faithful ministers of that presbytery of the presbyteries. In reality it had been condemned; eighteen presbyteries approved of it, eighteen returned no opinion, twelve required material alterations, and thirty-one were absolutely against it.* Yet the leading men of the Assembly contrived to procure its enactment, though they could not but be aware of its unconstitutional character, so eager were they to clutch the reins and wield the rod of

power.

were sharply rebuked, and commanded to support and encourage Mr. Stark, and strictly forbidden to admit any of the parishioners of Kinross to sealing ordinances, without the consent of their intruded minister, on pain of the highest censure. In the same haughty spirit they proceeded to consider the contest between Erskine and the synod. They speedily approved the proceedings of the synod, and appointed Mr. E. Erskine to It was now all but impossible to pre- be rebuked and admonished by the modevent an immediate schism. The domi- rator at the bar of the Assembly.nant party might yet have abated in their | Against this sentence Mr. Erskine proreckless career of tyranný and oppres-tested; and to this protest were added the sion, and the aggrieved ministers and names of William Wilson, minister at people might have laid aside their resentment, and, while they defended purity, still have been ready to accept of peace. But pacific measures appear not to have been contemplated by either. Indignant at the treatment he had received, especially in being prevented from recording his dissent from the injurious conduct of the Assembly, the Rev. Ebenezer Erskine, from his own pulpit in Stirling, denounced in strong terms the oppressive and sinful procedure of the church courts. This was but adding fuel to the flame, and his next step fanned it into a blaze. At the meeting of the synod of Fife in October, he preached a sermon, in which he boldly and keenly censured the growing corruption and degeneracy of the Church. The synod were deeply of fended, condemned his conduct, and ordered him to submit to a sharp rebuke. This he refused to do, protested against their sentence, and appealed to the next General Assembly.†

%

[1733.] There seemed to be yet time and opportunity to prevent the threatened deplorable division in the Church, had the Moderate leaders been willing to change their hand and check their pride." But they appear to have thought hat one act more of "firmness" would secure them a complete and lasting triumph. They passed an act of sufficiently ominous title, " concerning some of the ministers of the presbytery of Dunfermline, and for preserving the subordi

Gib's Display, vol. i. p. 26. Process.

† True State of the

Perth, Alexander Moncrieff, minister at Abernethy, and James Fisher, minister at Kinclaven. This protest was recorded, and the case of the four brethren remitted to the Commission, with full power first to suspend them, and then to proceed to higher censure, unless they should submit, express their sorrow for their conduct and misbehaviour, and retract their protest.*

The dissevering deed might be regarded as already done, when intrusted to the Commission. When the Commission met in August, they received from many quarters strong remonstrances against the imperious course so keenly pursued by the leaders of the Church, and urgent entreaties to try the effect of milder measures. In vain the course of Moderate policy has ever been immitigable, when civil power was on its side. The four brethren gave in a written representation, defending their conduct; but the sentence of suspension was pronounced, and they were summoned to appear again before the Commission in November. By this time the whole kingdom was in a state of the most intense excitement, and many members of Commission began to shrink, and hesitate, and recoil from the deed which they had been empowered to do. Not so the Moderate leaders: with them the thought seems to have been," one bold stroke more, and the victory is our own." The sentence of suspension had not been obeyed, and the Commission was empowered to proceed to a higher cen

• Acts of Assembly.

sure. This course was opposed; the | abstaining for a time from any acts of juquestion was put, "delay" or "proceed;" risdiction on their own authority.* the votes were equal; the moderator, Mr. John Gowdie, one of the ministers of Edinburgh, rose; a death-like still- sion. a death-like stillness reigned; the cause of mercy and truth, and the peace of the Church and community, or the paltry triumph of a secularizing policy and its partizans, seemed wavering on the balanced point of that passing moment: he gave his casting vote, "proceed," and the fatal deed was done, which Scotland to this hour deplores, and by which the welfare of the National Church, and the cause of Christianity itself in the land, sustained a grievous and almost irreparable injury, now too clearly manifest in our present sufferings and impending dangers.

It is unnecessary to trace minutely the subsequent steps of this deplorable secession. That it was caused by the corrupt and tyrannical procedure of the church courts, we do not affect to deny; that this. corruption and tyranny flowed directly from the admission of the prelatic incum bents at and after the revolution, from the lax and heterodox tenets which they and others like to them introduced, and from the pernicious influence of patronage we do not hesitate most strongly to assert. and we think it would require a very pe culiar combination of sophistry and hardihood in any man who should venture to attempt a historical refutation of the assertion. Let it never be forgotten, that The sentence actually pronounced was these pious and eminent ministers seceded, a modified form of deposition, being not from the Church of Scotland, but merely that they should be loosed from from that "prevailing party," the Modetheir respective charges, and declared no rates of the day, by whom heresy was longer ministers of this Church, all min-screened, sound doctrine condemned, disisters being prohibited from employing cipline neglected, the rights of Christian them in any ministerial function. Against congregations violated, and their feelings this sentence several ministers protested; outraged, and the scriptural government and the four brethren gave in a protesta- of the Church changed into a system of tion of their own, which was subse-cruel and oppressive secular tyranny. quently expanded into a full statement of [1734.] The heartless and destructive the reasons of their "secession from the wrong perpetrated by the Commission in prevailing party in the Church."* The their treatment of Ebenezer Erskine and public sympathized in general with men his friends, had roused the feeling of the whom they regarded as persecuted for religious part of the community to the the cause of truth, and in defence of the highest pitch of regretful solicitude ; constitutional rights and privileges of the and great exertions were made that the Church and people of Scotland. Even next Assembly might contain a sufficient yet there might have been a healing mea- number of right-minded men, to get, if sure, and some attempts were made by still possible, the fatal breach repaired. the better part of the Commission to pre- Even the Moderates were willing partialvent any decisive steps from being takenly to retrace their steps, not having anby which all hope should be precluded. ticipated that their guilty deed would call But the sense of wrong appears to have forth so strong an expression of national stimulated in the minds of the four indignation. No sooner did the Assemorethren a degree of jealousy and impa- bly meet than the work of attempted contience, which caused them to regard with ciliation began. The act of 1730, prodistrust every overture of a peaceful hibiting protests, and the act of 1732, for character, and to assume an attitude of planting vacant churches, which had more resolute antagonism. On the 6th been the immediate causes of dispute, day of December 1733, they constituted were both rescinded; and an act was themselves into an Associated Presbytery, passed declaring that ministerial freedom vetaining possession of their charges, but was not to be held as in any degree impaired by the late decisions. Another act was passed, empowering the synod of Perth to take into consideration the case of the seceding brethren, with a view to * Gib's Display, vol. i. p. 36.

* It was in their protest against this sentence of the

Commission that the four brethren used the memorable words, "We hereby appeal unto the first free, faithful, and reforming General Assembly of the Church of Scotland." See their "Testimony," page 28, first ediion, 1734; Gib's Display, vol. i. p. 35; Re-Exhibition, &c., p. 29.

their restoration to their charges, without | men of high eminence, such as Professor reference to former proceedings; which Hutcheson, Currie of Kinglassie, and was accordingly done by the synod in others, besides the address of the AssemJuly.* There seemed now no real ob- bly to his majesty, which was written by stacle to the return of the seceding breth- Lord President Dundas.* ren into the communion of the Church. But they had taken their ground, and felt so far bound in honour to maintain it; they had published a testimony to the doctrine, discipline, and government of the Church of Scotland, avowing their unaltered adherence to these, and stating the reasons of their secession, not from the constitution of the Church, but from the prevailing party in her judicatories. And scrutinizing narrowly the recent conciliatory acts, they conceived that they still saw reason to continue separate, till the Church should not merely rescind the unconstitutional acts of which they complained, but make an explicit acknowledgment of her sinful conduct in having ever passed them.

The Commission was prohibited from appointing "Riding Committees," for the purpose of executing such sentences as presbyteries and synods declined to execute. And as great complaints had been made against the style of preaching which had become prevalent among young ministers, who introduced into their sermons "little that might not have been found in Seneca and Plato," an overture was transmitted to presbyteries for their approbation, giving directions respecting a more full and faithful exhibition of the peculiar doctrines of the gospel.†

[1936.] The seceding brethren continued to stand aloof, watching jealously the proceedings of the Church, and apparently more disposed to censure omissions As the seceding ministers had appealed than to applaud the honest endeavours of to the first reforming Assembly, this As- the struggling Evangelical party. That sembly took one step more for proving its faithful body continued to strive for furright to such an honorable designation. ther reformation, but with weakened enA deputation was sent to London from ergy and diminished prospects of success. the Commission, to solicit a repeal of the The address for the repeal of the Patronact reimposing patronages; but this depu-age Act was engrossed in the records of tation was unsuccessful. The uncomply- the Assembly of 1736, at least to testify ing attitude maintained by the seceding the views and wishes of the Church. ministers discouraged the Evangelical The act concerning preaching was passed, party, and cast an early blight over their fondly cherished hopes of a reunion with men whom they highly esteemed; and this disappointment tended considerably to paralyze their own reforming exer

tions.

having received the approbation of the presbyteries. It is equally admirable in spirit and in substance; and deserves the serious regard of all ministers in the Church still, as a clear and pregnant directory for sound and evangelical preach[1635.] Still a reforming spirit seemed ing. The questionable doctrines of Proto prevail in the Church, the Moderates fessor Campbell of St. Andrews were abating their high-handed rule, and the brought under discussion; but he sucEvangelical party endeavouring to restore ceeded in giving to them such an evasive to the light the buried principles of ear- explanation as to save him from direct lier and better days. A deputation was censure, though he was cautioned to avoid again appointed to proceed to London, expressions which might lead the hearers and renew the application of the church into error. The last act of this Assembly for the repeal of the Patronage Act.† deserves peculiar mention. It is entitled, This was so far attended to, that leave "An Act against Intrusion of Ministers was given to bring in a bill for this pur- into Vacant Congregations," and contains pose; the bill was actually drawn up by these words:-"The General Assembly the celebrated Duncan Forbes of Cullo- considering that it is, and has been since den, but meeting little support, it was the Reformation, the principle of this abandoned. Several acute and able pam- | Church, that no minister shall be intruded phlets were written on the subject, by into any church contrary to the will of

Acts of Assembly, year 1734; Willison's Testimony, pp. 81-83.

† Acts of Assembly.

Pamphlets of the period; Randall's Tracts. † Acts of Assembly.

the congregation, do therefore seriously | to offer peace. An act was passed by the recommend to all judicatories of this Assembly, in which, after stating what Church, to have a due regard to this prin- was viewed as improper in the conduct. ciple in planting vacant congregations, of the seceding ministers, it was added,so as none be intruded into such parishes, "Yet this Assembly choosing rather still as they regard the glory of God and edi- to treat them in the spirit of meekness, fication of the body of Christ."* There brotherly love, and forbearance, did, and seems no reason to doubt that the majori- hereby do, enjoin all the ministers of this ty of the Assembly was perfectly sincere Church, as they shall have access, and esin passing this act, when it is viewed in pecially the ministers of the synods and connection with the proceedings of the presbyteries within which these seceding two former Assemblies; but there is as lit- brethren reside, to be at all pains, by tle reason to suppose that it had the ap- conferences, and other gentle means of probation of the Moderate party, who, persuasion, to reclaim and reduce them even in that reforming Assembly, were to their duty and the communion of this sufficiently strong to neutralize and per- Church."* But all was in vain; to no vert the operation of principles which proposals of "conferences and gentle. they could not openly oppose. Some means" would they listen; but began to proceedings of the Assembly, the Com- take steps for training young men for mission, and the subordinate judicatories, the ministry, granting license to probasupporting intrusive settlements about this tioners, and completing their organization time, gave to the seceding ministers the as a distinct and separate Church. opportunity of declaring their distrust of the sincerity of the Assembly, and their resolution still to continue in a state of separation.

[1739.] All endeavours to prevail upon the seceding ministers to abandon their antagonist position proving ineffectual, the Assembly of 1739 called them before the court, to answer to a libel which the Commission had been empowered to

They came, but came in the temper of determined combatants. Aware of what was in progress respecting them, they had prepared a declinature of the Assembly's jurisdiction; and, previous to their appearing in the Assembly, they constituted themselves into a presbytery, and entering as a court, gave in this document by their moderator. Its very title was conclusive: "Act of the Associate Presbytery, finding and declaring that the present judicatories of this Church are not lawful nor right constitute courts of Christ; and declining all authority, pow

[1737.] The year 1737 is not remarkable for any event of importance in church matters, the foolish irritation of the gov-frame, should all lenient measures fail. ernment, on account of the Porteous mob, led them to emit an order, that a proclamation against the leaders of that strange riot should be read from all the pulpits, "on pain of being declared incapable of sitting in any church judicatory.' This was resisted by a large proportion of the Church; and it deserves to be mentioned to their credit, that some of the Moderate ministers took a decided part in resisting this unconstitutioual procedure of the civil power. The seceding brethren received this year the accession of four others, the Rev. Messrs. Ralph Erskine, Dunfermline; Thomas Mair, Orwell; Thom-er, and jurisdiction that the said judicatoas Nairn, Abbotshall; and James Thomson, Burntisland; and, encouraged by this accession, they published their first Act and Testimony, by the appearance of which document the prospect of reunion was very considerably diminished.† [1788] Deeply as the evangelical ministers of the Church deplored the conduct of the seceding ministers in thus increasing the obstacles to their re-admission into their former communion, they continued

ries may claim to themselves over the said presbytery." Nothing now remained but for the Assembly to pass the sentence of deposition; but even yet they lingered, reluctant to cut of all hopes of seeing men, who were by many of them very highly esteemed, restored to the bosom of the Church. At the urgent solicitations of Willison of Dundee, and others, the Assembly consented to delay

passing the sentence of deposition for | brief years during that anxious struggle, another year, if even yet the Secession too soon recovered their ascendency, and might be averted. maintained their dreary and fatal sway for almost a century. And it cannot be doubted, that if the fathers of the Secession could have foreseen what principles would be adopted by their successors in later times,-could have anticipated the deadly warfare that would be waged against the very existence of the Church of Scotland, which they revered and loved,-they would not have taken a single step on the path that has led to such a strange and disastrous issue.

Both the Church and those who seceded from her communion sinned, when they permitted human pride and ́ wrath to fill their hearts and overcloud their better judgment; and the third and fourth generations are suffering, and may yet more deeply suffer, from the baneful consequences of their guilty conduct. Surely a time will come, if it has not come already, when those who hold the principles for the assertion of which the Erskines and their friends unwisely seceded from the Church, and in defence of which Boston and Willison, and such men, earnestly contended within it, will unite in the one great cause, the reassertion of the Redeemer's sole Sovereignty and Headship of his Church, which cannot but be held inestimably precious equally by both,

1740. The seceding ministers made no attempt to avail themselves of this pause, expressed no regret for what had taken place, and, instead of giving the slightest indication of a wish for peaceful reunion, continued to pour forth sharp invectives against the faithlessness and corruption of the Church. The Assembly passed the sentence of deposition on the 15th day of May 1740, and the seceding brethren, now eight in number, ceased to be minis ers of the Church of Scotland.* It is impossible to trace the progress and mark the conclusion of this melancholy event without feelings of the deepest regret. A calm and dispassionate view may now be taken of the whole proceeding, which could not be done by those who were personally engaged in them; and such a view may well lead us to deplore the errors and the follies of wise, good, and pious men. There can be no doubt that the pernicious and sinful course of procedure, so perseveringly followed by the church courts, was the direct occasion of the Secession; yet it is as plain that it might have been averted, had not the pride of the contending parties impelled them to use toward each other language of sinful and irritating asperity. And without any wish to stain-by all who know the import and have the memory of the Erskines, whom we deeply revere as eminently evangelical divines, it must be said that they indulged in applying terms of bitter reproach and angry vituperation against the Church, which no treatment could have justified, much less that forbearance which they experienced, both in the actions and' in the writings of their opponents. It may also now be seen, that they committed a great error in not returning into communion with the Church, when, by the strenuous exertions of their evangelical friends, the door of readmission was opened to them in 1734. Their return would have greatly strengthened and encouraged that faithful band to continue their arduous task of reformation, and might have averted the long reign of secular principles, cold legal and moral preaching, and uncensured immorality, which, shaken and dethroned for a few

"Acts of Assembly.

felt the power of that sacred and glorious truth. Yes, that time must come, whether soon or late, and it may be sooner than many think; for the hour of trial, like the fierce heat of the furnace, may melt. and blend into closest union, materials which, in the frigid temperature of selfishness, had long remained in hard and sullen separation, contiguous yet uncombining.

[1741.] The transactions of the Assembly which met in 1741 present nothing memorable. The elevation of Mr. James Ramsay of Kelso to the moderator's chair, indicated very plainly that the Moderate party had regained the power of which they had been deprived by the vigorous exertions of the Evangelical party in 1734. Another event proved but too clearly that their temporary loss of power had not taught them to use it with greater gentleness. A complaint of the parishioners of Bowden against the